Slashdot Mirror
SCO Files Suit Against Novell Over System V Ownership
nadamsieee writes "Yahoo! Finance is carrying a press release from SCO that details a new lawsuit against Novell for "Slander of Title". It looks like SCO has finally ditched their failing product line in favor of 24/7 litigation and PR work." To recap: Novell and SCO have a lengthy correspondence over the meaning of the contract between the two companies, Novell registers a claim with the U.S. copyright office over the code in dispute, SCO files this suit in response. Update: 01/20 23:04 GMT by M : SCO has placed their complaint (pdf) online.
Now, finally, a good test case for the Lie Detector Glasses for sceptical Slashdot readers!
Now, that's the pot calling the kettle "black".
It is not our abilities that show what we truly are... it is our choices.
How long until the BSA starts conducting raids on businesses without SCO "liceneses"? By the BSA's standards, unlicensed software will get you audited, and they like to bring in their pet cops to do these raids. Novell lawsuit is probably good though as it will help force closure on the great IP landgrab on the century.
SCO to IBM: "Hold on a sec while I go and steal something from this guy so I can say you stole it from me."
I bet that will fly.
I think SCO is in this for a long time, and they won't go away. Judging by 2003 and the last month's efforts, they will stick about and sue anyone and everything vaguely related to them.
And when their stock finally takes a plummet back under a dollar... they'll sue their investors and anyone who ever traded on them!
I guess it's a smart move by them to get in first before Novell acted. If Novell had acted in suing SCO for claiming to own Novell's UNIX when they didn't, it would give the worldwide impression that SCO is using IP illegally. As SCO has taken the first step of taking legal action against Novell, it now looks all the more (even if only to the clown troup of DiDio and Deutschebank) like SCO is the one working to protect THEIR ip.
Question
What do you have the best chances of seeing this year?
A) - The Easter Bunny
B) - Cupid
C) - SCO's compelling evidence against Linux.
D) - Another John Woo movie, including his signature cinematic touches such as; crossed guns, the boot, the villain's outer garment whipping in the wind, and, oh yeah.....those fucking birds !!!
Answer D - BECAUSE THE REST ARE FUCKING FIGMANTS OF YOUR IMAGINATION.
I think this explains why they didn't have time to correctly respond to the Judge's request that the produce evidence in the IBM case. The were apparently already working on their next frivolous lawsuit.
Finkployd
By suing they have effectively lost it IMO. If you read the Asset Purchase Agreement over at Groklaw, it's fairly clear that Novell is correct. Also Novell has claimed in the past that SCO has asked them to transfer the copyrights, but they (Novell) refused. If they can bring hard evidence of this out (and I would bet they can) then that proves SCO knew Novell retained the copyrights. Also look out for the Novell counter-suit about SCO's actions in claiming the Novell acquisition of SuSE violated the non-competition portions of the (old) SCO-Novell contract. Novell have played a vital role over the past few months in hastening SCO's demise. If SCO hadn't sued Novell they would still not get the UNIX copyrights. SCO can't win this one either way, much as they can't win the IBM suit. Ha ha.
Didn't you hear? Only lawyers work for SCO now. And they're only slightly embarrassed to admit it.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
This just in....SCO is suing themselves for owning the rights to UNIX. Darl McBride had this for comments:
"We cannot sit idly by and let our company steal source code from ourselves. Therefore, SCO is suing users of Caldera Linux, as they have apparently infringed upon use of SCO's UNIX source code. We decided oh, 8 billion would be about right."
http://ichart.yimg.com/y?s=NOVL&z=b&t=1d&c=SCO X
A couple of minutes later, however, prices were back at the level as they were before.
Looking at the correspondence Novell's put up, and given that SCO has acknowledged paying Novell royalties for SysV recently, it's hard to see how they can be serious. We can only hope that the judge here doesn't allow McBride & Co. to drag out the disclosure process as they have in the IBM case.
SCO delenda est!
No doubt Novell will file a countersuit. In fact, from Novell's correspondence it looks like Novell was preparing to file a suit over non-compliance with the purchase agreement. Maybe SCO saw it coming, and decided it would be better publicity to file first. Not that such a tactic will do SCO any good in the long run.
Alright, then I nominate the next paragraph for OVERSTATEMENT OF THE YEAR
The SCO Group (Nasdaq: SCOX - News) helps millions of customers in more than 82 countries to grow their businesses everyday. Headquartered in Lindon, Utah, SCO has a worldwide network of more than 11,000 resellers and 4,000 developers. SCO Global Services provides reliable localized support and services to partners and customers. For more information on SCO products and services, visit http://www.sco.com
The word SCO is in danger of becoming a synonym for sue. Some thing like "Oh yeah, well I am going to SCO your ass off, buddy" Sorta like google became a standardized verb.
> Figures.> Heh. I followed that "failing product line" link for a lark. Then on the side bar I clicked the "Intellectual Property" link...
Did you look on the IBM site? Maybe they stole the IP document along with the source code...
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Jesus Christ! Is there anyone SCO won't sue? I can just imagine the next ./ article
SCO's next lawsuit target CmdrTaco's Aunt Tilly for her recipe for Scones since the first three letters in it are SCO. Aunt Tilly gives SCO the finger and states "Come near me and my recipe book and I'll let you have it with a rolling pin you bastards"
Phoenix
-- Wiccan Army, 13th Airborne Division "We will not fly silently into the night"
I like your son's music. Are you still married to White?
No, The SCO Group failed to understand the ramifications of the Asset Purchase Agreement that was signed between Novell and the Santa Cruz Operation, a separate company. Caldera bought the Operating Systems division of the latter, and then changed their name. Confusing the names is their First Line of Misdirection.
Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
I would be absolutely embarrassed to say "I work for SCO"
"I work for SCO"
I just shouted that out loud while sitting at my desk. You were right--I am embarassed.
We need to get SCO's lawyers added to the "wonder chickens" and "barrels of monkeys" that come in that little tagline at the bottom of the front page...
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
Let's see Friday is court day on IBM's case. I smell a pretty bad debacle for SCO there.
Novell's been doing a pretty good job harrying SCO's flanks to the point where SCO is probably getting nowhere selling "licenses". They HAD to sue Novell to keep the pretense up.
I've noticed that their PR releases don't list a PR agency anymore. I used to work for a PR firm and usually they'll handle or coordinate media queries. Being done in house now. Hmmmm.... Maybe they can't find a flack who'll touch them.
My guess is that it's all about the stock price now but... The PR machine is losing steam. Like a junkie they need more drugs/PR to keep going.
Don't worry about the stock price, that's trailing news. There's so little stock being traded relative to amount outstanding that it doesn't take much to support it and the press releases are getting less effective. It'll crash rather spectacularly when there's a completely adverse opinion in one of the cases.
Friday will be fun to watch!
Pssst, Darl.. Some 17 year old punk named Mike Rowe is running his website on Linux! You better file suit against him, too!
Don't get him started. There's probably some kid out there S. C. Oh with a website...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
In viewing SCO Group's actions, a quote from Babylon 5 comes to mind.
In the words of Londo Mollari: "only an idiot fights a war on two fronts; only the heir to the throne of the kingdom of idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts."
I think that we have found the heir to the throne of the kingdom of idiots. I have lost track on how many entities they are really going after and how many they are threatening to go after.
Hi everybody,
I just figured I'd give a heads up to SCO's job opportunities page. If you'll notice the very first opening is for a Senior Software Engineer in India with the following job description:
Design and develop systems-level software for Linux and provide systems support by performing the following duties:...
I'm not making it up. Doesn't this sound really fishy/stupid?
Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
Bull. Caldera got DOS quite a bit after it was founded. Caldera started as a company bundling the Looking Glass desktop interface on top of Red Hat Linux! DOS wasn't even in the picture then.
:)
Getting history straight on this whole convoluted mess is not the easiest thing in the world. But seeing some of it first hand helps...
Agent: This is a simple lie detector. I'll ask you a few yes or no questions and you just answer truthfully. Do you understand?
McBride: Yes.
(The polygraph explodes.)
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Don't think pump up, think stall. I would bet that in light of the fact that the IP that they claim to own is in fact in dispute, that they file a motion to let them finish this second trial first. It has relevance to the trial and I think it would be hard for the judge to say no to such a request.
Meanwhile, they will be able to extor...er, persuade others to buy into that phantom ip litigation insurance and continue to pump up prices so that they can all sell their shares and get to the bahamas by next winter.
Hopefully Novell will file a motion to keep them from selling snake oi...er ip litigation insurance. Best of luck Novell. Make it quick please.
Funny thing is, a friend of mine actually does use some of the documents SCO filed to point out common, silly mistakes to his class, which in fact consists mostly of first year law students.
Ah, what would we be doing all day long without Darl the Bride and his litigation clown department..?
You're so vain, I'll bet you think that OS is about you
Don't you? Don't You? Don't You?
SCO had some dreams they were flushed down the toilet, flushed down the toilet, and...
I detest offshoring as much as the next rabid Slashdotter, but that's one job the Indians are welcome to!
Has anyone else noticed that SCOX are also looking for a "Director of Financial Reporting and SEC/GAAP Compliance", among whose responsibilities are "Financial reporting of quarterly and annual results in accordance with SEC rules and regulations." This has been listed since 8 December 2003, or over six weeks. I wonder why the last one quit? Could it be because there are some things even accountants won't do?
Just another wannabe fantasy novelist...
Specialists? If they are specialists, I'd hate to see what damage PR amateurs could do to a company.
flossie
Write now. Defend liberty
SCO sues Novell, but won't disclose its copyrights in Linux, even though it has to defy a court order.
In its press releases and letters to its customers, SCO claims that violations of its copyrights are in the Linux kernel. On December 5,SCO's lawyer, Keven McBride, said in court that SCO would be filing copyright claims against IBM. He also objected to the requirement to specify copyrights, but, after the judge insisted, said that SCO would comply. SCO was compelled by court order to answer ALL IBM questions with specificity by January 12. One of those questions was:
INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Please identify, with specificity (by file and line of code), (a) all source code and other material in Linux (including but not limited to the Linux kernel, any Linux operating system and any Linux distribution) to which plaintiff has rights; and (b) the nature of plaintiff's rights, including but not limited to whether and how the code or other material derives from UNIX.
On 1/12/04, SCO responded with an affidavit, a 60 page supplemental response, and some documents. Like everyone else, except IBM, I am still waiting to see the 60 page supplemental response, but I have additional information from public statements by SCO.
On 1/13/04, in the interview "SCO shows IBM the code", SCO spokesman Bruce Stowell said: "Monday's response included no examples of copyright violations. 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."
SCO could have made arguments like this before it was ordered to respond to IBM's questions without further discussion. Now it's too late.
The order said to identify all rights that SCO claimed. It was not limited to rights that SCO was currently claiming as part of its suit against IBM, and, in my opinion, even includes the code contributed by SCO to Linux.
If, as Stowell said, SCO did not specify any copyrights that it owns in Linux, then either it is not claiming to own any such copyrights, or it has not complied with the court order.
If SCO now officially declines to claim ownership of any such copyrights, then it is hard to see how they could claim them in any later suit against a Linux user or distributor.
If SCO does claim ownership of any copyrights in Linux, it has blatantly defied the court order, and the judge can order sanctions. My guess is that part of the sanctions would be to bar SCO from suing anyone on any claims that it failed to specify in its 1/12 response to the compel order. The judge might also order SCO to show cause why it should not be held in contempt, and why it should not suffer sanctions for failing to comply with the order.
I wonder if SCO will now claim that it does not own any code in Linux, but it owns the copyrights that Novell claims. It would be typical of the way SCO has been making and revising claims.