Slashdot Mirror
Australian Firm Asks SCO To Detail Evidence
An anonymous reader submits A Perth, Western Australian company called CyberKnights has told SCO ANZ's MD to detail its IP claims or face legal action for fraud. SCO has just released licenses for Australasia and claims enquiries by several companies already."
Maybe this has been answered already, but does anyone know whether SCO's board or management can face criminal charges if all these allegations are proved unsubstantiated?
why is SCO's stock still at 15? even after red hat joined the user protection game..
IANAK (Kangaroo), but I've talked to Aussies, and they say the ACCC can really sink its teeth into companies that stir it up.
I think SCO is misunderestimating the tolerance for stupid circus antics from big business overseas. It seems like we'll pander to them for awhile and play along with their stupid games, then frequently let them scurry away, but other countries' governments and court systems aren't so forgiving. Push them, they'll push back. Fortunately, it looks like SCO is the little dorky kid and now he's trying to shove the bullies that are twice as big.
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
This is a great thing, but yet again, the lessor if two evils. Slashdotters have not said nice things about Australia's ACCC, but they DO have teeth, and put up with no shit. SCO has just taken on a very dangerous shark that will eat them and spit out the bones.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Is anyone keeping a tally of how much moolah SCO has invested in the court system right now? Just to think, all of that MS money is going to feed hungry lawyers, all over the world! Darl should be proud. Also, it will be interesting to see how many simultaneous lawsuits it takes to kill the SCO Legal Team (also known as SCO). There's one from Austrailia, one in the UK(?), all the stuff between SCO and IBM, SCO v. Red Hat, SCO vs. Everyone Who Wishes to Smite SCO, et cetera...
Australia has a more conservative legal system than the US. Here, the ACCC can hit SCO pretty hard if they do not substantiate their claims. It is even possible that they could bring the SCO directors up on criminal charges. The only problem is that it takes a small company with big balls like CyberKnights to champion the claim before the ACCC will get involved.
On the Electronic Frontier Foundation site (EFF) site I found http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item =2775 talking how to fight back.
:)
I have not yet found, statistics on how many registered voters are fighting back, what state does these voters come from, etc etc. I think it would be interesting if EFF had that to show what kind of support against SCO exists. Anyone know if this exists? (Please tell me I am blind and cant read
Not that I'm feeling sorry for McBride et al. I just can't imagine how bad this will get for SCO if during the course of legal manuvering this turns into a criminal case and they're convicted by two sovereign nations of this farce of a white collar crime. What are they going to do? take turns and alternate between sitting in US and ANZ jails? Seriously, folks, who gets to decide which punishment will be administered by who and where?
Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
I work for a telco in NZ; one of our partners received an email yesterday from SCO as a heads-up. I'm actively trying to contact our finance and legal departments to make sure we don't pay any invoices. We will be a target: there are only three big telcos here, they'll be sure to hit all of us.
-- Your mother uses Emacs.
With all the publicity this company will get, which will then probably turn into more business for them, one has to wonder why more small companies don't go after SCO. In effect do the same thing SCO has; fill the press with your name.
sig: [insert something clever here]
The primary duty is not to increase the value of the stock, but to maximize shareholder value. There's a big difference, even though the value of stock is one of the best proxies for determining shareholder value. If the duty were to simply maximize the value of the stock, then we would see a lot more gaming of the system than we actually do. (We do see a lot of focus on short-term gains, but that's not the same as gaming the system.) We would also see tremendously more lawsuits against corporations.
In any case, the duty is not limited to the boards of publicly traded companies. The boards of ALL companies that have stock (i.e., corporations) have this duty. It's just that publicly traded stock has an obvious apparent value; the stock of privately held companies is more difficult to value, if only because you have to guess.
Australians aren't as "sue happy" as Americans. I've heard of people suing - and winning - with the most frivolous claims over in the states (warning: coffee is hot). Such cases would be laughed out of court over here.
If SCO started lawsuits in Australia based on their unsubstantiated claims and yet to be revealed evidence, Aussie judges would dismiss them and tell them to come back with a clue.
I ran a benchmark on my quantum computer, now I can't find it anywhere!
Are there any US companies that are (or contemplating) filing suit against SCO for fraud?
It seems like a reasonable legal risk for any plaintiff (or co-plaintiffs) with a large Linux installation. (SCO is not the UNIX copyright-holder of record; SCO's so-called "evidence" has all been easily discredited so far, etc.)
And what about criminal fraud charges? Are there any states that are contemplating this? Is there any chance of federal fraud charges?
SCO may indeed be in trouble, but notice that their carefully worded claims say that Linux contains their intellectual property, which you need a license for. They do not claim that their copyrights have been violated. In fact, since intellectual property doesn't have any legal meaning, they aren't claiming anything at all.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
They're trying it on in NZ, too.
The NZOSS has put together this summary of the issues and is requesting a copy of the license, but not telegraphing its plans so blatantly (ya gotta love Kiwis).
Check out http://WWW.SCO.CO.NZ for a larf.
In this article SCO is already getting the finger from a couple of big New Zealand Linux users.
Massey University has deployed a 132 CPU Helix supercomputer running RedHat Linux 7.3 at its Albany campus in Auckland and would be expected to pay $NZ171,192.61 for the right to continue using its operating system. The director of parallel computing, Chris Messon, says that's not going to happen. "We have no plans to pay off SCO."
And Weta Digital...
Operations manager Milton Ngan says any move to pay the licence would be seen as capitulation and Weta isn't about to start down that road. "We won't make any moves till we see what the rest of the industry does. We're a small company a long way from SCO so we'll try to stay here out of sight."