Slashdot Mirror


OSDL Pays For Linus Torvalds' SCO Defense

geoff313 writes " For all of you who might be worried about what financial consequences Linus Torvalds might have to endure as a result of being subpoenaed by SCO, fear not: the Open Source Development Lab (OSDL) will pay for its law firm to represent him. the OSDL, who are Torvalds' employer, will announce on Friday that the "OSDL has agreed to fund legal representation for Torvalds and any other employees of the lab who may become involved in the litigation." Just in case you didn't you didn't know, the OSDL is funded by a variety of corporations including (but not limitied to) IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Red Hat, Cisco, Computer Associates, Fujitsu, Hitachi, and Nokia. "

347 comments

  1. Bon Appetite! by corebreech · · Score: 5, Funny

    McBride is what is known in the poker world as a fish.

    Which is to SCO's great misfortune because penguins literally eat fish for breakfast.

    And Torvalds is the biggest, baddest penguin out there. One might even call him The Omega Penguin. The king of all penguins, indeed, of all penguin-kind. Their lord. The single template from which all other penguins were wrought.

    I'm just sorry they're not selling tickets for this one.

    1. Re:Bon Appetite! by bruthasj · · Score: 0

      Go fish!

    2. Re:Bon Appetite! by Baikala · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just read this Linus's sig below on people disregarding penguins:

      --
      16,777,216 comments ought to be enough for any forum!
    3. Re:Bon Appetite! by Ripplet · · Score: 1

      >One might even call him The Omega Penguin.
      Surely he should be the Alpha Penguin, being the first Linux developer.

      --

      Skiing? Check out The Independant Skiers Portal

    4. Re:Bon Appetite! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      McBride is what is known in the poker world as a fish.

      Never heard that in poker, so I looked it up . . . fish - a loose poker player who loses all their money easily.

      That's the same kind of fish telemarketers talk about.

      McBride's no fish. He's not running the show at all. He's a shill.

    5. Re:Bon Appetite! by walt-sjc · · Score: 4, Informative

      Funny comment, but misses the big picture.

      SCO is not after Linus. They are after IBM. It makes total sense to subpena Linus as who else knows more about IBM's contribution to the kernel than Linus? He is the one that approves all submissions. He's the one that when the question is asked: "This this particular code come from IBM?" can give the most credible answer.

      In totally separate but related cases, you have IBM and RedHat suing SCO for GPL infringment. Of course, the most relevant person to sue for Linux GPL copyright infringment is Linus too.

    6. Re:Bon Appetite! by BladeRider · · Score: 1

      I, for one, welcome our new penguin overlords!

      It has to be said in every thread.

      --
      j.
    7. Re:Bon Appetite! by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      Penguins waddle rather hopelessly when on land, however. They can only 'charge' under water.

      It's not that ironic that Linux chose as a mascot a bird that's forgotten how to fly.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    8. Re:Bon Appetite! by beebware · · Score: 1

      He is the Alpha and the Omega, the creator and the destroyer - for it was he that spawn Linux and, in a freakish time dilation effect with a parallel universe, fathered Darl McBride which will bring about the end of which we all hold true to our hearts.

    9. Re:Bon Appetite! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linus to Darl: I am your father.

    10. Re:Bon Appetite! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you are saying that Linus is wrong? Be careful, the next sentence out of your mouth could have 100 Linux geeks charging at you at 100 MPH.

    11. Re:Bon Appetite! by Payback · · Score: 1

      Actually, SCO is after money, and they're not after it the honorable way.

      BTW, it's subpoena..

    12. Re:Bon Appetite! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that is funny shit! Good timing.

    13. Re:Bon Appetite! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the same kind of fish telemarketers talk about.

      Actually the term is derived from the billiards world. A "fish"is someone who can easily be beaten.

    14. Re:Bon Appetite! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +5 Gay

    15. Re:Bon Appetite! by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      Hell, anybody who's been around awhile knows that the penguin mascot was mostly chosen because Linus was bitten by a penguin at some LUG event in a city he was visiting.

      The Platypus logo was more fitting, and a cooler, more appropiate 'mascot' for Linux anyway.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    16. Re:Bon Appetite! by evilWurst · · Score: 1

      That depends on how you interpret the Big Picture.

      1) SCO is after huge settlement and/or buyout

      -- OR --

      2) SCO is out to kill free software / open source / GNU / Linux (whether on their own or as a pawn of Microsoft)

      You sound as if you're sticking with #1. In light of all the other stuff SCO is doing, I'm more inclined to think they're shooting for #2 (though they'll take #1 if they can get it). If so, then it is in their best interests to inflict maximum harm on every part of the free software and open source movements. Time, money, and injunctions, against everyone they can. Linus, RMS, IBM, and Red Hat are prime targets to be dragged through the mud.

      If they were only after #1, they'd be fighting a much more narrowly targeted battle.

    17. Re:Bon Appetite! by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      That depends on how you interpret the Big Picture.

      1) SCO is after huge settlement and/or buyout
      -- OR --
      2) SCO is out to kill free software / open source / GNU / Linux (whether on their own or as a pawn of Microsoft)


      Unless there is a giant conspiracy out there that has some religious, moral, or political opposition to the idea of Free Software, its about the money. Even if they wanted to kill Linux, it would be to sell more Unix, so its still about the money. They may not even care how they get the money or it hurts along the way, which recent events seem to support. But its still, about making money, at any cost, in the short term.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    18. Re:Bon Appetite! by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      Thanks to a B-52, this penguin can fly. (middle page, 3 pix)

      And for no real reason, here is a picture of tux on the can reading one of the dummies books, that I found while googling.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    19. Re:Bon Appetite! by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 0

      Ah. Don't you just love content?

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  2. you know by The+Terrorists · · Score: 1, Interesting

    maybe all you people spending all your time posting should put money where mouths are? taking it from torvalds firm simply robs peter to pay paul and equally weakens open source movement. Contribute your money, as if it were code.

    1. Re:you know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about I just let the billion dollar corporations that already have my money pay for it?

    2. Re:you know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      What you have to understand is that your average slashdot poster has quite a lot of mouth and very little money.

  3. Fudning sources by bluelip · · Score: 5, Funny

    >>>Just in case you didn't you didn't know, the OSDL is funded by a variety of corporations including (but not limitied to) IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Red Hat, Cisco, Computer Associates, Fujitsu, Hitachi, and Nokia. "

    Just in case that was someone hiding beneath a rock, SCO is funded by Microsoft.

    --

    Yep, I never spell check.
    More incorrect spellings can be found he
    1. Re:Fudning sources by gormanly · · Score: 4, Informative

      Troll?

      I suppose you wouldn't call $8,000,000 funding, then?

    2. Re:Fudning sources by Kenja · · Score: 1

      Indeed, however anti-Microsoft trolls seem to be embraced here.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    3. Re:Fudning sources by Soul-Burn666 · · Score: 1

      I don't have the exact, solid, proof. But it was written on Slashdot that SCO got $50,000,000 from a child company of Microsoft.

      --
      ^_^
    4. Re:Fudning sources by mark_lybarger · · Score: 1

      it was BayStar Capital:

      see these:

      here
      and here

      - just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're really not out there.

    5. Re:Fudning sources by apoch2001 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like quite the gang-up. Industry vs Microsoft. It's like a two person royal rumble except that MS probably STILL has more resources at hand. Too bad things aren't going quite as fast as a WWE match. I could fall asleep at the pace this litigation is going. :)

    6. Re:Fudning sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, however pro-Microsoft trolls like you either don't know how to read or read at a level lower than that required to comprehend SEC filings.

    7. Re:Fudning sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "MS probably STILL has more resources at hand"

      Eh? IBM makes more money than Microsoft; it's a much larger company.

    8. Re:Fudning sources by pmz · · Score: 1

      except that MS probably STILL has more resources at hand.

      True, but the OSDL companies represent huge markets that Microsoft has yet to break into successfully. Microsoft is sort of walled off from the world, in the business sense.

    9. Re:Fudning sources by pmz · · Score: 2, Funny

      who continues to treat the court which convicted them with contempt.

      It just occurred to me that a good reason why Microsoft gets off so easy is that the judges and lawyers in the Justice Department don't want to face having to upgrade their Windows computers if Microsoft goes away. They are in a position of conflict of interest being a customer of the defendant.

    10. Re:Fudning sources by Alsee · · Score: 4, Informative

      I suppose you wouldn't call $8,000,000 funding, then?

      $8 million? Chuckle. That is just ONE of the Microsoft payments to SCO. Look in the SEC filing you linked to:

      " During the quarter ended April 30, 2003, SCO entered into a licensing agreement with Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft"). The initial licensing agreement allowed Microsoft, at its election, to exercise two options to allow Microsoft to acquire expanded licensing rights with respect to SCO?s UNIX source code. During the quarter ended July 31, 2003, Microsoft exercised and paid for the first of these options. During SCO's current quarter, ending October 31, 2003, Microsoft exercised and paid $8,000,000 for the second option. "

      The SECOND deal was for 8 million dollars. There was a filing last quarter about the first deal. That one was for 6 to 8 million dollars up front, plus an additional 5 million over the next three quarters. So the first deal totaled 11 to 13 million. Add the two deals and Microsoft is handing SCO about 20 million dollars. (And for all we know the second deal may include an additional 5 million over the next three quarters as well.)

      Just prior to the Microsoft deal, SCO's market capitalization was about 10 million dollars. Now, would someone like to explain to me why the hell anyone would pay 20 million to buy a licence from SCO when all of SCO itself only carried a 10 million dollar price tag?

      Not only that, but SCO had NEVER had a profitable quarter prior to the Microsoft deal. They were bleeding cash horribly and soon would have gone bankrupt.

      In addition to those cash payments, SCO has also received a 50 million infusion from an investment group with ties to Microsoft. There isn't any evidence that Microsoft influenced this 50 million inventment, but it sure does look suspicious.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    11. Re:Fudning sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which begs the question, "What is Misrosoft up to while we're distracted by SCO?"

    12. Re:Fudning sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not used to deciphering accountantese, I may have missed something. Is Microsoft buying the license to develop Unix in exchange for that $14-$16 million dollars? IOW, is SCO selling off its "intellectual property" or some portion thereof?

      Not trying to start a rumor here, I'm just curious what all that stuff in the SEC filing means.

    13. Re:Fudning sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      > Just prior to the Microsoft deal, SCO's market capitalization was about 10 million dollars. Now, would someone like to explain to me why the hell anyone would pay 20 million to buy a licence from SCO when all of SCO itself only carried a 10 million dollar price tag?

      Because if you buy the whole company you end up assuming all of their debt?

      (Not that that's the reason here, just wanted to point out that from an accounting standpoint there isn't a contradiction)

    14. Re:Fudning sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you combine the assets of what funds the OSDL VS MS, MS would be squashed like a bug.

    15. Re:Fudning sources by EvilAlien · · Score: 1

      ... and Sun Microsystems too, right?

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
    16. Re:Fudning sources by budgenator · · Score: 1

      IANAL. but I think that most courts not only demand that court papers that are electronicaly submitted are in a proprietary format i.e. MS Word, but they even specify font faces and sizes which are not in a standard install of windows.

      This in effect not only makes the court a customer, but forces all doing business with them to be a customer as well.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  4. It gladdens the heart by Space+cowboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    to see that there are occasions where companies don't automatically run the rule over individuals. Granted, this is Linus, and the companies involved have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, but it's still refreshing to see :-)

    And, of course, it's less leg for SCO to stand on (I'm guessing they'd have to have been a millipede at this rate :-). BAD sco, BAD sco...

    Simon.

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
    1. Re:It gladdens the heart by braindigitalis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wonder if such big fish will be just as interested in funding the other people who have been involved in this such as Stallman etc...

      --
      http://www.inspircd.org - Modular C++ IRC Daemon
    2. Re:It gladdens the heart by scooby111 · · Score: 0

      And when all the legs are gone?

      Come back here, I'll bite your kneecaps!

  5. Sad.... by starmang · · Score: 1, Troll

    Yah cause i was having trouble sleeping at night thinking of where Linus was going to get money from.

    --
    Never touch an Irish man's Guinness!@#
  6. Community would have supported a defense fund by Mr.+Dop · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is great news, but I'm sure the community would have supported a defense fund for him if they hadn't.

    1. Re:Community would have supported a defense fund by Ianoo · · Score: 1

      It's possible, I guess, but finding a couple million quickly from Linux/XFree/Gnome/KDE/whatever developers might have been hard, and most likely it would take a while too. All in all I'm pretty relieved that Linus has OSDL behind him.

      That said, I wonder who's funding the defense of the other guys? I don't think Stallmann could have made [i]that much[/i] off emacs sales...

    2. Re:Community would have supported a defense fund by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but who is going to represent Richard Stallman?

    3. Re:Community would have supported a defense fund by Polly_was_a_cracker · · Score: 5, Funny

      You mean who is going to defend SCO from Richard Stallman..
      Even though they asked for it... This is like going trout fishing and catching a shark that eats your wife.

      --
      I have a Cig, but do you have a light?
    4. Re:Community would have supported a defense fund by TrollBridge · · Score: 1
      ...but thank goodness your theory isn't going to be put to the test, right? It's easy to speculate good intentions when they don't have to be backed up with substance.

      I, for one, honestly don't think "the community" would put its money where its mouth is, at least not in the scale of what a legal defense fund constitutes these days.

      --
      There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
    5. Re:Community would have supported a defense fund by endeitzslash · · Score: 1

      This is like going trout fishing and catching a shark that eats your wife.

      Face it, your wife would never go trout fishing with you.

  7. Nice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Very nice of them, but somehow I doubt that he would lack donations, should he ask for it. :)

  8. Do you need a lawyer? by herrvinny · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Do you really need a lawyer for a subpoena? Even if Linus was a US citizen, he's not being investigated or anything. Just answer a few stupid questions from SCO, and you're scot free.

    1. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by bruthasj · · Score: 2, Informative

      In America, the questions might be stupid, but you better bet your bottom the answers are real good. That's why you need a lawyer.

    2. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by JonnyRo88 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure he will incur travel expenses during this process, so it's good that funding sources are available.

      --
      The Ro Factor - Jeep/Linux Weblog
    3. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by dipipanone · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Jesus, if Darl McBride is on crack, some of these retarded Slashdot moderators must be smoking an eightball an hour. This isn't a troll at all, but a legitimate question, and in a less high-profile case, the chances are that someone in Linus's position wouldn't need legal representation. Because of SCO's past behaviour though, and their tendency to use the courts to bully, to intimidate and to try and ramp up their stocks, Linus almost certainly *does* need a lawyer in this instance -- and he needs his own lawyers, rather than just IBM's lawyers, because he needs to preserve his independence, rather than giving SCO the opportunity to say 'Look, there's a big conspiracy going on between Linus and Stallman and IBM. Chewbacca lives on Endor. You must convict, you must convict.' The story headline is somewhat clueless though. Nobody is funding Linus's 'defence', because Linus hasn't actually been accused of anything.

    4. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by sfprairie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, you need a lawyer. If you receive a subpoena, you should let a lawyer handle it. It takes a rat to talk to a rat. If you structure your answer poorly, it will come back to bite you.

    5. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Rasta+Prefect · · Score: 3, Informative
      Do you really need a lawyer for a subpoena? Even if Linus was a US citizen, he's not being investigated or anything. Just answer a few stupid questions from SCO, and you're scot free.

      Technically, no. Linus is not charged with anything, just needs to answer a few questions.

      Realistically? I think anyone who's ever had any sort of serious dealings with the US (or really any) legal system would agree that at least talking to a lawyer in this situation is a really, really good idea.

      --
      Why?
    6. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by tindur · · Score: 1

      What bothers me more is that he needs funding. Does the one with the biggest mountain of money win in court?

    7. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I understand it, a subpoena is issued to make someone who would rather be doing something more useful with his time appear as a WITNESS, not an accused person. If a witness needs a lawyer, the US legal system has failed totally. A witness is there to tell the truth as it is, not as some potential schyster determines it to be. Not that Linus's specific lawyer will be a schyster of course, I mean in the general sense.

    8. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Possibly, but only the combatants...

      Microsoft likely has the most money, therefore SCO will be well funded. But, I think that to stand a chance of winning, there has to be something of substance in your case....

      SCO? McBride? Substance? Those words don't belong together in the same sentence unless the "substance" is something illegal that McBride uses to try to give himself inspiration. Linus has already allegedly commented on that one.

    9. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      ...some of these retarded Slashdot moderators must be smoking an eightball an hour. This isn't a troll at all...

      Slashdot's moderation system is a bit broken - we all know that. In this case I suspect the culprit is the use of drop-down lists to select the modifier; if you're not very careful to unselect the list box after making your choice, then when you try to scroll down to the next post, you'll end up scrolling down the list of modifiers instead.

      As if there weren't enough bad moderators to start with, the system appears designed to make sure that even good moderators mod things inappropriately - by accident.

      Gotta love Slashdot.

    10. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2, Funny
      While answering a subpoena does not require a lawyer, it's a good idea to get one in some cases especially if you know you will be treated with hostility. Given SCO's actions, a lawyer is a great idea. SCO might try anything even asking whether Linus was on the grassy knoll when he started coding Linux. Besides here at /. we all should know what the answer to any legal question should be:

      Does Linus need a lawyer?
      IANAL, but [insert opinion]. Remember to talk to a lawyer, though.

      But does Linus need to talk to a lawyer about getting a lawyer.
      IANAL, but [insert opinion]. Remember to talk to a lawyer, though.

      RMS would be proud of the recursion.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    11. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Having been deposed before, and having watched others, he should have a lawyer. Their job is to train you for and protect you when the opposition tries to make you look like an ass. The SCO lawyer will try to twist anything and everything that Linus says to SCO's advantage. (That's why its called adversarial!)

    12. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A witness is there to tell the truth as it is, not as some potential schyster determines it to be.

      But that potential shyster is the one who gets to frame the questions. If you know the opposing lawyer is a shyster *cough* SCO *cough*, then it pays to have your own lawyer to advise you.

    13. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by gregfortune · · Score: 1

      Which? The rat or the answer? :)

    14. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by $hecky · · Score: 1

      Um. Yes. For the same reasons you take a gun to a shootout.

      --
      You never know who will get one.
    15. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Look, this subpoena is a demand from SCO that Linus do some things, which probably include (a) sending in a stack of documents and/or (b) showing up to testify. It's a no-brainer that SCO probably demanded way more than they're entitled to.

      So, Linus can either comply, flip SCO the bird/refuse, or do some combination of these.

      What's a lawyer good for? Answer: the lawyer will know what demands Linus can flip the bird to and expect a judge to back him up on later. The lawyer will also know what things will cause the judge to grab Linus by that finger and spin him around so fast that he'll feel like Gandalf visiting Orthanc in Peter Jackson's LotR:FotR.

      SCO's lawyer is trying to get SCO what it wants. Linus should have a lawyer there to make sure SCO gets what Linus wants.

      YIAALBIANYL
      GYOGDL--YPNO
      --
      Diplomacy = the art of letting other people have your way.
      (Yes, I am a lawyer, but I am not YOUR lawyer. Get your own gosh darned lawyer -- you probably need one.)

    16. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by scrytch · · Score: 1

      The "IANAL" should be as unnecessary as reprinting your name in your post. If one is a lawyer, they'll say so, then their boilerplate should read:

      "IAAL, but I am probably not licensed in your state. [insert opinion]. None of this is to be taken as legal advice -- please contact a licensed attourney in your state if you want legal advice."

      I'm not an expert but I play one on slashdot.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    17. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by dipipanone · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the system appears designed to make sure that even good moderators mod things inappropriately - by accident

      Oh, OK. Thanks for reminding me about this.

      Actually, I've been caught by that 'feature' in the past myself. I'd modded one comment on the page, but somehow, the scroll wheel on my mouse managed to switch focus from the scroll bar to one of the drop down boxes and I accidentally randomly moderate a post that I had no desire to make any judgements about. As a result, when I clicked 'moderate', a random post got a random moderation from me.

      That could also explain the many seemingly arbitrary mods up, as well as the mods down.

    18. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the legal world, both.

    19. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by DrCode · · Score: 2, Funny

      Those lawyers are pretty sharp, but I have a lot of confidence in Linus:

      Lawyer: So, Mr. Torvald, when DID you stop beating your wife?
      Linus: My wife is a world karate champion.
      Lawyer: Um, er,...uh, let's take a break.

    20. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by bahamat · · Score: 1

      Linus hasn't actually been accused of anything

      Not directly no, but SCO has publicly claimed (on more than one occaision) that Linux is an unauthorized derivative of UNIX. If SCO really belives that (however misguided and stupid that belief is) Linus is a logical target. He will need his own defence before this is over.

    21. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by CowboyMeal · · Score: 1

      Heh. Post late in the conversation, that way when the mods get to the bottom, they'll scroll up and up-mod your post!

      --
      Your credit card information wants to be free.
    22. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by dipipanone · · Score: 1

      Funny mods don't give karma, overrated takes away karma

      That's me fucked then. Any moderation of my posts always seem to be divided equally between Funny and either Flamebait or Troll.

      They aren't ever intended to be either, but if the butt of your joke happens to be something that somebody somewhere venerates (be that Linux or Windows, Bush or Clinton) than a joke at the expense of any of them will inevitably result in a flamebait/troll modding.

      This one, for example.

      I suppose if I cared enough, I should think about posting jokes as an Anonymous Coward, but really, who can be bothered?

    23. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Microsoft has the most money?

      Nonsense---you forget who they are fighting.

      Microsoft is a 400 pound gorilla.

      IBM is a 12-ton space monster that shoots laser beams out of its eyes.

      IBM is a FAR bigger company, with a MUCH more experienced legal team.

      And Microsoft isn't fighting IBM directly, they are doing it (if at all) through a proxy.

      SCO is more like a 75-pound hyena. Mean bite, makes a lot of noise.

      But IBM is scary. Really, really scary.

      Quiet scary, you know? Creeping-up-and-splattering-you in one move scary.

      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
    24. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by HeghmoH · · Score: 1

      That's not a problem with slashdot, that's a problem with your browser. Why on earth would a browser be designed so your scroll wheel could change a popup menu?

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    25. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      spin him around so fast that he'll feel like Gandalf visiting Orthanc in Peter Jackson's LotR:FotR.

      So when did it stop being J.R.R.Tolkien's LotR:FotR?

    26. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I'm sure he will incur travel expenses during this process, so it's good that funding sources are available.
      Travel expenses? At least in Germany, a witness gets reasonable travel expenses from the court and is also compensated for the time lost. Costs are part of the total court cost (and in Germany are paid by the loser).

      I assumed that to be so in most western countries. Why on earth should a witness be put at a disadvantage for the fact that he or she helps the court finding a sound judgement?

      --

      Stephan

    27. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Ben+Hutchings · · Score: 1

      You can undo moderation on a thread by posting to it. You don't get your points back, though.

    28. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by lamasquerade · · Score: 2, Informative

      Much as I wish it weren't so, MSFT's market cap. is 275 billion versus IBM's 155. MSFT is quite large.

      --

      // It had been Fat's delusion for years that he could help people. --Philip K. Dick, Valis

    29. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus fucking christ give it a break already. Reminding everyone that his wife is a karate champion for the billionth time isn't even funny when its used in a relevant, logical context. Your little "skit" is neither logical nor relevant, and would only be found humorous by the particularly morbid and deranged. I find your sub human intelligence alarming and conclude your mental development to have peaked at about the level of a common chimpanzee. May god have mercy on your soul.

    30. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If he answered that question with anything other than Mu, his geek cred would immediately be revoked.

    31. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by CowboyMeal · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except that no one modded you funny on that one... 8-)

      --
      Your credit card information wants to be free.
    32. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I laughed at it. Then I read your post, and laughed at that, too.

      You take yourself too damn seriously. I look forward to the day when your forehead splits open and your overstressed hypothalamus squirts out.

    33. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      IANAL but actualy Linus/Stallman might not have to obey the supenea, a supenea issue by a court in Utah to people living where ever they live. It would sort of be like you being supeneaed by an EU court in France when you are a German citizen; its definatly a talk to a real lawyer situation.

      Of course it would look bad for them to just ignore the supenea, and much of the "substance" of what's going on seems to be looks rather than substance.

      It is funny to think that SCO is going to pay travel expenses/and per diem to people they must think of as evil incarnate. Just asking RMS a simple question about the GPL could invoke an hours long rant!

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    34. Re:Do you need a lawyer? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      You know the saying "When the elephants make love, the Mice hide." Linus always struck me as a regular guy who isn't necessarily comfortable being in the same room as a 75 pound hyena trying to bite a 12 ton space monster shooting laser beams out of his eyes.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  9. I can see it now by KU_Fletch · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've got good money on SCO suing OSDL within the next week for "blatant copyright violations and big meanie stupid poo faces"

    --
    It's not stupid. It's advanced.
    1. Re:I can see it now by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1

      I think putting money on SCO suing anybody probably is good bet.

    2. Re:I can see it now by milkman_matt · · Score: 1
      I think putting money on SCO suing anybody probably is good bet.

      I think i'll put my money on the fact that once this is all over, Darl will pull back his face to reveal that it was really Dr. Evil at the helm the entire time.

      -matt

  10. worried? by happyfrogcow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since when has anyone really been worried about Linus? There was probably a line of people bidding to represent him. With his cool headed demeanor and knowledge, lawyers would drool over helping him to shoot down SCO.

    Linus, your allright man. There are thousands of people who have got your back. Keep on hacking.

    1. Re:worried? by happyfrogcow · · Score: 1

      i do know, i just don't care. go troll, kiddy.

    2. Re:worried? by Pionar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and that's why no one's rushing out to back RMS. He's a radical, big-mouthed hippie. Linus is just your typical guy, middle-of-the-road, even-keeled, and all those other cliches.

    3. Re:worried? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You use Windows. Ha ha.

    4. Re:worried? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "There are thousands of people who have got your back."

      And some of them have deep pockets. Nice change from stories of feds imprisoning hackers and associated emergency defence fund appeals. This time the bad guys are picking on a hacker king. Very bad move on their part.

    5. Re:worried? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't call Linus a typical guy. There are a lot more big-mouthed guys than peacemakers like Linus. Too bad.

    6. Re:worried? by Bastian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't be so quick to cast the radical big mouthed hippie aside. He is certainly an iconoclast, I hear he has an abrasive personality, and he annoys a whole lot of people by being one of those rare types who sticks firmly to idealism rather than pragmatism. Don't let all that get in the way of your realizing just how valuable he is.

      If it weren't for the radical big-mouthed hippie and his radical big-mouthed hippie ideas, there would be no FSF, no GPL. Linux would have never caught on because with no glibc an' all that, nobody would have plugged all that stuff into Linux in order to make it useful. I doubt Linux would have even become a truly viable kernel for non-recreational hacking use without GNU.

      His radical big-mouthed hippie way of thinking is the way of thinking that gave us something like the GPL, and I seriously doubt that the GPL could have come out of a mind that doesn't work like RMS's. Someone less idealist would have come up with a much weaker license, probably something more like a BSD or MIT license. Someone less abrasive and bull-headed never would have started the project to begin with.

      So unless you're a long-time FreeBSD user or a hardcore Windows geek, grow up and quit whining about RMS. Linux wrote a great kernel, but GNU has done more to make Linux (GNU/Linux, whatever) a viable OS and getting this whole movement to go mainstream than any other body. RMS started gathering all the fuel, Linus is just the guy who lit the match.

    7. Re:worried? by jrwyant · · Score: 1

      I wish I had some moderator points to bump this up on Insightful...

    8. Re:worried? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it weren't for the radical big-mouthed hippie and his radical big-mouthed hippie ideas, there would be no FSF, no GPL

      This would be a good thing. Curse his oily hide.

    9. Re:worried? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's already got a lawyer. Eben Moglen does court stuff for both the FSF and RMS personally.

    10. Re:worried? by WryCoder · · Score: 1

      Linux would have never caught on because with no glibc an' all that, nobody would have plugged all that stuff into Linux in order to make it useful.

      Without BHM's gcc/glibc, there would not have been any Linux kernel at all.

    11. Re:worried? by Bastian · · Score: 1

      Ok, ya got me on the glibc, but I'm going to maintain that RMS was originally the primary author of gcc. (The other big dev tool he wrote was really gdb.)

    12. Re:worried? by WryCoder · · Score: 1

      Yes, BMH(RMS :) really was the original gcc author. First release, 1987, I think. And don't forget emacs :-)

      gcc Contributors

      The credit:
      "Richard Stallman, for writing the original gcc and launching the GNU project. "

      Roland McGrath was hired by the FSF to write glibc.

      And without gcc/glibc and the rest of the FSF code Linus would not have had the hgh quality, free compiler and library he needed to write the kernel, nor the utilities to turn it into an operating system. Without RMS it would be a different world.

  11. Slick move, SCO by cybermace5 · · Score: 4, Funny

    So, they try to pinch Linux where it hurts by going after the "little punks" who made it. I mean, what could some passive, nerdy, computer programmers have as a possible means of defense?

    And so now, SCO stands in the middle of a jungle clearing, waving a stick and raving madly at the 800-pound gorilla of IBM. Suddenly, a rustle from the brush and SCO turns around to see a whole pack of 800-pound gorillas, all staring with steely eyes....

    --
    ...
    1. Re:Slick move, SCO by advocate_one · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's not a whole pack of 800lb Gorillas... it's worse... a flock of attack penguins backed with some loose Gnus...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    2. Re:Slick move, SCO by cybermace5 · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, in this case I would equate the penguins to Linux users, who mostly just crowd up along the edge of the ice to see who falls in first and becomes orca bait. Some of the more enterprising ones might peck SCO's ankles, or send rambling emails saying that they will.

      --
      ...
    3. Re:Slick move, SCO by dspfreak · · Score: 2, Funny
      It's not a whole pack of 800lb Gorillas... it's worse... a flock of attack penguins backed with some loose Gnus...

      Sounds like SCO is having a bad game of Jumanji.

      --
      "Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." -- G. K. Chesterton
    4. Re:Slick move, SCO by Haeleth · · Score: 5, Funny

      it's worse... a flock of attack penguins backed with some loose Gnus...

      I can see the headlines now: BAD GNUS FOR SCO

    5. Re:Slick move, SCO by jazman · · Score: 1

      Yes, but eventually one of those gorillas will say "This ground sure feels strange", then someone will shoot the ground with a blaster and the enormous aseroid worm called Microsoft will start to close its jaws...

    6. Re:Slick move, SCO by mikeee · · Score: 1

      "[...]they have never seen an angry penguin charging them at speeds in excess of 100 mph. They'd be a lot more careful about what they say if they had."

      - Linus Torvalds

    7. Re:Slick move, SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can't be them... they are busy generating pages for Slashdot.

    8. Re:Slick move, SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your mother has a loose gnu.

    9. Re:Slick move, SCO by lordvdr · · Score: 1

      Let's face it people, GNUs don't kill SCO, SCO kills SCO. That is all.

      --
      If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor - Albert Einstein
    10. Re:Slick move, SCO by barton · · Score: 1

      [to the tune of Little Deuce Coup]

      Little loose Gnus... you don't know what I got.

    11. Re:Slick move, SCO by KillerHamster · · Score: 1

      As Linus said,

      "Some people have told me they don't think a fat penguin really embodies the grace of Linux, which just tells me they have never seen a angry penguin charging at them in excess of 100mph. They'd be a lot more careful about what they say if they had."

    12. Re:Slick move, SCO by advocate_one · · Score: 1
      I have a fondness for Penguins... unwrapped of course... and I did spend some time down in the Falklands standing penguins back up after they'd fallen over... you see they follow anything and fall over when trying to follow a helicopter that's flying overhead... and the pilots would be having bets with each other as to how many penguins they could get to fall over...

      This of course is just an urban myth and there is absolutely no truth in it at all... in fact, my work down in the Falklands is classified and the "penguin stacking" thingy is just my cover story... we were really training up those flocks of killer attack penguins to defend the islands against further aggression from Argentine forces...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  12. Anti-SCO License by frostfreek · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would like to know if the OSDL will pay to have their lawyers develop a version of a GPL that forbids downloading/use/repackaging of a software package by any computer that has ever had a SCO OS within 1km of it.
    That's just about what I want for my next Open Source software release.

    1. Re:Anti-SCO License by JonnyRo88 · · Score: 1

      While this would make me incredibly happy, doing so would probably add a lot more politics to the distribution of free software.

      If this would happen it would become more common to insert non-compete type clauses into open source code, like "you can use this for free as long as you are not my competitor."

      It really kills me to see SCO using Samba and other open source packages in their system, while at the same time spitting on the GPL. I guess it just proves that none of their money comes from actual sale of products, but just this lawsuit.

      --
      The Ro Factor - Jeep/Linux Weblog
    2. Re:Anti-SCO License by ajs · · Score: 1

      The greatest test of our resolve to make software a building block and a tool usable, distributable and modifiable by all... is to give it to those who do not understand the value of the gift that they are being given.

      If SCO uses our code, we win. If SCO benefits from our code we win. If SCO modifies our code, we win. If we deny SCO our code, we lose.

      To quote Babylon 5: "If we deny the other, we deny ourselves." -Citizen G'Kar, "Point of No Return"

    3. Re:Anti-SCO License by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a computer's had an SCO OS on it, it's suffered enough already. Do we really need to torture it more by denying it OSS?

    4. Re:Anti-SCO License by mackstann · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you're describing BSD, not Linux or GNU.

    5. Re:Anti-SCO License by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that idealists like Richard Stallmann are as entitled to their opinions as anyone else, and one of their opinions is that it is wrong to place any restrictions on what the software may be used for. Now while freedom is an admirable concept, it allows GPL software to be used by Saddam for developing weapons of mass destruction (OK, I know there is about as much substance in that as in McBride's allegations, it is only an example). Some people would not want their code used by abortion clinics, genetically modified food suppliers, lawyers, religious fanatics, racists, Microsoft...... (i.e. things which SOME people have violent objection to on moral grounds). I have my own set of uses which I would like to see banned, but as RMS rightly recognises, you can't allow only selective use, without jeapordising freedom itself. You have to make it free to everyone, or no-one at all.

      It would not be possible to do any better, because no two contributors to a package would ever agree on the list of users who should be banned.

      However, one way forward could be to make some changes to the GPL such that a violation of its terms brought about the immediate loss of all rights to use any GPL software, not just the relevant package. IMHO, SCO have broken the terms of the GPL, their "Linux Personality Module" is one place to start looking. It is almost certainly not possible to do anything retrospectively, with existing code, but if the GPL was changed, and the next version of Samba, for example, was released under the new GPL, SCO would be barred from using it. The GPL should also make some statement about requiring that users of GPL software may not take legal action against other users or suppliers, it would need very careful wording to achieve the required effect without attempting (which might invalidate it in court) to limit legitimate legal rights.

      But, it could be worse, just think what they could, and probably do, with BSD-licensed code, as of course have their financial backers, M$ (TCP/IP network code, and their perverted version of Kerberos, for example).

      The GPL is unquestionably the right way to go at the moment, but like everything else is capable of improvement.

    6. Re:Anti-SCO License by October_30th · · Score: 1
      you can't allow only selective use

      Just to play devil's advocate: Why the hell not? It's not like everybody's playing PC when it comes to defining what's right and wrong. If you insist on playing fair, you're going to get trashed.

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    7. Re:Anti-SCO License by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, that would be the consequences of the BSD licence. With GPL, if SCO co-mingles the code with their own proprietary code, they lose, we win, everyone else in the whole world wins, because they then have to open their source.

      Let us keep to the GPL, it might need a bit of improving to tackle new threats such as McBrideism, but it achieves a great deal. Just think, if Kerberos for example was GPL and not BSD, M$ would not have been able to "de-commoditise the protocols" (i.e. pervert the interface to their own monopolistic advantage, causing many compatability problems costing the world, but not them, billions in the process). In fact, a backward organisation like M$ would have taken years to catch up with what others more competent than themselves had already done, and might not be the vile monopoly that they now are, if they had not been able to use BSD code.

      (I was thinking the other day about how many things were achieved by Unix in the 1970s that still can not be done by any Microsoft software. I was doing text manipulations at the time, putting several columns of ascii into an Excel spreadsheet. Then I though about system files than can not be write-protected, my next nasty thought was that Bill had probably never learned to write in lower case, oh yes, and backing up the OS properly... I must make a list one day.)

      People are free to use the BSD licence if they want, but I for one wish they would not. If they want to see their efforts become perverted, closed, and make a lot of money for someone else, let them use the BSD, but if they want their effort to be seen by all, remain free, and have access themselves to the latest version, with contributions from many others, at all times, let them use GPL. Simple choice, surely?

    8. Re:Anti-SCO License by ajs · · Score: 1

      Let's not make this a license squable. That's about as far from dignified as we could possibly get. We all release our code in order to get it out where people can use and benefit from it. If SCO uses/modifies my code (and they have) I'm just as happy as if Bill Gates or Mother Theresa do (well ok, if a dead, saint-in-waiting used my code, I'd be pretty pumped). The goal is to get people into the mindset of having CONTROL over their own interaction with computers, and not the other way around.

      Usage = win, regardless of which OSS/FS license you care to select.

    9. Re:Anti-SCO License by roie_m · · Score: 1
      What your parent is trying to say it, of course, that you can't allow only selective use if your ultimate goal is freedom of code use, which is is historically in the case of the GPL (The GPL was based on that exact ideal: Anyone can use my code). That's also a tautology.

      However, absolute freedom is self-contradictory, because as they say, "your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins". You may indeed decide that certain freedoms of "ours" are more important than "their" freedom to use code (for certain values of "us" and "them"). Your parent post seems to have decided (as is well his right) that "their" freedom to use code outweighs "our" other rights, and I personally can think of at least one reason in his favor: That of the slippery slope. Ban GPL code from Saddam and SCO, and soon you'll find people banning code from producers of pocket-lint- and speed-bump-related products (to be extreme :-)).

    10. Re:Anti-SCO License by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      As a BSD fan, I must disagree. The GPL shares these attributes with the BSD license. While I personally would not want to license my own work under the GPL, it give me as an end-user exactly the same freedoms as the BSD.

      Probably the worst attribute of the GPL is not a part of the license itself, but the attitude of some people that the GPL is a "members-only" license.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    11. Re:Anti-SCO License by Skweetis · · Score: 3, Funny

      Please don't do this. My favorite computer has an old copy of SCO Unix within a few feet of it. Granted, the install tape is actually under one of the legs of a wobbly desk, but it works really well for that, and I don't want to have to replace it and my computer.

    12. Re:Anti-SCO License by WNight · · Score: 1

      Well, for one, the Linux kernel would have a thousand different restrictions placed on its use. Some conflicting.

      I'm with you in spirit. People like SCO should lose all the benefits they seek to deny others. Everyone still working for SCO should, in a just world, be forbidden from ever taking advantage of GPL or BSDL software.

      But, I don't see a good way to word the license that gets the point across, yet still lets people sue someone when there is a valid case, etc.

      At this point we'd need to just say "If you've ever been employed by SCO, or any subsidiary or derivative companies, past the date of Jan 1, 2002, or employed by them in a contractual position, or worked at a law firm supporting SCO after this date, ..." And how do you distinguish between incidental stuff, like some local legal firm they contract to draft up some reply to a city zoning ordinance or something reasonable, and someone whose work is insturmental in the SCO vs IBM, or SCO vs RedHat, or SCO vs TheHonestAndJustPeopleInTheWorld cases?

      I'd be easier if someone just shot McBride and the CEOs of the companies that invested in SCO. More humane too.

  13. When this is over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    It looks like there won't be enough of SCO left for the vultures in Utah desert to fight over.

    1. Re:When this is over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even less, not enough for a maggott's breakfast.

  14. Damn! by gandy909 · · Score: 1

    Too bad SCO wasn't part of the OSDL. Would have been funny to see them have to pay for his defense up front, even though we know they'll pay for it in the end anyway, unless bankruptcy get them first!

    --

    (Stolen sig) Remember: it's a "Microsoft virus", not an "email virus", a "Microsoft worm", not a "computer worm
    1. Re:Damn! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually Caldera (now SCO) _was_ listed as an OSDL sponsor company year back, and they were one of the founding companies of OSDL. See this. I wonder why they dropped their membership this year ... :-)

  15. Subpoenas are for witnesses by Oliver+Klozoff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I thought Linus was being subpoenaed. A subpoena is issued to force a witness to testify; why would Linus need to be defended against this?

    1. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by gclef · · Score: 4, Informative

      First rule of litigation: never go into a lawsuit without a lawyer, even if you're a witness. Maybe you can use one of the lawyers already involved, but if you're being compelled to testify, and aren't one of the central characters, you should have a lawyer.

      In a way, lawyers like firewalls: it's possible to be safe without them, but it takes knowledge and skill that some folks don't have the time to gather.

    2. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by Spl0it · · Score: 1

      Are you smoking something? Your going to turn over documents, turn over things that you don't even know whether SCO has rights to them because your too lazy to get legal defence? If your subpoenaed you get a lawyer. Its not a complicated thing, when your dealing with anything tied into a large legal case or your character you get a lawyer.

      --

      No, this is
    3. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by heritage727 · · Score: 1

      Well, he'll be testifying under oath; and since there almost certainly will be more lawsuits involving Linux and the GPL, some of which may involve him directly, he needs legal representation.

    4. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by swb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even with OSDL providing him legal services, I'd be inclined to retain my own counsel whose sole responsibility is to me and my interests.

      OSDL's counsel may prove to be just fine, but there's always the chance that in some way OSDL and Torvalds' interests may actually not be truly in sync, in which case OSDL's counsel may decide to drop Torvalds due to conflict of interest or have him do something not in his best interest, but in the best interest of OSDL.

      This is the reason there's such huge legal teams around high-profile cases; each counsel represents a specific entity, such as a business, a person, etc. They may agree on the goal, but there are times where sacrificing someone on your team for your advantage can be appealing, and without your OWN counsel, you might end up being the sacrificial lamb.

    5. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So that means that if you are simply an innocent witness to something, it will cost you a lot of money? Best to go around all day with eyes closed and ears plugged!

      Sadly, I suspect that you may be right.

    6. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by WCMI92 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "I thought Linus was being subpoenaed. A subpoena is issued to force a witness to testify; why would Linus need to be defended against this?"

      You don't EVER EVER go into ANY legal proceeding without YOUR OWN LAWYER in tow.

      Also, subpoenas are not automatic. If SCaldera failed to show sufficient cause as to why Linus, et all SHOULD be compelled to appear or testify, or give a deposition, whatever, then an attorney can quash the subpoena.

      And I think they could do that in this case, as the Scaldera vs IBM case is a case of alleged BREECH OF CONTRACT on the part of IBM, which has nothing to do with Linus Torvalds OR Linux...

      --
      Corporatism != Free Market
    7. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > First rule of litigation: never go into a
      > lawsuit without a lawyer...

      Linus is NOT a party to the litigation. This is
      a subpoena that will be used to establish basic
      facts concerning the case. Nothing else. Repeat
      after me... You do not need a layer, You do not
      need a lawyer. Even if you did retain a lawyer he
      would NOT be able to assist you in the court room
      as you're not on trial (or a party to thesuit).
      At most the lawyer could advise you prior to your
      testifying. Unless you have some very good reason
      to believe that your testimony might implicate
      you in some kind of wrong doing then you have
      nothing to fear. And, Linus hasn't done anything
      wrong, right???

    8. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he needs legal representation.

      All of what you said is true. And it's all irrelevant.

      Why does Linus need defense against a subpoena?

    9. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't EVER EVER go into ANY legal proceeding without YOUR OWN LAWYER in tow

      YES, but WHAT DOES THIS have to do with DEFENDING yourself against a SUBPOENA?

      Re-read the question. It's pretty straight forward.

    10. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First rule of litigation: never go into a lawsuit without a lawyer, even if you're a witness.

      What relevance does that have to the question posted?

      The question (again) is why does Linus need to defend against a subpoena?

    11. Re:Subpoenas are for witnesses by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 1

      Couldn't be said better. If there is a possibility that you might be sued, you should definitely have a lawyer review anything and everything that you say to the plantiff. Even if the suit has not been served, that's not to say it won't be. Given SCO's pattern of acting irrationally, it would not be hard to imagine them suing Linus, just for the PR value.

      Remember, this is a dying company gasping for air, and therefore really desperate with little to lose.

  16. Take that McBride by bigjnsa500 · · Score: 1

    Anybody know what kind of moneys will be shelled out to protect Linus? Hopefully its more than what SCO has in the bank.

    --
    This is a test. This is a test of the emergency sig system. This has been only a test.
  17. Yet more SCO fodder by cadfael · · Score: 5, Informative

    FWIW, you might want to read Motley Fool's Tom Taulli's take on this. th3m0nk

    --
    -- The Hollow Man
    Non illegitimati carborundum
    1. Re:Yet more SCO fodder by jrumney · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The lawsuit was bold, alleging trademark infringement on a hot market segment, Linux.

      I think this statement from Tom Taulli's article pretty much sums up what the average investor can make out what this lawsuit is about. There is no genuine reason for SCO to be suing IBM, so they make up their own (wrong) speculation.

    2. Re:Yet more SCO fodder by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      I know this is off-topic, but...you might also want to read The Motley Fool's opinion on Red Hat.

  18. Re:One important company was left out of the list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    No it's not.

  19. Won't SCO ultimately be the one that pays for his by Bob+Bitchen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    defense? The idea that OSDL or anyone else has to pay to defend themselves against a company that's gasping for air with some wild claims is wrong. What costs can be recovered once SCO is shown to be insignificant and wrong? All attorney's fees, travel fees, dining, babysitting, lost wages??

    --
    http://tinyurl.com/3t236
  20. Re:One important company was left out of the list? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Informative

    ehm no? The members. So unless Microsoft has some special hidden member status I very much doubt it. Sure joining your enemies to fight them from the inside is a smart move but this one nobody would fall for.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  21. Re:OK, so which is it? by musikit · · Score: 1

    you noticed that but you didn't notice the

    Just in case you didn't you didn't know, the OSDL is funded

    let me highlight it more for you
    you didn't you didn't know

  22. Also funded by... by tomknight · · Score: 4, Informative
    A lovely firm by the name if VALinux....

    Tom.

    --
    Oh arse
    1. Re:Also funded by... by zerocool^ · · Score: 1

      s/if/of/g

      hah, but (since i'm using dd a lot lately) the first thing I thought of was dd if=valinux of=something.

      god, tired.

      --
      sig?
    2. Re:Also funded by... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tired of fucking WILL DUNN GOATS? Baaaa!!!

  23. Re:OK, so which is it? by Delirium+Tremens · · Score: 1

    OSDL is an organization, but also try to keep in mind what the ODSLabs are.

  24. Question by mbrod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Have they succeeded in subpoenoing (sp?) Torvalds or have they just issued a request to have him subpoened that a judge may deny? Isn't that how it works or do they just get to subpoena anyone they want?

    Also another question to the legal wise out there. There is little doubt in my mind Microsoft funding and incentive is pulling the strings behind SCO. Isn't this extremely illegal for them to do based on the ruling of the previous judgements? Obviously they get out of a lot of legal holes by using SCO as a proxy attacker of Linux but it is nonetheless doing this for reasons of destroying a competitor.

    1. Re:Question by cyberbob2010 · · Score: 0

      heheh, you said proxy attacker

      --
      We seldom regret saying too little but often regret saying too much.
    2. Re:Question by UID30 · · Score: 1

      I read somewhere (can't remember where, sorry) that Torvalds had already received the subpoena as of yesterday (11/13/2k3). I think the same source said that neither Perens nor Stallman had received their subpoenas ... and that Transmeta & Digeo didn't know if they had received them yet, but both were boggled when informed they had been targeted for them by SCO.

      --
      "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte
    3. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
      A subpoena is technically issued by the court. This does not mean, however, that a court actually approves it before it is served. Rather, attorneys are permitted, as officers of the court, to draft and serve subpoenas. If the subpoenaed party does not respond, or objects, than the issuer must go to court and file a motion to compel compliance with the subpoena. This is when the judge actually looks at the subpoena and passes on its validity.

      If you're really interested in this, search for Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and look on any Federal Court's website for a blank subpoena.

    4. Re:Question by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 1

      Have they succeeded in subpoenoing (sp?)

      He was allegedely served during Dinner on Wednessday.

    5. Re:Question by Otter · · Score: 1

      1) Subpoenas can be challenged or denied if they're obviously abusive or frivolous. In this case, given Linus' position at the center of the code base at issue I doubt there will be any problem with naming him. Subpoenaing CmdrTaco or the Linux Gay Conspiracy Troll would be a different matter.

      2) My guess is that Microsoft isn't so much pulling the strings as they are pouring a little more fuel on the fire but no, it's not as if any of the antitrust rulings require them to perpetually sit in the corner and cry.

      (My legal opinions, of course, are worth as much as that mangled strings/fire metaphor...)

    6. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Re: your other question

      You're talking about the US Judicial System. It does not follow any law, logic, or fairness. This is how the system works: each party rolls a die and multiplies the result by the amount spent annually on lawyers, whoever gets the biggest number wins.

    7. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent has the answer right. Mod it up, please.

      IAALBIANYL, GYOGDL--YPNO

    8. Re:Question by Alomex · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why? just because it has a correct, informed answer?

      Hah! try again kido.

    9. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative


      Many people seem confused about the process right now. I suggest A Litigation Crash Course. Note that the SCO trial is in phase 2 presently. And here is more detailed information about depositions.

      The key here is that this is a "discovery deposition" - not trial testimony. Discovery depositions do not involve judges. They can happen anywhere - living rooms, kitchens, in a field. Usually though, they happen at the office of the lawyer who called for the deposition.

      In answer to your question, the subpoenas are signed by the lawyer calling for the dep - not by a judge. The only way a judge would be involved in any issues regarding the deposition, is if the people being deposed ask the judge for a protective order prior to the dep. Given Linus' central role in Linux, it's not likely a protective order would be granted. The only other potential, would involve the questions actually asked - if they are abusive and Linus' lawyer says "don't answer", they may be able to get a judge on a conference call to make a ruling, or more likely, after the dep, SCO would go to court and file a motion to compell. If granted, the deposition would be reconvened and the question asked. During the actual deposition testimony however, the judge is definitely not present.

    10. Re:Question by sootman · · Score: 1

      Another poster has already answered pretty completely, but it might interest you to know that 'subpoena' comes from a Latin phrase meaning 'under pain' or 'under penalty.' (I think 'pain' sounds better but 'penalty' is more commonly stated.) That should be a hint. :-)

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    11. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      does the loser get a saving throw?

    12. Re:Question by WCMI92 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Also another question to the legal wise out there. There is little doubt in my mind Microsoft funding and incentive is pulling the strings behind SCO. Isn't this extremely illegal for them to do based on the ruling of the previous judgements? Obviously they get out of a lot of legal holes by using SCO as a proxy attacker of Linux but it is nonetheless doing this for reasons of destroying a competitor."

      That should be IBM's next counter claim in discovery... Get a court order that _ALL_ documents related to their dealings with Microsoft be preserved and provided.

      If (and we know they are) Microsoft is backing Scaldera's baseless lawsuit they are probably in violation of the DOJ settlement.

      Not that Ashcroft cares...

      --
      Corporatism != Free Market
  25. Re:OK, so which is it? by Get+Behind+the+Mule · · Score: 2, Offtopic
    Referring to organizations as plural is stilted, unpopular, and, in this case, inconsistent.


    You're right about Taco being inconsistent, but in the British vernacular (encompassing not just the British Isles, but also such far-flung places as Australia and South Africa), it's neither stilted nor unpopular. That's just how they say it. Americans say that the committee meets, the British say that the committee meet.

    The difference between British and American English is mostly just a matter of pronunciation and vocabulary, but this is one of the few truly grammatical differences.
  26. Re:One important company was left out of the list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (-1, Wrong)

  27. Re:One important company was left out of the list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft are a member of OSDN??? Funny how they don't appear on the membership list!

  28. What have we learned today, class? by Ride-My-Rocket · · Score: 0, Troll

    McBride is what is known in the poker world as a fish. Which is to SCO's great misfortune because penguins literally eat fish for breakfast.

    Yes, but do penguins also play poker, as your statment seems to imply?

    1. Re:What have we learned today, class? by Aliencow · · Score: 3, Funny

      Seeing the clothe they wear, they probably play at the $20,000 tables!

    2. Re:What have we learned today, class? by wo1verin3 · · Score: 1

      >> Yes, but do penguins also play poker

      Duh!

    3. Re:What have we learned today, class? by Aliencow · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Somebody modded me troll?

      Maybe they didn't understand I meant that penguins wear tuxes.. tuxes are class... class means rich means plays at the expensive table and drinks martinis with James Bond.. har har funny.

      Oh well, I guess I'm born to troll!

    4. Re:What have we learned today, class? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you stop to think about it, SCO's actions are brilliant.

      Subpeona Linus and force him to give depositions forever...Linux development stops forever.

    5. Re:What have we learned today, class? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can't let that happen. Give me about 21 days, I'll continue the development for him.

  29. Re:OK, so which is it? by fiftyfly · · Score: 2, Funny
    the OSDL, who are Torvalds' employer, will announce on Friday that the "OSDL has agreed...
    Referring to organizations as plural is stilted, unpopular, and, in this case, inconsistent. Get with the program. The OSDL is an organization that is responding to this situation.
    Pfft it's "the OSDL, who art Torvalds' employer, will announce on Friday that the "OSDL hath agreed... "
    --
    "Sanity is not statistical", George Orwell, "1984"
  30. Open Source communities Strength by Spl0it · · Score: 1

    This is a great development. It demonstrates the Open Source communities Strength to come together and defend its code as an entity. Considering how many thousands? hundred of thousands? millions? of people are involved in the Open Source community actions like this make the community look very 'organized' despite the fact of geographical, racial and culural differences. SCO will be hard pressed to claim the community is 'un-organized' with actions like these.

    As well I think its safe to say had this not happened in such a quick fashion the community would have supported his legal defence.

    People will fund entities who stand for their own views. - Me - Now

    --

    No, this is
    1. Re:Open Source communities Strength by __past__ · · Score: 1

      This isn't the community of thousands of coders acting, its the companies that make money off their free work, and want to continue doing so.

  31. Read: IBM puts their laywers behind LT & RMS by csoto · · Score: 1

    Very cool! See what happens when people, industry and innovators cooperate? They tell bullies like SCO to piss off!

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
  32. Can we contribute? by fferreres · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know, our contributions wouldn't make a monetary difference, but they would surely make us feel nice, along with putting some pressure on SCO :-)

    --
    unfinished: (adj.)
    1. Re:Can we contribute? by Robert+Frazier · · Score: 1

      Hello,

      Try the empircial route. Send a cheque to OSDL and see if they return it.

      Best wishes,
      Bob

    2. Re:Can we contribute? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Certainly you can. Just email me your credit card number and how much you want to contribute, and I'll take care of the rest.

      (Hmm... I'd better post this anonymously, or someone terminally gullible might not realise it's a joke...)

    3. Re:Can we contribute? by battjt · · Score: 1

      Purchase an HP and install RedHat. Attach it to an IBM via a cisco router. Etc. Joe

      --
      Joe Batt Solid Design
  33. Re:One important company was left out of the list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    so now we mod up as informative stuff that is false?

    oh wait, this is Slashdot, nevermind

  34. Someone want to give Linus a heads up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Didn't OSDN also get subpoenaed? Didn't IBM also get subpoenaed? Didn't one or more of the other funders of OSDN get subpoenaed?

    IS OSDN picking Linus' lawyer(s)?

    Huge conflict of interest, even if the lawyers won't admit to it in their salivation over the impending legal fees.

    Linus, if you're reading this, you need to take the legal funding offered by OSDN, and find your own lawyer, one that hasn't done work for IBM or SCO (or SCO's principals) in the past, and one that doesn't expect to. At a minimum. Then have them put it in writing. Then have them check their records for others they may have done work for that are involved in this annoyance.

    This is a big conflict of interest, yet the lawyers will do all kinds of twists and contortions to try and minimize any conflicts of interest.

    OSDN funding legal fees is great. As long as it is for your benefit, and not for their benefit to your detriment.

    Don't make a serious mistake at this juncture. What's said on the outside doesn't matter. What makes it into court (or doesn't make it in) is all that matters. And what makes it, or doesn't make it is what can save your skin, or skin you alive at a later date.

    1. Re:Someone want to give Linus a heads up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OSDL, you fucking moron. Not OSDN.

      Sheesh. Learn how to fucking read.

    2. Re:Someone want to give Linus a heads up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linus, if you're reading this, you need to take the legal funding offered by OSDN

      OSDL != OSDN. Please to read the title of the article at least.

    3. Re:Someone want to give Linus a heads up by BigBuckHunter · · Score: 1

      I am of the opinion that he should do just the opposite. Linus should have a sit-down with IBM's lawyers. In a bar fight, it is often wise to get behind the biggest MF you see, and let them clar the path to the door. IBM's lawyers are bad MF's, and it's good to have them on our side at the moment. Perhaps we should send them a fruit basket.

    4. Re:Someone want to give Linus a heads up by donutello · · Score: 1

      Yeah, until that big MF decides he has no use for you anymore. You always want your legal representation to represent you, not someone else.

      --
      Mmmm.. Donuts
    5. Re:Someone want to give Linus a heads up by Error27 · · Score: 1

      I think you mean OSDL. The parent company of the OSDN does support the OSDL.

      > Didn't IBM also get subpoenaed?

      IBM can't be subpoenaed. They're the defendant.

  35. Re:One important company was left out of the list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Sure they're members. They joined just after SCO... ;-)

    Seriously, I don't know why the grandparent keeps being modded up.

  36. Re:Do you need a lawyer? (not a troll) by dougmc · · Score: 1
    Do you really need a lawyer for a subpoena? Even if Linus was a US citizen, he's not being investigated or anything. Just answer a few stupid questions from SCO, and you're scot free.
    People seem to be modding the parent down as a troll -- which is hardly fair, because it's a reasonable question. It was certainly my first throught when I saw the post where Linus said he'd need to get a lawyer.

    (Of course, my second throught was that if I were in his shoes, I'd want to talk to a lawyer about it.)

    Not being a lawyer, one question -- is SCO (or the court?) obligated to at least pay for Linus's expenses in answering this subpoena? (Not that it matters, because Linus is popular enough that he won't have to pay a cent, and RMS is probably covered too, but the next guy might not be so lucky.)

  37. google for the lazy by mekkab · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And here you go

    See? was that so hard?

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    1. Re:google for the lazy by I8TheWorm · · Score: 1

      Yeah, BayStar's $50,000,000 compared to the $8,000,000 (which was MS exercising their option on UNIX code, although that may be just to help fund SCO) is pretty large. And there's no connection between BayStar and MS. Of course, if someone is a M$ hater, it's easy to ignore the BayStar funding and simply point out M$'s funding instead. Maybe they work for Fox News....

      --
      Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
    2. Re:google for the lazy by Aliencow · · Score: 1

      "There are only two investors in this deal: BayStar Capital and the Royal Bank of Canada." I still can't believe I'm sitting here in an RBC office. And I signed a paper saying I'm not allowed to post stuff that could affect RBC's reputation on forums. So I won't say that this is stupid, I will only state the fact that "RBC invested in SCO" . That's a fact, it's not negative if you love SCO !

    3. Re:google for the lazy by mekkab · · Score: 1

      The good stuff is buried in there:
      Another open-source player, who asked not to be identified, told eWEEK that the $50 million investment into SCO was surprising to him as "SCO is not a good growth company and is in fact on life-support. A solid company that's been in business as long as SCO has should be making it's money from product/services and not donations and lawsuits.

      "I had to look at BayStar to see why they would do this and the only thing that makes sense is the PIPE program. Someone has a vested interest in seeing SCO continue and lo and behold, there is Microsoft listed as a BayStar PIPE customer," he said.



      Baystar may not be a Microsoft TOol (and I don't care if they are), but they are FUCKING MORONS for making a $50 mil unsound investment.

      --
      In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    4. Re:google for the lazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And there's no connection between BayStar and MS.

      Buzzt. Did you research this at all, fanboy?

    5. Re:google for the lazy by I8TheWorm · · Score: 1

      If by connection you mean Paul Allen, then yes, I did the research (I'll take the higher ground on name calling here). Paul Allen has been out of MS since 1983. That's research. Other than Paul Allen, there isn't a connection between the two. I'm just stating the facts, rather than making accusations.

      --
      Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
  38. Reap what you sow, young geek by csoto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To support Linux, coders contribute code, and get... code in return!

    Corporations (IBM, RedHat, Sun, etc.) contribute dollars and guess what they get for their support of Linux?

    These corps. have a lot invested in Linux (and will continue to do so), simply because they stand to make boatloads of money using and growing it. It's in their interests to fight SCO.

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
    1. Re:Reap what you sow, young geek by frane · · Score: 1

      It's interesting to see the position that Sun is taking. Sun backs OSDL and so is paying a portion of the legal fees to fight SCO. Yet Sun also invested in SCO by purchasing the right to buy a 15% stake in SCO. I guess they're hedging their bets, but I find it amusing that in a roundabout way they are paying for both sides of the legal battle.

    2. Re:Reap what you sow, young geek by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 1

      Funny but fair. By funding both sides, they're leaving the decision to the judges where it belongs. If a company was pouring money to buy the best lawyers money could buy to ensure a victory one way or another, you'd probably complain about that too right?

      --
      Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
    3. Re:Reap what you sow, young geek by e_AltF4 · · Score: 1

      >pouring money to buy the best lawyers money could buy

      that's ok, as long as they don't pour money to buy the best judges money could buy

  39. Defense? Who's suing him? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    What the hell is this about a defense fund?

    I wasn't aware that Linus was being sued, so why should he need a defense fund?

  40. Penguin Overlord by Polly_was_a_cracker · · Score: 1

    I for one welcome our new penguin overlord! --- This sig is fake to help kill 20 seconds --- And so is this one.

    --
    I have a Cig, but do you have a light?
  41. Re:Won't SCO ultimately be the one that pays for h by Fnkmaster · · Score: 4, Informative
    Unfortunately, cost recovery usually comes after the main penalty phase in a civil case. It's definitely not guaranteed that the instigator of the suit bears the cost of the lawyers, though if they instigated a very weak, baseless case, it's much more likely they will have to bear the costs.


    Unfortunately, in this case, it's clear that the SCO strategy is to draw out litigation long enough to give everybody an uncomfortable feeling in their rectal areas, until somebody snaps and decides to make a favorable acquisition offer. And if SCO loses, good luck getting a dime out of them, they'll fold the shop up in a way that lets them get out of everything, I'm quite sure, and still make off with a lot of money. This is definitely one of these cases where the malfeasance of corporate officers and attorneys is so blatant, I'd like to see the corporate veil pierced and have personal liability passed on to these fuckers for the financial losses and damaged reputations they have incurred on lots of other legitimate, hardworking people and companies.

  42. Re:OK, so which is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    And probably linked to the american's bizarre hallucinations of personhood for corporations.

    Perhaps if more americans realised that corporations and other organisations were collections of people, the world would be a better place.

  43. Ignore Subpoena's by awol · · Score: 1

    IIRC ignoring a subpoena is a contempt of court.

    I would think that there is a better principle for which Linus etc can stand and that is to use all these lawyers lining up to pro bono them (ooh er vicar) to defend them against completely ignoring these specious subpoena's and fighting the for the fact that they should never have been issued in the first place.

    The act of issuing the subpoena in the way that SCO has is verging on vexatious and the problem is that when they get slaughtered, and they will, there will be nothing left on the corpse by which to compensate those who have suffered a loss as a result of all this bollox. Like those forced to deal with being subpoenaed to appear (or at least give evidence) before the court.

    There are certain times when a judicious amount of contempt of court is important to correct the largess of the litigious.

    --
    "The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging."
  44. Don't blame this on a gorillas! by whittrash · · Score: 2, Funny

    I am sick and tired of gorillas being accused of being evil thuggish creatures. Gorillas are friendly and do not attack humans. Don't liken the friendly gorillas to a pack of bloodthirsty IBM lawyers.

    1. Re:Don't blame this on a gorillas! by cybermace5 · · Score: 1

      How can you say that, don't you know that evil thuggish creatures have feelings too, and might not appreciate being compared to bloodthirsty lawyers? Hypocrite.

      --
      ...
  45. Why is this news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It would be far more surprising, and hence news-worthy, if either OSDL or TransMeta did not pay for Linus' lawyer.

  46. Re:Funding sources by sulli · · Score: 4, Funny

    they're called the Editors.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  47. Re:Do you need a lawyer? (not a troll) by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you've called them as a witness, you're responsible for their travel expenses and per diem.

  48. Man I Wish by ImTwoSlick · · Score: 1

    SCO was among those companies paying for Linus' defence. That would be sweet!

  49. Linus is defending SCO by shoppa · · Score: 4, Funny
    What's the deal with the article title?
    OSDL Pays for Linus Torvalds' SCO Defense
    I'd be very surprised if Linus was going to defend SCO here. Although obviously SCO thought that it would be advantageous to pump him for *something*, I dunno what.
    1. Re:Linus is defending SCO by hoofie · · Score: 1

      I'll think you'll find the title refers to Linus defending HIMSELF against any accusations by SCO, not acting for SCO's defence.

    2. Re:Linus is defending SCO by shoppa · · Score: 1
      I'll think you'll find the title refers to Linus defending HIMSELF against any accusations by SCO
      That's not it either: Linus hasn't been charged with or sued for anything (yet).

      I think SCO is trying to pull a "Perry Mason" type move where a hard line of questioning forces Linus/RMS/whoever to break down in front of the court with an admission that they stole EVERYTHING from SCO and they did it FOR IBM. It's gonna backfire on them *so bad*.

    3. Re:Linus is defending SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously SCO thought that it would be advantageous to pump him for *something*, I dunno what.

      They might be going to try to get him to state in court that submissions to the Linux kernel are not checked to make sure they don't infringe anyone's copyright. Perhaps they hope to convince the judge that he's a shady character who's more interested in putting one over on closed-source software than on keeping Linux legal, or some such.

  50. Defense Fund? by nurb432 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Ummm last I heard Linus (etc) have only been subpoenaed, not charged or accused or indicted..

    Why would you need a 'defense' fund for that? Giving evidence testimony doesn't require an expensive lawyer....

    It only helps line some more attorneys pockets....

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  51. Linus's Theme Song by Foofoobar · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hope when Linus enters they either play the Ride of The Valkyries or Darth Vaders theme song so that SCO gets the full effect of the wrath they bring upon themselves.

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    1. Re:Linus's Theme Song by makohund · · Score: 1

      OK, sounds good.

      But I vote for The Sorcerer's Apprentice... the more SCO tries to take him (and us) down, the more trouble they'll get.

      I'm having visions of McBride in a robe & funny hat, frantically trying (and failing) to stop the army of busily working brooms. They simply ignore his wild efforts, and he shouts spell after useless spell to no avail.

  52. And baystar got the money from... by MarkusQ · · Score: 1

    "There are only two investors in this deal: BayStar Capital and the Royal Bank of Canada."

    Baystar's own website claims Paul Allen, Microsoft, etc. in their list of top ten investors. IIRC, four of the top ten were Microsoft or close friends of Microsoft.

    -- MarkusQ

    1. Re:And baystar got the money from... by MonkeyDluffy · · Score: 1
      And of course, Paul Allen was a big investor in Transmeta, who employed Linus for quite a while...

      --
      Happy meals fund terrorism
    2. Re:And baystar got the money from... by MarkusQ · · Score: 1

      And of course, Paul Allen was a big investor in Transmeta, who employed Linus for quite a while...

      True, though IIRC that deal was done long before microsoft started fearing linux.

      -- MarkusQ

    3. Re:And baystar got the money from... by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      Since when has Microsoft 'feared' Linux?

      "First they ignore you, then you pretend they're laughing at you, then you pretend they're fighting you, then you're a loser."

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    4. Re:And baystar got the money from... by I8TheWorm · · Score: 1

      Usually when someone on slashdot makes a claim like that, they provide a link. I hit Baystar and have yet to find anything about Paul Allen. That doesn't mean it's not there, but you could have provided proof of that claim fairly easily.

      Paul Allen has long made it clear that he does his own thing, and MS doesn't not follow (nor vice versa). He has six foundations of his own, owns his own investment firm (Vulcan), is a lobbyist, and owns the Seahawks.

      However, he left MS in 1983 (battling Hodgekins disease), and now owns Marcus Cable, Hollywood Entertainment, and Asymetrix Learning Systems.

      Any other non MS employees you'd like to point out that invest in BayStar?

      --
      Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
    5. Re:And baystar got the money from... by MarkusQ · · Score: 1

      Since when has Microsoft 'feared' Linux?

      Well, October 31, 1998 comes to mind.

      -- MarkusQ

    6. Re:And baystar got the money from... by MarkusQ · · Score: 1

      Usually when someone on slashdot makes a claim like that, they provide a link.

      Sure thing. It's on page three of this white paper-- the same page, incidentally, where they list as one of the advantages of their PIPEs "the ability to conduct transactions confidentially".

      I hit Baystar and have yet to find anything about Paul Allen.

      Ah. You do know that Vulcan Ventures == Paul Allen, right?

      -- MarkusQ

    7. Re:And baystar got the money from... by I8TheWorm · · Score: 1

      Ah... yeah.. and ah... you do know Paul Allen hasn't worked for MS since 1983.. right?

      --
      Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
  53. Why this is truely good for OSS by BubbaTheBarbarian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    while there seems to an outpouring of support for Linus, the idea of contributing to a defense fund would actually hurt him. As opposed to RMs, who as an idealist and catalyst of social change makes his way through life via his supporters, Linus "works" for a living. Having OSDL and the various companies that support it come to his support gives the man, and therefore his product, an air of legitimacy that would not be had if his defense was being funded by OSS supporters. In this case, both methods of paying for their defense works, as RMS is supported by the people and Linus is not (from a monetary POV people).

    Secondly is the screaming by those asking why the hell he needs a defense. In the case of both RMS and Linus they both are responsible for the two major things that makes Linux what it is today, free and strongly coded. SCO is attacking both the freedom we have in distributing code and the underlying source of the strength of it's code, ergo it is imperative for them to prove to the court that both of these things are not permissible under the law.

    This is not just a test of the GPL and Linux. This is a coordinated attack meant to gauge the underlying strength of the OSS community and those that (corporate and private) that support it. The bet was made with the thought that after a little law action, one of the players would pull out making the house of cards fall.

    Oppps.

    Now they are faced with something they never thought they would have, the beginnings or a tighter conglomerate of users and corps that are ready and willing to defend our right to code and not have it stolen, and our right to distribute that code without interference from companies hell bent on stealing for a living. I have said before that this is not the last of this ordeal, and I truly thing that we are in for a rough 2 to 4 years here in regards to challenges on the GPL and the community in general, but seeing things like this makes believe even more that good things are all that can come of this.

  54. What I learnt as a kid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Damn tree-hugger.

    If I ever learnt anything as a kid it was: do not go outside. If you do go outside, under all circumstances stay with the civilization. Yes, that means that the nice little forest or the green pasture just a walk away are off-limits.

    Untamed nature is cold, wet, dark and full of disgusting lifeforms that when they're not busy killing and eating each other, they will find time to sting, bite, scare or hurt you in some way.

  55. okay... by mantera · · Score: 1


    just a question; why does it mean that he's subpoened... i thought that he was being subpoened as a witness, but now that he needs legal representation, is he being a defendent...

    what are they hoping to do subpoening him... and what are they accusing him of...

    1. Re:okay... by carlos_benj · · Score: 1

      i thought that he was being subpoened as a witness, but now that he needs legal representation, is he being a defendent...

      Not yet. It's a prudent move to protect him. Legal representation could help coach you on what to say or not to say in order to avoid implications that could later get you into trouble. That's not to say he will be coached to lie but to know his rights and how to present information so that it can't be misconstrued and used against you later.

      --

      --

      As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.

  56. A scene from Batman comes to mind... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Danny DeVito and his army of penguins with rockets attached to their backs...

    However, it's about time the villian wins!

  57. That flock of attack pengiuns by theMerovingian · · Score: 1

    also generated this slashdot page for theMerovingian (722983).

    --
    "If you think you have things under control, you're not going fast enough." --Mario Andretti
  58. Re:OK, so which is it? by daeley · · Score: 1

    And probably linked to the american's bizarre hallucinations of personhood for corporations.

    Perhaps if more americans realised that corporations and other organisations were collections of people, the world would be a better place.


    Informative? Ah, no. The logic here is that "committee" is a singular noun, as is "corporation."

    Perhaps if more Anonymous Cowards realized that political trolling doesn't enter into grammar, Slashdot would be a better place.

    --
    I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
  59. Motion to compel disovery by HangingChad · · Score: 1
    On Dec 5th has motivated SCO to announce their earnings on Dec 3rd. From this article in The Register.

    I'll be surpirsed if Linus even has to show up for a deposition. The judge has got to be getting pretty tired of SCO's stall-o-rama.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  60. Just a note to SCO.... by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 1

    "OSDL has agreed to fund legal representation for Torvalds and any other employees of the lab who may become involved in the litigation...the OSDL is funded by a variety of corporations including (but not limitied to) IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Red Hat, Cisco, Computer Associates, Fujitsu, Hitachi, and Nokia. "

    Ha, ha. Eww....what did you just step in...

  61. SCO funding anti_SCO campaign? by scovetta · · Score: 1

    Just in case you didn't you didn't know, the OSDL is funded by a variety of corporations including (but not limitied to) IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Red Hat, Cisco, Computer Associates, Fujitsu, Hitachi, and Nokia.

    I really thought SCO was going to be on that list!

    --
    Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche
  62. SCO. Squashed. Like a bug. by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 2, Funny

    One day all that old SCO merchandise is going to worth a lot to geeky collectors on eBay.

    I'm holding out for a frisbee or baseball cap, myself.

    --
    -- clvrmnky
  63. What about Stallman? by jmichaelg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Glad to hear Linus is covered. Who is covering Stallman's legal expenses?

    1. Re:What about Stallman? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know. But I for one signed up as an Associate Member of the FSF after hearing about the subpoena.

    2. Re:What about Stallman? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is covering Stallman's legal expenses?

      That would probably be the FSF, who aren't short of good lawyers.

    3. Re:What about Stallman? by LittleBigLui · · Score: 2, Funny

      The American Barber's Association together with Gilette and Head&Shoulders.

      --
      Free as in mason.
    4. Re:What about Stallman? by Chester+K · · Score: 2, Informative

      Glad to hear Linus is covered. Who is covering Stallman's legal expenses?

      I'd imagine the FSF is. Stallman's only involved because SCO's attacking the GPL, and defending the GPL is the FSF's raison d'etre.

      --

      NO CARRIER
    5. Re:What about Stallman? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Glad to hear Linus is covered. Who is covering
      > Stallman's legal expenses?

      Probably himself. He's only received about
      1.5 million dollars over the last five years
      in "grants". Funny how he's getting rich telling
      other people about how software has to be "free".

    6. Re:What about Stallman? by whig · · Score: 1

      My guess is Eben Moglen.

      And oh my God will he rip SCO a new one!

      --
      Peace and love, y'all
    7. Re:What about Stallman? by dominion · · Score: 1

      Ummm. His software is free. As in libre. And gratis.

      He can get all the grants he wants, he's not requiring anybody to give him anything. If people want to throw money at him for the last 25 years of work that he's done, I'm not gonna complain.

      It's not like the guy's wearing prada shoes and dining out at 5 star restaurants every night.

    8. Re:What about Stallman? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think Stallman is on Linux's side?

      Stallman would probably defend the GPL, but I don't know about Linux.

    9. Re:What about Stallman? by Knights+who+say+'INT · · Score: 1

      As much juvenile and downright silly Stallman gets, I wish he'd get a bit of support from "the community". He's one of the founding fathers after all.

      What, me, donate? Wait, I've only been using the internet since 1995. I don't even run an open source OS. Don't tax me, don't tax thee, let's tax this guy behind this tree.

      I wish there'd be modifiers for "cynical" alongside "funny" or "offtopic".

    10. Re:What about Stallman? by Chester+K · · Score: 1

      As much juvenile and downright silly Stallman gets, I wish he'd get a bit of support from "the community". He's one of the founding fathers after all.

      If you donate to the FSF, you're supporting Stallman. It's not cynical, it's what the FSF is for. You don't have to address your checks to RMS directly for him to benefit from it.

      --

      NO CARRIER
  64. Re:Motion to compel disovery /BRILLIANT by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 4, Funny

    IBM cited a Judge who ruled in a 2001 securities case that fraud allegations "should not be a pretext for the discovery of unknown wrongs". That Judge, sharp-eyed posters of Groklaw have spotted, is the same Hon. Dale A Kimball who will hear the Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses, to which the filing is addressed.

    Your honor, we have heard the courts say that "the fishing idea" is wrong and can not be done. What a brilliant point, excuse me...
    Your honor (nice robe!) I had no idea you PERSONALLY said that. Absolutely amazing, poetic so Jeffersonian.
    (turning to look at McBride, sticks tongue out and issues official IBM rasberry)

  65. Dont work in EU, case dismissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IANL, EU Software Patient Directive does not allow the copyright of the actual code.

  66. Re:One important company was left out of the list? by ronaldb64 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm just surprised SCO isn't a member of the OSDL. After all, they're becoming famous for their inability to know what they are doing ("I din't tell you we were issueing subpoena's to certain people because I didn't know we were.").

    --
    There's no place like 127.0.0.1
  67. How would an Anti-SCO License work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would like to know if the OSDL will pay to have their lawyers develop a version of a GPL that forbids downloading/use/repackaging of a software package by any computer that has ever had a SCO OS within 1km of it.
    That's just about what I want for my next Open Source software release.


    How would that work? I could see it now.

    "By using this software, you are accepting this licence. If you are SCO, by accepting this licence you are in violation of it."

    1. Re:How would an Anti-SCO License work? by frostfreek · · Score: 1

      As I see it, the installer displays the License Agreement. On a normal OS, you get:


      "Do you accept this license?"
      "Yes" or "No"

      On a SCO product, you get:

      "Do you accept this license?"
      "No" or "Format Hard Drive"

  68. Re:Defense? by Viduliya · · Score: 1

    Have you watched REAL tech media lately?

  69. Does Linus, Stallman, Etc. Take Paypal? by ausoleil · · Score: 1

    It would be good if someone somewhere would set up a legal defense fund for these folks, one that you and I and other "little" Linux users could easily contribute to.

    Linus and Stallman have made my a lot easier, it certainly is worth a click and a donation to make theirs go just a bit smoother.

    1. Re:Does Linus, Stallman, Etc. Take Paypal? by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 1

      Trust me, they don't need it yet.

      OSDL is big.

      The RedHat defense fund is big.

      IBM is the mothership that all motherships dock to.

      If they need to raise money for a legal defense fund, they'll hit up these mammoth sources first.

      While I agree with you that the solidarity of us little Linux users is valuable, there are far better ways to contribute than by donating a couple bucks---

      Instead, tell people you know (especially not technically literate people) about what kind of crap SCO is trying to pull.

      There are a lot of us 'little' Linux users out there. We can raise quite a bit of awareness---

      I think it is because of us 'little' Linux users that a fair number of mainstream media source have been rating SCO's chances as rather poor.

      Lets keep up the good-work....

      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
  70. Does he have to go? by Stone316 · · Score: 1

    Since he's not a US citizen why is he even bothering to go?

    --
    "Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
    1. Re:Does he have to go? by iggymanz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Being a "U.S. resident alien", he not only has to obey the same laws as you & I, but if he does not, he also can face the added consequence in some cases of being incarcerated by the INS, and even deported.

    2. Re:Does he have to go? by Stone316 · · Score: 1

      Ah... I didn't know he currently resided in the US.

      --
      "Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
    3. Re:Does he have to go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ask any Mexican immigrant in Arizona, California, or Texas: If you have kids that were born in the US, you're practically guaranteed not to get deported. Those kids are quite the ticket. Of course if you want to go back to your home country, and your kids aren't citizens there, it can get pretty complicated.

      I consider Scandinavia as something of an ideal. A realistic ideal, culturally, socially, geographically, and politically, not some kind of utopia. It never has quite added up that someone would move FROM Sweden, Denmark, Finland, TO the US. I can see maybe moving to Bavaria or the Netherlands or something. Or maybe going to Europe because there are no jobs in Iceland or Norway, or something. But I simply can't fathom why anyone would go FROM a free country with a good culture and society, TO the US, even if it is California. It just doesn't make sense.

    4. Re:Does he have to go? by Simple-Simmian · · Score: 1
      The weather. The Money. Real Freedom. Those are all real reasons.

      You are right the US is just a bunch of war criminals and drunk football fans.
      The people are stupid and ugly.

      Man the EU is more full of it's self than a van full of drunk Texans I am starting to think.

      --
      If you don't like what I write don't be a CS and mod it down. Refute it.
      Yea I can't spell. So what is your point?
    5. Re:Does he have to go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're an idiot, man.

    6. Re:Does he have to go? by Crazy+Eight · · Score: 1

      He lives in Silicon Valley.

  71. Re:OK, so which is it? by DataCannibal · · Score: 2, Funny

    the British say that the committee meet.

    Oh, no we don't !

    At least I don't and none of my friends or aquaintances do. But then, we went to Grammar School and don't try to talk like Australian soap stars.

    --
    No but, yeah but, no but...
  72. OSDL by NerdHead · · Score: 1

    For a minute I thought OSDL stood for "Open Source Defense League."

  73. Re:from the this-man-sucks dept by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I actually admire Linus, and this was just a flame-bait FP.
    Go Linus.

    Of course I can't prove ethat I made that FP and I could just be another Anonymous Coward....

  74. In a flock... by Kjella · · Score: 1

    And Torvalds is the biggest, baddest penguin out there. One might even call him The Omega Penguin.

    ...the leader is usually called the Alpha male. The other two I've often heard used is Beta for the lead female and Omega as the lowest of the pecking order. So I'd rather suggest The Alpha Penguin instead :)

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:In a flock... by Ugot2BkidNme · · Score: 1

      Omega being the last Character of the Greek Alphabet. Can be used as a "be all end all" so depending how you intepret it. However I believ eyou are correct however since. Linus is a leader then Alpha would apply better. Omega woudl apply that there is no Bigger and there is no better and the evolution has reached its pinacle. Cause I certainly hope not Linux has a long way to go and I believe Linus may not be the leader to bring Linux to the masses. I t may be someone else.

  75. SCOX by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1

    From review of the facts it appears that SCO case has the merits of the green river killers defense in court. However the only thing that has concerned me in this debacle is that SCO's stock price has been nothing but buoyant.

    Now this week it looks like the price is beginning to head towards its future target. If the past is any clue I am sure we can expect a McBride public release anytime now.

    Hot Sauce and gourmet stuff
    Mozilla and Linux customers get 5%

  76. Well Linus by floydman · · Score: 1

    I am with you man, but looks like they didnt like that "they are on crack" thing...

    --
    The lunatic is in my head
  77. In defense of my statement... by M$Marketing · · Score: 1, Informative

    I feel that I have been moderated unfairly. I'll rephrase just to get my point across.

    This article goes to show that it is worth while for companies & organizations to support open source initiatives. These guys have thrown money into the cause, & that says to me that there are financial incentives. So, I think that this is a good thing. Just as some companies are trying to get money while being unjust towards people, some companies are trying to get money while being just towards people.

    I understand that there are many different views on money. However, I'm trying to get a point across, & not troll.

    --
    Take care...
    1. Re:In defense of my statement... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anything said by someone with a name starting with M$ should have an instant troll modifier.

  78. Re:Linus's Theme Song - Better by linuxkrn · · Score: 1

    More like 'Duel of Fates' from SW EP1

  79. INAL but ..... by Usagi_yo · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If Linus is being subpoened by SCO and Linus isn't a named defendent, isn't SCO responsible for his travel and time off expenses?

    While it's entirely Linus's option to have legal representation, shouldn't SCO have to foot the bill for that too? In essence SCO is subpoening Linus as an expert witness.

  80. Just guessing how SCO is going to spin it... by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm guessing that SCO will try to spin it that he and IBM somehow cooperated, or at least he was aware or should have been aware or could have been aware, that IBM was "illegally" putting code into Linux. At best, they'll spin it as someone who can't properly control what's in Linux.

    Anything Linux answers to those FUD-fishing questions will have great importance, not so much for the merits of the case but for Linus and Linux's reputation as well as SCOs FUD campaign. That's why he should have a lawyer.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  81. OSDL stands for by CitznFish · · Score: 2, Funny

    Open Source Defense League, kinda like the SuperFriends except they don't get along.

    --
    'mmmmmmmmm.... forbidden donut'
    1. Re:OSDL stands for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Open Source Defense League, kinda like the SuperFriends except they
      >don't get along.
      >
      >
      The SuperFriends don't get along all that well. You think that most of them *ACTUALLY* like Batman?
      They'll kick him out given half a chance, but they are terrified that he'll hunt them down one by one and do uspeakable things to them.

    2. Re:OSDL stands for by sharkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      Shape of... a core dump!

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  82. the article has been revised! by CoughDropAddict · · Score: 1

    It looks like the article has been revised! The word "trademark" no longer appears, and the above statement has been replaced with

    The lawsuit was bold, alleging violations of trade secrets and copyrights related to a hot market segment, Linux. (emphasis mine)

  83. Ninnle would step up to the plate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and I'm sure they will if Linus needs the extra help.

  84. Re:OK, so which is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another American who thinks he's invented English.

    FYI about 50% of english speakers think US English is stilted, unpopular and inconsistent. They'd gladly tell you that the only way to refer to organizations is as PLURAL.

    Me, I think that's beautiful and makes a lot of sense.

  85. Don't forget the EFF by gumpish · · Score: 2, Informative

    https://secure.eff.org/

    They're doing important work.

  86. Your spelling error by localusr · · Score: 1

    There is no such word as "truely" in the English language.

    1. Re:Your spelling error by BubbaTheBarbarian · · Score: 3, Funny

      Dang, forgot to check my grammer...oh deer....

  87. Linus' lawyers will be busy. by LightSail · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Linus will get the opportunity to allege copyright infringement in deposition. In SCO's reality the GPL is invalid, so they are infringing on Linus' copyrights or in the real world, by issuing a separate license for any part of Linux, SCO voids the use of the GPL thus infringing on Linus' copyrights. It's best to have a lawyer available in that circumstance. One who can explain copyright law to SCO's attorneys, as they seem to have some difficulties in that area.

  88. Re:Won't SCO ultimately be the one that pays for h by fermion · · Score: 1
    I suspect the courts would first have to have to find the SCO claim is baseless, and order SCO to pay legal fees. Also, since if SCO losses the stock would be worthless and there would be no business, the bankruptcy courts would have to decide who deserves payment and how much that payment would be. Of course the stockholder would get nothing. The other investors, who know that bankruptcy is likely, will get some of there money back. The lawyers will get paid as long as there is cash left. Of course, the SCO legal team could be sued, but that is whole 'nother can of worms.

    Which is to say that SCO is playing to enrich certain persons. Win or lose, those persons will be rich. If they win, a few more people will be rich, and a great many more people will be poor. If they lose, the same people will be rich, and a few people will be poor.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  89. New thought (I think)... by NaugaHunter · · Score: 1

    I often seen it posted about how the stockholders can/should react for fraud/deciept/whatever. But can normal employees sue the actual executives in civil court in some manner? No matter how this plays out, won't developers with 'SCO' on their resumes essentially be tainted, and possibly avoided by all other Unix/Linux based companies?

    Just a thought. Maybe they should unionize and strike - that could certainly throw a wrench into things.

    --
    R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
    1. Re:New thought (I think)... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Does SCO even have any developers any more? What would they need them for, since their real business now is just litigation?

  90. I though the issuer of the subpeona had to pay ?? by steveoc · · Score: 1

    I will never understand US law, but here in Australia, if you subpeona someone to appear as a witness, then you are obliged to pay them at an hourly rate for their time, as well as pay to put them up in a hotel, receive a decent meal allowance, and provide enough surplus cash for them to go out at night, get roaring drunk, and end up in some stranger's apartment with three table dancers, an overweight german shepard dog, and a pet parrot who keeps saying 'Give us a Beer, Give us a Beer' over and over again.

    So I cant see how Linus would be financially put out by being subpeoned to appear as a witness.

    Actually, when I remember back to my time as a witness in techo/computer related case in the Supreme Court of Queensland (with fond memories indeed), then I can perhaps see why they have called on him - maybe they hope to destroy the quality of kernel code by plying the main players with alcohol and loose women, as is the custom when calling witnesses to the stand in high profile cases ? And there are some totally gorgeous loose women in Brisbane. (Where is this one .. Utah ? .. hmm .. any comments ?)

    Lets hope they dont get him up to the point of being threatened with a contempt of court hearing for arriving late and semi-attired, or for overtly flirting with the stenographer during question time. (Why do they place the witness box in an elevated position so that the witness can see nothing but the exposed cleavage of the stenographer ? .. thats not really fair is it ?)

  91. OSDL Just Grandstanding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahhhh... Poor Linus. What, he only probably
    makes about a 150K a year. Poor fellow, he'll
    have to buy a plane ticket and pay for a hotel.
    Wow, that's going to cost him dearly!

    Is this just grandstanding on the part of the
    OSDL for public relations purposes? Being
    subpoenaed does not require one to hire a defense
    lawyer. It is not an idictment and the person
    being supoenaed is not being tried. The court
    is only requiring Linus to appear as he apparently
    has testimony to be given that is relevant to the
    case at hand.

  92. From the horse's ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    McBride is a keynote speaker at the Computer Digital Expo in Las Vegas (cdexpo.com)

    If you're around for that or Comdex (running the same week) you could get it right from the source.

  93. MOD PARENT UP by bahamat · · Score: 1

    Very interesting...

  94. The SCO Defense by Astrorunner · · Score: 1

    does that start out with p-qb4 or p-kb4? I can never remember.

    1. Re:The SCO Defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1.e4 (==pK4) c4 (==pQB4) ain't bad (== sicilian defense)

      1 .. f4 is generally regarded as suicide however.

  95. Speaking of financial incentives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone else find it curious that SCO's stock is through the roof, but their earnings don't match at all? The P/E is right around 80 right now. That's about 10 times that of a healthy 'real valued' stock...

  96. My guess? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    He gets more pro bono work by Eben Moglen or something. Eben has been kind enough to do so much already, after all, and...

  97. They should just do what Microsoft did... by Phantasmo · · Score: 1

    during the antitrust suit. Delay things until the next regime change.

    When Clinton was in power, it looked like MS was going to really get in trouble for once. But they delayed, and delayed, and delayed...

    then GWB was elected. All of a sudden, the federal government didn't want Microsoft split up. The judge was replaced. They just wanted a quick and easy settlement. No financial penalties needed. Just promise to be on good behaviour.

    Dean wouldn't stand for this shit. He'd kick the case out of court for good.

    Hey, are there going to be any protests about this whole fiasco?

    --

    The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
    1. Re:They should just do what Microsoft did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dean's a fuckin' retard. At least Bush understands there are people in the world trying to kill us.

      Dean and his crew of rednecks taking on SCO? hehe...yeah, right.

    2. Re:They should just do what Microsoft did... by rdean400 · · Score: 1

      A message promoting Howard Dean *and* the Official Vampire Webpage. Howard Dean's a wallet vampire.

    3. Re:They should just do what Microsoft did... by Phantasmo · · Score: 1

      Oh my God, I can't vote for a Liberal! He'll raise my taxes!

      Well, not MY taxes per se... he'll raise the taxes on big companies and the extremely rich!!!

      And give the money to me. Affordable healthcare? Decent funding for public schools? Pfft.
      HELLO?? Do you ever KNOW HOW CAPITALISM WORKS?

      Eventually EVERYONE gets filthy rich. That's why you can't raise taxes on the rich... because, in just a few more months, YOU'LL BE ONE OF THEM! Any day now!

      Oh, gotta go. I'm late for the night shift at my second job.

      --

      The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
    4. Re:They should just do what Microsoft did... by Elf-friend · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but your comparison is not apt. The MS case was a federal anti-trust prosecution, while this case is a private lawsuit. The fed's backed down in the MS case, but here the government is not a party. Howard Dean is not going to interfere in a private lawsuit (even if elected, and it appears from the polls - in our pro-Dean press, I might add - that his own state isn't going to vote for him). Bush won't interfere either. Even the president has no legal authority for that. In fact, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this being tried in Utah state courts?

    5. Re:They should just do what Microsoft did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As we know, high taxes have been proven to create jobs. Would you care to post a link to prove this? If not, then admit that Dean will destroy the economy and you don't care.

    6. Re:They should just do what Microsoft did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, he'll raise taxes on the rich alright...rich being defined as someone whose household income is > $50k.

      Affordable healthcare: the answer is complicated. It involves capping damage awards on malpractice suits and reducing the bureaucratic mess that is our healthcare system. In the former case, the dollar flow for malpractice is consumer --> health insurance premiums --> insurance provider --> doctor --> malpractice insurance premiums --> malpractice insurance provider --> damage award claim --> "victim". The larger damage award leads to higher malpractice insurance premiums which leads to more expensive doctor visits which leads to larger insurance company payouts which leads to higher premiums for the consumer. In the latter case, all of the laws that are being enacted to promote privacy also increase the number of people required to deal with them. More people = higher doctor visit costs = larger insurance company payouts = higher premiums. The answer isn't government subsidies...it's a complicated series of cost-containing measures.

      As far as public schools go, the states should take care of that problem. Amendment 10 says powers not expressly reserved for the federal government are reserved for the states.

    7. Re:They should just do what Microsoft did... by Phantasmo · · Score: 1

      High taxes on the rich don't cause job loss any more than low taxes create jobs.

      Look at America today: companies just got a huge tax break from Bush, and the unemployment rate is rising. He cut the bottom out of countless social services, and the nation's in the biggest debt it's ever seen.

      So, as a Canadian, I might've cared before Bush and his gang slapped us in the face.

      I personally think that the people will elect a Democrat again, but also that the Republicans will take full advantage of the Diebold machines and rig the election.

      --

      The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
  98. Re:Won't SCO ultimately be the one that pays for h by WCMI92 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "defense? The idea that OSDL or anyone else has to pay to defend themselves against a company that's gasping for air with some wild claims is wrong. What costs can be recovered once SCO is shown to be insignificant and wrong? All attorney's fees, travel fees, dining, babysitting, lost wages??"

    There needs to be a "loser pays" provision added to civil lawsuit law. If the loser is the initiator, and is a corporation (individuals should be exempt) they should have to pay ALL such legal expenses.

    If the legal action causes the corporation to go bankrupt, persons whom the corp owes legal expenses go to the front of the line, ahead of all other creditors when it comes to claims against assets.

    This little poison pill might discourage what Scaldera is doing right now. It also encourages officers, execs, and employees, who's wages, benefits, etc would fall in line BEHIND these claims to discourage such practice.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
  99. Moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Referring to organizations as plural is stilted, unpopular, and, in this case, inconsistent.

    Get with the program. The OSDL is an organization that is responding to this situation.

    That's the grammatical standard in the UK, dildo. It's called a "plural noun," and is quite correct.

  100. poor souls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just in case you didn't you didn't know, the OSDL is funded by a variety of corporations including (but not limitied to) IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Red Hat, Cisco, Computer Associates, Fujitsu, Hitachi, and Nokia.

    I bet some of the companies got in there by accident and don't know what's going on...

  101. SCO's side of the story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SCO may have genuine IP claims on code which has found its way into Linux. Does no one think that they are at least entitled to have their side of the argument heard?

    1. Re:SCO's side of the story by Simple-Simmian · · Score: 1
      Not if they are a bunch fucktards about it, no.
      If they have valid claims lets see them.
      Since they have said they were going to show us all several times and haven't no they don't.

      They are not interested in getting their side of the story out just pumping up the value of their stock and gettting rich off of others work.
      If it's not obvious by now you have been living under a rock
      Fuckum' and the horses they rode in on.

      --
      If you don't like what I write don't be a CS and mod it down. Refute it.
      Yea I can't spell. So what is your point?
    2. Re:SCO's side of the story by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, no they don't.

      SCO does not have genuine IP claims on code in Linux.

      Not one iota.

      Why do I say that?

      I have no evidence to suggest that it is try, except SCO's word on it.

      Everyone, and their mother, has asked SCO to reveal the evidence.

      IBM is getting sued over it, and SCO will not even describe the infringement.

      Beyond that, Caldera distributed the code under the GPL.

      Read Groklaw, and you'll feel the same way about it.

      If SCO had actual evidence of infringement, they would play it up big time.

      Why? Because they would be able to easily drive IBM to settle---IBM has no business being in bullheaded lawsuits, they would license any IP that was actually stolen.

      Remember, IBM has full access to ALL of SCO's source tree, and IBM has full access to AIX's source, and the Linux source.

      IBM already knows what is in all three source trees.

      As far as I am concered, SCO is not entitiled to have their side of the argument heard, because they are doing their best to spew BullShit(TM) in order to drive up their stock price.

      If SCO want's their side of the argument to be heard, they need to put up, or shutup.....

      Show us some code, SCO---Or die!

      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
    3. Re:SCO's side of the story by nathanh · · Score: 1
      Beyond that, Caldera distributed the code under the GPL.

      And the BSD license. Let's not forget that. SCO/Caldera distributed the "new" code (SMP, RCU, NUMA, JFS) under the GPL with their SCOLinux 4.0 product. They also advertised those features in their SCOLinux product brochures so they can't claim ignorance that the code was there. However in the SCOForum slides they were not showing "new" code but extremely old code; in fact, code that's nearly 30 years old! This code was released by SCO/Caldera as "Ancient UNIX" under a BSD license.

      Also, SCO/Caldera recently listed the files that supposedly infringe their "UNIX methods" (notice the non-specific SCO/Caldera claim). One file listed contains exactly 6 lines, and the only relevant line is the comment which states that there's no support for SMP yet (in the M68000 tree). This proves beyond any reasonable doubt that SCO hasn't taken due diligence in preparing their list. They've grepped the kernel tree for keywords; they haven't made any attempt to distinguish between SCO/Caldera SMP code and independently developed SMP code. SCO/Caldera definitely does not own all implementations of SMP!

      SCO is fishing. It's obvious they're fishing. IBM has even accused them of fishing, in writing, in a court document!

    4. Re:SCO's side of the story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Caldera, noun -- a dangerous crater, often emitting hot air and toxic vapor.

  102. Their most important question by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

    SCO Lawyer: When you said "Darryl is blowing smoke out of his ass", you meant the donkey/horse crossbread, not the other kind, right?

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  103. the real theme song by PollGuy · · Score: 1

    No, Linus' real theme song -- as distributed in Red Hat et. al -- would have a much more direct dual purpose:

    Hello, this is Linus Torvalds, and I pronounce Linux as "Linux."

    Hear for yourself!

  104. ...it gets worse... by rbird76 · · Score: 1

    ..and SCO is naked and covered in fermented sardines.

    I think this is even better than the SCO execs-go-to-hardcore-federal-prison outcome - kind of like the scene in the book Jurassic Park where the clueless exec is tranquilized and the devoured by carrion-eating dinosaurs. SCO can fulfill its ultimate purpose - to be food for something more useful than itself.

  105. Re:Won't SCO ultimately be the one that pays for h by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Which is to say that SCO is playing to enrich certain persons. Win or lose, those persons will be rich. If they win, a few more people will be rich, and a great many more people will be poor.If they lose, the same people will be rich, and a few people will be poor.

    You forgot to mention that they are already rich.In addition to that, if SCO loses, those that invested the most won't really lose any money - they'll just get tax write-offs... and hefty ones at that.

    This lawsuit is just high stakes poker on the part of SCO, its largest investors and the lawfirm representing them... but with no real loss for those that stand the most to gain.

    The people that jumped on the "greed bandwagon" by investing as the stock jumped up may get burned if their timing is bad, but those are the chances that they take. The big players won't lose anything.

    Welcome to the reality of modern business. The mantra in the movie "Other People's Money" - "Greed is good", comes to mind.

    Posted AC 'cause I'm feeling really cynical.
  106. SCO vs. RMS by skink1100 · · Score: 1

    Subpeoning Linus is one thing, but I bet those SCO lawyers are really going to earn their money deposing RMS. I hope he keeps 'em busy. :-)

  107. Worried about linus? by contrasutra · · Score: 1

    Doesn't linus drive a BMW and live in a mansion?

    I really wouldn't worry about Linus's financial trouble. After all, SCO isn't sueing him. (yet)

  108. Caldera & OSDL by minkwe · · Score: 1
    Was SCO not a founding member of OSDL? OSDL 2001 Press Release
    Computer Associates, Fujitsu and Hitachi today joined original lab sponsors Hewlett-Packard Company, Intel Corporation, IBM and NEC Corporation in supporting the lab. Miracle Linux, Mitsubishi and Covalent joined original members Caldera, Dell, Linuxcare, LynuxWorks, Red Hat, SGI, SuSE, Turbolinux and VA Linux as additional contributors and sponsors. The lab is managed by an independent board and officers, as well as a full-time director and staff.
    --
    "Fighting terrorists with millitary might is like killing a mosquitor on your Dad's forehead with a rifle."
  109. Re:I though the issuer of the subpeona had to pay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Utah ? .. hmm .. any comments ?

    Well, let's just say that Utah ranks right up there as one of the most conservative states in the US... IIRC, there were places where you couldn't until recently buy alcohol, not even beer. Talk about religious persecution!

    It is getting better, from what I've read. See: http://www.utahrights.com/alcohol.htm for more information.

    As with most places ruled by religion in the US, H.L. Mencken's quote about Puritans applies: "A Puritan is someone who is desperately afraid that, somewhere, someone might be having a good time".

    In the case of Utah, substitute "Mormon" for "Puritan".

    Please note: I am not picking on Mormons specifically. I distrust all organized religions equally, believing that "God created Faith, Man created Religion". Substitute whatever you worship for "God" in that quote :)

    In other parts of the US, one could easily substitute "Baptist" or even "Fundamentalist Christian" in place of "Puritan" and arrive at an equally valid (IMHO) statement.

    Posting AC because even though free speech and freedom of religion is guaranteed by the Constitution in the US, it still isn't a good idea to piss off those that believe in their "One True Way" and are sure that everyone else is going to suffer eternally in one fashion or another and might just be eager to help one "sinner" arrive there faster (and if you think that's paranoid, look at the current President in the US - he's used religion to justify just about everything that he's done thus far - that should give you an idea of what the current level of religious tolerance in the US really is, at least with regards to those in power).

  110. We all owe a lot to that man. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, have really enjoyed playing around with linux as a hobby. Sure, I have XP, but can't seem to get anything done with it, since it's so closed up. With my SuSE 2.2 and fvwm2, at least I can tinker around with my .fvwm2rc till my heart's content. And that's just what it is, too. Thanks Linus Torvalds!

  111. He's a WITNESS, NOT on trial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Duh!

  112. Re:from the this-man-sucks dept by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually I sat and had a beer with him at the Simonkentta hotel in Helsinki. He wanted me but I said I'm not that type of guy.

  113. FUD ning sources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    So, can stockholders in microsoft sue them because they invested in a stock pump and dump scam?

    (Please, someone who is a lawyer, say "yes"...)

  114. Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds by ikluft · · Score: 1
    Linus owns the trademark on Linux. That's a result of the 1996-1997 trademark dispute when a scammer fraudulently registered the trademark and lost against a community backlash when he tried threatening companies that used Linux. (See the Linux history page at linuxpicnic.org for more info.)

    Sound familiar?

    Ever since the trademark was assigned to Linus in the aftermath of that event, he has not withheld use of the trademarked name Linux from anyone referring to the Open Source OS. However, it is within his rights to do so.

    Even SCO's legal disclaimers page acknowledges Linus as the owner the Linux trademark.

    I think legal harassment of Open Source volunteers is a valid criteria to revoke permissions to use the Linux trademark.

  115. nice! by Jonathan+Platt · · Score: 1

    I think it's nice... The entire computer industry is bonding over the mutual hate for SCO.

    --


    VENI, VIDI, VICI, DIXI
  116. Re:Won't SCO ultimately be the one that pays for h by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't see any reason to exempt individuals. When people file baseless lawsuits against corporations, the costs will ultimately be passed on to the consumer. McDonalds is spending a lot of money defending themselves from baseless obesity lawsuits. Restaurants as a whole will be paying higher liability insurance costs to cover defense of these suits.

    When a judge dismisses a case, he/she basically says that the case is so lacking in evidence that even if everything that the plantiff says could be proven true, they still don't have a case and should not have ever filed the suit. For this reason, going to a 'loser pays' system will not harm anyone with a valid reason for a lawsuit. There is no reason why the plantiff (and possibly their attorney) should not have to reimburse the defendant for abuse of the court system.