Slashdot Mirror


IBM, Intel Set Up $10m SCO Defense Fund

An anonymous reader writes that the "NY Times reports that a group of companies, led by I.B.M. and Intel, plans to announce today that it is setting up a $10 million legal defense fund to help pay for the litigation costs of corporate users of the popular GNU/Linux operating system if they are sued. ZDnet also has a story on this." otisaardvark points out that "The fund is to be administered by OSDL (Open Source Development Labs) and so, amongst other things, could bankroll legal costs for Linus."

90 of 300 comments (clear)

  1. Ah what it is to have friends by Space+cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Big, Rich friends :-))

    Of course, IBM and Intel aren't doing this out of the kindness of their hearts, but it's still a nice gesture, 'cos it works for us (well, them, I'm not a kernel contributor :-)

    Simon

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
    1. Re:Ah what it is to have friends by diersing · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I think it works for the greater good as well.

      If SCO goes after google, a well recognized name outside tech circles and gets thumped in it's first big, real court battle... it may force the "SCO Get Rich Train" right off the tracks before it really gets started.

      I'm not a kernel developer either, but if Linux costs me $799 per proc to run, Windows and Apple become the cheaper alternative.

    2. Re:Ah what it is to have friends by weileong · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not a kernel developer either, but if Linux costs me $799 per proc to run, Windows and Apple become the cheaper alternative.

      Why else do you think MS told SCO to set it at that price point? :-)

  2. An old proverb comes to mind. by Locky · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    1. Re:An old proverb comes to mind. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The enemy of an enemy has already proven that they have the ability to be an enemy.

    2. Re:An old proverb comes to mind. by dubious9 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Quite right. Even though IBM has seen that it is better to be loved than feared, it wasn't too long ago when they took the Machiavellian stance.

      Remeber when the term "FUD" was invented, that it was in reference to IBM. Remember that IBM agressively takes advantage of the lax patent system, procuring IP whenever and wherever possible. Just because the Gaint is stepping on our enemies doesn't mean he'll won't accidentally (or not) step on us later.

      --
      Why, o why must the sky fall when I've learned to fly?
    3. Re:An old proverb comes to mind. by GSloop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just like Saddam?

      Just like Bin Laden?

      Just like Noriega?

      Just like Ferdinand Marcos?

      Just like Pinochet?

      (Man, that "Proverb" must have come from the inverse of Solomon.)

      Cheers,
      Greg

  3. Nice by michaelhood · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Kudos to IBM/Intel for "doing the Right Thing (TM)". Also found it interesting how the ZDnet article words it "Anti-SCO". Harsh. I like it.

  4. timing by parnold · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the timeing of this is interesting with today being the day that SCO has to show evidence in court of IBM's infringment on their copyright.

    --
    this sig intentionally left blank
    1. Re:timing by agentforsythe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm refreshing frenetically, waiting for the /. story regarding SCO's 'evidence'. Ah, what a day to be given mod points. It doesn't get much better than this.

    2. Re:timing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What I find amazing is the big stink that SCO brought up about indemnification, and protecting your customers against legal action. Even Laura DiDio, our favorite shill, brings up the indemnification issue time and time again.

      Now look what's happening here. OSDL is indemnifying linux users against legal action (more than an MS EULA can do, by the way), and SCO is... what's that? they're making noises about suing their own UNIX licensees?

      Hypocrites!

    3. Re:timing by !the!bad!fish! · · Score: 5, Informative

      You need to calm down a bit. Over at Groklaw they "don't expect to know much until the next court date on the 23rd".

      --
      Kids today are tyrants. They contradict their parent, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers. - Socrates 400 BC
    4. Re:timing by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Informative
      Sorry to burst your bubble, but they only have to give documentation to IBM today, the chances of it being read and making Slashdot before the next court session on the 23rd are slim. The only way this *will* make Slashdot today is if SCO fails to deliver any documentation at all, in which case it's likely to be game over, insert coin.

      Here's hoping.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    5. Re:timing by Krow10 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      What I find amazing is the big stink that SCO brought up about indemnification, and protecting your customers against legal action. Even Laura DiDio, our favorite shill, brings up the indemnification issue time and time again.

      Now look what's happening here. OSDL is indemnifying linux users against legal action (more than an MS EULA can do, by the way), and SCO is... what's that? they're making noises about suing their own UNIX licensees?

      What's really really funny to me is that this is the worst of all possible worlds for SCOX -- it takes the wind out of the extortion aspect of this fiaSCO ("pay up, or da Boies will sue youse") and it doesn't give them the leverage against a company's insurance provider of unlimitted liability that "indemnification" would have -- they actually have to sue an *indemnified* HP customer, or they have to sue *many* linux end users before they can start squeezing anyone on legal costs. As my 1yo daughter would say, Uh-Oh!

      Cheers,
      Craig

      --
      Corollary to Clarke's Third Law: Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
  5. Covers end users, too by kennykb · · Score: 5, Interesting
    As Groklaw points out, one significant item with Intel's defense fund is that it covers end users. That means that it is not redundant with Red Hat's, which covers only developers.

    This announcement should add a new dimension to SCO's nonsense about indemnification.

    1. Re:Covers end users, too by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've just finished reading this at Groklaw too, and for me the interesting point was the bit about SCO's "Big Linux Target" being a user of Linux *and* holder of a commercial Unix license. As noted by Groklaw, unless this is just Darl shooting his mouth off again, then Google is kind of off the hook. It would also imply that SCO is changing their story again, from "if you use Linux, we can sue" to "if you use Linux and have a commercial UNIX license, we can sue".

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:Covers end users, too by TopShelf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It makes some sense that SCO would start with a user of both Unix and Linux, because the Unix license presents a target for their legal strategy. i.e. a contract that the user is breaking by using Linux as well.

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    3. Re:Covers end users, too by KillerHamster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Would that include the free Solaris license you can get by downloading it from Sun, or just a license for SCO's own Unix?

    4. Re:Covers end users, too by TopShelf · · Score: 3, Informative

      In SCO's legal reasoning (take appropriate psychodelics to get into that state), the Unix license is an agreement that a given customer has entered into, and in their opinion the use of Linux somehow represents a breach of that agreement by using the same intellectual property without paying for it. It gives them a "gotcha" on the customer in question, at least in their view.

      Of course, IANAL, and it is Monday morning...

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    5. Re:Covers end users, too by WCMI92 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      " In SCO's legal reasoning (take appropriate psychodelics to get into that state), the Unix license is an agreement that a given customer has entered into, and in their opinion the use of Linux somehow represents a breach of that agreement by using the same intellectual property without paying for it. It gives them a "gotcha" on the customer in question, at least in their view."

      It seems to me that SCaldera is trying to retroactively change their license terms (ie: contract) with their customers to make it a violation to use Linux if you licensed OpenServer or UnixWare.

      Legally, I'd think that (IANAL) unless such language was SPECIFICALLY already there when the customer signed, it's an extremely weak claim.

      Such language would also almost certainly be illegal in some, if not most jurisdictions, as it's anti competitive.

      If anyone wanted confirmation that SCaldera's business plan is a MS funded FUD machine stock "pump n dump", the fact that they are DIRECTLY attacking their own customers, their SOLE source of ongoing revenue should do it.

      SCaldera isn't a business, unless you count shilling for Microsoft and Barratry as legitimate business practices.

      --
      Corporatism != Free Market
  6. So what will it be? by eggstasy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Megacorps are EVIL! EVIL I say! And they will bring DOOOM TO US ALL!!!
    But... they are wasting $10 million on a legal defense fund to help Linus! YAY MEGACORPS!

    1. Re:So what will it be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Megacorps are neither all good nor all evil. They are just human institutions that plug along and do their thing. What they do often depends on circumstances and who is running them. Often when they do seemingly "evil" things it's out of stupidity and shortsightedness rather than malice.

      As for why IBM is doing this, that's obvious. Intel and the others? I'd say that being on the list of contributors for that is probably the best PR money can buy with the hacker community. If you are a tech company, the hacker community are your customers. They probably just redirected a few mil from advertising. Intel needs good PR right now with the hacker community to help them compete with the AMD Opteron.

      This may be one of the last nails in the SCO coffin, since $10 mil can buy a lot of legal representation and SCO likely can't match that. SCO does not have the cash to bankroll fifty lawsuits. If the legal battle really got ugly, I'm sure the fund could solicit at least another few mil from Linux users.

    2. Re:So what will it be? by 3Daemon · · Score: 5, Funny

      And they will bring DOOOM TO US ALL!!!
      Interesting enough then, that Activision, the one megacorp that would actually be thanked for bringing us Doom (well... Doom 3 anyways), seems unable to do so.

  7. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In a weird way this is kind of adds 'validity' to SCO claims. I wish IBM would put a 1 million ransom for capture of McBride or something...

    1. Re:Is that a good thing or a bad thing? by pe1rxq · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually it hurts SCO's claims...
      On of there PR thingys was indemnification, by creating this fund IBM is showing that they don't believe SCO will win.
      They are also making sure that whoever SCO is going to target can defend itself properly. Nothing could be worse than some linux user getting sued and loosing due to lack of funds and setting a precedent.

      Jeroen

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    2. Re:Is that a good thing or a bad thing? by r00zky · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But, but, it's not an indemnification, it's a legal defense fund...

      It's not agreeing they're guilty and paying their consumers a compensation, is just helping their consumers don't get harrassed by SCO litigation spree.

      --
      I'm a chainsmokin' alcoholic sociopath, so-ci-o-path
  8. IBM by bwdunn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since Lou Gerstner took control of IBM (although he is no longer at the helm), this has been a different company. Today they are doing everything possible to help Linux, but of course to that end they are also helping themselves. Still, it must be said that the IBM of today is one great company.

    (I don't work for IBM or have any connections to them other than my Thinkpad T40 (NewEgg has them now for $1600 bucks!)

  9. Where can I contribute? by YanceyAI · · Score: 5, Funny
    Is there a PayPal donation link anywhere?

    ; )

    --
    Can I bum a sig?
    1. Re:Where can I contribute? by kj0rn · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just PayPal your $699 to Darl ;-)

  10. SCO's new plan. by Saven+Marek · · Score: 5, Funny

    The SCO vs Linux legal battle took another turn today, as the SCO group plans action against Caldera, it's former self, for releasing their alleged IP. In a move that stunned the rest of the industry, SCO is effectively suing itself for initiating distribution of SCO IP as GPL code. SCO says they are assured of winning the case as they have all of the evidence and can present it in court.

    SCO claimed that, to defend itself against such charges, it will be making gratuitous use of the OSDL defense fund.

    nude mac desktops

  11. Intel and IBM won't throw away that much money... by Shisha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    IBM & Intel won't just throw all this money away would they. I think what this means is:

    We're pretty damn sure that Linux is clean. You can be sure too, because if you get sued we'll pay the legal costs for the time being, but since we know that you (we, Linux) will win in the end, SCO will have to pay and so it won't cost us a dime.

    And so our Linux bussiness can roll on. It's more than PR. It's saying we'll win.

  12. Bigger promises to bigger fish by Nadsat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They are making preparations to buffer their new role as being total service providers, providing OS helpdesk and contracting support to corporaions.

    OS was supposed to be use at your own risk... but it seems they are now going to make promises above and beyond a general GNU contract.

  13. Ummm. by anonymous+coword · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Those $10 could be spent on more useful stuff, like doing a full audit of the source code to see what REALLY is in linux. The Linux source bz2s are over 35Mb in size now, who knows what is inside them? There is bound to be some old code laying around that may of been leaked in by an ex caldera/sco employee.

    1. Re:Ummm. by kubrick · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There is bound to be some old code laying around that may of been leaked in by an ex caldera/sco employee.

      Caldera released all of that code under the GPL, though.* If not initially, through the contributing developer, then when they published the resulting body of work as OpenLinux.

      They still retain copyright, but that doesn't mean they can revoke the use, distribution and modification rights that they've already granted to Linux users.

      * (and SCO were still doing so until midway through last year, after this whole kerfuffle started.)

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
  14. check your facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    OSDL hopes to raise $10 million, Cohen said. So far it's raised $3 million from a group of companies that includes IBM, MontaVista Software and Intel.

  15. Smart business move: Ring fence the bastards! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What this may do is set the stage for killing SCO by bleeding them by laywers...

    The idea is simple: Ring fence SCO from accessing customer license fees. Meanwhile, bleed them to death by keeping them entangled in the SCO/IBM, RedHat/SCO suits.

    If SCO cannot extract a single license fee because it ends up in another court case, their business model is effectively dead, thus (hopefully!) devaluing their stock!

  16. Zero Hour by Xpilot · · Score: 3, Informative

    On a related note, according to scocountdown.com, SCO should hand over whatever evidence they claim to have to the court....TODAY!

    --
    "Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
  17. End user contributions?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know I cannot give as much as Intel or IBM, but I was wondering if there is anyway I can contribute $$ to the fund?? Admitedly my 10$ may not pay for 1/10th of an hour to pay a lawyer, but I would like to feel that I helped destroy SCO in some way. And this isn't a troll, I'd give anything to be part of the reason SCO had to shut it's lying trap!

  18. I wonder what Darl would have to say about this by JustKidding · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I wonder if SCO is happy with this, or not.

    Ofcourse, it is yet another news article with SCO's name in it, but it also seems like IBM and Intel think they need a crapload of money to defend people, which in turn suggests that there is something to SCO's claims.

    SCO really wants to go to court, but ofcourse they know they don't stand a chance. This amount of money on both sides could make for a spectacular trial.
    At the same time, some people, who hadn't figured it out yet, might realise that there is no way on earth SCO is actually going to win.

    Besided that, i wonder if IBM and Intel did return-on-investment calculations on this. Maybe they figure the kudos will be worth more than 10M.

    1. Re:I wonder what Darl would have to say about this by mccalli · · Score: 4, Insightful
      it also seems like IBM and Intel think they need a crapload of money to defend people, which in turn suggests that there is something to SCO's claims.

      To me, it seems as if IBM and Intel need a press release to reassure customers, that's all. Not everyone follows every twist and turn in this, and a potential customer might be swayed by some of the SCO press.

      To me, this is just IBM and Intel showing that their money is where their mouth is, so customers can look and feel safe in choosing Linux.

      Cheers,
      Ian

    2. Re:I wonder what Darl would have to say about this by NeuroManson · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not quite. Since Linux is open source and all, the primary designers were all dabbling with code in their spare time, or making "free as in beer" add-ons for it.

      Those add-ons qualify as an extension on an operating system that SCO claims is in violation as well, being that one would need a familiarity with a "stolen" product. If anyone profits from it, then by the standards set by the BSA and DMCA, they're guilty.

      Needless to say, however, most of these developers make enough to live (relatively comfortably) on, but not enough to buy a new 100' yacht for their respective lawyers, if they can afford lawyers at all. That, IMO, is why Intel and IBM are tossing in the $10 million. Technology tends to run on the trickledown theory, hence, if Linux loses, IBM loses, and if IBM loses, Intel loses. IBM, especially, has a lot to lose, considering how they fumbled the ball when OS/2 Warp was released at the same time as Windows 95. Eventually they do learn their lessons.

      SCO, however, lives for market numbers, and whoever is crazy enough to invest in them (such as Microsoft). They aren't fighting for their livelihood, make no mistake in that. Most of their CEOs and whatnot have already cashed in their stocks, with a couple hundred residual stocks to collect any likely profits if they can.

      --
      Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    3. Re:I wonder what Darl would have to say about this by Schnitzel+The+Viper · · Score: 2, Informative

      Darl says: 'No amount of money into a defense fund can protect somebody if they're the guilty party,' as you can read on Groklaw.

  19. Sued by RedHat Linux? by Debian+Troll's+Best · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The question of users being sued for running Linux has got me thinking. Now that RedHat no longer offers a free desktop version of their product, would it be possible that a Linux-running site could be sued by RedHat for illegally running a 'pirated' copy of Red Hat Advanced Server? Would this be any different to Microsoft calling in the BSA to investigate a site running unlicensed copies of Windows? What if the RedHat site was running a hybrid type of installation, with portions of the distro taken from the unlicensed 'illegally obtained' version of RHAS, but others, such as package management (apt-get, for example), taken from the free GNU/Debian distro? Are there any lawyers out there that would care to comment. Thanks.

    1. Re:Sued by RedHat Linux? by DA-MAN · · Score: 4, Informative

      I am not a lawyer, but I will try to answer this in that I have spoken with Red Hat directly before regarding most of this stuff.

      Now that RedHat no longer offers a free desktop version of their product, would it be possible that a Linux-running site could be sued by RedHat for illegally running a 'pirated' copy of Red Hat Advanced Server?

      Only if you actually purchased a license do you give Red Hat permission to audit your facilities for license violations. Installing Linux is allowed by the GPL, as many times over as you would like. But you are only entitled to Red Hat services on the machine you paid for. IE NO UPDATES/BUG FIXES.

      Would this be any different to Microsoft calling in the BSA to investigate a site running unlicensed copies of Windows?

      Not really, you can always get Red Hat workalikes built from the source code available to us all. For Free!
      White box Linux
      Tao Linux
      CentOS
      Just to name a few.

      What if the RedHat site was running a hybrid type of installation, with portions of the distro taken from the unlicensed 'illegally obtained' version of RHAS, but others, such as package management (apt-get, for example), taken from the free GNU/Debian distro?

      Depends on whether the machine is licensed or not. I assume a jacked up installation (debian packages on rh system) would void any warranty or compatability assurances that come with Red Hat.

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
  20. Encouraging, but... by Pembers · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's encouraging to see that some of those who benefit from Linux are prepared to defend it against predators. But it may mean that they think there is a significant probability that SCOX will not implode before they can file any new lawsuits (as opposed just to threatening to file new lawsuits).

  21. Re:Produced any evidence yet ? by jobsagoodun · · Score: 2, Funny

    Today is the day! They have until 5.00pm Utah time to tell the judge what IBM did wrong, or why they can't say what IBM did wrong. Engage! Mr Data! Maximum Short!

  22. Re:Produced any evidence yet ? by Eluding+Reality · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It ends today and SCO has stated they are handing it over today, but no one knows what it will be yet.
    It may just be evidence they give to IBM so that they can then look at the code themselves, in which case we don't get to find out anything yet, but they may also submit evidence to the court, in which case we do get to find out today or soon after

  23. SCO stock going down... by Bendebecker · · Score: 2, Funny

    They are doomed... again. nuff said.

    --
    There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
    most of us won't be able to afford it.
    -- Lemmy
    1. Re:SCO stock going down... by Greyfox · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's only 3.22% right now. A 10% jitter up or down seems about normal. Call me when they're down 50%.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  24. Re:Intel and IBM won't throw away that much money. by pkaral · · Score: 5, Informative

    IBM & Intel won't just throw all this money away would they.

    For these companies, this is not a lot of money. What they really are putting on the line (and have been for a while) is their prestige and reputation.

  25. Well by eclectro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    help pay for the litigation costs of corporate users of the popular GNU/Linux operating system if they are sued.

    That leaves grandmas, 12 year old girls, and nerds in parent's basements out in the cold.

    I guess we now know who SCO is going to target next.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    1. Re:Well by RobNich · · Score: 2, Insightful

      SCO is an entity. As such, it should be referred to in the singular. "SCO Lies," "When SCO appears to be..."

      I keep seeing this, and it makes me think that perhaps the Brits treat a corporation differently. Maybe it's because corporations are different in the UK. However, in the US a corporation is an entity (SCO is a US corporation), and therefore is not treated grammatically as a plural of 'person.'

      --
      Hello little man. I will destroy you!
  26. Intel has more to contribute than money by Crashmarik · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It will be interesting to see how much of the code for X86 that sco is claiming as stolen actually came from intel. Either intel reference code for talking to the bios or for talking directly to the chipset peripheral controllers tends to show up everywhere. Plus there is intels own work on SMP operating systems. Hypercubes were an intel specialty.

    Now if adaptec joins in sco could be in for a ripping the like of which has never been seen

  27. Who is not IANAL wins by tcoady · · Score: 3, Insightful

    $10 million? Thats enough money to fund OSDL for three or four years! More proof, as if needed, that this case is principally about lining the pockets of the legal community.

  28. Donate to groklaw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Donate to groklaw - www.groklaw.net

    PJ is doing some AWESOME unpaid work uncovering and collating all the information about the case and the history of unix, sco, novell, the copyrights etc. Many journalists are looking and linking to groklaw already. If there's one person working against SCO who needs support from the community, it's PJ.

  29. The future by vchoy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "... a group of companies, led by I.B.M. and Intel, plans to announce today that it is setting up a $10 million legal defense fund..."

    I am just looking forward to the day where this SCO's legal challenge gets thrown out of court...I am interested what would happen to all these companies that setup these defense funds worth millions of dollars. I sure hope thy donate this back into the OS community in some form (eg donations, code contributions, OS marketing) etc etc.

    1. Re:The future by djeaux · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I am just looking forward to the day where this SCO's legal challenge gets thrown out of court.

      As are many others here! Let's hope that IBM's contribution helps get that ball rolling. It takes money to mount enough of a challenge to get SCO's case pitched into the circular file, hopefully with prejudice.

      I notice that a lot of folks are questioning IBM's ultimate motive here. Of course, their motive is to make money & defend their interests. But until SCO's spurious claims are properly squashed, nobody -- whether it's "profit-mongers" or the "free as in beer" crowd -- will be able to move with any certainty.

      --
      "Obviously, I'm not an IBM computer any more than I'm an ashtray" (Bob Dylan)
  30. But by rhadamanthus · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Nobody has been sued but IBM, right? And that was for breach of contract! Until SCO actually has the nuts to sue anyone (won't happen), who cares?

    --rhad

    --
    Slashdot needs to interview Natalie Portman.
  31. It's set up to pay for legal defense by gotan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So the only thing that is "validated" here is, that SCO might (threaten to) sue you if you use Linux. We know that already, nothing new there. It's in IBMs (and other Linux-Distributors) best interest to put up a good defense in the first SCO vs. Linux-end-user case since the outcome of such a case will have high publicity value.

    --
    "By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
  32. linux. by mr_tommy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sure, it's nice to have corporate support, but is anyone else a little worried about big businesses real interests in Linux? We live in a capitalist society : the interest is money and profit. Just makes you wonder what kind of support linux is going to need from these boys in the future, and how dependent they are going to be.

  33. This sends a loud and clear message by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And I for one welcome our new lawyer overlords.

    Say, remember when the Romano-British employed one lot of maurading Saxons to protect them from another lot of maurading Saxons? How did that turn out? As I remember, the Saxons won by default... and then decided to pay one lot of maurading Vikings to protect them from another lot of maurading Vikings...

    Tort. Reform. Now.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:This sends a loud and clear message by CaptainAlbert · · Score: 4, Funny

      Say, remember when the Romano-British employed one lot of maurading Saxons to protect them from another lot of maurading Saxons?

      I would say you're showing your age there. :P

      Ah, those were the days. The sight of a circle of Norsemen huddled around a fire, reciting their ancient sagas... imagine a Beowulf clu... oh, wait.

      What do you mean, Off Topic? C'mon, it's more fun than bitching about SCO!

      --
      These sigs are more interesting tha
  34. Partner Link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Partner link for the NYT article.

  35. bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is bad news, not good news. Before this announcement, SCO legal hound dogs were chasing only the big game; small firms and users were safe (what is the point in sending a 1000$/hr lawyer against a 50$/hr one-man ISP?). Now this fund changes everything: expect to see many more of those faxes rolling.

  36. I guess this means indemnification by emtboy9 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, so much for that.

    This begs a couple thoughts/questions though.

    First, $10M US is not that big a pinch really. IBM could throw that kind of cash around without even a blink (kinda like MS throwing $6M to SCO for a "License",) so $10M really shouldn't be too hard to come up with.

    In fact, I would like to see a list of people who are contributing to this, and would like to see some big names on that list (hello Red Hat!)

    Also, this would be an EXCELLENT time for Novell to step up and put their money where their acquisition is, and back their SuSE purchase by getting in on this as well.

    And someone earlier made an excellent comment: where can someone in the general OSS community donate to such a fund? I mean, its one thing for "We the People" to piss and moan about SCO, and then rely on major corps to handle the legal stuff for us (Which is fine for now, but with the way SCO has acted over the last few months, who knows WHO they are gonna sue next), but it would be a much better show of solidarity if we also contributed to this fund, or sone like it, above and beyond the usual contributions to groups like EFF and such.

    --
    "Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
  37. SCO no longer shows up in Google searches by waif69 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since SCO approached Google about (SCO)Linux licencing fees, google no longer produces results on searches on "SCO". It has been addressed that any search result in concern with SCO will require Google to pay $695x10000servers=$6,950,000 per result. Therefore Google reprogrammed their search engines to ignore searches on "SCO".

    Is the humour lost on everyone?

    1. Re:SCO no longer shows up in Google searches by SquareOfS · · Score: 2, Informative

      Which just isn't true .

      Why did this get modded interesting?

  38. Re:Intel and IBM won't throw away that much money. by spitefulcrow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    haha, "all this money"? $10 million is a drop in the bucket compared to what IBM could make once it clears this legal bull up and goes on selling Linux workstations/servers. They're not looking out for anyone but themselves.

    --
    Sorry, my karma just ran over your dogma.
  39. Re:In other news: MS set up SCO defense fund ... by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, that may not be needed after the next court hearing. SCO has to produce real linux code and SHOW the court (and IBM) how it truely belongs to them. I suspect that within 30 days after that , IBM will show the total farce that SCO is and the case will be dismissed.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  40. new direction sought by holy_smoke · · Score: 2, Insightful

    MS is floundering, and Intel's fate is too tied to them now. Perhaps they want to free Linux of the SCO cloud so that they can continue to rocket into the mainstream. = more diverse markets for Intel and a shot at re-charging the flatlined processor market? Also maybe a way to cozy up to the OpenSource community to perhaps steal some light from AMD? Like you said - they aren't doing this for free.

    --
    Is the juice worth the sqeeze?
    1. Re:new direction sought by smittyoneeach · · Score: 3, Insightful

      MS is floundering, and Intel's fate is too tied to them now
      Well, given the cash reserves and market share of MS, 'floundering' seems a malapropism.
      OTOH, since Intel's compiler now does the Linux kernel, clearly they perceive some market growth in the penguin direction.
      In other news, SCO swears up and down that it lost the winning lottery ticket...

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    2. Re:new direction sought by holy_smoke · · Score: 2

      perhaps I should have been more concise. I meant that Longhorn seems to be an age away, and with it an upgrade wave that would put a spike in Intel's processor revenue. So perhaps they are trying to encourage diversification in the OS market that supports its processor platform. They can't afford to be so tied to one OS vendor, and its in their best interests to foster the adoption of Linux in the mainstream to accomplish that.

      --
      Is the juice worth the sqeeze?
    3. Re:new direction sought by GSloop · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'll pick a nit or two...

      Floundering may seem like a premature word.

      I recently saw an employee get fired and worse from a client of mine. The employee seemed invincible as he was a serious suck-up to the owner. He used slime tactics, and would stab anyone in the back to get ahead. I knew he would get his just reward - yet even then I dispaired that it would happen in my lifetime.

      This went on for 3-4 years!

      About six months ago, though, it caught up to him.

      So, yes, MS isn't dead, yet. But I know that their kind of behavior eventually costs. And it will cost MS. And I think the cracks are starting to show now.

      So, yes, I think "Floundering" is appropriate. Perhaps a bit visionary or ahead of it's time, but not wrong.

      Cheers,
      Greg

  41. It's a shame by bangular · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's a shame this money has to be spent in this way and that it couldn't be used to pay for programmers and bandwidth. Hopefully it won't have to be used.

  42. Hopefully.. by Alioth · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hopefully, the nightmare possible scenario I outlined as the possible SCO strategy can't and won't happen now this has been done. See the link to my JE below for an explanation.

  43. I believe Ambrose Bierce.. by Lobo93 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...said it best when he wrote this entry in "The Devil's Dictionary":

    CORPORATION, n.
    An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility.

    In short; whatever the acronym, they're all in it for the green and the Holy Ego.

    --
    "The only clear view is from atop the mountain of our dead selves." - Peter Carroll
  44. No affecting end users by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As far as I understand, Red Hat Advanced Server is protected by tradmark law, not copyright law. This means that if someone redistributes RHAS without removing Red Hat trademarks, they may be sued for tradmark violation. I don't believe an end user will be in any risk, trademark law is supposed to protect trade, not use.

  45. Part of a legal strategy, not just being generous by RhettLivingston · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A typical legal strategy for a battle like this is for the side in SCO's position to tackle a bunch of little guys first to build up precedents without actually having to prove their case against an oponent equipped with a like legal force. IBM and Intel are simply serving notice to SCO that that isn't going to fly here. They will put on their defense wherever SCO goes instead of waiting for SCO to come to them.

  46. Yeah, I'm kinda hoping by confused+one · · Score: 3, Insightful
    That they'll pick the U.S. Gov't. I can't think of anyone who's a much bigger user of Linux that also has Unix licenses. NASA, DOD & DOE have all worked to improve (add to) linux. NASA & DOE more or less created the Beowulf cluster.

    If they're going after 800lb gorillas...

    1. Re:Yeah, I'm kinda hoping by DarkVader · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The only problem there is that the government might just cave in.

      If the forces currently in charge of such things as microsoft investigations see losing a case to sco as a good strategic move, or they simply see a payoff as less expensive than the case would be, they might just give up.

      After all, they don't have any reason to support free software. The people making the budget decisions are spending other people's money.

      And then sco would have a win - and a ton of new cash.

    2. Re:Yeah, I'm kinda hoping by Thuktun · · Score: 2, Funny

      If they're going after 800lb gorillas...

      Well, yeah, they have the most bananas to take.

  47. Quotes from Article by EmagGeek · · Score: 2, Funny

    The article continues:

    Davey "Idaho" Boise, in response to the measure establised by Intel and IBM, was quoted as saying, in a very solemn tone, "Oh fuck..." without further comment.

  48. It's brilliant by HangingChad · · Score: 4, Interesting
    This isn't just a proactive strike, this is IBM rolling thunder. Think about it, they totally undermined SCO's FUD machine. The only card SCO has left is saying IBM wouldn't have put up the money if they weren't worried about IP issues. Anyone thinking of buying a license, just in case, is now going to tell SCO to bugger themselves. IBM won't have to actually part with any money unless SCO sues someone and the chances of it adding up to anything close to the total amount is nearly zero. The total amount, chump change for IBM, is realistically more than SCO has to spare.

    IBM comes off looking like a hero, combined with the Linux commercials all over TV this weekend and it's a huge PR win. I'm not easily impressed but this was brilliantly conceived, timing and execution nearly flawless.

    With everything else they've done so well one would have to believe that somewhere inside the folds of the cape there is a sword ready to strike the killing blow.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  49. Look at their stock! by haxor.dk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's already happening!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SCOX&t=5d&l=on&z =m &q=l&c=

    SCOX is on a steady downhill slide. Bye Bye Darl!

  50. SCOX dropping like a rock by WCMI92 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    http://moneycentral.msn.com/scripts/webquote.dll?i Page=lqd&Symbol=scox

    As of this writing:

    Last 15.95
    Change(%) -1.15 (-6.73%)
    High 17.18
    Low 15.77
    Volume 216,036

    It doesn't even bear predicting (because it's a sure thing) that Darl will vomit forth more bombastic FUD today or tomorrow in response to this.

    SCOX stock is the only currency they have. They pay their lawyers in it. If it collapses, they are done.

    But, their bubble can't have much longer to run though... For all the threats, intimidation, spin, etc, SCaldera has YET to take any action on their copyright claims...

    Sooner or later, the Emperor will be exposed for the streaker he is.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
  51. Money well spent, called SCO's bluff by siskbc · · Score: 2, Insightful
    We're pretty damn sure that Linux is clean. You can be sure too, because if you get sued we'll pay the legal costs for the time being, but since we know that you (we, Linux) will win in the end, SCO will have to pay and so it won't cost us a dime.

    For what it's worth, if SCO sues and loses, their stock price immediately hits the shitter, and there will be nothing to recover for IBM/Intel. So whatever money they use for defense is lost...if there is any.

    That said, it's money well spent because they could easily lose that much money in sales from timid IT managers/legal departments. So it's worth their $10M purely as an advertisement.

    That said, I don't believe SCO will ever end up in court against IBM anyway, because they get more money from keeping their stock price up as long as possible. I see Canopy looting SCO right before an actual court date (probably one with Red Hat they can't avoid) in case they lose. If they accidentally win, well, that's a nice unexpected bonus for them.

    And so our Linux bussiness can roll on. It's more than PR. It's saying we'll win.

    It's certainly putting their money where their mouth is. But I think all they did is call SCO's bluff. The only other thing they accomplished is blocking the possibility that SCO could have gone after small companies, hoping to establish a precedent before they go after the big (blue) fish. By IBM telling SCO they won't get an easy victory against a chump defendant, I think they keep SCO out of court as a plaintiff altogether.

    All in all, good move.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  52. Re:What if... by WCMI92 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    " Why do people ignore IBM's past? They're so easy to forgive IBM , and yet so quick to jump down Microsoft's throat for any little thing.

    Imagine if Microsoft was doing team-ups like this. Slashdotters would be all over them for the "unfairness" of it all."

    Microsoft already HAS "teamed up" and is intimately involved in this thing, or at the very least encouraging it.

    $8 million dollars to SCaldera for licenses they didn't need, for one thing...

    You can bet Microsoft will _NEVER_ "team up" with anyone fighting a cause for FOSS... The whole reason they are funding SCO's FUD driven pump n dump is because of the fact that the GPL is "Kryptonite" to their Embrace, Extend, Extinguish business model that they have used thus far to maintain their monopoly.

    I forgive IBM for past transgressions because it seems they LEARNED from the mistakes they made in the 1980's. If they hadn't, it's likely IBM would have gone the way of Digital and other former dominant players...

    Microsoft could crush Linux forever tomorrow... If they released Windows complete with source under the GPL. Won't ever happen.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
  53. Smart move by Performer+Guy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is a smart move, in helping others to resist SCO's shakedown they undermine SCO's ability to fund additional litigation and limit the impact of their legal intimidation. Companies who otherwise might have given SCO some money and furthered SCO's PR campaign are now likely to refuse and they'll be backed by the slush fund put in place to defeat SCO.

  54. A US-only problem by Teun · · Score: 2, Interesting
    As someone that grew up during the Cold War and to admire the USofA for doing The Right Thing (well often...) it makes me SO sad to see how the US legal system is not able to protect it's people against silly extortional tactics as these by SCO.

    Why can't the US repair it's legal system so as to do what happened in for exemple Germany and Poland where the courts told SCO to "Put up or Shut up", i.e. shut up untill you SHOW the problem.

    Regretfully the present situation reflects baldly not only on the flawed US legal system but on a once great nation (and people!) as a whole.

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  55. OT: Re:Well by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hmmm, interesting. I suspect you're right, that corporations have different legal positions in the USA vs. the UK, but I don't know. To be honest, I tend to think of a corporation as being the sum of its employees (or at least its board members!) Thanks for the info.

    --
    This is where the serious fun begins.