Slashdot Mirror


Bob Young's Open Letter to SCO/Darl McBride

Oskie-wee-wee writes "Infoworld is carrying a story about Bob Young (Red Hat, Lulu, Classy Formal Wear, Hamilton Tiger-Cats, etc.) and his open letter to SCO and Darl McBride - in response to Darl's open letter 'defending, in one breath, the SCO suit, the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, and the Supreme Court Decision in the Eldred vs. Ashcroft case.'"

263 comments

  1. Repeat??? by Q-Hack! · · Score: 3, Informative

    isn't this old news???

    --
    Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
  2. sticking it to Darl by glassesmonkey · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From Young's open letter to Darl:
    The sad thing about your arguments is that you undermine them by running your company so badly.

    These self-serving "open letters" make SCO appear extremely untrustworthy.

    Darl, for the sake of your case in front of the courts, for the sake of your company's ability to win customers, for the sake of everyone's blood pressure, and to save yourself further personal embarrassment, you might want to be less vocal.
    Finally, some soundbites MSNBC can run with! (oh, well maybe FOXNEWS?)
    1. Re:sticking it to Darl by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's my favorite quote from the open letter: you might want to be less vocal.

      And just to quibble, I think Bob is incorrect where he writes, " It is the crook who should be sent to jail, not the tool. . . "

      Darl has proven many times over that he is a tool that should be sent to jail.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  3. Hey by iamdrscience · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An open letter to Bob Young, re: your open letter to Darl McBride:

    Never argue with a fool, you'll be brought down to his level and he'll beat you with experience.

    P.S. don't feed the trolls, Bob, really.

    1. Re:Hey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never argue with a fool, you'll be brought down to his level and he'll beat you with experience.

      Same could be said for much of the comments and replies on Slashdot.

    2. Re:Hey by FearUncertaintyDoubt · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The way I've heard it said is, "never argue with a fool, because a passerby cannot tell the difference."

    3. Re:Hey by KiwiEngineer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or alternately, don't try to catch a pig by rolling in the mud with it, the pig enjoys it and you only end up dirty yourself.

      --
      Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!
    4. Re:Hey by segment · · Score: 4, Funny

      I heard it was "stop hitting her with the leather retard she's into bdsm she really does like it"

    5. Re:Hey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although surely you would have the pig? Wasn't the point to catch it?

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

      it's no use feeding a troll when you are not experimented but if you have good arguments, it's a good thing.

      Feeding a troll with angst is bad, with intelligence it's good.
      cheers

    7. Re:Hey by chadm1967 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, it's a VERY good thing that people like Bob Young are speaking out. We need a lot more of this. We, as users and fans of Open Source applications and operating systems, know that Darl is full of crap. There are some, unfortunately, that feel Darl is right. If more people like Bob speak out, it will help bring those people to our side.

    8. Re:Hey by sdcharle · · Score: 1

      I don't know, if somebody went on CNBC everyday and said you beat your wife and kids and probably cheat at cards, too, you'd probably have a hard time sitting by and ignoring it.

  4. Not this again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's getting to where any moron can write an "open letter to SCO" and get on Slashdot's frontpage.

    1. Re:Not this again by herrvinny · · Score: 5, Funny

      Open Letter To SCO, From The Guy Who Owns scoreport.com:

      Dear Darl,

      You Suck

      Signed,
      herrvinny

    2. Re:Not this again by CAlworth1 · · Score: 1

      Not only can any moron do it, but they can be right. . .or at the very least they can make a better point than Darl can. Its like hitting an unarmed man who thinks he's bulletproof and has all the guns!

      My other reply to you - where do I sign up for my turn to hit back - everyone else seems to be taking turns. . .an open letter out, and return fire, one by one. . .

    3. Re:Not this again by JK+Master-Slave · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bob Young isn't 'any moron.' He's one of the clueful. He got in when Linux was young, and he's cashed out now. How can you call that the behavior of 'any moron'?

    4. Re:Not this again by dilby · · Score: 2, Funny

      Although I don't necessarily consider Bob young a moron.

      I am waiting for the front page article....
      Goatse man's open leter to SCO



      Oh ... that's right....

      --
      This post patent pending.
    5. Re:Not this again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol if I had mod point man you definitely would not be up by my hands ... but at least I would have laughed

    6. Re:Not this again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ouch. Yellow-orange. Hard on the eyes.

    7. Re:Not this again by mattjb0010 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Thanks for that, I just submitted it ;)

    8. Re:Not this again by sirsnork · · Score: 3, Funny

      Sorry in advance, but brings whole new meaning to the word "open"

      --

      Normal people worry me!
    9. Re:Not this again by hplasm · · Score: 1

      Oi! Don't call Bob a moron, you moron- he's on our side!

      --
      ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
    10. Re:Not this again by Captain_Chaos · · Score: 1

      It's getting to where any moron can write an "open letter to SCO" and get on Slashdot's frontpage.

      The CEO of Red Hat, the company which is right now sueing SCO, is "any moron"? It would seem to me that whoever modded this "insightful" is the moron in this case...

    11. Re:Not this again by fuzzix · · Score: 0

      "Dear Darl,

      You may know me as just a gaping anus who passed away some time back, but yes, even I can retort your ridiculous statements..."

    12. Re:Not this again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You guys realize that Daniel Lyons is now mining slashdot/groklaw trolls to make us all look bad, right?

      He's finding anyone who sounds ticked off, then copying whatever part of the comment they made, without proper citations (e.g. doesn't even tell you what URL to find it at) and with no context, complete with poor grammar and spelling, to accuse us of more "terrorism."

      In reality, he's a third-rate hack who is embarrased that he's been shown up by Groklaw (where they do actual *gasp* research) and how he slipped that last story past his editors when it contained nothing new or interesting, save a survey of random troll postings.

      It's not worth having here on slashdot--best not to feed the trolls--but you do well to know that folks like him are mining these postings to troll us again.

      I wonder if there's any sort of 'ig noble' type award that "journalists" can be nominated for? Hmmm...

    13. Re:Not this again by forrestt · · Score: 1

      I read that as "score port".com...
      Thought it might be a sports page.

      Well, feel free to use it as a sports page once SCO dies and you're left with a domain name without a purpose.
      Shouldn't be long now.

  5. Re:Unclear blurb. by peeping_Thomist · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else read it that way, or have I relocated by brain to crack island?

    You didn't notice that there wasn't a comma after the word "letter". Had there been such a comma, your misreading would have made (some) sense.

    Punctuation affects the meaning of sentences, people.

    --
    Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
  6. I had this idea by Apreche · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know it's not possible or probable, but I came up with this great idea today. The ultimate scenario.

    Linus Torvalds subpoenas Darl McBride under the DMCA for violating the GPL. This results in a repeal of the DMCA in the supreme court.

    I know it's just a dream, but its nice to think it could happen.

    Also, if the DMCA is ever repealed, freakin' party of the century at my place!

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    1. Re:I had this idea by Geek+of+Tech · · Score: 5, Funny
      >> Also, if the DMCA is ever repealed, freakin' party of the century at my place!

      You bring the keg and I'll bring the magic markers, shift key, single session cd drive and anything else that at one time was not allowed by the DMCA.

      --
      Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
    2. Re:I had this idea by Stonent1 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Linus Torvalds subpoenas Darl McBride under the DMCA for violating the GPL. This results in a repeal of the DMCA in the supreme court.

      This sounds very Douglas Adams to me. It goes something like this. God exists on faith. Proving that he exists will only negate the need for faith, and thereby, God disappears in a puff of logic. (I know that is nowhere near the exact phrasing, but you get the idea)

    3. Re:I had this idea by Richardsonke1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The real text, if you want it:

      "Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so
      mindboggingly useful [the bablefish] could have evolved purely by chance that some
      thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the
      non-existence of God.
      "The argument goes something like this: `I refuse to prove that I
      exist,' says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am
      nothing.'
      "`But,' says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It
      could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore,
      by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'
      "`Oh dear,' says God, `I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly
      vanished in a puff of logic.
      "`Oh, that was easy,' says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove
      that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

      --
      "Men lie."
      "Yeah, about sleeping with other women, but never about bioluminescent plankton."
      -Dan Brown
    4. Re:I had this idea by mattjb0010 · · Score: 1

      You bring the keg and I'll bring the magic markers

      Mmmm.. magic markers. Don't think the shift key will have the same effect, though I could be wrong.

    5. Re:I had this idea by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1

      And yet we still need Electric Monks to believe stuff for us.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    6. Re:I had this idea by Rupert · · Score: 1

      Possibly. Long, drawn out, expensive and risky.

      What I think Linus should do is immediately notify SCO that they are no longer allowed to use his trademark. It would be quite something to try to claim licence fees on an OS that you can't name.

      --

      --
      E_NOSIG
    7. Re:I had this idea by operagost · · Score: 1

      Welcome to Milestones in Trolling. This week's biography: Douglas Adams.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  7. Re:Unclear blurb. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You're not alone. For a second I thought Slashdot was actually defending SCO... But only for a minute, then my reality check kicked in.

    Yes. That blurb was unclear if you read over it quickly (like I did, and I think most people will too).

  8. Re:Unclear blurb. by Q-Hack! · · Score: 1

    two words...

    Yep!

    --
    Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
  9. is this everyone gets some spotlight time? by jasonp1014 · · Score: 3, Redundant


    An open letter from Linus or Stallman, or the heads of IBM or whatever make sense since they're directly involved.

    So what is the deal with Bob Young? Why is he involved with this? Is this how everyone get's attention now - write an open letter to Darl?

    I didn't see much in the letter that was particularly informative, insightful or articulate.

    I want to see someone really let loose with a civil suit suing SCO's pants off, a class action lawsuit, or even better a SEC criminal investigation.
    These open letters to Darl just kind of make me yawn...

    1. Re:is this everyone gets some spotlight time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also worth noting that Bob Young founded the Center for the Public Domain, which is among other things partly responsible for iBiblio, Creative Commons and the Eldred v. Ashcroft case (which McBride directly attacks in his letter).

  10. Is he... by herrvinny · · Score: 0

    Young, who serves as a Red Hat board member and is no longer involved in the company's day-to-day operations, believes that McBride's recent statements amount to an attack on Young's new business, an on-line custom publishing venture called Lulu Inc., that Young founded in the spring of 2002.

    Is this guy going to file a lawsuit against SCO too?

    begin shameless plug

    Remember to visit SCO Countdown - Counting Down To The End Of This fiaSCO and SCO Report, where non-nerds (anyone here not a geek?) can find stuff on SCO, the abSCOnders of the Internet world!

    end shameless plug

  11. Quite frankly, his letter is rather weak. by inflex · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I would have expected better to be honest. Instead the letter seems to drift about, morphing from rhetorics to tongue-in-cheek. Perhaps it's been specifically designed to work with Darl's psych?

    1. Re:Quite frankly, his letter is rather weak. by Geek+of+Tech · · Score: 1
      >> Perhaps it's been specifically designed to work with Darl's psych?

      I doubt that. The letter did have some logic in it. That and no one has tried to sell us a licence to read the letter yet.

      --
      Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
    2. Re:Quite frankly, his letter is rather weak. by Felinoid · · Score: 1

      >> Perhaps it's been specifically designed to work with Darl's psych?

      > I doubt that. The letter did have some logic in it. That and no one has tried to sell us a licence to read the letter yet.

      Maybe the idea is to blow Darl's mind or drive him insain?
      Blowing Darl's mind would put an end to this as there'd be no Darl to do this...
      As for driving him insain... WAY to late dude.

      --
      I don't actually exist.
  12. slashdotted by dtfinch · · Score: 4, Informative

    It took about 30 seconds to load, so I'm posting the letter here:

    Dear Darl,

    Many smarter people than me have demolished your arguments around the idea that anyone has knowingly stolen any property from you. Yet you continue to refuse to tell anyone what it is that you claim has been stolen. So your arguments against others ring very hollow. It is like my claiming you broke into the trunk of my car and stole something from me. But then I refuse to tell anyone, the police or anyone else, what was stolen, or even allow anyone to look in the trunk of my car. Your strategy would be laughable if it were not costing everyone involved huge amounts and of time and effort to correct your errors and respond to your lawyers.

    Secondly, no one is arguing against copyright. Everyone agrees Intellectual Property, from trademark law, to copyrights and patents, is a good thing.

    Ok, so maybe Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation, the inventor of the GPL license, thinks it is not a good idea to copyright software. But even Richard thinks copyright has its place to enable authors to earn a living. Free markets are not so fragile that a new idea like the GPL can threaten them. The only thing that can threaten free markets in a democracy is fear. Fear can cause well-meaning governments to enact flawed legislation. The kind of legislation the DMCA represents. The DMCA is the equivalent of trying to stop break-and-entry of homes by making screwdrivers illegal. Breaking and entering should be illegal. Allowing honest citizens to own innocent tools that evildoers might use to break and enter must remain perfectly legal. It is the crook who should be sent to jail, not the tool nor the owner of the tool.

    The Supreme Court case that you misrepresent in your latest open letter demonstrates the Justices think too much of a good thing may no longer be so good. The case you quote (Eldred vs Ashcroft) was accepted by the Supreme Court specifically because they wanted to consider whether copyright, enacted by the founding fathers with a term of 14 years, may be getting stretched a little too far at its current 95 years. The case was decided based on the Justices concluding that it was up to Congress, not the Supreme Court, to set the terms of copyright law. Groups like Creative Commons are working to fix in the marketplace the problems caused by recent expansions of copyright terms. But then you seem to have little respect for the marketplace.

    The sad thing about your arguments is that you undermine them by running your company so badly. SCO's revenues from the sale of goods and services (not counting some very odd license "revenue") have fallen every quarter since you took over SCO. Corporate America does not illegally download anyone's property to save a few bucks. They purchase the best product and services available from the companies they trust the most. You and your team have proven to be incapable of producing good products, at least not as good as those from other suppliers. These self-serving "open letters" make SCO appear extremely untrustworthy. So you have violated both of the customer service rules you should be focused on honoring.

    Darl, for the sake of your case in front of the courts, for the sake of your company's ability to win customers, for the sake of everyone's blood pressure, and to save yourself further personal embarrassment, you might want to be less vocal. All you are doing is causing your audience to educate themselves. Once everyone understands how wrong you are your stock price will suffer. Hmmm, suddenly when I think about it - you might in fact be doing us all a favor.

    Thanks, Bob.

    Bob Young, CEO Lulu.com

  13. DMCA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    It is paramount that the DMCA be given full force and effect, as envisioned by Congress. The judgment of our elected officials in Congress is the law of the land in the U.S. copyright arena, and should be respected as such. If allowed to work properly, we have no doubt that the DMCA will create a beneficial effect for the entire economy in digital technology development, similar to the benefits created by the 1976 Copyright Act.

    1. Re:DMCA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is paramount that the DMCA be given full force and effect, as envisioned by Congress.

      Wait, don't you mean: as envisioned by Corporations?

    2. Re:DMCA by mabhatter654 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I understand Darl's reasoning that the 1976 copyright act make it easier for "mass media" to pump out copyrighted content without needing to be hastled by "properly" registering it as "protected" content and by changing the rules for software to allow "binary only" protection...perfect for the "tycoons" that sprouted up that quickly "protected" stuff they initially plagurized or "dumpster" dived for.

      On the other hand, we wouldn't have any corporations or news [i.e. no /.!] on the internet WITHOUT those restrictions being eased...otherwise web content would have to be registered BEFORE POSTING online to have copyright protection, hence making online news and such useless [or maybe not a bad thing if it meant getting rid of rubbish!] But in many ways, the 1976 act actually HURTS [his wet dreams of] copyright by diluting the pool of "protected" stuff by assuming every little thing is protected. On the other hand, its the very same act that gives the GPL it's teeth!!! It removed the need equally for ANYONE to have to register for basic protections...that means you and I can use our rights to add GPL just like he can use his rights to "hide" his code as "trade secret" and protect his webpages. Like a typical American CEO, he wants the protections, Darl just doesn't like than EVERYBODY ELSE has them too! Because then HIS little bits of code don't amout to squat...because the sea is flooded right now!!! GPL is intened to BREAK THE SYSTEM! Get it! Nobody can constitutionally stop the authors from "sharing" their rights in the manor of the GPL...and now that the public is catching on, Why would they want to pay for stuff when other people are giving it away for "other reasons".

      Like you, I think a DMCA violation for an OSS program would be sweet irony!!! What Darl and other miss with the DMCA is that technology has progressed to grow and flourish without strict copyrights because the govt has got it's hand out of "registering" every little thing. The "joke" to mention to the media companies is that without the 1976 act to ease the registration process, none of them would need DMCA because they would not have businesses to begin with...90%+ of the internet would be PD under the old rules...and impossible to track or register anything after the fact. But it's hard to make the argument to congress that MILLIONS of people are benifiting from FREE stuff while a few thousand are suffering losing great amount of "federal benifit" money. Lessing tried to make that argument in court, but they "copped out" rather than draw a line in the sand.

    3. Re:DMCA by Alsee · · Score: 1

      On the other hand...
      On the other hand...


      Mutants of the world unite!

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    4. Re:DMCA by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      Do Moties have a lawyer caste?

      (If you don't get it, Google for Niven+Pournelle+Mote).

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  14. I *MOSTLY* Agree... by thecampbeln · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...but considering SCO's only product is media spin, some high profile/intelligent people need to counter the bullshit they are pumping out. Else no matter how unintelligent the argument, it will eventually be seen as the truth.

    --
    "1984" was ment to be a warning, not a guidebook. You hear that Kim Jong-il!? BushCo?!
  15. Not quite a duplicate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    The open letter from Bob Young is a duplicate (follow the bottom link), but the InfoWorld story isn't.

    You've probably read all the standard SCO comments before, though.

  16. celebrate him! except his letter was dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Mr. Young's letter made it obvious that there are far more educated people than him fighting this fight. Can we please not champion his mediocrity, /.? Thanks.

  17. An Open Letter To Linus Torvalds: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dear Linus,

    I have always felt that Linux is a nice operating system (for hobbyists and
    geeks), but there are some areas where it is seriously lacking, especially when
    compared to its main competitor, Microsoft Windows.

    * File sharing. Windows has long been superior when it comes to making large
    amounts of files available to third parties. Even early versions of Windows
    automatically detected and made available all directories thanks to the built in
    NetBIOS-powered file sharing support. But Microsoft has realized that this
    technology is inherently limited and has added even better file sharing support
    to its Windows XP operating system. "Universal Plug an Play" will
    make it possible to literally access any file, from any device! I think
    universal file sharing support needs to be built into the Linux kernel soon.

    * Intelligent agents. With innovations like Clippy, the talking paperclip
    and Microsoft Bob, Microsoft has always tried to make life easier
    for its customers. With Outlook and Outlook Express, Microsoft has built a
    framework for developers to create even smarter agents. Especially popular
    agents include "Sircam", which automatically asks the users' friends for advice
    on files he is working on and the "Hybris" agent, which is a self-replicating
    copy of a humorous take on "Snow-White and the Seven Dwarves" (the real story!).
    Microsoft is working on expanding this P2P technology to its web servers. This
    project is still in the beta stage, thus the name "Code Red". The next versions
    will be called "Code Yellow" and "Code Green".

    * Version numbers. Linux has real naming problems. What's the difference
    between a 2.4.19 and a 2.2.17 kernel anyway? And what's with those odd and even
    numbers? Microsoft has always had clear and sophisticated naming/versioning
    policies. For example, Windows 95 was named Windows 95 because it was released
    in 1995. Windows 98 was released three years later, and so on. Windows XP
    brought a whole new "experience" to the user, therefore the name. I suggest that
    the next Linux kernel releases be called Linux 03, Linux 04, Linux 04.5 (OSR1),
    Linux 04.7B (OSR2 SP4 OEM), Linux 2005 and Linux VD (Valentine's Day edition).
    Furthermore, remember how Microsoft named every upcoming version of Windows
    after some Egyptian city? Cairo, Chicago and so on. I think that the development
    kernels should be named after Spanish cities to celebrate Linux' Spanish
    origins. Linux Milano or Linux Rome anyone?

    * Multi-User Support. This has always been one of Microsoft's strong sides,
    especially in the Windows 95/98 variants, where passwords were completely
    unnecessary. Microsoft has made the right decision by not bothering the user
    with a distinction between "normal" and "root" users too much -- practice has
    shown that average users can be trusted to act responsibly and in full awareness
    of the potential consequences of their actions. After all, if your operating
    system doesn't trust you, why should you trust it? (To be fair, Linux is making
    some progress here with the Lindows [lindows.com] distribution, where users are
    always running as root.)

    With Windows XP, Microsoft has again improved multi-user support. Not only
    does Windows XP come with a large library of user pictures that are displayed on
    the login screen, such as a guitar and a flower, it also has "quick user
    change". This makes it possible to login as a different user with a simple
    keyboard shortcut, and the good news is: programs from the old user keep running
    in the background! Beat that, Linux!

    * Programmability. Microsoft has always been known for making computer
    machine power accessible to end users. The operating system comes with many
    helpful tools such as VBScript, a programming language especially useful for
    developing intelligent agents as mentioned above, and QBASIC, a truly innovative
    "hacker" tool that makes it possible to

    1. Re:An Open Letter To Linus Torvalds: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This makes it possible to login as a different user with a simple keyboard shortcut, and the good news is: programs from the old user keep running in the background! Beat that, Linux!"

      Linux already has that feature. See here.

    2. Re:An Open Letter To Linus Torvalds: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      I think that the development
      kernels should be named after Spanish cities to celebrate Linux' Spanish
      origins. Linux Milano or Linux Rome anyone?

      Celebrating Linux' Finnish origins would sound like a better idea to me. "Linux Kuopio", "Linux Tampere" and "Linux Pihtipudas" sound all cool, don't they?
    3. Re:An Open Letter To Linus Torvalds: by amevba · · Score: 1
      I think that the development kernels should be named after Spanish cities to celebrate Linux' Spanish origins. Linux Milano or Linux Rome anyone?
      I think GWB should next look for WMDs in both Spain and Italy so that you gringos could get your geography straightened out for that part of the world, too.
    4. Re:An Open Letter To Linus Torvalds: by You're+All+Wrong · · Score: 1

      I've been running Linux Yli-Ii for years you insensitive clod!

      I think the distibutions should translate their names into Finnish too. I'd like to see anyone familiar with the slang word 'punani' install a Punainenhattu Linux, for example.

      YAW.

      --
      Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
    5. Re:An Open Letter To Linus Torvalds: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a bird! It's a plane! It's sarcasm flying right over your head!

    6. Re:An Open Letter To Linus Torvalds: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'd like to see anyone familiar with the slang word 'punani' install a Punainenhattu Linux, for example.

      Punainenhattu is for lusers. Loysatavara Linux is the choice of real 3117s.
    7. Re:An Open Letter To Linus Torvalds: by Coneasfast · · Score: 1

      I think that the development
      kernels should be named after Spanish cities to celebrate Linux' Spanish
      origins. Linux Milano or Linux Rome anyone?


      First of all this whole post is completely off-topic, secondly, i hope you were joking when you said Linux has Spanish origins.

      --
      Marge, get me your address book, 4 beers, and my conversation hat.
  18. Mirror: santa claus operations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    here is a mirror of the bbspot article
    http://bbspot.com/News/2003/12/sco_christ mas.html

    SCO Must Prove Existence Of
    Santa Claus in Thirty Days
    By Brian Briggs

    Salt Lake City, UT - Supreme Court Judge Isaiah Moore ruled that SCO must show proof of Santa Claus in the next 30 days, or he will dismiss their lawsuit against all Christians and companies profiting from the Christmas holiday.

    A new look for SCO CEO Kris Kringle (formerly named Darl McBride)

    SCO, formerly known as Santa Cruz Operations, recently changed their name to Santa Claus Operations. This change was widely regarded as a move to improve their image after their controversial claims about Linux. Critics of the name change say it's just another fantasy created by SCO CEO Kris Kringle, formerly known as Darl McBride, to profit through litigation.

    In a recent press release SCO said it would begin sending out invoices to anyone who celebrates or profits from Christmas in the next couple of weeks including corporations and individuals. A price list for SCO Christmas licenses which companies and individuals need to celebrate the holiday without violating SCO's intellectual property rights were released as well.

    "Children can avoid penalties by sending 10% of their Christmas gifts to SCO," said Kringle.

    Followers of the case consider the judge's decision a defeat for SCO, because they feel the company cannot prove the existence of Santa Claus.

    Kringle was confident that SCO would prevail in the lawsuit. He said, "We have hundreds of e-mails addressed to Kris_Kringle@sco.com. Under Federal law it is illegal to route e-mail to the wrong location intentionally. This proves without a doubt that Santa Claus exists and he works at SCO."

    Chief Counsel for the company Fred Gailey said he planned to print out these e-mails and place them in giant mailbags to dump on the judge's desk. "When the judge sees the number of e-mails we've received he will have to rule in our favor, or face breaking the hearts of his grandchildren."

    Related News

    Office 2003 Editions Compared

    Notepad Rallies for Extension Name Change

    Office Jesus Will Work Miracles for Food

    "Christmas existed long before the existence of SCO," said VP of marketing for Giantco, Clayton Moneybags. "In fact I heard that at one point it was about celebrating the birth of Jesus."

    SCO Vice president, Jesus Christ countered, "Don't you think we thought of that one too?"

    1. Re:Mirror: santa claus operations by Anonymous+Slacker · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the people living in Santa Claus, Indiana would be able to counter-sue Santa Claus Operations, since they had the name first.
      Or would Kris Kringle (formerly named Darl McBride) attempt to use that town's existance as proof in such a case?

      --
      "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!" -Rush
  19. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it won't happen, of course, but it should. Young's letter was bad. SCO should burn, lose, etc.... but please lets not raise every open letter writer w/ a pedigree to heights he doesn't necessarily deserve.

  20. in summary by highwaytohell · · Score: 1

    Darl needs to read /. every now and then.

  21. When this is over.... by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 4, Funny
    When this is all over, and Darl is inevitably tossed in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison for securities fraud, I think I will design a "Free Darl!" t-shirt, much in the style of the Kevin Mitnick ones. I think it will be really interesting to see the kinds of reactions I'd get from fellow geeks.

    On second thought...perhaps I should put the design on a kevlar vest as opposed to a t-shirt.

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    1. Re:When this is over.... by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      Better not have it say "Free Darl!" or the other inmates might get the wrong idea. Plus, kevlar underwear would probably be a better choice.

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

      While I've never been imprisioned myself I always thought it was more along the lines of "state pound-me-in-the-ass prison" rather than "federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison." At least in the minimum and medium security places.

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

      >> When this is all over, and Darl is inevitably tossed in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison

      You should have the shirt read:

      "Free Darl! The rest of us want to shove things up his ass, too."

    4. Re:When this is over.... by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      Wow, way to COMPLETELY miss the Office Space reference.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    5. Re:When this is over.... by NotAnotherReboot · · Score: 1

      But, you get conjugal visits there, right?

      Lawyer: Conjugal visits? Not that I know of. No, minimum security prison is no picnic. I have a client in there right now. He says the trick is, kick someone's ass the first day, or become someone's bitch. Then everything will be alright.

    6. Re:When this is over.... by Chicane-UK · · Score: 1

      Well.. you could do the 'Free Darl!' on the front.

      And have something like 'Not Really!' on the back, or have something like 'Because we all want a turn at kicking his ass' underneath the 'Free Darl' bit :D

      --
      "Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
    7. Re:When this is over.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give me a break friend. I'm doing time right now. I get internet access, cable tv, and conjugal visits.

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

      > I think I will design a "Free Darl!" t-shirt

      And on the back it will say

      "With this T-Shirt!"

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

      > When this is all over, and Darl is inevitably tossed in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison for securities fraud, I think I will design a "Free Darl!" t-shirt

      How about:

      Free Darl McBride
      (I want to kick his ass myself)

    10. Re:When this is over.... by SQLz · · Score: 1
      When this is all over, and Darl is inevitably tossed in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison for securities fraud..

      Yes, thats when his name will change from Darl, to Darling!

    11. Re:When this is over.... by oPless · · Score: 1

      You could always put the word "NOT" on the back

      Hell, I'd might even buy one !

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

      When I think of geeks attacking, a couple things come to mind:

      - don't worry, it's only a board game
      - flying Cheetos

      Unless of course you run into an ESR geek... then you'll need the kevlar.

  22. Not just any moron? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    He has connections with Red Hat so he's not just some "moron." Don't you think you're being overly harsh?

  23. No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The parent is extremely derisive and goes way overboard in criticizing this guy. Now, if Slashdot posted moronic rantings of some random dude, then it would be justified. But Young isn't exactly some random guy; he has some interest in this case. Criticism of the act of posting this story is warranted, but not to the degree the parent declared.

    1. Re:No. by spacecowboy420 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, he just doesn't proofread for clarity or flow. In other "Open Letters", people counter Darl's arguments with well thought out responses. This guy effectively sat down and spent 15 minutes typing:

      "Quit it Darl, you look silly"

      BFD, nothing to see here, move along folx. Geesh, at least throw in a goatse link.

      --
      ymmv
    2. Re:No. by chendo · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Okay.

      goatse.cx (not work safe, for those who don't know :)

      Btw, what's IANAL, BFD, and all those other acronyms I see on /.?

      --
      Founder of Mirror Moon - Tsukihime Game Trans
    3. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANAL = I Am Not A Lawyer
      BFD = Big Fucking Deal

      For more info you can go here

    4. Re:No. by spacecowboy420 · · Score: 1

      You're kidding?
      I Am Not A Lawyer (IANAL)
      Big Fucking Deal (BFD)

      --
      ymmv
  24. Damn buncha cluebies around here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Bob Young is the FOUNDER and CEO of REDHAT...

    You know...

    The company SUEING SCO.

    Maybe, just maybe, that is why what BOB YOUNG SAYS MATTERS.

    Clues, they do a body good.

    1. Re:Damn buncha cluebies around here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it doesn't matter who he is. it matters that he was inarticulate and silly in his letter.

    2. Re:Damn buncha cluebies around here... by zieroh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bob Young is the FOUNDER and CEO of REDHAT...

      You know...

      The company SUEING SCO.


      Here's a clue for you: He's no longer at Red Hat. The original poster's question is valid: why is he here?

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    3. Re:Damn buncha cluebies around here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      He said as much to why he wrote the letter. If it had been just about Red Hat, he would have let it go. But it was about an issue that McBride is trying to bring up (alternative utilizations of copyright laws in the US) affecting a new line of work that Bob is working on.

    4. Re:Damn buncha cluebies around here... by segment · · Score: 2, Funny
      Bob Young is the FOUNDER and CEO of REDHAT

      Not only is he the founder... He's also a client

    5. Re:Damn buncha cluebies around here... by teg · · Score: 3, Informative


      Bob Young is the FOUNDER and CEO of REDHAT...



      Founder, yes. But he's not the CEO, Matthew Szulik is. Bob Young also left the board some time ago, although he still is the largest shareholder.

    6. Re:Damn buncha cluebies around here... by Angst+Badger · · Score: 3, Informative

      Here's a clue for you: He's no longer at Red Hat. The original poster's question is valid: why is he here?

      Damn, did anyone RTFA? Bob Young is speaking on the subject because McBride's latest open letter attacks the legal foundation of his new business. Entirely aside from this, he still has a considerable interest in Red Hat since he's on the freaking board of directors. Sheesh.

      --
      Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  25. Only one thing to Oskie-wee-wee . . . by ManDude · · Score: 0

    Oskie-Wa-Wa!

  26. Umm, not everyone by Kris_J · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Secondly, no one is arguing against copyright. Everyone agrees Intellectual Property, from trademark law, to copyrights and patents, is a good thing.
    I'm arguing against copyright. Not necessarily in the context of SCO vs The Real World, but I no longer believe that IP benefits the community, on balance.
    1. Re:Umm, not everyone by black+mariah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      IP isn't there to benefit the community, it's their to benefit the person that came up with whatever the IP happens to be.

      --
      'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
    2. Re:Umm, not everyone by dtfinch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Copyright is an incentive to create. People can share if they want. Without copyright, there would be no more incentive to create public works than there is today, perhaps even less. For example, the GPL relies on copyright to keep derivative works in the public domain.

      It's software patents that everyone should be fighting, whereby someone with money to spare can buy from the government the right to collect fees on the original works of others, regardless of if those others came up with the same ideas entirely on their own.

    3. Re:Umm, not everyone by Kris_J · · Score: 4, Informative
      IP isn't there to benefit the community, it's their to benefit the person that came up with whatever the IP happens to be.
      This is a common error. IP laws were originally designed to provide an incentive to add to the public domain. Since they no longer result in any benefit to the public domain, they are therefore pointless.
    4. Re:Umm, not everyone by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      Copyright is an incentive to create. People can share if they want. Without copyright, there would be no more incentive to create public works than there is today, perhaps even less. For example, the GPL relies on copyright to keep derivative works in the public domain.
      If copyright didn't exist, the GPL would be unnecessary. It exists specifically to prevent people from taking from the public domain without giving back. If there was no copyright, everything you create would automatically be available to everyone.
    5. Re:Umm, not everyone by spitzak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wrong. The GPL uses copyright to force anybody redistributing a modified version of the code to release the code. Without copyright there is nothing forcing anybody using the code to do anything, and they can keep their modified version secret, thus contributing *less* to the public domain.

    6. Re:Umm, not everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      $ifconfig -a
      $s0: flags=1000843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4> mtu 1500 index 2
      inet 127.0.0.2 netmask fffffff8 broadcast 127.0.0.1
      ether 8:0:20:b4:2:ee
      $ipf -f - block in on s0 from 0.0.0.0 to 127.0.0.1
      $echo h0h0h0

      There now no one benefits from IP

    7. Re:Umm, not everyone by Kris_J · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes, sorry, missed a subtle distinction between the availability of source code and the right to copy the binary.

    8. Re:Umm, not everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're proving his point. People are arguing about copyright. Otherwise, you're talking to yourself.

    9. Re:Umm, not everyone by MisterFancypants · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Proof that most Linux/GPL people are in it for the no-cost software, and not really for 'freedom'. You damn hippie fucks. GET A JOB!

    10. Re:Umm, not everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoa there cocheese.

      Pretty big assumption you're making.

      Last time I worked as a programmer, I "created" works because I was paid to, not for the copyright.
      Also, last time I submitted some code to an open source project, or wrote up a personal project, it was not for the benefit of the copyright that I would receive, it was for the function that it would perform.

      Perhaps you are arguing that there should be no patents AND no copyrights on software?

      Regardless, I would suggest that most code is not written in order to receive a copyright. Your opinion may differ, but I at least hope that you see why you may possibly be wrong.

    11. Re:Umm, not everyone by Tokerat · · Score: 1

      This is a common error. IP laws were originally designed to provide an incentive to add to the public domain. Since they no longer result in any benefit to the public domain, they are therefore pointless.
      Ahh, but this is a flaw within our current copyright legislation, not within the concept of copyright itself.
      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    12. Re:Umm, not everyone by nagora · · Score: 3, Insightful
      In a country ruled "by the people, for the people" all laws should theoretically be to benefit the community (ie, the people). If a law only aids a small number of people while disadvantaging most then it is exactly the sort of tyranny the founders of America said they were trying to escape.

      The aristocracy of the modern day US have managed to turn this on its head to the point where most Americans now believe that laws disadvantaging any of that same aristocracy are "communist" and bad.

      George the Third would have been astonded at the power wielded by Bush, Gates, Murdoch, Turner, to say nothing of the much more faceless 1% of America that have the money to buy their own laws, senators or even presidencies.

      TWW

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    13. Re:Umm, not everyone by gilgongo · · Score: 1

      I think George III (well, British constitutional historians anyway) were pleasantly surprised by the electoral college system. Very few people outside the United States know that the president is not actually elected by the people.

      Of course, the same is effectivly true in the UK where the people vote for a ruling *party* and that party chooses (has already chosen by the time the vote takes place) its leader, but with all the talk of "democracy" in the US, there is a mistaken impression that the president is there through the popular ballot box. He's not.

      --
      "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
    14. Re:Umm, not everyone by nagora · · Score: 1
      Very few people outside the United States know that the president is not actually elected by the people.

      Yes, it was a bizarre mistake although I don't know what the reasoning for it was.

      TWW

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    15. Re:Umm, not everyone by RevMike · · Score: 2, Informative

      Very few people outside the United States know that the president is not actually elected by the people.

      Yes, it was a bizarre mistake although I don't know what the reasoning for it was.

      There are a number of historical reasons for the existence of the electoral college, and a number of practical reasons that it has continued to exist.

      First, consider that the USofA was originally formed as a federation of sovereign, independant nations - states - and only formed a national character around the time of the civil war 90 years later. Like one would suspect, the small states were concerned about being utterly dominated by the larger states.

      Second, consider that the economy of the Sourthern states was largely slaveholding while the people of the north - particularly New England - had pro-abolition views. Again there is a concern that one region would dominate over another.

      The electoral college provides a practical way to balance these interests. Basically, the electoral college sets up a system such that, in a close election, the candidate with broader support (state by state) will win.

      Today, the electoral college still provides benefits. Aside from the regional power sharing, which remains an issue (though not as great as it once was), the electoral college has the effect of limiting the incidence of voter fraud. Political "machines" in places like Chicago and New York City have frequently controlled the vote in their areas of influence. Their impact on a presidential election, however, is limited. No matter how many votes they "manufacture", they can never have a greater impact than the number of electoral votes in their state. In a purely popular vote, the local political machines would be motivated to generate every vote possible, since every extra vote they manufacture could negate the legitimate vote of someone in another state, or the vote generated by a competing fraudulaent political machine.

    16. Re:Umm, not everyone by Badanov · · Score: 2, Informative
      In a country ruled "by the people, for the people" all laws should theoretically be to benefit the community (ie, the people). If a law only aids a small number of people while disadvantaging most then it is exactly the sort of tyranny the founders of America said they were trying to escape.

      As a leftist you should know this, but I will respond anyway: Corporations and small businesses are entitled to the same legal protection as any individual. When you talk about law protecting 'the people' you should also know they protect everyone, not just smarmy leftists such as yourself.

      --
      Dawn of the Dead
    17. Re:Umm, not everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, the same is effectivly true in the UK where the people vote for a ruling *party* and that party chooses (has already chosen by the time the vote takes place) its leader

      No. In the UK you vote for an INDIVIDUAL to represent your constituency. On a practical level that individual is typically a member of a party which has selected a leader, but the elected individual is not under any actual obligation to remain in any party or to vote the way that party wishes.

    18. Re:Umm, not everyone by arkanes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're making the fundamental mistake of assuming that a corporation deserves protection as an entity, rather than the individuals who make it up. When _I_ talk about the law protection the people, I mean REAL people, not virtual ones.

    19. Re:Umm, not everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No matter if your right or wrong, I think "smarmy leftists such as yourself" was a bit rude.

    20. Re:Umm, not everyone by nagora · · Score: 1
      Corporations and small businesses are entitled to the same legal protection as any individual.

      Why? And why do you treat both equally?

      Also, your idea of "leftist" is incorrect. Wanting the law to maximise the well-being of the people is not "left" or "right", it's "fantasy"; the rich never allow such a situation to arise whether the government is communist, fascist or anything in between. As Cornelius Vanderbilt said "What do I care about the law? Ain't I got the power?"

      TWW

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    21. Re:Umm, not everyone by mpe · · Score: 1

      Copyright is an incentive to create. People can share if they want. Without copyright, there would be no more incentive to create public works than there is today, perhaps even less.

      People were being creative for 10's of thousands of years before copyright was invented.
      It's rather hard to prove that copyright actually encourages creation and publication. It's certainly possible to find examples where the existance of copyright provided no incentive at all.

    22. Re:Umm, not everyone by mpe · · Score: 1

      Regardless, I would suggest that most code is not written in order to receive a copyright.

      IMHO this applies to most pieces of creative work. Also where someone is paid they are unlikely to be the copyright holder...

    23. Re:Umm, not everyone by mpe · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      This is a common error. IP laws were originally designed to provide an incentive to add to the public domain.

      This is also a common error. Copyright did not start with the Statute of Anne or the US Constitution. The original purpose of copyright was censorship, specifically to stop anything being printed which the authorities did not approve of.

    24. Re:Umm, not everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Point of order:

      Laws must be made to benefit the smallest group of people of all: the individual.

      The tyranny the founders of America were trying to escape wasn't laws that benefitted a minority...it was laws that *unjustly* benefitted a minority at the *expense* of the majority.

      Taxation without representation = benefits derived from a minority (aristocracy) for no reason (no, or few benefits to the minority).

      Capitalism, the philosophical root of the American system requires that every individual have the same rights as every other individual or group of individuals. "Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins".

      The problem with the current spate of anti-terror legislation etc., is that some groups are suddenly more equal than others, and that the law holds that (in defiance of the constitution), individual rights may be suspended by those "more equal" groups.

    25. Re:Umm, not everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, the one of the main issues the system of electors was intended to address was the concentration of the population into a few states which have very large cities, as a means of preventing, say, the votes of the welfare mothers in Detroit and Cleveland, which outnumber the total number of farmers in the entire country, from being able to set national farm policy by selecting some form of urbanist panderGore. I think Texas lost a state agriculture commissioner who once stated this politically fatal truth.

    26. Re:Umm, not everyone by nagora · · Score: 1
      Laws must be made to benefit the smallest group of people of all: the individual.

      Perhaps but "the individual" does not mean "an individual".

      Taxation without representation = benefits derived from a minority (aristocracy) for no reason (no, or few benefits to the minority).

      When money buys new laws and decides which old laws are enforced then you are right back to exactly this situation.

      Capitalism, the philosophical root of the American system requires that every individual have the same rights as every other individual or group of individuals.

      In theory. In practice no society has ever achieved that. The reality is that money talks and always will.

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    27. Re:Umm, not everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I'm arguing against copyright. Not necessarily in the context of SCO vs The Real World, but I no longer believe that IP benefits the community, on balance.

      Expand that into a nice long impassioned speech.

      Then I'll use it and claim I wrote it. While I'm at it, I'll stick in a few plugs for whomever pays me for product placement.

      You won't care, will you? Not your work to control.

    28. Re:Umm, not everyone by You're+All+Wrong · · Score: 1

      Beware - "public domain" is a loaded term.
      Nowadays, those who think that they own the language insist that if you try to put copyright material into the public domain then you're contradicting yourself. Everyone unquestioningly seems to believe them by rote. However, if you take 'public' to mean 'public', and 'domain' to mean 'domain', and thus 'public domain' to mean the 'domain of the public', then there's no contradiction.

      YAW.

      --
      Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
    29. Re:Umm, not everyone by You're+All+Wrong · · Score: 1

      I'd not use that wording. The GPL uses copyright to forbid redistribution of a modified verison of the code without the offer of provision of the source code.

      No-one's _forcing_ anyone to do anything. If you _chose_ to redistribute, then you must bide by the licence.

      "Doctor, it hurts when I ..."
      "Then don't ..."

      YAW.

      --
      Your head of state is a corrupt weasel, I hope you're happy.
    30. Re:Umm, not everyone by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      The US system was originally an attempt to turn older, European style copyright laws on their heads. The thinking of the founding fathers on this is more analogous to RMS's or Eldred's positions than many know. I'm amazed that all life+ legislation isn't considered unconstitutional on the transfer of rights vrs manufacture of rights conflict alone (but then IANAL - some of them swallow the logical contradiction without blinking).

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    31. Re:Umm, not everyone by rossifer · · Score: 1

      Corporations and small businesses are entitled to the same legal protection as any individual.

      Why, exactly, would you possibly hold this as your carefully considered opinion?

      The elevation of a corporation to equality with human beings is in current US law, however, my analysis implies to me that this is because it suits the interests of those with the money to purchase laws. Something is not true simply because wealthy people desire it to be true.

      The rest of your statement stands, however.

      Regards,
      Ross

    32. Re:Umm, not everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have it wrong. "Capitalism" was never the philosophical root of the American "system." "Capitalism" is a set of power relations in an economy: I do not think it means what you think it means. Furthermore, American revolutionaries had no radical ideas on the subject of economics--what they built they built with a blind eye to the economy, not to foster it or ameliorate it.

    33. Re: Umm, not everyone by gidds · · Score: 1
      The reality is that money talks and always will.

      True. One reason is that money can form a good way of telling how much people want something. It's a terribly unequal and unfair way, but in some cases it's still the best (or rather the least bad) - the 'free market' is based on it, for example.

      --

      Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.

    34. Re:Umm, not everyone by Dwonis · · Score: 1
      Without copyright, there would be no more incentive to create public works than there is today, perhaps even less.

      This is a broad assumption that is not founded in science. In reality, some types of works (high-budget movies, computer games with lots of eye-candy, etc) seem to require a profit motive, and other types of works (music, application software, etc) seem to exist regardless of profit motive.

      The same situation exists with patents: software and business model patents are nearly useless (though some might be acceptable with a maximum lifetime of 2-4 years), while patents on the results of medical research are pretty much what drives that industry.

      The problem of creeping intellectual property is not going to be fought effectively until we understand it in more than a it's-good-or-it's-evil fashion.

    35. Re:Umm, not everyone by Dwonis · · Score: 1
      Nowadays, those who think that they own the language insist that if you try to put copyright material into the public domain then you're contradicting yourself. Everyone unquestioningly seems to believe them by rote.

      I think "Language lawyers" (also called "language nazis", etc) are essential to making sure that common language does not change too quickly and in ways which hinder communication. The purpose of language is to comunicate, after all.

      Note: IANALL

  27. Will the Retribution Be Just enough .... by leoaugust · · Score: 5, Interesting

    All you are doing is causing your audience to educate themselves. Once everyone understands how wrong you are your stock price will suffer. Hmmm, suddenly when I think about it - you might in fact be doing us all a favor.

    After all is said and done, all that may happen is that SCO's stock price may suffer ? Really, is this Just enough ? Will Justice have been served after all the mayhem that has been created ?

    Borrowing from Friedman in NYTimes

    ... the image that comes to mind is that famous scene in the movie "The Shining" where Jack Nicholson, playing a crazed author, tries to kill his wife, played by Shelley Duvall, who's hiding in the bathroom. As Ms. Duvall cowers behind the locked bathroom door, Mr. Nicholson takes an ax, smashes it through the door, and with a look of cheery madness peers through the splintered wood and announces, "Heeeere's Johnny."

    And the analogy would be that after all this Johnny's book doesn't sell well in the market. Other than that his life goes on ....

    I am all for a little poetic justice .... How about adopting a little from What The Onion had in store for the Gigli Stars and dish it out to Darl, SCO, and all the members in their Axis ....

    To quote from the Onion Story .... Focus groups at advance screenings for Gigli, a romantic comedy starring Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez set to open nationwide July 30, have demanded a new ending in which both stars die "in as brutal a manner as possible," sources at Sony Pictures said Tuesday.
    --
    To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies ...
    1. Re:Will the Retribution Be Just enough .... by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      I'd wager that Bob was referring to the consumers getting educated as far as doing us a favor, not the end result of SCO's stock tanking.

  28. A responce from me about defending the clarity. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    Oh, I understand now. I think.

    'defending, in one breath, the SCO suit, the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, and the Supreme Court Decision in the Eldred vs. Ashcroft case.'

    Is about Darls original letter? That would make sense, except its a quote. From what exactly? I don't know. Its almost as if that was the title of darls letter. But it wasn't.

    Note, I never said it was incorrect grammatically, just that it could easily be misinterpreted (which it can be).

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  29. Re:Unclear blurb. by penguinboy · · Score: 1

    That's what it looks like, yes. Quite confusing.

  30. Good Luck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Good luck with that, ummm, letter thing.

  31. Then I ask you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is ESR here?

    He's not with VA Software anymore...and VA Software isn't with Linux anymore...So he's TWICE REMOVED from Linux. Why should ESRs crap be posted?

  32. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Classy Formal Wear?! Oh dear...

  33. Darl McBride will most likely go to jail for fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Securities fraud is a criminal offence!

  34. SCO stock up today. by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1

    I just checked it at WSJ on-line. Is there some news that came out that I missed to influence this?

    --
    Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    1. Re:SCO stock up today. by xlyz · · Score: 1


      According to Yahoo SCO stock is sky rocketing.

      any connection with Red Hat positive revenue results?

      anticipation of licensing fees on Red Hat customers?

  35. But Daryl by codepunk · · Score: 1

    My definition of profit is very different then yours. My definition of profit is the ability to allow you to change, modify the source code that "I" have written. A condition of this is that "I" insist that you allow others to do the same.

    --


    Got Code?
    1. Re:But Daryl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Get it through your head. HIS NAME IS DARL . Note the lack of the Y in his name. Darl. Not Daryl. Darl.

      Rinse. Repeat.

    2. Re:But Daryl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Darl, Daryl, Dickhead we all know who we are talking about.

    3. Re:But Daryl by fuzzybunny · · Score: 1

      I like Daryl better. It reminds me of "Hi I'm Larry, and this is my brother Daryl, and this is my other brother Daryl."

      Look it up if you're too young to remember--it's strangely appropriate 8)

      --
      Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
  36. Talking of cluebies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The original poster's question is valid: why is he here?

    DID YOU PERHAPS READ THE ARTICLE?

    NO?

    THX, K.. BYE!

  37. Executive Summary by bstadil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Darl, Put a sock in it!

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  38. why pay any attention to SCO? by Neuroelectronic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    like in the article, SCO has been dis-proven over and over again. the Press is paying to much attention to this case (among other things). by now isn't it apparent by now that SCO is simply a *industry status probe* by microsoft? consider it a spectrum probe launched by the MSS Enterprise. Although, everywhere it scans, it costs resources to the enemy, the open source community. =]

    1. Re:why pay any attention to SCO? by SoIosoft · · Score: 1, Troll

      If the open source community is so confident that it's correct, why are IBM and others refusing to pay the expenses should any of their users be sued over intellectual property violations? Microsoft recently extended full protection to its users, should they be sued for using Windows. Why are the large vendors of the Linux community such as IBM, Redhat, and SuSe being so niggardly? I'd like to believe the open source community is right, but the vendors would do themselves a huge PR favor by extending the protection I've discussed to their users. What's stopping this from happening? And even if it isn't necessary because SCO has no IP rights in the kernel, someone else could easily come along, make a similar claim, but have a much stronger case. This is one of the few things that bugs me about open source and Linux. I'd feel much more confident if the vendors weren't so niggardly and would provide protection to anyone sued for using Linux.

      --
      Help me. I've been modbombed by a few people with entirely too much time on their hands.
    2. Re:why pay any attention to SCO? by hdparm · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Microsoft recently extended full protection to its users, should they be sued for using Windows. Why are the large vendors of the Linux community such as IBM, Redhat, and SuSe being so niggardly?

      Funny you'd asked this question without hinting at obvious answer - perhaps because at Microsoft they know exactly what UNIX algorhytms have they used in NT kernel? Whole fucking TCP stack used to be derived of BSD code. Or maybe becuase this is one more way to spread FUD?

      Linux kernel have had so many contributors over 10+ years that it is virtually impossible to have a compact group that would know every bit of kernel code. In case there is an infringment (which I really doubt, especially deliberate one), all Darl ought to say is where the code is and offending kernel tree will be patched and distributed in no time.

      Somehow, as this saga unfolds, I can't see this happening. Probably because there is nothing to show. And with every day passing by, I am more and more convinced that all this crap is initiated by Microsoft and that Bob Young is, as he usually is, right - there is only one entity that benefited from SCO case so far - Microsoft. And a pockets of few SCO executives.

    3. Re:why pay any attention to SCO? by GSloop · · Score: 1

      Because I don't think end users are liable for the torts of a vendor with which they negoitiated with in good faith.

      Offering this "protection" is simply a snake oil. Anyone offering this, and touting it as a remedy ought to be seen as not terribly interested in the truth and reality.

      It's an illusion. Smoke and mirrors. FUD.

      Microsoft? FUD?

      Same story, different day.

      Cheers,
      Greg

    4. Re:why pay any attention to SCO? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Niggardly" is actually a perfectly legitimate word in English, meaning "petty in giving or spending", or stingy. The etymology is completely uncrelated to a certain similar-sounding racial term, though due to the similar pronounciation and misinterpretations such as yours, "niggardly" is quickly falling out of use.

      http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=niggardly

      That said, the grandparent is most certainly 1) wrong (and stupid), as users would not be liable for infringing code in Linux anyway, and 2) a sad attempt at a troll, for reasons you stated.

    5. Re:why pay any attention to SCO? by arkanes · · Score: 2, Informative

      You know what the word niggardly means, right? Hint: it has nothing to do with black people.

    6. Re:why pay any attention to SCO? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Care to explain the etymology of the word, then?

    7. Re:why pay any attention to SCO? by DShard · · Score: 2, Informative

      Man at least check out the definition before you blast someone for being whatever...

      niggardly

      \Nig"gard*ly\, a. Meanly covetous or avarcious in dealing with others; stingy; niggard.

      Where the owner of the house will be bountiful, it is not for the steward to be niggardly. --Bp. Hall.

      Syn: Avarcious; covetous; parsimonious; sparing; miserly; penurios; sordid; stingy. See Avaricious.


      It looks like _you_ win the ignorant idiot award.

    8. Re:why pay any attention to SCO? by koekepeer · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      yeah right.

      i know the word and the use for it, and i feel it is ridiculous and flame-inducing language.

      any dictionary (online even) will give you synonyms for words like these. it was used to invoke a negative response, and never did i say anything else about the use of this word than it being rude.

      you, and the anonymous reply-er presume i misinterpreted the word because of it's 'racial sound'. that thought didn't even cross my mind.

      let me put it this way: common sense tells me that, even if it does not have an officially documented racial association, this word can be offensive to people who percieve this word as being linked to skin color.

      no-one would say "niggardly" in an average group of black people, and expect to be treated with respect. and rightfuly so! being etymologically correct and being considerate are two different things.

      now mod me OT again. rightfully so. i just wanted to clarify that you and the other poster were overinterpreting my post quite a bit, without me giving you any reason to do so.

    9. Re:why pay any attention to SCO? by Bob+Loblaw · · Score: 1

      The protection that MS extended to their customers only covers the cost of the MS software purchased and nothing more. So if someone suffered extensive damages and lost business due to a flaw in MS software, good luck to them in recovering more than the $300 it cost to buy Windows.

    10. Re:why pay any attention to SCO? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Atlantic City and Las Vegas casino workers know this well. Especially at the Blackjack tables. When the dealer shows an Ace or a Face card, he or she will ask if you want to buy insurance. It's a sucker bet, because if the dealer has a blackjack, you only lose your insurance (usually an amount equal to your bet). If you buy insurance and the dealer does not have blackjack, you won't win any more by having bought the insurance, and the house still gets that money from you. And, if you still lose to the dealer, you lose your insurance plus the bet, thereby doubling the house's profits. I think IBM is right in not offering this phony bet to its customers. They are willing to take their chances in court. As to SCO group threatening IBM's customers if they continue to use Linux, well, I can only say this. I may buy a server in the future, and it will run an Operating System. I know two things for certain. 1. I will never buy a server running Windows, and 2. I will never buy a server running SCO UNIX. Sun Solaris, OS/400, Linux, FreeBSD, these are my choices now, and one of them will win my money. If these are no longer distributed, I will dig out my old installation disks and install Linux. SCO group cannot stop me from using something that I have legally acquired previous to their lawsuit, and they cannot force me to pay them for someone else's work. The most they can hope for is a cease and desist order being placed on IBM, then they will have to go after each distributor in order. Eventually, they will run out of money. When Red Hat breaks up, how much do you want to bet we'll have "Bob's Linux" and "Fred's Linux" and "Joe's Linux" thrown into the arena?

  39. Boot party by AoT · · Score: 1


    If you don't know what a boot party is, you're about to see one all over Mr. McBride and SCO. Thats what this is about, everyone smells the blood, everyone.

  40. Re:Darl McBride will most likely go to jailfor fra by NSash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because white collar crime results in so many jail sentences, right?

    Steal $240 from a convenience store, and you'll get at least 5 years behind bars. Defraud investors of millions, and -- if you're an executive for Worldcom, Enron, or Fannie Mae -- you'll pay a fine and get on with your life.

  41. On other news... by ivern76 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Darl can't even spell properly. "The FSF and Red Hat believe that the progress of science is best advanced by eliminating the profit motive from software development and insuring free, unrestricted public access to software innovations." Insuring? I never knew the FSF was in the insurance business...sure hope he meant ensuring.

    1. Re:On other news... by BurritoWarrior · · Score: 1

      Insuring:

      2 : to make certain especially by taking necessary measures and precautions

    2. Re:On other news... by Quixotic+Raindrop · · Score: 1
      According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, insure and ensure are essentially interchangable (see: ensure):

      [...]ENSURE, INSURE, and ASSURE are interchangeable in many contexts[...]
      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. (Einstein)
    3. Re:On other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From www.m-w.com:
      insure:

      2 : to make certain especially by taking necessary measures and precautions.

      If you're going to be a grammar-nazi, at least get it right.

  42. SCO = Santa Cruz Operation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never really knew what it stood for, took me long enough to find it.

    1. Re:SCO = Santa Cruz Operation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Santa Clause Operation

  43. Re:Unclear blurb. by perf_monkey · · Score: 1

    Yes, I read the post this way too. Of course, if you know who Bob Young is, that should be shocking. :)

  44. Re:Unclear blurb. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I guess I caught the meaning of the GPL and its reliance on US Copyright law when I first heard about the GPL, oh, in '87 or '88. The GPL absolutely *DEPENDS* on US Copyright law to exist as-is for it to have meaning, the basis of "I wrote this work and copyright lets me define what terms it can be used by".

    What Bob Young is trying to defend is the right under copyright for someone to copyright a work, and define THEIR terms for how that copyrighted work is used and distributed.

    What Darl is trying to impress is that there is only ONE way for Copyright to be interpreted and used (which seems only to be "Not the GPL").

    Most of us on Slashdot AGREE that there is some basis for SOME justification and need for laws such as patents, trademarks and copyrights, and agree that the processes and systems used for and by these are being abused and warped like no one has seen before, solely because of corporate and IP lawyer greed, not because of any concern for the protections of real individual people.

    (Maybe "The Matrix" really is trying to be a subtle wakeup call about how powerful we've allowed corporations to become, and what will happen if it continues, because this time there may not be a Teddy Roosevelt, Sherman Anti-trust Act and a judicial system willing to do the modern equivalent of "trust busting", because corporate america has provided the means for many of the people in the system to get where they are. It's not robots to fear, it is multinational corporations...)

    GNU, Stallman, EFF, et al. are NOT arguing for abolition of IP laws, but for not allowing them to be bastardized beyond belief merely by, and for the sole benefits of, Corporate America.

    Yes, I would also say that I defend the right of SCO to be able to make their lawsuit, as frivolous and without basis that I think it is. And I pray as much that it does not have the perverse outcomes like the OJ Simpson and latest Microsoft anti-trust cases had.

    We all have probably decried about the US Government detaining people outside of the US, on a military installation, without telling them (or us) specifically why they are being detained, without releasing them after 72 hours, etc.

    Yet SCO is trying to do the same thing with copyright. "You've cheated us! But we can't tell you exactly how you have, nor will we let you try to fix it beforehand."

    It is like some little hot-headed little Napolean and his posse threatening to kick your ass because you did something that pissed him off (woke up? wore white pants after Labor Day? yawned w/o covering your mouth?), he won't tell you what it was that you did, and won't let you apologize for it, etc., because he *really* wants to kick your ass...

    Oh, well...

  45. If the SCO-Linux battle was moderated on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Darl McBride: -1 Troll
    Linus Torvalds: +1 Funny
    Groklaw: +1 Insighful
    Bob Young: -1 Redundant

    Sorry Bob. You're on the good side, but you really contributed nothing.

    1. Re:If the SCO-Linux battle was moderated on /. by MobyTurbo · · Score: 1
      Bob Young: -1 Redundant

      Sorry Bob. You're on the good side, but you really contributed nothing.

      I know this is a "funny" post, but seriously Bob Young did contribute something; not so much as what he wrote but who he is. As a founder of Red Hat, Bob Young stands in the public mind for open source's business viability. This very idea is part of what SCO is trying to put in jeporady, so a response for a spokesman on the other side is very appropriate.
    2. Re:If the SCO-Linux battle was moderated on /. by Trogre · · Score: 1

      FSF/EFF: +1 Informative
      Bill Gates: -1 Overrated

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  46. Seriously what the hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    None of the articles referenced are less than a week old!

  47. Open mouth; Insert foot by CjKing2k · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The DMCA is the equivalent of trying to stop break-and-entry of homes by making screwdrivers illegal.

    The DMCA wouldn't make screwdrivers illegal. It would just make it illegal for you to publish instructions on how to fabricate a screwdriver, locate the door, and insert the screwdriver.

  48. McBride is a sad man... by Comatose51 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems to me that he equates incentive to create with profit. Now, I'm not an idealist or anything and money is a good incentive but there are some of us who just want to advance the art/science. Can he not see that? Surely he must be aware of it. Perhaps he thinks the world is so materialistic that everyone would simply buy his argument.

    Whenever I read his argument I imagine either:
    1. Mr. Burns pulling his hair out, unable to comprehend this new "madness" of non-profit work.

    2. Sauron, unable to imagine what the little geeks have in mind for Linux's profit potentials...

    --
    EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
    1. Re:McBride is a sad man... by Angst+Badger · · Score: 1

      Whenever I read his argument I imagine either:

      1. Mr. Burns pulling his hair out, unable to comprehend this new "madness" of non-profit work.

      2. Sauron, unable to imagine what the little geeks have in mind for Linux's profit potentials...


      Sauron? Really, that's far too grand for Darl McBride. He always makes me think of Frank Burns from M*A*S*H.

      --
      Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
    2. Re:McBride is a sad man... by wilhelm · · Score: 1

      Surely he must be aware of it. Perhaps he thinks the world is so materialistic that everyone would simply buy his argument.

      I've noticed that people's perceptions of "the way things are" are heavily colored by the way they are. For instance, at a development house I used to work for, we didn't have a legal piece of software in the house (the BSA would have had a field day with that place!). So the CEO was extra-concerned about piracy with everything we produced - "is it copyable, can we keep it to ourselves" kinda thing. He was a software pirate, so he figured everybody else was too. The general Slashdot opinion is that OSS and FS are good things, and that how could anybody possibly think they aren't? Darl's just the same, except he wants to make boatloads of money on his supposedly-copyrighted stuff, and why wouldn't everybody else want to do the same? It's all about what motivates you, which colors your world view.

  49. GPL vs. SCO by bckrispi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Darl has apparently violated several clauses in the GPL. Are any of these actionable? Is there a precident for this? I can't imagine a more fitting ending for this than Darl being slapped with a class action lawsuit by kernel contributers (as he's being slapped with his cellmate's schlong, securities fraud==bad). I know Linus wants to avoid this kind of litigation, but a successful suit defending the IP rights of contributers and OSS copyright holders, I feel, can only be good for the GPL.

    --
    Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
    1. Re:GPL vs. SCO by glassesmonkey · · Score: 1

      No, you don't want to test GPL in the courts against a bunch of proven-sleazy lawyers (not that I am necessarily connecting the above mentioned people with any specific claims about their sleaziness). Any case that gets rejected adds to case-law regarding GPL.

  50. I Didn't Know He Owned the Ticats... by dupper · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Darl: "Aaaaargooooos!"

    1. Re:I Didn't Know He Owned the Ticats... by Ron+Harwood · · Score: 1

      He bought them in October.

    2. Re:I Didn't Know He Owned the Ticats... by good+soldier+svejk · · Score: 1

      Cool! I may have to switch my CFL team.

      Back when the CFL was expanding into the US, I fantasized about bringing a franchise to Hartford Connecticut and call it the Hartford Bluefin. Then I'd steal Charlie Ward away from the Knicks to play QB...

      --
      It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man

      -James Baldwin
  51. Give him a break by DroversDog · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Bob sounds battle weary like the rest of us who care and his point anyway is to alert us to the sinister nature of Darls sad view point and that forces are at work who would see Mr McBide's selfish take on copyright enshrined in law. Nothing new here that aside tho' but the message is clear: the proprietory system is under threat and the lobbying must already have started.

    Don't be afraid but be very alert!

  52. Re:Darl McBride will most likely go to jailfor fra by bckrispi · · Score: 1

    Nope, five years for the first Enron exec to be sentenced. While I agree that legislation needs to be harsher for such white-collar criminals. The notorious days of "Club Fed" ended in the 80's. These guys will get prison time. The question is, will it be proportional to all the hurt they caused.

    --
    Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
  53. SCO goals by js7a · · Score: 4, Interesting
    SCO's only product is media spin

    That's a simplistic view that ignores what SCO really wants.

    They are not intentionally trying to pump-and-dump, although they will surely be very vulnerable to suits charging such intentions within half a month.

    The truth is that the head executives at SCO really believed that there was some part of SysV inside Linux, and you can tell by the malloc() and other examples that they were showing to the analysts under nondisclosure. They believed it so much that they didn't want to even consider the possibility that they were wrong, and the executives weren't technical enough to tell that their "evidence" was faulty.

    What they've always really wanted is to get a license fee from each copy of Linux in any commercial use. That's why they've resisted explaining exactly which code they consider infringing, because they were afraid Linus would order it replaced right away (which of course he would, if there was any.)

    1. Re:SCO goals by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Insightful
      What they've always really wanted is to get a license fee from each copy of Linux in any commercial use. That's why they've resisted explaining exactly which code they consider infringing, because they were afraid Linus would order it replaced right away (which of course he would, if there was any.)
      Isn't that a rather faulty premise, really? It might work if every company with commercial Linux installations were foolish enough to pay the license fee, but I cannot imagine that any court would allow SCO to collect royalties on a product that is mostly other people's work, with a just few (alledged) lines of SCO's code in it. Not without at least disclosing which lines actually belong to SCO, which would then allow the core team to replace those lines.

      Maybe at first the executives had some strange idea about collecting royalties, but when they threw a stone at the sleeping dragon (IBM), it was clear that they just wanted someone to buy SCO, making them rich. Now that this plan fell through, they're trying pump-and-dump. Wilder and wilder claims follow hard on one another, and with each surge in the share price, SCO's leadership sell off a bunch of shares (as others have pointed out here before). The fact that they are offering their lawyers a big chunk of cash if someone buys SCO indicates that they're still in hopes that this will happen.
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:SCO goals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, the verve pipe had to give up every cent of money off of "Bittersweet Symphony" because they used a few measures of another groups music without acknowledging it

    3. Re:SCO goals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Sure but were they forced to keep distributing the music, with the infringing part included, and forbidden from correcting the problem?

      The idea is ludicrous.

    4. Re:SCO goals by lone_marauder · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What they've always really wanted is to get a license fee from each copy of Linux in any commercial use.

      No, what they've always really wanted is to portray Linux as an outlaw, anti-American OS, because that is what their paymasters at Microsoft want.

      --
      who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
    5. Re:SCO goals by schon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The truth is that the head executives at SCO really believed that there was some part of SysV inside Linux

      I disagree - refusing to show the alleged infringing code shows that they don't have any evidence at all; by refusing to show the alleged infringing code, they are effectively preventing themselves from reaping any monetary benefits from the alleged infringement. A first year law student would know this (do some reading on the Doctrine of Laches).

      and you can tell by the malloc() and other examples that they were showing to the analysts under nondisclosure.

      I disagree - their examples can also be explained by desire to decieve people who they think wouldn't know better.

      What they've always really wanted is to get a license fee from each copy of Linux in any commercial use.

      This may be true, but simply put, it's just not gonna happen.

      That's why they've resisted explaining exactly which code they consider infringing,

      Again, no. If this was true, then Darl and co is living in a dream world - nobody is that stupid. Their lawyers would have pointed out that it was hopeless, and they'd be screwing themselves by not coming up with their 'evidence'.

      From a logic standpoint, the only explanation is that SCO knows that there is no infringing code. To believe otherwise is to believe that every lawyer under their employ is so horribly inept that they never would have passed the bar.

    6. Re:SCO goals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      grammar nazi: in your past (parenthetical) clause: "which of couse he would, if there *were* any.

      it's the subjunctive tense. use it when you speak of the hypothetical.

      peace

    7. Re:SCO goals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heck, they were even told where the problem was!

  54. RamBus by BuckaBooBob · · Score: 2, Insightful

    \SCO should have learned from the mistakes that RAMBUS made... You can't build a business model around litigation. Wheres Rambus now?

    --
    Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
    1. Re:RamBus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Wheres Rambus now?

      FYI ...

      Rambus Inc.
      4440 El Camino Real
      Los Altos, CA. 94022

    2. Re:RamBus by Jayfar · · Score: 1

      Bad example maybe; still litigating and maybe winning:

      http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/6 95 3138.htm

    3. Re:RamBus by BuckaBooBob · · Score: 1

      Well not really we never did see RDram hit the streets... Not alot of MB manufaturers wanted to support a litigation company that increased the cost of thier products...

      --
      Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
    4. Re:RamBus by FurryFeet · · Score: 1

      Wheres Rambus now?

      Alive and well , thank you very much.
      I agree with your point, but maybe it was not a good example...

  55. Seriously by BuckaBooBob · · Score: 2, Interesting

    SCO is busy trying to keep "Infringing" code away from public eyes.. What for? if they own the rights to it then big deal.. No one can copy it anyway. But if some how they get away with this what Will happen? How could a judge let SCO get away with it..

    I find it inconciveable that they will be able to hide thier "Infringed" code forever.. The second its Identified it will be cleaned and SCO will no-longer have any claim for licence fee's.

    For some odd reason if sco is able to keep it a secret then who on earth will police SCO from charging thier licence fee's once enough changes have been made that thier code is removed?

    --
    Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
  56. In other news today... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    In other news today SCO anounced they were switching to use the services of the law Firm "Dewie, Screwem & Howe" Expect more action shortly!

  57. In other news... by Xconnect · · Score: 1, Funny

    I sure hope you meant "in other news". I don't think the news casters would enjoy having Darl's ass on their heads. :-)

    --
    --- root@127.0.0.1
  58. Re:Darl McBride will most likely go to jailfor fra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ".. five years for the first Enron exec to be sentenced."

    don't you mean "five years for the only Enron exec that will ever be sentenced(to jail time)."
    read - scapegoat.

  59. mcbride is insane by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what he's effectively saying is that creating something and then GIVING IT AWAY is in violation of the U.S constituton.

    just what crack is this idiot on? surely no-one can take seriously a man who says such ridiculous things as this?

  60. Dumb letters are good by greenrd · · Score: 1
    The people who really need to read this stuff are non-techie, not-particularly-bright or well-informed people in the business community (i.e. PHBs). To this end, dumb open letters are good.

    Non-genius people like people like them. See, just look at George W. Bush. He wasn't elected for his brains. Or rather, he was, but for his lack of them.

  61. Complain to the FTC and the SEC by Hanno · · Score: 4, Informative

    Since this story is a dupe , allow me to repeat myself, as well:

    You guys should complain to the FTC and the SEC about SCO. I have. It's easy and yes, they do accept complaints from non-US citizens.

    --

    ------------------
    You may like my a cappella music
  62. Verve Pipe - sorta OT by Iffy+Bonzoolie · · Score: 2, Informative

    The "other group" was the Rolling Stones, from what I've heard.

    -If

    --
    Run a pencil-and-paper RPG campaign with your far-off friends: Gametable!
    1. Re:Verve Pipe - sorta OT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does the group that infringed matter?

  63. The real message of this open letter.... by Angostura · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is "please visit Lulu.com".

    Don't get me wrong, he is a splendid, guy, and lulu is spendid site. But what he has discovered here is a splendid way to get free advertising for his new venture.

  64. morons' open letter to /. - robbIE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    dear robbIE,

    whatever happened to 'stuff that matters'? all that matters now is more monIE? isn't that what's caused the planet/population crisis, & poteNTshill overheating of the main processor? greed/fear/ego based MiSinformation. that's how it happened? tell 'em robbIE?

    a few lunatics in 3k outfits, right? corepirate nazi ?pr? ?firm? scriptdead stock markup FraUDsters are running your 'show' now, right robbIE?

    get ready to brighten up?

    (score: mynuts won, don't meNTion monIE & robbIE in the same sentence.).

  65. I think OSS helps people make money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Increasingly, businesses love Linux because it reduces their costs. Because software is so readily replicable, it makes sense for it to have a near-zero marginal cost after it is created. The idea of a significant per-copy price just doesn't match well with how software is created. The rewards depend almost solely on the size of the market, irrespective of how much work went into the project. As an example, my organization recently installed an electronic medical record product that is a MS Access application. The price - close to $200K. The app is non-trivial, but it involved an infinitesimally small amount of development compared to Access itself, which is available for a couple hundred dollars. Does this make sense in any rational world? I think a more logical system would be to consider software inherently public, like roads or parks, and fund software development through the government, much as we fund medical research with the NIH. I'm generally a proponent of keeping as much as possible in the free-market, private sector, but the intrinsic characteristics of software seem to fit better with it being a public resource.

  66. Movie Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The SCO Redemption
    Scene 1
    Luca Brasi: Don Darl, I want to thank you for inviting me to the trial of your lawsuit on the day of the trial of your lawsuit.
    Darl McBride:Ehhh...uhhhh...linux...

    Scene 4
    Darl: I can't go to prison! They pee in a cup and throw it in your face! I saw it in a movie!
    Judge: There won't be any prison movies where you're going ... prison!

    Scene 10
    Inmate #1: Hey Darl, you dropped the soap.
    Darl: Wha...oh...shi...
    Inmate #2 Yeah, now pick it up!
    Inmate #1 Squeal like a pig, boy!

  67. Re:The more descriptive T-shirt.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    would be the one depicting Darl after incarceration for a period of time -- the one with the legend "Open Sores Darl." I imagine him screaming "Open Sores violates the Constitution!"

    Geez, I'm feeling vindictive this morning.

  68. Re:sticking it to Darl (OT) by jtev · · Score: 1

    But it didn't say not the tool, it said not the owner of the tool, meaning of course that Darl's Dominatrix shouldn't be sent to jail.

    --
    That which is done from love exists beyond good and evil
  69. Dear Bob by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

    You Have Been Trolled.

    You Have Lost.

    Have A Nice Day.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  70. Do we have to give up "Niggle" too? by arrogance · · Score: 5, Informative

    Check the etymology. Niggard and Niggle have nothing to do with Nigger. By your argument, we can't use Niggle either, because it might "sound" like a racist epithet? I also find it funny that someone (you) who has a problem with the way others use language, use it so badly. Are capitals difficult? Do you know how to use it's/its?

    You also have a problem with logic. You say the thought of its racial sound didn't cross your mind, yet that's what concerns you: are you assuming that all "average" black people don't know the difference between Nigger and Niggardly? Who's the racist here?

    From an etymological dictionary:

    niggard - 1366, nygard, the suffix suggests Fr. origin (cf. dastard), but the root word is probably related to O.N. hnoggr "stingy," from P.Gmc. *khnauwjaz; related to O.E. hneaw "stingy, niggardly," which did not survive in M.E.

    nigger - 1786, earlier neger (1568, Scot. and northern England dialect), from Fr. negre, from Sp. negro (see Negro). From the earliest usage it was "the term that carries with it all the obloquy and contempt and rejection which whites have inflicted on blacks." But as black inferiority was at one time a near universal assumption in Eng.-speaking lands, the word in some cases could be used without insult. More sympathetic writers late 18c. and early 19c. seem to have used black (n.) and, after the American Civil War, colored person. Also applied by Eng. settlers to dark-skinned native peoples in India, Australia, Polynesia. The reclamation of the word as a neutral or positive term in black culture, often with a suggestion of "soul" or "style," is attested first in the Amer. South, later (1968) in the Northern, urban-based Black Power movement. Variant niggah attested from 1925, usually in situations where blacks use the word; without the -h it is attested from 1969. Slang phrase nigger in the woodpile attested by 1800; "A mode of accounting for the disappearance of fuel; an unsolved mystery" [R.H. Thornton, "American Glossary," 1912]. Nigger heaven, "the top gallery in a (segregated) theater" first attested 1878 in ref. to Troy, N.Y. " 'You're a fool nigger, and the worst day's work Pa ever did was to buy you,' said Scarlett slowly. ... There, she thought, I've said 'nigger' and Mother wouldn't like that at all." [Margaret Mitchell, "Gone With the Wind," 1936]

    niggle - 1599, possibly from a Scand. source (cf. Norw. dial. nigla "be busy with trifles"), perhaps related to source of niggard.

    Should we also tell anyone with the name Nygard that they need to change it, or at least shouldn't utter it?

    Next time you're wrong, just admit it, or shut up.

    1. Re:Do we have to give up "Niggle" too? by M.+Silver · · Score: 1

      Should we also tell anyone with the name Nygard that they need to change it, or at least shouldn't utter it?

      I wasn't sure whether to be amused or saddened that some birdseed sellers have taken to spelling "Niger" (black thistle seed) as "Nyjer."

      --

      Slashdot's token middle-aged housewife
    2. Re:Do we have to give up "Niggle" too? by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. Even though the word has no connections to the similar sounding racial slur, this word has no place in the English vocabulary today. The first time I'd ever heard this word was when there was a big news story about some idiot politician who used the word and got people pissed off because... THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS. I didn't either, and I am a very well educated man. The only people who know this word now are people who heard the story back in the 90s about that political flap and English scholars.

      I think you would have a very hard time convincing a group of average (insert any race here) that this word is useful at all in today's modern vocabulary. Given that there are many other useful synonyms, I don't see the point in ever using that word other than to rouse tempers and upset people who DON'T know what it means. And in today's world, that would be 90% of the population.

    3. Re:Do we have to give up "Niggle" too? by FiloEleven · · Score: 2, Funny

      "I think you would have a very hard time convincing a group of average (insert any race here) that this word is useful at all in today's modern vocabulary."

      humans?

    4. Re:Do we have to give up "Niggle" too? by ccp · · Score: 1

      I just cited the word 'niggardly' from the original post because it was the most obvious inflammatory word.

      Even I know the difference, and English isn't my first language!
      Neither the second, thinking on it.

      Cheers,

    5. Re:Do we have to give up "Niggle" too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a very well educated man

      Apparently not as educated as you might think. The point is, it is a perfectly fine word, and if people do not know that, then it is better to educate them than to drop the word entirely. I did not post this to call you stupid or anything like that, I did it to prove my point. YOu may be a very eduated person as you claimed, well you just learned something, use the knowledge and pass it on, instead o burying the knowledge.

    6. Re:Do we have to give up "Niggle" too? by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 1

      Let's put it another way. Let's say that there was a rarely known word: "GeorgeWBushIsAnAss". This word has no connection to George W. Bush himself. It's an old word that just happens to bear a striking resemblence to a meme that is percolating through the collective minds of Americans today. In reality this word just means, untrustworthy.

      So someone posts something here on /. using "GeorgeWBushIsAnAss" and get's lambasted by the vocal minority of Bush backers even though he meant no offense. Even though I would find the situation humorous, I would have to say that such a word probably has no place in modern discourse since it is likely to do nothing more than fan flames. If there are other more suitable terms, then the word should be abandoned. ESPECIALLY considering that only a small group of people would have any idea what the word actually means. The world does not cater to those with arcane knowledge no matter how much we may wish it did. It's all about the lowest common denominator.

    7. Re:Do we have to give up "Niggle" too? by koekepeer · · Score: 1

      funny guy :)

      give it up, it wasn't even about the word's meaning itself... you can guess what it was about, but you'd likely be wrong... mr. trolling4dollars

      greetings, well-educated man :) you just made me smile!

    8. Re:Do we have to give up "Niggle" too? by BadDreamer · · Score: 1

      So, mr Very Well Educated Man, is this what they taught you in school was a useful analogy?

      It seems to me you should have been less niggardly when picking your place of education. But then, since it's all about the lowest common denominator, let's just dumb everyone down.

      At least you provided me with my best laugh of the day, thank you. Now please do go back to dumbing down your writing for the rest of us.

    9. Re:Do we have to give up "Niggle" too? by koekepeer · · Score: 1

      for chrissakes drop it

      i wish i was never tempted to start this discussion!

      FYI elitist attitude and failure to see someone else's point of few just because you think they don't understand the meaning of a word is just downright unproductive discussion technique.

      i know i shouldn't care so much, but i try to write in such a way that people understand what i am saying. if clarifying a point means to some people that i am trying defend myself while being 'wrong', without even listening to me explaining that that wasn't the original point, well... that is their problem. i guess i'm waisting my time here talking to them.

      so yeah, what else is new :)

      thing is, i was right, the original post was a huge troll and at the time modded up for no reason. now i don't mind getting modded down offtopic, as long as this type of post is not in my face when i browse at treshold 2. i don't even want to be modded up for being insightful about a troll -> it is offtopic to respond to it. in fact, ithink it's good that i'm modded down for this reason exactly. what boggles me is that some people find dictionary definition worthy of modding up. maybe i take this whole /. modding thing too seriously :)

      i just see a little too much of an elitist attitude in this place. why not leave? /. is like the M$ of weblogs, there is no good alternative for lazy bastards like me to read news on geeky topics (and don't start mentioning K5, gosh, talk about elitism...). and believe me, i am looking for it!

  71. Someone told me by gr8_phk · · Score: 1

    Someone once told me "never argue with a fool, people on the outside can't tell which one is the fool" or something to that effect. This guy should take that advise.

  72. Moderators on crack again by tapin · · Score: 2, Informative
    How the hell did the parent post get modded to 5, "Insightful" after claiming that "the GPL relies on copyright to keep derivative works in the public domain."?

    Look, "public domain" is a very specific concept. It's the removal of any and all copyright and patent restrictions on a piece of property.

    The GPL doesn't "keep derivative works in the public domain" any more than paying a SCO license fee "keeps Linux legal". It's problematic to FOSS's acceptance and proper use to conflate the two.

    (However, to be fair, I completely agree with the point about software patents. Perhaps the moderators only read the last paragraph of any given post?)

  73. Use the glue at the edges. by mnmn · · Score: 1

    Sometimes a letter might not reach its destination if its left open. Close the letter, SCO probably has enough of a company left there to have a letter-opener.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  74. Re:GPL vs. SCO - IBM is suing on this basis by gvc · · Score: 1

    One of the bases for IBM's countersuit is that SCO has illegally distributed IBM's copyright material, contrary to the GPL.

    This claim was the impetus for McBride's blather about GPL and the constitution.

  75. it's for the press by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1
    It's for the press, let him be.

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
  76. Darl would hate your shirt more than anyone by sdcharle · · Score: 1

    He hates the word 'free' so much, after all...

  77. OT: your sig by ReelOddeeo · · Score: 1

    A programmer needn't spell correctly, just koncistentlee (sic)

    Gnot Gnecessarily.

    --

    Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
  78. it's Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they have a law office in Harvard Square... (don't know if they have one in UT)

  79. Bonk by arrogance · · Score: 1

    "keep this discussion decent": It was your post which attacked someone else for using a legitimate work that started this entire pointless thread. It's too bad you can't take criticism, even from a number of posters who believe you are wrong-headed on this subject. Telling someone their logic is flawed is a part of this kind of forum. However, you make ad hominem attacks in your first post, with no good reason (niggardly is NOT an inflammatory word): "if you had some sense of self-respect", "you are a troll", "you are just sad", "stupid troll", and "you are lower than a troll. it makes me wish for a (-5 ignorant idiot) moderation". I guess I can (ironically) add hypocrisy to your list of deficiencies.

    "Furthermore, I highly object to you calling me a racist because I state that in an average group of black people the word 'niggardly' would likely be misunderstood. The same holds true for an average group of caucasians." Unfortunately, you didn't include the caucasians in the grandparent post, which would make it appear to the reader that you were, in fact, only talking about the "black people". All the same, I don't think you should consider that the "average" person doesn't understand a particular word just because you have a problem with it.

    "but the root word is probably related": in EITHER case, it has nothing to do with Nigger. You have no sticks for beating. I see your reading comprehension skills are lacking too.

    Just for fun, and just from your last post: Caucasians should be capitalized. misinterprete. A group is singular. orginal. capitalisation. allright. descent.

    I could go on I suppose but it's losing its appeal and presumably boring anyone who manages to read this far. Please let the thread die.

    1. Re:Bonk by koekepeer · · Score: 1

      I could go on I suppose but it's losing its appeal and presumably boring anyone who manages to read this far. Please let the thread die.

      ok, fine, whatever.

    2. Re:Bonk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on, stick to the arguments. And I assure you, this is a very entertaining thread :)

      just for fun:
      all right - one space missing (nitpick)
      descent - going down you know?
      capitalisation - english spelling
      orginal - oops he missed an i: typo
      misinterprete - oops an e too much: typo

      The only real errors you point out:
      - the lack of capitalisation in Caucasians
      - the singular/plural thing

      What you fail to understand is what this koekepeer guy was talking about. You are fighting and not listening. This is silly, and has no place in a discussion. Bonk. I guess it sounds a bit hypocritical to hear you apply the word hypocritical to him. All IMHO of course.

      I don't have karma to burn, I am anonymous. Nice and cowardly :)

    3. Re:Bonk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think "how long it will take me to descent from Excellent to Good" is correct? You are a coward and perhaps your english is at approximately his level. I'm pretty sure that a) typos are errors, and b) many might understand what he was trying to get across but disagree with him. Hence the argument.

    4. Re:Bonk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Re:why pay any attention to SCO? (Score:1, Troll)
      by SoIosoft (711513) on Friday December 19, @06:56AM (#7761728)

      i rest my case

  80. Both letters have quite a different tone by cschmidt · · Score: 1

    Although I don't agree with Darl McBride's open letter, it was at least professional. Mr. Young's letter got personal, which undermines its legitimacy. The assertion that SCO's revenues have fallen because of Mr. McBride's leadership has no bearing on whether or not the GPL is valid, which is the core of Mr. McBride's letter. In fact, Mr. Young barely even responds to the claims in Mr. McBride's letter.

    Not very effective.

    --

    Who am I to blow against the wind? -- Paul Simon
  81. Also, never wrestle with a pig... by conan_albrecht · · Score: 1

    ...because you both get dirty. But the pig enjoys it.

  82. Didn't realize the /. crowd were such commies by rumblin'rabbit · · Score: 1
    Sure lot of commies out there. Can you imagine a world without IP? You write a book, someone else publishes it without your permission or sharing the profits with you, maybe even putting their own name on it. You establish a sound and respected brandname, someone else uses it, trashes it, and makes a lot of money off of it. You write a nice piece of software that you license so that you can pay your bills and feed your family, someone rips it off and distributes it free to however wants it, and you (and your employees) get to flip hamburgers.

    Doesn't sound like a lot of fun to me.

  83. Capitalisation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I might be wrong, but I believe "capitalisation" is correct in every English-speaking country but the US and probably Canada.

  84. Re:Darl McBride will most likely go to jailfor fra by Artifakt · · Score: 1

    Proportionality is unlikely at best. Let's take some typical numbers for a pension fund looting operation. 1,000 employees lose their retirement funds. The have to work an average of 5 extra years (to retire later when social security for them is higher and this is merely to reduce, not eliminate the damage done). That's 5,000 years of life they collectively lost, the equivalent of murdering 64 healthy, newborn infants with a normal projected lifespan of 78 years.
    Now some people would argue that not being able to retire on schedule is not the same as actually losing those years of their lives. You could adjust this if you like, to reflect the time they would have still spent watching TV, brushing their teeth and such, but it still looks like some real losses at absolute best.
    Those 1,000 people all enjoy a reduced standard of living despite their extra years of work. Social securty doesn't pay all that well, and on aveerage only about 1/3 of a prvate pension. Couple that with having to work through their declining years, and their actual life expectancy drops, by an estimated 2.8 years (that's based on Provident Life's current actuarial tables, which break down mortality by income level). That in turn works out to the equivalent of murdering only about 36 heathy newborn infants. Many of these deaths will be the result of poorer medical care and diet.
    I'd argue for both the above losses being applicable, for total damages equal to about 1 real murder/10 people screwed in a pension fund ripoff. Worldcom, for example, with 15,000 people given the shaft in one of their pension fund raids (if memory serves), would therefore be guilty of the equivalent of 1,500 premeditated murders. (And that's just one of the crimes in a series). If you want proportional here, think Nuremburg v 2.0. Anything less is coddling the criminals.

    --
    Who is John Cabal?
  85. That's because we love free market's by argoff · · Score: 1

    Sure lot of commies out there. Can you imagine a world without IP? You write a book, someone else publishes it without your permission or sharing the profits with you, maybe even putting their own name on it. You establish a sound and respected brandname, someone else uses it, trashes it, and makes a lot of money off of it. You write a nice piece of software that you license so that you can pay your bills and feed your family, someone rips it off and distributes it free to however wants it, and you (and your employees) get to flip hamburgers.

    Yeah, and those million or so people who downloaded Madonna are claiming to be the author of "Like a Virgin" and trashing her good name.

    The simple truth is that for every creator that makes a good living from copyrights, there are thousands who they haven't helped a bit, hindered, or even destroyed. Today it is celarly not about talent, but rather how far you can stick your nose up a record company executives back end.

    As for software, don't even go there, people who develop GNU/Linux software are getting sick of hearing it. Closed software has done far more to help M$ screw us over than help the little guy make a living.

    Once you stop falling for the propaganda and start looking at copyrights like an overbearing government regulation, and not some type of free market property right - you might just get it.

  86. Awesome! by sethadam1 · · Score: 1


    Great comment. Seriously, fricken funny.

  87. Mod parent up by Hentai · · Score: 1

    Also, your idea of "leftist" is incorrect. Wanting the law to maximise the well-being of the people is not "left" or "right", it's "fantasy"; the rich never allow such a situation to arise whether the government is communist, fascist or anything in between. As Cornelius Vanderbilt said "What do I care about the law? Ain't I got the power?"

    Someone please bump this up to +5 Insightful

    --
    -Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
  88. Justice is death to copyrights NOT Revenge by argoff · · Score: 1

    After all is said and done, all that may happen is that SCO's stock price may suffer ? Really, is this Just enough ? Will Justice have been served after all the mayhem that has been created ?

    I do not know if it will be enough, but I do think it is important to understand the difference between justice and revenge here.

    Justice does not undo wrongs that already happen, but rather makes sure (however you do it) that the chances of that wrong happening again are appropiately minimized.

    Where revenge implies that if you suffer, then whoever else is (in your opinion) responsible for it has to suffer to.

    Sometimes they imply the same consequence, other times they do not. But the reason why I wanted to say this is becasue Justice will never be done until copyrights are dead - the very nature of deriving profit by restricting how people freely copy things that come their way is unethical, and was bound to lead to problems like this one way or another.

    Now we are in the information age and copying things is no longer just about xerox machines and cassette tapes. And content is no longer different from code, free speech, and political expression in the eyes of the internet. We half to get rid of copyrights, or freedom will suffer.

  89. "Fellow Travellers" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bob Young uses the phrase "Fellow Travelers" in the phone interview:

    "But this letter was actually an attack on alternative forms of copyright, and that's what worried me. If McBride and all the fellow travelers -- the Recording Industry Association of America, and the various publishing industry associations"

    It is an apt phrase, for although their motives are clearly different, the ends they desire are the same.

    "Fellow Travellers" was a euphamistic phrase used by leftists of many types back in the 1930s and 1940s who did not want to directly ally themselves with Communism's brutality or Nazism's aggression, though they agreed secretly with their principles. It included many groups that are still popular today, such as the ACLU/Planned Parenthood. What, you didn't know it was the same group?

    It's an apt description. The RIAA, SCO, the ACLU, AFL/CIO, NEA, and other groups all desire the same thing: totalinarianism. Even though their motives may be different.

  90. Irrelevant by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If Darl's goal was go try to get some company to get excited about the potential of SCO and buy the company for big bucks (which seems pretty likely, or at least some version thereof), then what this guy thinks of Darl's claims about copyright and IP and his itemized rebuttals are completely missing the point. Quite possibly, Darl would say ANYTHING that he thinks might get someone to make him a great offer on the company, and couldn't care LESS what the legal realities of any of the claims are. The idea seems to be if you spread enough FUD that SOMEONE will think you must have some kind of interesting case that is worth investing in, and gobble the company up for big bux.

    The only surprise for Darl is that it hasn't happened yet-- the P.T. Barnum effect doesn't seem to be working very well. Never fear though, perhaps Darl's claims just haven't been quite preposterous enough-- yet.

    Darl may very well have learned his tricks from the old back of the magazine ad scams-- like the famous one that read "Last chance, send 25c" and nothing else. Supposedly the guy got all kinds of folks to send him quarters.

    There's no point in looking so deep into motivations that are so shallow.

  91. Hey! My pen is blue too! You stole it! by dbIII · · Score: 1
    The truth is that the head executives at SCO really believed that there was some part of SysV inside Linux
    It's a lawsuit based on ignorance, by the incompetent. The fact that the main player compares himself as James Bond to clients and gets his brother to do his legal work shows how bad things have got. As the head of a small company going against IBM he see's himself as the underdog. The sad thing is that you can make money that way.

    The whole greek character replacement joke shows what utter contempt he has for the technology his company sells. Someone like this should not be in charge of a technology company.

    What they've always really wanted is to get a license fee from each copy of Linux in any commercial use
    I can see the resoning behind this - it's the same as seeing a bridge that is owned by the public (ie. a govenment body) and selling it to whoever will fall for the trick. Why is history full of scams like this? The failure of US law enforcement with fraud like this case has global effects, I wish the state of Utah would get off it's arse - they're already seen globally as a place where underage sex and bigamy is condoned, so they should be doing something about fraud reported in the press before their reputation gets any worse.
  92. You must go FURTHER! by IBitOBear · · Score: 1

    As a gay man I *INSIST* that everyone stop using any word ending with or containing the two letters "ag". Similarly, the word "got", clearly having no usage except as an slang argot (and that word has to go too) for the longer word faggot.

    I am embarrassed and humiliated every time anybody uses the past perfect of "to receive" because it belittles my people and our struggle to escape being steriotyped (by Churchill) as somehow entangled with the British Navy!

    etc...

    Besides the country of Nigeria is just damned if they do and damned if they dont.

    ====

    PARDON MY RANT BUT...

    Crimeny people, there is only one person who can hurt you with a word, and that person is you yourself.

    On the contrapositive a hatefilled butthead can turn even the most common and seemingly neutral words and phrases into vile invective.

    The belief that the words are, in and of themselves, to blame for the attitudes is just humanist bull. People who cannot face the fact that humans can be vile and abbusive will blame anything that comes to hand to protect their world view. You can get rid of the words and new ones will crop up to replace them one-for-one. You can get rid of the guns and knives, and the bad people will pick up sticks and stones and just keep on going.

    It's not the things and its not the words. It is the willful ignorance of the pointless people. If you fight the things instead of the ignorance, you become equally pointless and equally harmful.

    Just think, if every black parent could teach their child that "nigger" meant "someone who others are rightfully jealous of for being strong and black" instead of "the terrible n-word" ...

    oh... what's the point... people have decided to be wounded by this stuff, and that it is better to hide from the ideas so thuroughly that "master hard drive" is "offensive."

    At this point I suspect that there will be that "race war" and it will, sadly, be between the people who think race really matters and those who think it doesn't.

    I envision a day where the Black Panther alikes (in whatever form they end up) and the KKK (in whatever form they end up) take up arms together to assault all the people who wish both sides would go the hell away. They will be cheered on from the sidelines by Gay people who want to get married but only if they can do so using a different word than "married" because they "don't want the negative associations from thousands of years of straight married people" and the More-Native-Than-Thou (Americans|Serbians|Corats|Albainians|Arabs|etc by geographical region.)

    Take the following truths to heart people:

    There is ONLY ONE INSULT in all of human experience. That is when I ascribe to you a trait you do not wish to have. No matter what word I use for stupid, if you don't want to be stupid that word will become an insult.

    Actual quote from a radio show: "Moron is a medical term, the morons I know are hurt greatly when they hear that used as an isult." Replace "moron" with "blort" and the statement will remain a tautology. The moment "handycapt" was coined it was an insult. Same with "special" "differently abled" etc. The ENTIRITY of the MECHANISIM is that we as a species want to be hale, whole, and healthy. (Diety forfend! That should change! Fix the word again! 8-)

    Repeat for old, young, black, white, jew, arab, "disenfranchised", poor, ignorant, stupid, geek, lawyer, and any other collective noun you care to think of.

    These are all steriotypes, but so is "teacher" and "doctor" and "circus peanut vendor".

    Short of replacing every word for every person, place, thing, or idea with the word "Marklar" there will always be words that someone will find just too terrible.

    Well Marklar every Marklar damned Marklar of those Marklars and lets get back to feeding the hungry, opposing the corrupt, protecting the weak, and servicing the needs of ourselves and those who are less fortunate.

    --
    Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
    --"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
  93. GPL puts NOTHING into the "public domain" by IBitOBear · · Score: 1

    Please people, watch your words. "The Public Domain" is a spesific thing, and the GPL does not intersect the public domain at all.

    The GPL provides a means for me to release, for general use and scruteny, a body of work. The terms are spesific and governed. My rights are preserved. Your rights are explicitly enumerated. Among those, your rights, enumerated is the right to use my work to create a deritive of my work under the provision that your diritive work, IF you release it, is also released under the GPL.

    The public domain is a condition of release where the creator waives (or has lost) all rights to the work and can not then place, grant, or revoke enumerated rights and responsibilities on anybody.

    Consider Mickey Mouse. (yes, the Disney property.) If Mickey Mouse were released under a "open source" license, that license *might* include a "no pornography" restriction (etc) whereby Mickey could be rendered as performing any non-lude act, or any act that was, at worst, "rated PG". You know, something like "we, Disney corp, release the image, likeness, and character of Mickey Mouse for any public use or performance, provided the portryal of same is in keeping with the wholesome nature and public image of the character..." In this public license scenerio, Disney would be saying "go ahead and use him but within limits."

    Mickey Mouse (et. al.) in the public domain would mean that Disney could do nothing about persons who chose to depict the furry beast swearing like a salor while mounting goofy from behind whilst they both tumble freely about amidtst and feeding upon the bloody entrails of Minny and Donald.

    See... "Licence", that last word/letter of the GP_L_ inferrs restrictions and aggrements.

    "Public Domain" means all bets are off, come what may, hell or high water.

    Get it straight please.

    --
    Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
    --"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
  94. Abolish copyrights and patents ! by Thinkit3 · · Score: 1

    Put it on your sig!

    --
    -Libertarian secular transhumanist