Slashdot Mirror
Groklaw Outlines More SCO Linux Contributions
An anonymous reader writes "Groklaw today reported that they have discovered another SCO programmer, Tigran Aivazian, who has committed code to the Linux kernel. According to the latest story Mr. Aivazian contributed a microcode update feature, a testing program, and made contributions to SMP and vmalloc. This new story adds weight to earlier stories about Caldera coder Chris Hellwig's additions to XFS, SMP and JFS. " Also on the SCO front, an anonymous reader writes "SCO's last Open Letter has drawn two new responses, one from Red Hat cofounder Bob Young, and the other from Jon 'maddog' Hall. 'maddog' makes a carefully reasoned rebuttal that defends the GPL and includes observations like 'How could the founding fathers or the early legislators have foreseen the Web, or even computers?' Young curtly offers McBride the following advice: 'Be less vocal' - making him the King Canute of Linux, perhaps, because it ain't gonna happen anytime soon."
... and here I was thinking that I needed a tinfoil hat.
Trolling is a art,
Seriously, this is not a troll:
Being as
Trolling is a art,
Might be possible, but how much has Linux development -- or even adoption -- slowed? If anything, Linux is now seen by more people as a legitimate product; after all, it's important enough for a couple companies to fight over.
But when push comes to shove the courts system is going to have the final say so. I hope with all my heart that whatever judge oversees this case will make the correct decision and squash SCO like the bug they are.
Get Movie Posters
"'maddog' makes a carefully reasoned rebuttal that defends the GPL and includes observations like 'How could the founding fathers or the early legislators have foreseen the Web, or even computers?'"
maddog isn't careful enough to avoid the irrelevant "author's intent" of the "framers" of the US Constitution. The primary design principle of the Constitution was to model the "natural" rights of people in a document that would guide a just government, mainly by limiting its power. Their primary mechanism for making the model accurate was to enumerate mechanisms for keeping it current, starting immediately with the first 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights). That's why the US government is now the oldest in existence, excepting some ways of looking at China and the Vatican (and some other tiny places). The founders of the USA had insight, more accurate than foresight. Much of that insight was gained through the importance of publishing in the colonies - NB Ben Franklin as publisher, Thomas Paine the leafleteer, and many others.
The self-reinforcing dynamic feedback relationship between the US government structure and the people has shaped both the government and the people, keeping them in relative harmony. maddog can forget about the "founders", as long as he keeps the Constitution (to be read in the present tense) in mind - a living document that really works.
--
make install -not war
As we all know, open source code is transparent; it's all out there for everyone to see.
So why did it take four years to notice this?
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
Its been thought of. And more or less refuted in general. And while I cant find the link, I remember a groklaw admin specificly stating that being slashdotted wasent an issue; they could handle it.
Freeze up the linux community just long enough and the world will pass them by.
has anyone else noticed even the smallest slowdown in open source development? i haven't. it certainly hasnt been frozen.
Gyrate Dot Org - "Where high-tech meets low-life"
"'Now I know it's trollish to root for MS in any case,"
Especially here where the MS fanboys and astro turfers will mod you up like crazy.
It does take a special kind of troll to suggest that MS actions and sleazeball tactics had zero effect on the demise of netscape though. Congratulations.
Go teach your children that crime does pay. Teach them that it's ok to break the law, to throw all their moral and ethical lessons out the windows and do anything they want to as long as they "win" and "laugh all the way to the bank".
No wonder kids flip out in school. The cognitive dissonance must be too much to bear. Their parents tell them to be nice and share, their churches tell them to be moral and ethical but the law and society tells them that it's OK lie, cheat and steal as long as you make lots of money.
War is necrophilia.
What this further demonstrates is that SCO obviously did not, based on their original lawsuit and all arguments after, perform adequate pre-acquisition due diligence to protect the Intellectual Property they are claiming is infringed.
SCO investors should be extremely interested in this point when the courts rule against SCO. This opens up the possibility of investor lawsuits against Darl and his E-staff personally (regardless of any governmental actions contemplated by the SEC and/or FTC)
.Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of fuckwits.
I have something in common with Stephen Hawking...
The second point is that this is not a case where copyrighted material has escaped, been used by a competing company, and the competing company is claiming that because the copyrighted material is now in public view, it is no longer under copyright protection.
This is a case where the accused party is perfectly willing to discuss specific instances of copyright violation, and, if proved valid, remove the code.
The things that complicate this is whether IBM was under the standard or modified UNIX agreement, and whether anyone who ever worked in UNIX can be considered to have stolen IP from UNIX.
And this is why most of the discussion on this topic is irrelevant. The suite against IBM is probably a valid question, and maybe even justifiable due to the previous action of IBM. If the laws are followed, it will only affect IBM, at least until another battle is fought to prove the code in Linux is substantially similar. At which point the code will simply be removed and life will go on.
This is why they are trying to attack on the second front, essentially saying that Linux stole everything from Unix. There is no reason to show specific code, because all the code in effect breaks copyright because it was all done by people who saw Unix code. Saying that a programmer here and there legally contributed little pieces of code does not mean that overall product is does not break Unix copyright. Many would say this is a silly argument. But this is not something that will be won in courts. This will be won in the marketplace. And even thought the OSS software has no more risk than closed software, people may begin to believe that it does. And by fight SCO on the battlefield it selects, with articles such as this, we play into their strategy.
There are only two things that matter. First, the real battle is between IBM and SCO. That is the lawsuit that is filed. That is the only battle SCO needs to actively defend. If SCO wins, Linux will adjust the code. I think everyone has said this. Until a judgment is handed down, nothing needs to be done.
The second is the assumption that Linux breaks copyrights from Unix. SCO is not putting anything substantial into this fight. It is merely a distraction to make the OS community waste time. The only reasonable response is to sumarily state that there is no legal basis to find that Linux is derived from Unix and no known copyright infringement exists. If any are found, they will be corrected, as in the past. If asked why this is true, all one needs to do is ask why SCO has not filed suit to defend their point. At this point it is all words.
OSS can and should define the battlefield, and not just respond to SCO. I am sure that people will correct me or mod me down if they disagree.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
So...why the heck did SCO allow employees to contribute to Linux? That seems massively stupid.
That doesn't mean that SCO won't claim otherwise, or claim that the person that authorized such contributions didn't have the authority to do so. Lets face it, it's not like telling a falsehood is a problem for SCO. That is my point from the first post albeit not well made. I assumed everyone had read the article and would infer that I was impying that SCO would lie about the companies past contributions
While your analysis is interesting, I think there is enough legal history in the BSD case to make it hard for SCO to pursue that "all of linux is in violation".
AngryPeopleRule
"Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
MadDog understands the issues as well as anyone. When he says "take the software" he is implying violating the intent of the GPL.
Certain companies, for instance, have been caught trying to distribute modified Linux kernels with networking equipment and not offering the source to kernel developers that both purchased the products and developed the original code in question.
In this context, you can not take the code, add a few lines and then sell it to make a huge profit.
Well, in the country with in its history legends such as Buffalo Bill and a long history of fighting racial inequality, there is a lot less silk-glove-handling and you have to stand up for your rights. The government will not just do it for you, you have to get up and make a stand, and then maybe you will get help. Or maybe not, but that doesn't mean that you will lose. But you will lose when you are lazy.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
1. The technological world moves fast, this is its nature. To slow any portion of it down is to kill it. If you force a technology to wait on slower social systems like justice the world moves on without it.
3. Is this what we're seeing with SCO? Freeze up the linux community just long enough and the world will pass them by. Are the same actors involved? Does SCO get money from Microsoft? Bill's a smart man, why not loose a battle to win the war?
This only works in commercial models, ie. when you need sales for money for continuing development for continuing sales.
But the Linux model doesn't work that way (something MS doesn't seem to get yet, but it takes a while for an old dog to learn new tricks).
Linux development does not require an income stream to continue it's momentum like Netscape, Go and all the other innovative companies that Microsoft has killed with this tactic.
Of course, this might have been a play against Red Hat and SuSE, rather than Linux as a whole. These companies DO need sales to continue doing business. But Linux as a whole will continue developing and improving and taking share.
>>
I am the director, and this is my movie
"If you really cared you would be pushing/calling for the ouster/trial of Arafat for stealing so much money from a people that desperatly need the money."
I am all for it. I also believe that Sharon should be tried for war crimes. Let's do both. Let's arrest and try both Arafat and Sharon. Let's crack down on hamas, kill and arrest their leaders and at the same time let's dismantle all the settlements, tear down the fence, and give the palestenian people the freedom they deserve.
You are the one that's one sided. I do not dismiss anything the PA does but neither am I willing to give the Israeli govt a pass.
A civilized nation eventually makes the people it conquered citizens. The US did this, Russia did this, and China did this. If you gain ground in war then eventually you must assimilate the people you have conqered. The palestenians are the keep of the Israeli govt. Israel should annex the terrorotories as spoils of war and give full citizenship to everybody living there. That's how civilized nations act.
War is necrophilia.