Slashdot Mirror
SCO Ordered to Produce Evidence
harmless_mammal and others wrote in with news from the SCO-IBM hearing in Utah today - apparently the judge has ordered SCO to respond to IBM's discovery requests within 30 days. IBM is asking SCO to tell IBM precisely what code it is alleging is infringing, and to date SCO has failed to show any evidence whatsoever. Some reports from the hearing are at Groklaw, which is already slow under the load. If SCO continues to fail to produce the evidence they've claimed they have, the judge will likely be very displeased, perhaps dismissing the lawsuit entirely.
We can end all this SCO crap. Though I get the feeling that they've already gotten what they want...
LOAD "SIG",8,1
The judge could, indeed, dismiss the case if SCO refuses to comply, but that is an extreme remedy that is seldom used. I think SCO will either give the information (although probably not with "specificity") or else dismiss the suit on its own. As Michael's pithy tag-line says, this is a classic case of put-up-or-shut-up, and I (like most /.ers) doubt there is much of anything to "put-up."
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
You know you have a popular site when you are Slashdotted even before your story hits /.
From Groklaw:
;)
First Report from Grokker Inside Hearing: IBM Wins Both Motions to Compel Friday, December 05 2003 @ 02:30 PM EST
Our first report from a Groklaw volunteer, sam, who attended the court hearing is that IBM won both of its motions to compel and SCO's motion was set for a later date. Here is what sam is telling us, and it's subject to further information and confirmation as more news arrives. We have several attending and I'll do a followup, but this is the first word. Here is what sam is telling us:
"Just returned from the hearing.
"Needless to say there was blood all over the floor on the SCO side of the aisle none on the 'left' side.
"Judge granted both IBM motions to compel, gave SCO thirty days to comply 'with specificity' and suspended further discovery. Did not rule on the SCO motion until next hearing scheduled for Friday, Jan 23 and 10:00 am.
"SCO did say that they will be filing a complaint within days on copyright violations.
"More to come"
So it looks like they have 30 days to finally tell us what code they are talking about "with specificity". Finally.
like the little bitch that he is
They better be careful or SCO may sue the judge.
Each side has spent bucketloads of money and all the judge could come up with so far is "Shit or get off the pot."
Fabulous.
Trolling is a art,
At least the outcome wasn't as dire as predicted here.
PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools
Hopefully the judge will order SCO to pay for the courts' time in filing such a meritless suit, a practice I believe our entire tort system should follow.
If this "evidence" is produced...will it become immediately public, or be only for the use of the lawyers and/or court?
IBM does not have to respond to any more of SCO's interrogatories until and unless SCO coughs up and SCO's motion to compel is heard in late January.
Also, SCO admitted that IBM didn't put any Sys V code in Linux. They are claiming that IBM misappropriated Unixware trade secrets they learned in the Monteray project. They are also claiming that IBM had a contractual obligation to keep RCU, and NUMA technologies confidential. Expect that argument to be thoroughly demolished by IBM's crack legal team as opposed to SCO's crack-smoking legal team.
A big win for IBM in this legal chessgame.
I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
As Cartman would say, " I'll Roshambeaux you for it!"
:)
If you don't watch South Park, you won't get it. IBM just claimed the right of first kick.
All Ad hominem replies happily ignored as the sender shall be deemed to lack the faculties to comprehend the equation.
And what about /.? What are we to do without SCO? Go back to Microsoft bashing? Too easy. Troll about Natalie Portman and hot grits? Too two weeks ago, man.
And what about Groklaw? Who will /. them if not us trying to see the latest SCO foolishness!
Just stop it, right now!
This is the beginning of the end for SCO. They have 30 days to show the code and then they will die. They have no code. Even if, by some miracle, they did have code it would be removed, no matter what the effort.
Once this copyright thing is dead we just have to bone up on our patent law. That is next and is the real threat. Think of this as an easy warmup. We either need IBM to use its huge patent portfolio to protect OSS or we need to get the ridiculous laws changed. Note that an IBM defense just leaves the hole open for any two bit company with some backing to come up and make a fuss, the laws have to change.
There are miles to go before we sleep.
What's really bizarre is that apparently none of the high-priced lawyers from Boise & Co. even showed up at the hearing. SCO was represented by...
Darl McBride's brother.
WTH? Did DB finally realize his client was, um, fibbing to him and that he was filing a frivolous lawsuit?
The really telling thing is whether the upcoming copyright suit against a user comes from the Boies firm or from SCO directly. If the latter, we can figure that Boies has wised up and is inching away with his cash.
and then KICK THEM IN THE NUTS
Come on now, this isn't Australia.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Peter Mayhew, actor best known for his role as Chewbacca in Star Wars, the Empire Strikes back and Return of the Jedi has stated that he has been asked to reprise his famous role by a Utah Based Software Company. Details at this time are scetchy but Mayhew did comment that "I'm delighted to return as Chewbacca, Chewbacca lived with with Ewoks on Endor, I know it doesn't make any sense".
I know that I for one do NOT want this case dismissed. I would like to see it finished out for the future of Linux and the GPL. Let's put all this rubbish to bed. If this thing goes to court and SCO losses, then Linux and the GPL will be that much stronger. Less likely to be attacked down the road.
SCO is knowingly making false and misleading statements which negatively impact IBM, RedHat, etc. Furthermore they are representing themselves to linux-using businesses as owners of Linux IP and demanding license fees. This is all not just unlikely to succeed, but in fact illegal. It's fraud. If prosecutors want to deal with it, Sontag, McBride, etc could see themselves facing not just civil actions which could be ameliorated by resignation and/or bankruptcy, but criminal actions. And I hope they do. They represent a destructive force, they are theives, and I hope they suffer the consequences.
Great... so instead of posting a mirror, they make ABSOLUTELY SURE that Groklaw melts down.
I'm sorry, guys, but I really think this is crappy. You cry about how it's hard to mirror stuff, because it would require *gasp* permission. So instead of taking a little extra time, particularly when you know that the remote server ALREADY can't handle the load, you aim tens of thousands of hits at them.
I'm sure this isn't the intention, but it is essentially a deliberate DoS.
Enough excuses, already.... the prior permission thing just doesn't work anymore. Google mirrors practically EVERYTHING and they don't have specific permission. You can live by the same rules they do.
At the VERY least, in cases where the server is already obviously choking, post a synopsis without a link.
Some classmates and I in the PMST program at the University of Utah just completed a Business Fundementals course. As part of the course, we completed a semester long project that analyzed The SCO Group. We came to same conclusions that many analysts did, that if SCO wins this case, it will be huge for them. But no one can come close to saying for sure that they are going to win. Download the report here.
Mad Software: Rantings on Developing So
This judge cannot dismiss the case because this is NOT the judge that will try the case. The trial judge can take a recommendation from this judge, which is possible.
The only thing that remains is what is SCO going to produce within the next 30 days.
Banjo - The more I know about Windoze, the more I love *nix
IBM was extremely precise on what specificity means. By granting the motion, the judge also agreed to their definition of specificity. By bulshittin they will contempt the court and this is not a wise thing to do. Not that MSFT did not do that for several years for example.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
IBM: "Show me!"
Darl McBride: "No! What are you going to do about it? Huh?"
IBM: "I'll make you, you little punk."
Darl McBride: "Oh yeah? You touch me and I'll get my big brother after you."
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
Even IF the SCO crime syndicate is thrown out of court, they will continue to "plead their case" in the media like they've been doing. They've already got a few trained seals slapping their fins on command in the media (like Didio) in their favour.
SCO needs a MAJOR smackdown if we're ever going to shut them up good.
1. Detailed migration plan and tools to ease transition from SCO UnixWare to Linux. This includes researching companies that will do his service. A paper showing hard numbers on the cost savings and benefit of migrating away from SCO Unixware.
2. Create a collection of testimonials from former SCO customers who has successfully migrated away from SCO products.
3. Extensive benchmark showing inferiority of SCO Unixware.
4. Feature comparison between SCO Unixware and Linux.
5. Create a list of things Linux can do that SCO products cannot do.
6. List of hardware that Linux supports which SCO products do not.
7. Create a list of companies using SCO product and educate these companies about findings from 1 - 4.
8. Urge Free Software and Open Source developers to drop support for SCO Unixware across all softwares being developed. GNU Software (GCC, Emacs, libraries, autotools, base utils), Samba, Apache, OpenSSL, OpenOffice, XFree86, Gnome, KDE, etc.
9. Dissemination of information regarding insider trading of SCOX stock. Collection of detailed information on who is selling how much shares and when.
10. Analysis of all SEC filings by SCO especially that part about disclosure of all SCO's competitors and it's liability with investing money in SCO.
11. Create a collection documents debunking every single press releases, interviews and official statement made by SCO officials. Dissection of every sentence ever came out of Darl McBride's mouth clearly citing fallacies, misinformation, and contradictions.
12. Create a list of all patents held by SCO and then systematically try to disprove the validity of those patents by citing prior art.
13. Start a letter writing campaign to Wall Street analysts of all the findings from above. (There has to be Linux users who has connection to Wall Street folks.)
Any thought?
With Alan Meckler, the CEO of Jupitermedia. His company recently put on the CDXPO conference where Darl gave a keynote speech. I asked Alan if he had attended that keynote, and he said that he had.
I believe his quote was, "He's like a Nazi propagandist, trying to convince everyone that concentration camps are for the good of the country"
God Fucking Damnit
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Dear Santa
Thank you for the most excellent gift, and early to boot!
Now, if you could just see your way to also delivering my request about spammers, I will endevour to be a VERY good boy this year.
www.eFax.com are spammers
I'm sure I don't know any more about the law than you do, but Lawrence Lessig does. And he seems to think that McBride's claims are preposterous. Another source for (para)legal opinions on this nonsense is Groklaw, where even Linus Torvalds has something to say about the latest McBride open letter.
Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
...it might have something to do with the fact that, for the first time since this whole ugly debacle began in March, SCO had to get up in front of a judge and make its case, instead of trying it in the (clueless financial) media.
/. to cover it.
Man, the SCO-story whiners are starting to bug me as much as the JonKatz whiners did, before I removed him from my story preferences two years ago.
Again, if everyone is so pissed off about the SCO coverage, uncheck the "Caldera" topic in your Slashdot preferences and they'll go away (taking your much-vaunted eyeball impressions with them, for the tinfoil hats who think Slashdot is only flogging this case to get hits).
But this case is arguably more important to the Free/Open Source Software community than the Microsoft antitrust trial was, and as long as the suit progresses, and SCO shouts blatant lies about Open Source software, its advocates, and the GPL, expect
Jay (=
The volume is astronomical [...]
WTF are you talking about? The volume today was pretty much nonexistant, about 2/3:rds of the average (234,629 versus the average of 323,545), though pretty normal for a friday.
It wasn't anywhere near astronomical. And also, the news came directly from the court to Groklaw via 'Sam' during the last half hour of trading or so.
No, the interesting things lie ahead of us. FUD during the weekend, possible stock-movement on Monday -- but remember, there isn't a whole lot of float on this one.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
I started out thinking about all the ways that I could demolish his argument (not terribly hard), when the thought suddenly occurred to me that, in a sense, that was exactly what SCO wanted.
Let's use a little common sense on the whole SCO thing.
First off, toss out a couple of emotionally popular but rather unlikely theories:
1) Darl McBride is insane, in the medical, legally-incompetent sense of the word. If he was, the rest of SCO and the Canopy Group would have shut him down a long time ago. Similar reasoning applies for "unbelievably stupid", "totally ignorant" and similar epithets.
2) #1 is true, but for everybody in SCO and Canopy, not just Darl, which is why he's still there. Ok, c'mon. If you're that out of touch with reality, talk to your doctor about upping the dosage on the little green pills.
A common allegation is that Darl McBride is a greedy money-grubber with the morals of an advertising exec. This is probably true, but in America, at least, being greedy on behalf of your company is not only not frowned on, it is (somewhat) required by law. (There is a SEC regulation that requires all publicly-owned corporations to try and maximize the value of their stock. Since it says nothing about HOW that's to be done, the range of tactics is pretty wide. You won't find any American corporations saying "We gave away all our profits, 'cause we felt like being nice guys", though.)
SCO's basic strategy is obvious: Fire the shotgun everywhere possible, as often as possible, and see what sticks. I saw an article the other day that said the software business in 2004 was predicted to be about $230 billion. If SCO can get 1/10 of 1% of that, they'd be ecstatic.
Another characteristic that McBride has, he shares with lawyers, politicians, and most high-powered types in business: a thick skin. I very much doubt he has been bothered in the least by the various vilifications called down on him by his detractors.
I think he was a bit surprised at it when it first started, but since then, it's been more of a weapon in his arsenal than anything else. If he is not bothered by name-calling and accusations, but the other side (the open source community, in general terms) is, then the more furious the argument, the better his odds of being able to find a weak point and exploit it somehow. At the very least, he (and SCO) can point at all the ranters and ravers and claim "With enemies that act like THAT, doesn't it make sense that we're the ones in the right?" (Something along these lines may be what got the money out of Baystar.)
If you're caught up in a strong emotion, you're not entirely sane. If you're angry, all kinds of little things you would ordinarily blow off make you even angrier. If you're ecstatically happy, you can find a silver lining in a mushroom cloud.
The reason I brought up politicians, lawyers, and CEOs earlier is that they all have one thing in common. I called it a "thick skin" earlier. Another way to describe it is that they have the ability to climb out of their emotions and think rationally again about whatever the subject is. That ability is what gets them paid the big bucks.
So what I think SCO is doing with a lot of the more unbelievable claims they've made (like the attack on the GPL last night) is not to seriously convince anyone of that position, it's to stir up trouble. The more emotional the opposition gets, the better the odds that something, anything, will happen that he (they) can exploit. It goes with the shotgun approach: the more you get things stirred up, the more targets of opportunity there are.
Fortunately for IBM, they have good lawyers, who haven't been influenced in any way they shouldn't be by the public furor. They simply stuck to the facts and the law. My favorite element of what they've been saying is that it's mostly in plain English. When one side speaks English and the other sid
SELL! SELL! SELL!
They were all out selling stock as fast as they can!
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Judge Tells SCO: No, *You* Have to Show the Code First
Friday, December 05 2003 @ 04:13 PM EST
The big news from the hearing today is that Judge Wells told SCO that they have to go first. They have to show IBM what code they are alleging is infringing. All during discovery, SCO has been telling IBM they had to show all their code first, and then SCO would identify the alleged infringements. IBM kept telling SCO in reply that they had the burden, as plaintiffs, to at least tell IBM what code was involved. Today the judge told SCO that IBM was right. SCO has 30 days to comply. IBM doesn't have to turn over anything until they do it. The judge's order will be filed Wednesday, and SCO has a month to show the code. They can't force IBM to go first. That dance is over.
Cody Hilton of Guru Labs , a Utah Linux training company, attended the hearing, and the second big piece of news is that David Boies didn't show up. Darl's brother represented SCO. His brother is Kevin McBride, the same person we noted who was involved in writing the Open Letter yesterday.
Why Boies didn't show up is hard to understand. And then again, maybe not. Brent Hatch was there and so was Darl. There was no media presence at all. Or more accurately, there was a lot of press there in the building but they were all there to cover the Olympic bribery trial , which got thrown out by the judge. Nobody in the courthouse was interested in talking to Darl today, according to my eyewitnesses, to the extent that they noticed, and they were looking.
Cody talked to him, though, after it was over. He asked him why he was there, and Darl said he just wanted to get a feel for it. Cody asked him what he thought about how it went, with IBM winning both motions. Darl said he expected it. Cody rode in the elevator with IBM's Marriott and asked him how he felt about how things went. Marriott said, "We're happy. Everything went as we'd planned. We're happy with the decision."
For IBM, it was David Marriott and Todd M. Shaughnessy. There were about 15 people there sitting in the gallery, including one woman, who rumor had it might be the patent attorney SCO hired and mentioned as possibly having a conflict of interest. But that is only a rumor.
The room was small, with maybe seats in the gallery for about 20 people, but no one was denied entrance. There were seats available.
Cody says that when the judge entered, she told them that it was her inclination to grant IBM's motions, and then she let both sides speak. First, SCO's Keven McBride spoke for about 40 minutes. The judge interrupted a few times and to Cody, it seemed like the presentation was hard to follow. Basically, he was arguing that IBM should hand over code first, so SCO could go over it and then categorize the violations as to whether they were copyright violations, trade secret, etc. Then Marriott spoke for IBM. He spoke for only 20 minutes. Cody described it as clear, crisp, easy to follow, easy to understand. He cited a case, Xerox Corp. v. International Business Machines Corp., he believes, which you can find mentioned here, in footnote 3 of IBM's Memorandum in Opposition to SCO's Motion to Compel Discovery, where the judge ruled like this:
"[3] See also Xerox Corp. v. International Business Machines Corp., 64 F.R.D. 367, 371 (S.D.N.Y., 1974) ('[Plaintiff] should be able to identify in detail the trade secrets and confidential information alleged to have been misappropriated by [defendant]. Clearly until this is done, neither the court nor the parties can know, with any degree of certainty, whether discovery is relevant or not; and it is doubtful whether [plaintiff] can undertake a meaningful discovery program'.)"
The hearing lasted an hour and a half.
Frank Sorenson was there too and he also reports similarly:
"Judge Wells came into the courtroom, and announced that she had read all the filings and the relevant case law, and it was her intention to grant IBM's Motions and postpone any further Discovery until this matter was
After investing billions of dollars into researching the theft of its intellectual property, SCO produces the following source code in court:
}
According to The SCO Group's respectable CEO, Mr. Darl McBride, one million of the above lines were found in various source code files pertaining to Microsoft Windows XP, proving that the Linux community did, in fact, steal one million lines of valuable SCO intellectual property.
Mr. McBride had this to say about his discovery:
(Darl could not finish commenting because the orderlies carried him back to his padded room at this point.)