Slashdot Mirror
SCO Expands Licensing Money Chase Worldwide
drizst 'n drat writes "Article posted recently on ZDNet that 'companies outside the United States that use Linux now face the threat of legal action from the SCO Group, following the announcement on Wednesday that SCO's licenses are available worldwide.'" And cbiltcliffe writes "Vnunet is reporting that SCO is now threatening legal action against UK businesses that run Linux.
Yet again, they claim they're going to initiate legal action against Linux users 'within a couple of weeks.' (Funny...weren't they saying that back in September?)
They also claim that Novell and HP indemnification schemes are essentially useless (similar to SCO's Linux licences).
It definitely appears the media is getting somewhat wiser to the FUD, however, as the story reports 'The run-time licence only permits use of what SCO says is its IP,' rather than 'The licence permits use of SCO's IP' like we would have heard a couple of months ago."
So have they got WIPO to approve their claims?
We have so much time, and so little to do - strike that! Reverse it. Tryn Mirell
But isn't SCO supposed to have produced some evidence by now?
I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
If there is a ruling in the US against SCO which says there is no SCO IP in Linux, can they still try to force licenses upon those in other countries until a case is that country goes to trial?
Nigeria.
Again ... Why is this NOT unusual ?
Me and some friends conspired that maybe another very big software company was there to fund them
You all know what company im thinking about.. dont ya ? =]
...the rest of the world also collectively gives SCO the finger.
The licence permits use of SCO's IP
Idiotic Proposition? No thanks!
SCO: OK guys, this US gig isn't going to get us anywhere. Let's go to Europe!
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
I am not for or against the RIAA but they have the power to only scare. RIAA is larger than SCO and they don't have the man power to sue every single person. Sco's situation is no different the have the power to make idle threats. Whether they have a good base to make these threats or not. They simply don't have the man power to sue every single Linux user!
There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
Finally. Even the media are begging to SCOff. :P
Yo Grark
Canadian Bred with American Buttering
This is (and has been) ridiculous. This is akin to watching a well-known person have a collosal and very public breakdown. If it were a person I would suspect them of having amphetamine psychosis, and avoid them (or recommend treatment quietly to the large men with nets and white suits) accordingly. Nothing new, it's just that every now and then the absurdity of it strikes me all over again.
-1, "1337" speak
Doesn't the UK have a law against barratry, something the USA desperately needs? SCO could get royally fucked by playing their legal games in the UK. We can only hope.
Remain calm! All is well!
.. Yup, rock solid set of balls on those boys.
Especially since this can get you jail time in other countries, perhaps..?
Whew - Spirit was busy enough, and Beagle II was in enough trouble. It's a good thing they never plan to bring those things back home.
Ryan Fenton
Oh, SCO's Linux licences are not useless... they are very useful... for SCO making money, that is.
- no sig.
Translation: we're not making enough cash from North America because they're not taking us seriously. So, we'll hit you guys up for a few bucks.
I really wonder if anybody in Europe will really take these guys seriously? Since SCO was sooooooooo successful in launching their lawsuits in the U.S., I'm sure they'll do just fine in Europe.
It is not our abilities that show what we truly are... it is our choices.
Until Novell and SCO sorts out who owns what, anyone can just tell SCO to go to hell. That's if there's anything of SCO left by the time IBM finish with them. Anyone who now pays SCO money is stupid.
-- oldthinkers unbellyfeel ingsoc
'Cause everybody knows that Germans *love* David Hasselhoff. . .
The fact that the media is becoming skeptical is probably based off the fact that we are skeptical. Enough of us have probably informed the media agencies of exactly how things work and that SCO is just blowing smoke so that they realized that SCOs claims may just be a lot of smoke. They Media will be all over SCO like white on Rice of IBM's response CRUSHES SCO's case.
I can't wait to see the headline "SCO's propaganda crushed by IBM".
If you cannot keep politics out of your moderation remove yourself from the Mod Lottery.. NOW!
Translation: "We have them our ultimatum, and they gave us the finger!"
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
... the sound of SCOs' death rattle.
Shop smart, Shop S-Mart.
If history has taught us anything its that Europe as a whole has embraced open source faster then the US to top it all off the US gov. has been working very hard to keep relations poor to europe and the rest of the world. I'm thinking a small US company like SCO isn't going to scare large European corporations and goverments much.
There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
I hear you can redeem 15 SCO liscenses inside Chucky Cheese's near the skiball games for a plastic keychain or 50 SCO liscenses for a yo-yo.
The more claims they make and the bigger the problem that they claim exists, the more they just sound like they do nothing but BS. Eventually noone will listen and hopefully we can all forget this silly mess and have proper geek articles like the lander that moves in 10" increments...
I see sco.com is currently proudly proclaiming its title graphic - "SCO Products Span The World".
;-]
If, by this, they're referring to their bull****ing, I guess that's one claim of theirs that can go on record as being truthful.
Well, in reality everyone has the threat of legal action looming over them. It may be entirely unwarranted, as in the SCO fiasco, but you can still go file suit against anyone for pretty much any goofy reason you can come up with.
Trolling is a art,
SCO has been backed into a corner so they're striking at anything to survive. The end is near and they can see it coming...
34 days left and
-3 days left.
(wtf?! -> soon we will know what court and IBM thinks about their 60-paged document...)
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
Sorry to burst your bubble but this started a couple of weeks ago. We got back from the Christmas break to find one of the letters from the SCO Group asking us to verify that we had not copied any code from our SCO servers into Linux machines.
As our last SCO server went into the trash a couple of years ago legal told us to ignore the letter and that's exactly what we did. Our three AIX machines continue to run as do our two Linux clusters, the only thing that's changed is the FUD from SCO.
Ed Almos
Budapest, Hungary
The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. - Tacitus, 56-120 A.D.
SCO also gave IBM some of the purported evidence the judge required them to divulge. Story today at InfoWorld.
~~~~~~~
"You are not remembered for doing what is expected of you." - Atul Chitnis
I mean seriously. They seem to be seriously shooting themselves in the foot. If we used SCO we'd be moving off them so fast and hoping never to hear from them again.
I can't wait till this is over.
Unless and until they can prove in a court of law that they really have these rights they claim, they cannot expect to be paid. On the contrary, they can expect to be investigated for fraud, an perhaps subject to criminal charges of extortion...
And trying to dodge the GPL does not count. Either the GPL is valid and must be obeyed, or it is invalid which makes everyone distributing Linux and other GPL'd software into copyright infringers. This latter seems somewhat less than likely...
SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
From Groklaw : SCO has posted a job opening, for an "Inside Sales Manager", as of January 9th. Here is the job description, in case you are interested: "The inside sales manager will be responsible to implement a successful campaign of generating daily revenue from selling IP licensing in the North American market. Initially, the sales manager will also be responsible for generating the revenue as a stand-alone sales entity with the goal to grow the department revenue to justify additional sales resources. All sales will be generated from outbound phone calls and incoming phone call leads based upon the SCO Group's IP campaign." Applicants should have the ability to "communicate the offerings of the SCO Groups [sic] IP license strategies in a manner that is successful in generating revenues." Daily. Of course, you have to live in Utah.
Is it just me or is there anyone else who thinks that Darl McBride reminds about Bagdad Bob?
Darl "Bagdad Bob" McBride, how does that sound?
For a nice date: Call strftime(3C)!
Dear silly CEO McBride,
I say NI to you. Your SysV was a hamster, and you SCOsource smells of elderberries. Now go go away or I shall taunt you a second time.
French Taunters, SARL
P.S. to legale departement: Fetchez la vache
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
"We have had some discussions. With some of those companies they have not been fruitful."
In other words... they got told to get off their property or Guido will break their legs while laughing like a 12 year old school girl.
yvan eht nioj
On Tuesday, McBride said that lack of indemnification proved that companies knew there was something wrong with Linux. On Wednesday, he said that indemnification programs proved that companies knew there was something wrong with Linux. Darl is obviously showing signs of short-term memory loss.
This whole thing is just starting to piss me off, as they want it both ways, want everyone to lay down and pay them money for just sitting on their asses and thinking about ways to rule the world. They keep making these threats, but with the resulting 60 pages of docs they handed over, it is now being widely assumed that these guys are smoking some of the local meth (Utah has a HUGE meth industry).
One other note is that Sontag backtracked and said that this case is not a copyright case, but a breech of contract case. If that is true (who knows) then the ONLY entity that they could get money out of is IBM. They cannot go after an end-user using a contractual basis for their case, as the end user has no contract with SCO, much less any implied of such. They could go after under the basis of the copyrights, but then any end user could defer the case until after the Novell v. SCO copyright fight is over.
This sounds like a last gasp of desperation from SCO. They had to put out something to pump the stock, and what better way to say they going to get money from the whole world! What they do not realize is, just like a TV show killing off a main character to garner interest, this latest tact will prove to be opening act of their permanent cancellation.
Must be discouraging for SCO. The latest press releases aren't pumping the stock up anymore. Down again today... Cry wolf a few times too many and people begin to catch on.
Thank you SCO! Thank you RIAA!
... until they go for licenses in south east Asia and eastern Europe.
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
According to InfoWorld, SCO is now claiming that in it's response to IBM interogatories, they have submitted no examples of copyright infrigement.
Blake Stowell is quoted as saying, "We've not introduced copyright infringement as part of our case with IBM. We've tried to make it clear that it's a contract issue."
Seems quite odd when a SCO press release from yesterday says exactly the opposite. Old Darl said this, "SCO is willing to enforce our copyright claims down to the end user level and in the coming days and weeks, we will make this evident in our actions."
What freakin planet are these guys from? I'm sorry, but I despise them like I despise neo-nazi, racists, thugs.
I'm sorry that I ever bought a Caldera product...
Your mom always said, a PB&J is better than nothing, and God is nothing, is a PB&J better than God?
I wonder if Darl and Chris knows where Switzerland is.. A small chance to spare 699$
Titan Court
3 Bishop Square
Hatfield
Herts AL10 9NA
I don't know if they own their building or are renting, but surely there are some assets in it.
I wish they'd just hurry up and show their bluff.. I tire of all the SCO news. Dagnabbed court system.
You're nothing; like me.
This is EXCELLENT! Not only do they dig themselves deeper and deeper, but I'm sure the Europeans will be much less inclined to put up with this kind of shit from SCO as long as we have. SCO is defiantly lining themselves up for a smack-down
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Panic?
I knew you(SCO) could.
"Pay up."
"Go eff yourself."
"Waaaah."
SCO is just like the schoolyard bully that keeps pushing other kids around until someone hits him in the stomach and leaves him in pain. I was the kid who would never fight, but when one of these guys got to be too much and pushed me around, I fought them. I didn't even have to win. Once word got around that I (the kid who hated fighting) could even hold my own with them, their reputation as a bully was gone.
That's what SCO is doing. They're pushing everyone. When they don't get enough attention, they make more threats. They keep threating more and more people and companies. As long as they can rant and rave, their stock stays high, but once someone (like IBM, hopefully) and kicks them down a notch, it'll all be over.
They know they have nothing. They know the only thing keeping their stock high is the bluster and fuss they keep making. They're reaching out as wide as possible to bully the schoolyard, the neighborhood, and, soon, the whole world. When they reach the end of people they can threaten, they'll have to act. If they had the strength to act and actually do something, they would. Since they don't, they're Shakespeare's idiot, telling a tale full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
Which country gets to be the first to put Darl in jail for fraud?
/. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
In other news, I'll be phoning Trading Standards.
...can you say "go f#ck yourself"?
FLR
I predict one of four things will happen with the threatened lawsuits:
===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
There is a fine line between chutzpah and criminal insanity. Methinks the SCO Group has crossed it.
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
and eventually crash every time they tried to access SCOs notice of compliance PDF file? I've tried it ten ways to Tuesday and I have yet to read it.
It looks more like SCO can see the writing on the wall that they are about to get the US case thrown out of court. It appears that SCO is looking for a court that does not need evidence.
Then SCO can come back to the US and say something like "The evidence was enough to win the trial in Libya, it should be enough evidence to stand in the US."
I, for one, welcome out new litigious bastards overlords!
SCO pays the license!
DON'T PANIC
Someone should point Darl to an Al Quada encampment and tell him to go demand license fees from them.
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
Of course we care. It's a great ocasion to learn how to say "sod off Darl" in foreign languages:
Fick dich Darl
Vaffanculo Darl
que te jodan Darl
Vas te faire foutre Darl
vai-te foder Darl
Ay Gamisou Darl
Knep dig selv Darl
stop het in je nauwe gaatje Darl
k chortoo Darl
cachau bant Darl
sa-mi sugeti pula Darl
haista paska Darl
poq gai Darl
spierdalaj Darl
yebem ti mrtwu mater Darl
bazd meg a picsadat Darl
popusis mi krac krasni Darl
siktir lan Darl
ebi se v guza Darl
Do prdele Darl
mine vittu Darl
lech lehizdayen Darl
achike Darl
jebi se Darl
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
down 10% since the 8th while the Nasdaq is pretty much unchanged for the same period. Must be time for another flurry of distracting press releases and conference calls!
IIRC,President of SCO Japan says "There are absolutely no copyright infringement in Linux. Linux user should not fear legal problem from us"
I wonder how this SCO(US) move affect Japan.
We've secretly replace the SCO Group's stocks with Folger's Crystals. Now let's watch them fluctuate.
This sig no verb.
You are mistaken (although the gist of your question was fair enough). The Republic of Ireland (i.e. the South) is categorically *not* a part of the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland, however, *is*.
If I'm not mistaken, they're part of the United Kingdom.
Er, you're quite wrong on that one. Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom. The Irish Republic, which is most of the land area of Ireland, is quite separate.
And now, from the "demented conspiracy" section of *my* *brain*, comes the following twisted-beyond-repair illogic:
1) SCO has, so far, *threatened* lawsuits against US users, but hasn't actually followed through yet because (I surmise) they know they'll lose.
2) (Lawyer, please!) If SCO files a suit in a US court against an entity who fails to show up to defend themselves (like, say, some dude from the UK where US law does not apply and who, therefore, doesn't give a rat's ass about paying to put high-priced attorneys on a plane to Utah), then SCO wins, right?
------------
3) Therefore, SCO's strategy is to get some quick default wins in court against defendants who won't show up to get some quick PR validation so they can move forward with the sale of the company and assets.
Is this stretching it maybe?
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
-
Let's Put SCO Behind Bars
From the page: Thank You For Your Attention.Request your free CD of my piano music.
The Republic of Ireland is not part of the UK (and hasn't been since 1948, IIRC). They've been functionally independent for longer than that.
You're thinking of Northern Ireland, which is not a republic. I don't think they even have a devolved government right now.
As far as the legal system goes, I'm not sure. On the other hand, the original poster said "Great Britain" has two legal systems, which means he was ignoring Ireland altogether, as it isn't part of Great Britain. UK, yes, GB, no.
You are mistaken; they're not. Northern Island is though.
SCO can say: "I can eat glass. That does not hurt me"
<^>_<(ô ô)>_<^>
While the mainland, especially Germany, has been big on OSS, it seems the UK is more of a Windows shop than the USA is, and they appear to be targeting the UK. Of course they may not have anybody at SCO who know any languages other than english...
As others have pointed out, the Republic of Ireland is an Independent Country. I intentioanlly missed out Northern Ireland because it's a bit more complicated. It has its own courts, but its laws are made in the UK Parliament in England and have much in common with those covering England and Wales. Most of the legal differences are associated with terrorism and not computers.
I've spent more time than I care to admit to in the last weeks and days trying to figure out what SCO might really be up to. Can they really be as stupid is most people claim? Sure they could be as evil, coniving and greedy as we claim, but could they be as stupid as we claim?
I assume that we have two sides here. One side says "show us the infringing code".... on the theory that in order to demonstrate copying you have to show more or less a letter perfect copy...
I assume that SCOs game is to get inside of the sausage making process and to demonstrate that even though the code is not literally system V you can trace a "legacy" that involves the gradual modification of ideas expressed in one form to ideas expressed today in Linux, and that by linking the people who worked on code to its evolution over time through evidence derived from the discovery process, they will make the case that current Linux code is derived from code that they claim to own. The continuity of people may be part of making the case of continuity of "ideas" and thus of "ownership."
From this perspective (IANAL, etc.) I would think that all of the moaning about how Linux code isn't exactly, or aproximately, Unix code is really beside the point. IBM would of course like to keep it at that level, arguing "if the glove does not fit you must aquit", eg. if this code isn't exactly the copyrighted code then they have no case.
But my understanding of the law (limited and amateur as it is) is that SCO would have a case to make if the concepts ideas, "manner of expression" and all sorts of other stuff in Linux could be shown to be derived through a chain of modification, backed up by the ongoing involvement of individuals in that modification process, even if the code and expression of programing ideas took a very different letter by letter form.
So if they can get inside of IBM records they can begin to stitch a winnable case together, while if the "Match code or acquit" theory holds then the case is over. So if they can satisfy the initial requests enough to make the judge open up IBM to their SCO discover, then they can begin to make the case.
Anyway that's my effort to understand what SCO might be thinking and why this might make more sense than we'd like it to make.
They are scum, but let's not assume that they are stupid scum.
The person (or corporation in this case) will come up with grander and grander delusions to support their psychotic thought process ("we own Linux"). This is of course because reality for SCO ("we don't own squat") is so difficult to face that it is much easier to come up with more and more psychotic thoughts to support the delusion.
The Republic of Ireland (Eire) was founded in 1949, but it had been separate from the UK since 1927.
See this wiki page on Irish history for details.
... is one more fuckwit American trumpeting around the world arrogantly making the United States look bad. :rolleyes:
do() || do_not();
From the website:
The UI is a bit overdone, but the data rocks...
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
"On Tuesday, McBride said that lack of indemnification proved that companies knew there was something wrong with Linux. On Wednesday, he said that indemnification programs proved that companies knew there was something wrong with Linux."
Hmmm... I've always assumed that indemnification was something of a warranty of sorts. Basically the company distributing the product stands behind what they've sold to the customer, rather than pansying it out to the user to deal with. They can strongly and confidently make their statements of indemnification because there won't be any need to use it.
Of course, Hyundai has a 100,000 mile warranty on their cars, and a friend of mine's Tiburon has been in the shop about ten times in two years, so it might not apply like a warranty perfectly...
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
"We fart in your general direction."
The Republic of Ireland is not part of the UK... he was ignoring Ireland altogether, as it isn't part of Great Britain. UK, yes, GB, no.
First you say they're not in the UK. Then you say they're part of the UK and not part of Great Britain. Which is it? And what exactly does it mean to be part of either the UK or Great Britain in the first place?
I do not have a signature
The Republic of Ireland are not part of the UK, but the barratry and other laws of Republic of Ireland are very important indeed, as SCO's EMEA sales HQ appears to be in Dublin judging by the contact info on their website.
Is it legal to publish press releases announcing "Any day now, we're going to start sending out letters threatening to break people's legs unless they pay us money," as long as you don't actually send out the letters? How can SCO get away with publicly announcing its intention to perform what many would regard as illegal actions?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Just curious if SCO is considering protecting SCO licensees against the threat of legal from others. Please SCO, protect us from big bad IBM.
Reminds me of that Honey Mooners episode!
SCO dials Suse Deutschland;
Ring ring: Halo, Suse Deutschland.
SCO: Pay up nazi scum!
Suse Deutschland: Ficken sie SCO.
Suse Deutschland: Click.
SCO: . . . . . . . Damn.
Sorry, my bad. I got my Irelands mixed up and I missed that you said GB and not UK in your original post. But thanks, you answered my question.
I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
You know, extortion tactics like this aren't entirely new. I am sure there are hundreds of examples of where "smart" people leverage some sort of thing similar to FUD to make "dumb" people give them their money.
There's insurance fraud, there's the nigerian oil scam, there's "Call Chloe For Your Free Reedin's", there's the Lottery, and on and on. In the 1800's people were scamming those unawares with magic hair tonics, snake oil penis enhancements and horny goat weed, etc.....
The funny thing about this all along, is that the tables are turned. Instead of "smart" people trying to outwit "dumb" people, we've got someone who greatly underestimates his target.
You don't go talking IP and code and OSes with PEOPLE WHO LIVE AND BREATHE THIS SHIT DAILY. We wrote this code, we know what we've got and what we can do. Many of us have also worked with UnixWare and well, quite frankly, they can HAVE it.
I'd like to see someone who doesn't know a lick of physics go storming into a major automobile manufacturer's engineering office and demand they pay you $X for suspected stolen technologies in their seat springs or something. Those guys could let you have it in such a way that would make your head spin.
Something tells me that Darl knows all this. He's smarter than what he's letting on, and that he's got an agenda, or is getting funded by someone (insert favourite pump-n-dump/{MS, SUN, HP, Apple} is behind all this, etc conspiracy theorem.)
do() || do_not();
UK -> United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
Great Britain -> The island on which England, Scotland and Wales lie.
So Northern Ireland is part of the UK, but not of Great Britain.
The Republic of Ireland is part of neither.
"Ireland" by itself can refer both to the Republic and to the island on which the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland lie.
I say: "Bring 'em On!" ;-)
I think, therefore I am...I think.
Every company that runs Linux, in any capacity, immediately sues SCO for fraud, extortion, and for willful and malicious interference. There's no way they could survive that many lawsuits. They don't have enough money to even respond to them all.
Then again, IANAL...
Yeah, thanks. I actually studied in Cork last year, and I took so much Irish history that you'd think I'd remember it. It's been a long day.
This is just SCO's lame attempt at trying to divert the public's attention from the fact that Novell has a firm grip on their balls (= 95% of their licensing revenues, which SCO don't have anymore, not even counting damages and interests) and that they failed to obey a direct court order to divulge all their proof of breach of contract.
Maybe we deserve this world ?
When referring to Great Britain, you can ignore both Irelands as even Northern Ireland (which belongs to the UK) doesn't belong to Great Britain.
Are they really sure what they're getting into here? The laws are different in the UK than they are in the US. What they're doing here is demanding cash as "protection money" to cover the risk that the target company might get sued over infringement of copyright, the ownership (and infringement) of which is currently in dispute. Any UK lawyers here? Does the UK definition of "extortion" cover this?
It would not surprise me if that was the case, since Ireland is the only English-speaking country in the EU that also uses the Euro as its currency. It's one of the primary reasons that many American companies use Ireland as an entry-point to the EU market.
Thank you.
I do not have a signature
This page goes into great detail about which word to use when you want to nark who
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
SCO is just like the schoolyard bully that keeps pushing other kids around until someone hits him in the stomach and leaves him in pain.
SCO isn't even that. They're the schoolyard bully wanna-be, that claims he can beat up anyone. But for some reason nobody actually *believes* he can, so in the end he has to set himself in respect. So he goes after the biggest, strongest kid on the block, the kind that noone wants to try to bully (IBM) and challenges him. And the other kids go "Whoa, if he can do that, he really must be strong."
Until he gets beaten into a small, bloody pulp.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Answer: Kashyyyk
How else would they know of wookies and the Chewbacca defence?
Then again, they might be from Marklar.
Who's for a little alien autopsy on Darl McBride?
Which slavic language is that? I recognize the root "yeb" ("fuck") and the root "mrt" (dead) from my three years of Russian in college. The W seems to indicate Polish - it makes heavy use of w's compared to other slavic languages that use the Roman alphabet.
It seems to says "fuck your dead mother, Darl." Did I interpret correctly?
-paul
P.S. - "ebi se v guza Darl" = "fuck you in the ear, Darl" ? I'd be very interested to know the language for all of the phrases you provided.
Pistol caliber is like religion: everyone has their favourite, and theirs is the only right choice.
SCO stock down today WSJ
Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
Since SCO is now making their license available worldwide, I will now announce that my license to SCO to kiss my ass will now be available worldwide.
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
How much energy and $$$ are being wasted by all of us dealing with these cretins? Now they want to spread their disease to the rest of the world. Great, now SCO can plague the entire planet.
Will this ever end?
I beleive the Italian is actually "Va fan culo Darl," which I beleive translates to "Go take a shit, Darl." I must admit your list is quite impressive; here, I've been trying to learn how to pick up women in all different languages, while you've been working on telling people to piss off in all different languages... I wonder which is more useful?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Are we forgetting the Spanish? "Chinga tu madre, Darl!" (correct me if I'm wrong).
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Couldn't they actually go after the retards who actually bought one of those $699 licenses since they now DO have a contract with SCO? As in the first time thet suspect they compiled a kernel from source, as they have only a 'binary' license?
(Stolen sig) Remember: it's a "Microsoft virus", not an "email virus", a "Microsoft worm", not a "computer worm
the more SCO does this stuff (digging their grave), the more satisfying it will be when they fall into it (or get their ass bitten).
I'm waiting until they piss off the Russians (specifically, the russian "underground" with short tempers) or go down under to Australia...and get the Croc Hunter angry....
People seem to be preoccupied with who is right, when it seems obvious who is right. I'd be more concerned with: o If they settle this case and it doesn't come to trial or get ruled upon o If you have a portfolio, annuity or mutual fund with SCOX stock
Just keep an eye on the ball (I am waiting on delight that they demand payment from me or my company here in the UK) to know the latest.
Then sit back and enjoy this for what it is: the ultimate Reality Web show. Never somebody made such fools of themselves.
I just want a happy ending, anything less that all these individuals handcuffed on their way to a long holiday in a penitenciary in Utha would be an anticlimax.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
It has more to do with the relatively low employment costs and the tax breaks than anything else. Countries such as Denmark, Holland & Belgium all have a lot of fluent English speakers and are probably 'closer' to Europe than Ireland is.
That would only affect SCO current customers (poor sods), anybody else does not have any commercial relationship with SCO.
Even the unfortunate few *still* in the group above most probably when they bought the sofware agreed to resolved contractual issues in a local court. Otherwise, well, who knows, read my signature.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
The people who will get their butts kicked will be employees, late investors, and perhaps customers of SCO Unix.
This assumes no charges are ever laid. I have no idea about the likelihood of that.
As to English-speaking, I won't make any snide comments since my ancestors emigrated to the US from Scotland and Wales and were more than capable of tearing the language to verbal shreds.
-h-
Now, if there was a law which said that software source code had to be released into the Public Domain whenever a product reached End of Life, it might be a little different
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
Nice theory, BUT ... ideas can't be copyrighted, and we know SCO holds no patents. Their only possible "IP" is copyrights on code. Even if there was a clear geneology of ideas, the only possible suit would be if they can show enough direct copying of code that they can also show a clear copyright on (and Novell says that SCO does not have the copyrights). It also has to be code that doesn't exist in any other source that is "libre" (such as BSD) that could have served as the source AND there has to be substantial originality in it. Code that has to be written a certain way (the infamous errno.h files) because of standards or hardware constraints is hard to copyright. It's like a description of how a USB port works: given the standards and the constraints of technical English, they all sound very similar.
So...give 'em back!
Here's what you'll need:
1) scrounge up all your old Caldera CD's, manuals, etc.
2) get some bricks (has to fit in mailbox)
3) boxes to hold said bricks
4) magic marker (scratch'n'sniff is good)
5) duct tape
6) *optional* dog shit
Next, tape a cd to the brick (you may need to snap an edge off the cd, so be sure you have an exacto knife), box it, and write SCO's mailing address in the top left corner of the box. Sending address can be anything you want (I suggest 1 Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA...blah blah - look it up). Mail it.
SCO mailing address
Fools are unloading themselves of the useless stock, specially after realizing what SCO presented to the courts yesterday.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
My prediction for this one is they may send out some vaguely threatening letters to see if they can pick some of the low-hanging fruit like they did in the USA and that'll be the last we hear of it.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
"stop het in je nauwe gaatje Darl" Put it in your narrow little hole, Darl Very colourful, but I never heard of this expression. I believe the proper Dutch translation of "sod off Darl" is: "Rot op, Darl". Short and to the point.
"It wasn't me, I didn't do it, I don't post, the bite marks still haven't healed from last time." Ryan/jrc
But it should be added to the list.
It will also let Darl buy that house he wants on park place.
Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
... I would like to contribute the Spanish version (localized to Mexico) of this:
SCO: vayanse mucho a la chingada!
It is not a literal translation, but gets the job done, believe me.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Right version in Czech language is Di do prdele Darle or stronger version Tahni do prdele Darle
You need to read the stuff that Novell just put out , they have their correspondance with SCO which is very illuminating.
Go to Groklaw and read the Asset purchase agreement yourself. You can see first hand, just how full of shit SCO is, and exactly what rights they have.
Novell never sold any patents to SCO, that is blatantly written in the asset purchase agreement. SCO probably has few if any copyrights to Unix, the document describes copyright transfer conditions, which SCO has not met. SCO and Novell have actually registered many of the same copyrights to the same Unix products (I have no idea who really owns them but both companies can't claim exclusive ownership of the same copyright). It seems what they really bought was the right to use and sell Unix, not own it free and clear. People are stupid, that is the one thing I have learned from all of this. It makes me wonder how many bogus lawsuits have been settled over similar bogus crap in the corporate world. It also makes me wonder just how smart these hotshot lawyers are. This whole episode shows me just how empowering a distributed network of people can be, like the open source community.
Back up in after market trading, according to finance.yahoo.com. A deviation of 10-ish percent isn't what I'd call news. 50 percent, now that would be interesting...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I normally don't post on slashdot. I just read it. Personally, I think the best part of having SCO destroyed will be not having articles about SCO posted on slashdot everyday. I love slashdot and hate SCO, but come on... Even the +4 and +5 comments are bound to repeatedly rehash the same stuff by virtue of the volume of discussion on the subject. I give slashdot a -2 for redundancy. -Norm
and save time if I wrote my cheque for the license fee out to Microsoft?
I mean, they are going to want a return for the money that they have put into SCO.
You were probably thinking of Dubya.
Why can't you Euros keep this stuff straight? It's almost like the US doesn't exist to you guys!
... ;P
Um
Blake Stowell is quoted as saying, "We've not introduced copyright infringement as part of our case with IBM. We've tried to make it clear that it's a contract issue."
Well, if that's the case, then why did your attorney, on the record, in court, tell the judge, "I will proffer to the Court that we are filing a second amended complaint that has copyright infringement claims, and will be filed within the coming few days or no less than a week. And we'll put then fully in front of the Court the three buckets we have outlined here, contract, trade secrets and copyright."
Anyone smell smoke? Because I think Mr. Stowell's pants are on fire.
So if they can get inside of IBM records they can begin to stitch a winnable case together, while if the "Match code or acquit" theory holds then the case is over. So if they can satisfy the initial requests enough to make the judge open up IBM to their SCO discover, then they can begin to make the case.
/. or me for legal advice, you're going to get your money's worth)
What you're describing is known as a "fishing expedition", and is generally frowned upon when bringing a lawsuit. The judge in this case apparently understands this, which is why she decided that SCO has to show all of their cards first before the judge will decide on SCO's Motion to Compel Discovery.
In case you've forgotten, here are some of the questions that SCO must answer before they get a shot at IBM:
INTERROGATORY NO. 1: seeks specific identification of all alleged trade secrets and confidential or proprietary information that SCO alleges IBM misappropriated or misused. This information is requested by product, file and line of code.
This means that IBM wants SCO to show show which parts of Linux are deemed to be infringing, "by product, file and line of code". This is "The Code" that followers of the suit have been waiting for since at least March.
INTERROGATORY NO. 2: For each alleged trade secret and any confidential or proprietary information identified in response to Interrogatory No. 1, Interrogatory No. 2 seeks further identification of: (a) all persons who have or had rights to the same; (b) the nature and sources of SCO's rights in the same; and (c) efforts to maintain secrecy or confidentiality of the same.
This is IBM saying "For each item you identified in answer to the first question, we want to know who else can claim rights that information, the exact nature of any agreements between that entity and SCO, and what efforts were made on both parts to keep it a secret." (Novell, maybe?)
INTERROGATORY NO. 3: For each alleged trade secret and any confidential or proprietary information identified in response to Interrogatory No. 1, Interrogatory No. 3 seeks the identity of all persons to whom the same was disclosed and the details of such disclosure. In particular, this interrogatory seeks: (a) the date of disclosure; (b) the terms of disclosure; (c) the documents relating to disclosure; (d) all places where the trade secret and/or confidential or proprietary information may be found or accessed.
This is IBM saying "For each of the items you identified in answer to the first question, we want to know who all you've shown that information to, when you showed it to them, why you showed it to them, all documentation relating to that disclosure, and any place where that information can be found." Remember, SCO not only charges that SCO's IP got into Linux against their wishes, but that IBM did it. IBM wants to see SCO's evidence that is had to be IBM and couldn't be someone else.
As far as what SCO wants this case to be about, SCO has contradicted itself on so many occasions that it's impossible to say with any certainty what SCO is suing over. We've gone from Darl McBride saying, on several occasions, that there is "line-by-line" copying of UnixWare code into Linux. But somehow we've gotten to the point where they're trying to tell the court that they can't possibly find has been infringed until they get their response from IBM.
So if you will excuse me, I will continue to believe that SCO are stupid scum, because they've not shown any evidence to the contrary.
Jay (=
(I'm not a lawyer either; if you're coming to
So if I purchase a license, do I get just a single IP or can I buy an enterprise license and get a full subnet?
Hey as long as we're in fantasy land, why not open up all the stops?
Study everything, you'll find something you can use - Jason Bourne
How will this whole affair the public language in the future?
./?
Will they be Bride'ing instead of "making false claims"? Will they "go to SCO" instead of "going to the toilet"?
Will we refer to "Darls" instead of "Trolls" on
Look, this thing is totally safe! Built it myself, you know. You just press that button like this and then turn that lev
Useful too...
...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
But this translation proves the original poster to be very well known with the Dutch language!
My, even the inhabitants of 't Westland couldn't express this better!
"We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
Actually, the best bit is the occasional literal translation that they gives, for instance, from the Finnish section:
Vittujen kevat: Goddamn! (lit. Spring of the pussies!)
Suksi vittuun: Fuck off (lit. Ski into a cunt)
Aitisi nai poroja: Son of a bitch (lit. Your mother copulates with reindeer)
Quite creative those Finns.
Jedidiah.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
...that is was OpenSource that copied the code (at least not on one of its first claims):
"We're finding...cases where there is line-by-line code in the Linux kernel that is matching up to our UnixWare code"
All that is saying that the lines match up. What's interesting about that sentence is that they weren't sure at this time it was really SCO's code.
If the revision logs had clearly stated that the lines where copied TO Linux he would have said something in the line of "We're finding...cases where there is MATCHING line-by-line code in the Linux kernel that HAS BEEN COPIED FROM our UnixWare code"
Something like that, anyway...
Look, this thing is totally safe! Built it myself, you know. You just press that button like this and then turn that lev
InfoWorld has a report that has some interesting info in it:
1) 'SCO hopes to make the license available in countries such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and China by February 1, but is not yet certain which countries will be added, the spokesman said. "We're still doing a review of the legal rules of being able to offer this license in other countries," he said.'
2) 'Germany, however, will not be on the list because of a court order that prohibits SCO from "even talking about" its license, the spokesman said.'
3) 'One industry analyst firm is advising companies against purchasing SCO's license until the company settles lawsuits with IBM Corp. and Red Hat Inc. that related to its IP claims. "We don't feel that companies would be advised to pay any license fees until the actual decision of whether there is an infringement is settled in a court," said George Weiss, a vice president and research director in Gartner Inc.'s server group.'
HCG 50a = 2MASX J11170638+5455016
11h17m06.4s +54d55m02s
I think of SCO as one of those bugs that enters a pitcher plant. It seems so easy at first and the smell of so much nectar is irresistable. But, then they find that the sides are slippery and there are hairs/spikes preventing them going backwards. They have to go forwards ... to their destruction. I guess to use another metaphor they think that if they hit this problem at high enough speed they'll have escape velocity or something ... maybe to the Bahamas. Personally, I think they're just plain screwed and panicing.
Bitter and proud of it.
The legal reason is simple, we have the First Ammendment. This ammendment to the Constitution is one of our most cherished and freedom of speech is a right granted by the First Ammendment that can has has been used in case law since we became a country. You want to burn a flag, well the First Ammendments grants you that right to "speech" against the government. You want to spout nazi propoganda to a crowd, well the First Ammendment protects that as well. We cannot of course copy other people's work because of the copyright clause in Article 1. Through copyright case law however, a balance has been established between the copyright clause and the first ammendment. You can't copy and distribute the work of others without their permission because it is "their" speech, not yours.
The reason that SCO cannot legally say "you can't distribute ANY of Linux without a license from us" is because of the First Ammendment rights of all the other contributors to Linux. There is no way that the courts will consider SCO's copyright protection as more important that the First Ammendment rights of all the other contributors. It could be argued that the people that have worked on Linux have made a much greater contribution to science and the useful arts (the reason for the copyright clause) that SCO (or AT&T by creating Unix) ever had, especially since the source code is open for anyone and everyone to use and contribute to.
Rationale: They did not want to play the international arena too early since other countries (Europe etc) are a lot less tolerant of the kind of bullshit SCO is pulling. They stand the best chance of getting something out of the US courts where people slopping coffee on their laps and microwaving their poodles can make a fat pile of money. Getting laughed out of court in Europe (or even Nigeria :-)) will hurt their case in USA where the easy mone is. Conversely a win in US would bolster their case in other countries. So, if they're playing internationally it suggests they know the US game is over.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
If you wanna mess with SCO, apply for the job!
Let them try to sort out real applicants from those who have no intention of extorting money. And if you get the job, you'll be getting paid to have an insider's view of the shit SCO is attempting, and the opportunity to throw a bit of a wrench in there extortion scheme.
Deconstruct the State
Seems they have reached Market Saturation in the US and now have to move out of the US..
:)
I am sure they could collect more money if they have collected any at all.. But that would cost $$ which they do not have not to mention this could still flop in their face yet so they need to be a bit careful on the ammount of money they spend in these affairs.. But i can see the MS's "Investments" are more or less to pay lawyer fees for this to happen
Who needs WiFi when we can have Packet Over Sheep! http://datacomm.org/PoS-InternetDraft.txt
the law economy is extremely important.
If the USA stamped out frivolous lawsuits, the economy would be in terrible trouble.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Well folks, forget barratry, in the UK we have a law called obtaining funds by deception. The only actual info I could find based on a real case related to an estate agent who had tried selling a house he didn't own. The case fitted the offence because they matched following conditions:
(1) that certain property should exist,
(2) that that property should belong to another,
(3) that the defendant should obtain it, and
(4) that the defendant should act with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
So:
(1) that certain property should exist.
exchange property for Linux and yes, it exists.
(2) that that property should belong to another.
Well, regardless of the IBM contractual case and the validity of the GPL, the code so far included in by OSS coders remains their IP as the GPL doesn't remove their copyright.
(3) that the defendant should obtain it, and
Sco are trying to hijack Linux that's for sure
and finally:
(4) that the defendant should act with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
Given that Sco seem to be trying to get OSS authors ownership of their property revoked by nullifying the GPL this could be argued.
Ultimately, the defining point must be that SCO are threatening UK businesses BEFORE they have proved a case that is becoming more and more complicated every week and will not be resolved until at least 2005. Without positive, watertight proof of the ownership that Novell are contesting SCO cannot prove they own Linux and any attempt to bill users without proof fits the bill for a charge of OFDC which is a criminal offence.
Now a question for any lawyers out there. Who do we right to within the UK legal system to get SCO UK jumped on and a warrant for the arrest of Evil Master errrrr.... OK maybe not mastermind, fill in your own abuse, the evil grinning Darl McBride should he ever set foot on our little island. Thinking about it, maybe he should move here now. I hear that British prisons are a lot more comfortable than US ones.
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
The licence will be available both directly and through SCO's 11,000 resellers.
Amazon.com Sales Rank: 5,668,654,789,222
The temporary injunction which a German court issued last June is still in force. Before they can try to force Germam companies to buy "licences" they must get the injunction dropped.
This will be impossible until they can present proof of copyright ownership to the court. But es long as the injunction in in force they will have to pay a fine for any attempt to talt a German company or a German resident into buying a "license".
Would the court systems of the rest of the world telling SCO to go shove its senseless licensing schemes up its ass be considered a precedent for any such cases in the US ?
The only thing you need to sue in small claims court is to file the filing fee ($50 or so), have a case and have jurisdiction.
1. Pay the damn fee. Its worth it for the entertainment value.
2. The small claims court should have jurisdiction if SCO does business in your state. Since they supply McDonalds and mom and pop stores with register machine OS's, they should be in every state in the union.
3. Are you a consulting software engineer? Can you make an estimate of the *current* damages done to your consulting business and convince a judge. No need to make anything up. Just approach someone who would likely buy systems consulting time from you, who can't because SCO Group has slowed down adoption of unix. Come up with an estimate and make it stick.
4. File the damn case and wait your turn. If you win most jurisdictions will award up to $2000, $3000 or sometimes up to $7000 for each incident.
5. If you win, you will probably have to force collection. That's everything I know.
BTW: I noticed that someone registered 'scoclassaction.com'. That's the spirit!
I don't get it - how can companies take people to court on unsubstantiated claims ? eg. I cannot sue you for driving a Ford if I arbitrarily claim that I invented the Ford car and it uses my design IP - I would be thrown out of court for vexatious behaviour. If you're being sued by sco, surely a court would need to defer to the case in the US ?
The only sentences anyone needs to know in a foreign language are:
1. Is this edible?
2. Can I please have a glass of beer?
3. I suppose casual sex is out of the question.
Although being able to tell Darl to fuck off would be pretty good too.
What a long, strange trip it's been.
Responding both to the above, and to several comments below:
... if they can claim to own Linux code based on that then they win big time.
On Groklaw we read in the last few hours that SCO claims
"16. Our engineers have reached the conclusion that parts of Linux have almost certainly been copied or derived from AIX or Dynix/ptx. In those cases, confirmation of this opinion would require access to more current versions of AIX and Dynix/ptx.
17. In some additional cases it was also possible to infer with reasonable certainty from comments in the source code that the engineer who implemented that code had experience and knowledge of the methods, sequence and structures used in either or both of Dynix/ptx and AIX. Confirmation of this would require depositions from the IBM individuals involved in programming the actual Linux modules in question."
Now I read that word "derived" as the key issue. Copied means copied, in a literal sense. But it sounds like the real argument SCO is making is around "derived".
And then when they talk about "methods, sequence, and structures"
I'm in no position to evaluate the potential for making this case... but it I were an evil scummy SCO general counsel, I would envision a multipart campaign, in which SCO raises enough potentially valid claims (in the eyes of a judge) to pry open more information, and bootstraps its way into information that makes possibly the kind of claims I quote above.
Legal battles aren't about reason and logic alone....
If I rewrote a best selling novel, so that each paragraph used entirely different sentences, and yet the novel's plot and theme was exactly the same... couldn't the author sue my sorry ass?
I'm asking that as a serious and naive quesiton. I don't know the answer. That's the situation I'm envisioning here from SCOs perspective.
if you beg them.
Go ahead, give it a try. A lot of people in the UK already have tried.
It's just part of the stock scam. Scox just needs investors to think that scox has big source of revenue on the horizon.
After six months, scox hasn't sold any "linux licenses" and they never will.
Apparently saying "SCO are stupid scum" gets you moderated "+3 Insightful", while being one of the few posts giving logical reasons why there are not as stupid as people think, gets you mod-down as a troll.
LOL
why *any* company would choose to buy a SCO license without knowing exactly what the infringing code is? Someone please play Devil's advocate and explain why a company shouldn't just wait to be sued by SCO. What judge/jury would penalize a company for saying "we were perfectly willing to pay licensing fees, but SCO just made a completely unverfiable (from out POV) claim of ownership. Why should we have paid until they proved they owned it?"
Seems to me that even if SCO is completely right, the most reasonable outcome for a company that refuses to buy a license now is: pay back fees since the license was offered. How is the company worse off in that case? What am I missing?!
Imposing Libertarian views on everyone online since 1992.
"spierdalaj Darl" is Polish
xb0x
If some world-wide company answered their extortion-letters with something along the lines of: "Please contact our german office about that, they're handling all software our company licenses."
I also wonder why it's aparently impossible to get a similar injunction in the US. I mean there should be a way to say "put up or shut up" in legalese in the US of A too.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
> Of course we care. It's a great ocasion to learn how to say "sod off Darl" in foreign languages
Those who've studied Latin will find that the semster they spent on Catullus can come in handy here.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
SCO already lost its court cases in some countries. Way back in September last year, for example, SCO has been fined $10,800 for violating a German court order that told them to immediately stop defamation against Linux.
Rather then reporting that SCO will start treating Linux users in other countries the same as in the US, the US media should take a closer look on what's been happening in other countries to SCO.
It is also interesting to see why SCO lost in Germany: The judge told them to put up or shut up, and they went incompletely for the latter.
...the USA is going to send a mission to Mars. It will allow SCO to claim license fees from the martians.
He said Great Britain has two legal systems, one covering England and Wales, the other covers Scotland which is entirely correct, no mention of Eire or NI is done.
So actually what is your point? Too many pints last night perhaps matey?
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I'm sorry, but that's just the greatest curse ever devised. I can't even put into words how brilliant it is.
I agree that it is unfair the parent comment was modded down, but I believe it was too far off base to be modded as Insightful, either!
The questions say "with specificity", so the answer cannot be as curt as the one the parent gave.
Code contributions into Linux are generally publicly available in the Linux kernel mailing list. Linux kernel source code (all versions) are available for download. Unless SCO can give even one specific example, they are not allowed to go on a fishing expedition.
All SCO has to do is come up with a few files and line numbers that they believe they have rock solid evidence on, and they are then allowed to go fishing for more.
In order to bring an action, you must have prima facie (first look) evidence before discovery and further examination is allowed. SCO have claimed on several occassions that they have this evidence but have not produced it. They have claimed that mathematicians and engineers have determined that lots of source code is contaminated in this way. If they truly believe this, then they should lay their claims before the court. It is not unfair to let a defendant see what he has to defend against.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Spanish is third in the list: que te jodan Darl
However, SCO doesn't own AIX, so they can't sue based on that. What they need to do is to demonstrate that Linux (whose source code is freely available) has been copied from Unix (whose source code SCO has). Therefore, what they should have done is to show a file by file, line by line correspondence between Linux source code and Unix source code. Demonstrating corpus delicti comes first, they must prove that something wrong has been done before they try to prove anything else, otherwise it's a "fishing expedition". AFTER doing that, they can try to prove that such code copying was done through IBM, by the AIX development team. For this they can request that IBM provide documents. If they didn't do it in that order, then the case should be dismissed.
So I searched for a local distributor (Cambridgeshire), and I found just one.
These guys use the public Extreme tracker, and according to the stats, this UK distie's sub-site on SCO's has only ever had ONE UNIQUE visitor in the last 20 months!
I looked through some of the UK disties (after guessing the correct URL's because SCO didn't list them properly!), and didn't find ONE that had SCO clearly visible on their website, and a few of them clearly sell other unixes (didn't find linux mentioned though :-(
So, I conclude that SCO are a spent force in the UK and should be laughed at.
Document Not Found
To find the document you're looking for, please see our company sitemap
Oooops!
jigoku e ike Darl-san
Um... I'm not sure the "-san" is quite appropriate, though. You do realise it's a polite suffix?
"All code contributed by IBM" isn't specific enough, but anyway their claim would be: "All Linux code contributed by IBM employees who have worked once on UNIX source tree". They have lots of choice and probably they can list the files in fs/jfs (that is: akefile jfs_dmap.h jfs_inode.c jfs_txnmgr.c jfs_xtree.h file.c jfs_dtree.c jfs_inode.h jfs_txnmgr.h namei.c inode.c jfs_dtree.h jfs_lock.h jfs_types.h resize.c jfs_btree.h jfs_extent.c jfs_logmgr.c jfs_umount.c super.c jfs_debug.c jfs_extent.h jfs_logmgr.h jfs_unicode.c symlink.c jfs_debug.h jfs_filsys.h jfs_metapage.c jfs_unicode.h xattr.c jfs_defragfs.h jfs_imap.c jfs_metapage.h jfs_uniupr.c jfs_dinode.h jfs_imap.h jfs_mount.c jfs_xattr.h jfs_dmap.c jfs_incore.h jfs_superblock.h jfs_xtree.c ), in entirity, for starters.
They have claimed that mathematicians and engineers have determined that lots of source code is contaminated in this way.
They did not claim it in front of the court though. In front of the court, they claimed they needed to access IBM development history to support their claims, which may be perfectly true, because I don't see them have a simple way to identify all/most of the IBM employees who worked on both Linux and UNIX, on what and when.
It is not unfair to let a defendant see what he has to defend against.
However, they had no way initially to know exactly the details about who developped what at IBM. I suppose they just gave one or two examples of a IBM developper who worked on both UNIX and Linux, and ask the judge, on the basis of this evidence, to access IBM information in order to give a more precise list.
Is there a Lesser Britain?
That's true, but the idea that Ireland is the only English speaking country in the Euro-zone is one of the bigger reasons that the country decided to adopt the Euro when it did.
You're absolutely right, but (as I posted in reply to another comment along these lines) being the only English speaking country in the Euro zone was one of the bigger reasons that the country adopted the Euro when it did.
:)
The whole package certainly makes the country an attractive choice.
As for ancestors, mine came from Ireland and Scotland. Both quality places.
A quick google revealed this link from Straight Dope, which says that lesser Britain would be Brittany, in France. But I would say that in common usage, no, there's not.
At that level of copying, yes, they probably could. Fiction, however, has a plot and characters and a setting and a far larger set of possible words to draw from ... something that non-fiction writing in general and especially programming, does not have. Given the limits of the language and the few really efficient ways that are to write code, stir in the decades of exposure to public examples and classes, and the standards that one must write to ... efficient well-written code will strongly resemble other code. It's like chocolate chip cooky recipes ... of all the ways thare are to mix butter, sugar, flour, eggs and chocolate chips, only a few produce edible cookies.
However, SCO does not have the copyrights to the code they claim IBM illegally used ... they are claiming some sort of "IP" right based on their reading of the contracts and their totally wierd definition of "derivative works".
Today we piss of the country, Tomorrow, The World!!!!
-------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.
Dubya, the Second.
-------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.
Even this would not be specific enough, although I grant you it would be a good start.
Just because Linux has JFS, NUMA... and AIX has the same support does not mean the code is the same. However they could possibly get away with what you described above if they accompanied it with reason(s) why they think the Linux and AIX code is the same (even binary comparison would be good).
You said they needed to access IBM code to support their claim, and that is the very problem. You cannot claim if you do not have some evidence in the first place.
Fishing is not allowed. SCO is required to prove there are fish around by putting a mackerel before the court before being allowed to go cast a net to find the whole shoal (through discovery). So far we have not even seen a fin.
SCO have repeatedly claimed that Linux also is guilty of copyright infringement directly on SCO products, not just AIX. In this case they do have both sets of source code (Linux and SCO Unix). One of the interogatories requires SCO to publish reasons and code samples where they believe Linux is also infringing. Here they have no excuse whatsoever for not laying the evidence before the court.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Well lastest SCO legal info show they did it: "17. In some additional cases it was also possible to infer with reasonable certainty from comments in the source code that the engineer who implemented that code had experience and knowledge of the methods, sequence and structures used in either or both of Dynix/ptx and AIX. Confirmation of this would require depositions from the IBM individuals involved in programming the actual Linux modules in question."
Also: "18.1 The "Read Copy Update" (RCU) code contributed to Linux by IBM was copied substantially verbatim with only relatively minor changes from Dynix/ptx."
You said they needed to access IBM code to support their claim, and that is the very problem. You cannot claim if you do not have some evidence in the first place.
Yes, that's why they had probably given a handful of examples of developpers likely to have worked on both UNIX version of a code, and a released version of Linux of the same code. According to their personnal legal theory, I think they don't even have to claim that's it's the same person who wrote the same code in both OSes, just something like having worked on UNIX internals before contributing on Linux code could be problematic. But that would be the weaker claim, they'd go first for developpers having worked on the same code (say JFS) for both AIX and Linux. Given that newer internal versions of AIX were ditched, I'm sure at least some developpers might have been realocated from AIX teams to Linux teams.
SCO have repeatedly claimed that Linux also is guilty of copyright infringement directly on SCO products, not just AIX.
As I initially said, SCO claims in PR releases have been stupid, but they of course carefully avoided doing them boldly in front of the court, hence the title "They ARE NOT stupid scum..."
Whilst the First Amendment may exist, PR releases from a company have legal consequences too. They can be sued for making false statements, as it affects investment decisions. Saying that Linux has copyright infringement problems falls under the "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" scenario; what you are saying had better be true or there are consquences.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Yeah, thanks. I actually studied in Cork last year, and I took so much Irish history that you'd think I'd remember it. It's been a long day.
Well, as you said, they'd been functionally independent from the UK since just after WWI, and that was the important bit. When all the treaties were actually signed and links broken is mostly academic after that, so I don't think anyone would blame you for forgetting.