Slashdot Mirror
SCO Lobbying Congress Against Open Code
An anonymous reader writes "Along with suing Novell - it was announced today that SCO has been lobbying Congress about the horrifying ways that Linux and the rest of open source software saves users money, allows others to use the software anyway they see fit and 'gasp' causes SCO to not make as much money as they would like. Along with all of the usual FUD. OSAIA has the details (as well as a rebuke)." Darl's words will seem pretty transparent, even funny, to anyone aware of the widespread acceptance and use of Free / Open Source software (by individuals, governments, non-profits, and even companies like SCO) -- but you might have to point this out to your servants in Congress.
sPh
Folks, it's easy to dismiss this as a non-issue but it's a scary thing, this Congress...stuff that doesn't make sense gets passed as law...because corporations LOBBY for it. (not to mention throw around campaign contribution money)
Also, SCO isn't the only company out there lobbying against Linux. This is something Redmond has been actively pursuing long before, and we know how much of a pull those guys have in American government.
We may think it's a stupid threat, but folks, I've seen stupider things happen in politics.
SCO has been lobbying Congress about the horrifying ways that Linux and the rest of open source software saves users money, allows others to use the software anyway they see fit and 'gasp' causes SCO to not make as much money as they would like.
...
It's akin to saying people who donate their time to help newbies understand computers hurt the bottom line of universities offering CS course. That's silly, people do what they want with what they produce. How can they force people to stop donating what they make?
Then again, at least regarding the Linux kernel, they argue that part of it is theirs, and therefore can't be "donated", so it makes sense in their perpective, in an odd acid trip sort of way
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
It amazes me that SCO thinks they will be taken seriously by any policymakers when you have the likes of IBM, HP and Apple using Open Source every day.
Darl, you're an idiot who just doesn't get it. You've got enough lawsuits going (what are we up to now: IBM, HP, Google, ???) might as well add another front to your war.
Good riddance SCO, you're bound to loose. And you, Darl, will go down in history as the sorriest idiot ever to run a company. You got in and you let the lawyers take over. And to think that SCO was once a decent player in the GNU/Linux arena. Sour grapes, huh? Asshole.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
I think the Linux advocates in the crowd should form their own lobby. Then lobby the same people SCO is lobbying.
But wait -- don't say anything about Open-Source, software, UNIX, Linux, etc.
Just re-hash the same arguments SCO is making, but in a parody. We should argue that it should be illegal to fix your car in your driveway, since it robs tax-paying mechanics of their livelihood.
With enough access to the drivel coming out of the SCO lobbyist's mouth, it could make for some pretty hilarious (and pointed) commentary.
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
While I am sure that MS is happy to see SCO cause controversy, I hardly doubt they were needed to prompt them into this kind of action. Sure, they will buy a license, knowing that it will fund a lawsuit they will enjoy playing out in court.
Despite what it does have, MS does not have a monopoly on ill-informed, greedy executives willing to make a play for cash. The SCO debacle would have happened with or without MS, plain and simple.
You are right, IMHO.
It needs to be presented as a way to save American *businesses*.
Look at IBM in the three years before getting the "Open Source Religion" and the three years afterwards...
Look at all the (fair) studies showing that the OS development model produces code faster, with less errors... using programmers with sub-optimal skills...
Look at what the model has produced in 10 years and compare it to what the proprietary model employeed by MS has produced in twice the amount of time... and then compare the cost of obtaining each result...
Show them the latest figures concerning losses suffered by American *businesses* due to viruses affecting proprietary software, and the inability of *any* business to solve the problem because the software *is* proprietary...
Put it in terms that a CEO can understand, and let *them* make sure their "representatives" have the facts.
--Phillip
Can you say BIRTH TAX
The open source movement simply doesn't appear as a potential source of campaign cash to congressmen, so the likelihood of these dolts being convinced to side with SCO and go against open source software is high.
I spent far, far too long studying politics before I realized how much it absolutely drove me insane, and it's these sorts of things -- complete ineptitude on behalf of this nation's leaders -- that drove me back to compsci. The fact of the matter is that SCO looks like dollar-bills to politicians, and open source looks like some strange threat to democracy (the same way they view 3rd parties).
I fully expect, and will be very pissed off when/if it happens, Congress to side with SCO's lobbying and proposals.
The only way to bind all software by U.S. export controls is to prevent foreign developers from creating software. "Perhaps SCO believes that only U.S. developers have the 'right' to develop software," OSAIA's Black said. "They should understand that it is a big world, and developers outside the U.S. have helped make the tech industry what it is today."
Remember when encryption came to browsers, and you had to certify that you were in the U.S. before you could download Netscape?
I'm thinking that there must be a fair number of software companies that are watching the U.S. government today and are thinking that similar export restrictions could once again become a significant problem.
I can see a day - say after Al Quaida manages an actual attack via the Internet - when Dick Cheney's mob makes it illegal to sell American software to Foreigners.
Perhaps some forward looking companies are moving significant parts of their programming offshore just to avoid this possibility.
As in "American software? No this is INDIAN software, so the American export rules don't apply!".
Three Squirrels
You make it sound like it's never happened before. In World War II American's were encouraged to grow hemp for the war effort. In the 50's, Dupont saw easily grown hemp as competition. However, he knew better then attack it directly, so his friend William Hearst started a campaign against marijuana, and had hemp criminalized since it was 'hard' to tell them apart.
This, obviously, is a summary, but the point remains - this has happened before. The only difference is Hearst had a stranglehold on the media industry and therefore public opinion, and all kinds of crazy views are available on the internet.
R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
Kind of surprised the lawyers have not muzzled that moron yet.
I would have agreed with you, back when SCO was pretending it's lawyers were just working on contingency. In that case, the lawyers would be paid only if SCO won the IBM case, and so it would make sense for them to do everything possible (including shutting up Darl) to ensure a victory.
Now that we know that SCO's lawyers are getting paid even if they lose, we can no longer be certain that they're expecting (or even hoping) to win. In fact, it's possible that SCO's lawyers are quite aware of how they're getting paid and understand that Darl's media circus is more likely to extend those paychecks than to curtail them.
I'm impressed with the level of lobying in the US. Any corporation, from Disney, to MS even SCO can lobby it's way in businness through a law... doesn't matter it hurts consumers (I was about to say citizens, but corporations see the people as consumers only - get used, you are a consumer with some citizenry rights that will be eroded little by little until you become just a CONSUMER)
Copyrights for 75 years? No, Mickey is already 75... let's make 120... Music sales is down? A new tax for CDR, tell people that downloading is thief... who cares if the music is shit? You are a consumer... the new hollywood blockbuster failed? the fucking consumers sending SMS messages and talking to friends that the movie is garbage, destroying a very well planned (and expensive) marketing plan... how dare you have an oppinion? shut up and buy, or else you are a communist, a terrorist or some other "ist"
Due the trail left by others I don't think that SCO is doomed to failure... I can see even a chance of victory...
scary...
If he thinks the Linux kernel is a threat then he hasn't been watching FreeBSD for the past 10 years.
Linux is used on a small percentage of web servers: Apache is the king here and it runs on anything. He's trying to talk up Linux ! Thanks but no Thanks.
Only SCO believes that GPL contradicts US Copyright law. I'd trust EFF here.
GPL keeps code IN COPYRIGHT and not the public domain. Public Domain is near impossible to achieve as an individual under US law as far as I know. I think some goverment stuff can be public domain but its quite rare (IANAL)
Free beer verses free freedom: usual misunderstandings ! Typical Lindows or Mandrake boxed set is quite a lot more expensive than free !.
I think of GPL not facing a court case like many would like other laws to also not be tested in court e.g. murder, rape, embezzlement, Dangerous Driving, Kidnap and so on. If I reword GPL for SCO: GPL is a social contract and it says: if you steal the code then you have certain obligations.
McBride: We've said this time and time again and yet you refuse to prove that Linux contains significant Unix code. Anyone who says that yet fails to prove it has something to hide.
The US a capitalist system ? Bullshit: its Federal Socialism when you cry to government because you can't get your way in the market. Open Source is the product of raw capitalism as it ruthlessly uses the economic might of many companies to remove all competition. Microsoft know this and will probably adapt but they have $40 billion to play with across many product lines, whereas SCO has one product that few are wanting.
Linux is not full of proprietary code. This is lie.
McBride: Open Source allows more money to be spent on value-added services. Its better for the economy not worse. Services are on-site not offshore whereas line of code can easily be created off-shore.
North Korea supercomputer !: McBride, you ignoramus: Personal Computer do not need multi-processor capabilities. Personal computers are (generally) UNI-PROCESSOR. This means One processor you jerk. A cluster is many PCs and its useless with just Linux. It MUST also use Beowulf code or Mosix to be a cluster. If you thnk Beowulf or Mosix have got stolen Unix code then then say so. Linux on its own doesn't make a supercomputer.
It explains a lot about SCO press releases. I thought that there may just be some possiblity of Unix code leaking into Linux accidently and sincerely wish this was removed (I don't need JFS or NUMA anyway even if JFS was IMHO all from IBM and NUMA was from Dynix/Sequent).
Looks like it is simply an emotional breakdown by the CEO. It happens and its sad both for Mr McBride and for the employees and shareholders of SCO.
Rep. Pallone: A company by the name of SCO has been contacting members of Congress in regards to its ongoing litigation and campaign of slander against free software. Its most visible target is the free operating system Linux. While I support anyone's rights to state their views, the copy of the letter that I read contains much that is yet to be proven in court. While SCO has continually widened their attacks, they have yet to prove even one of their assertions in a court of law. Not one. In addition, the letter contains numerous misstatements of fact about free software, and the people who support and contribute to it. I would urge you and your fellow members of Congress to wait until this has been settled by the court system, which is the proper place for this kind of dispute. If at any time you or your staff would like more information about free software, please feel free to contact me. Of course, there are also many excellent web sites on this subject also. Regards, D---- Z-----
This is a sign that SCO believes they might not win in the courts with existing laws,
Or they are creating one hell of a backup plan and supporting evidence trail to cover their asses for a potential stock fraud case. They can claim they were honestly doing what they "thought" was right and not just trying to manipulate the stock prices on false claims and slight misunderstandings.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
It just amazes me how theres always a comment about how Republicans are all for helping out SCO.
In reality, if you asked George Bush who SCO is, he probably wouldn't know. But I'm pretty sure he knows who IBM is.
And IBM has lobbyists too, plus they could easily donate the entire value of SCO to political campaigns if they wanted to.
AFAIK, Eben Moglen can be considered one of the authors of the GPL, and I wonder what a professor of law and history of columbia would have to say about this. Isn't there a punishment for slander in the US btw, especially if it can be proved that the difference between public domain and software licenced under the GPL was brought to the attention of SCO on numerous occasions. This is getting more and more ridiculous, and the sad thing is that you are probably right. Seeing the current political climate, this appeals to most polititians unfortunately.
It just amazes me how theres always a comment about how Republicans are all for helping out SCO.
Republicans are actually well-known for decrying what they see as abuses of the civil courts by money-grubbing trial lawyers; this is one of their favorite slams on John Edwards. One wouldn't expect them to be sympathetic towards a company that has shifted their entire business model towards filing lawsuits against nearly every successful tech company in the country.
Frankly, I think IBM, RedHat, and the rest should counter with an aggressive pro-capitalism endorsement of the GPL. They should emphasize how collaborative software development and open standards are improving technology for both industry and consumer. Basically, just copy Microsoft's "Freedom to Innovate" campaign, applied to Linux instead.
(And above all, keep RMS muzzled.)
What if Linux Contains SCO Code?
Then it will be gladly removed, once identified.
If true, any normal business would deal with it, except we all know how cheap linux users/coders can be.
And, not many people would blame them.
However... how would you feel about being forced to pay for something you don't want ?
Nobody wants illegitimate code in Linux. Everyone is willing to do without the code. Yet, SCO is trying to game the system... by not identifying what it believes to be problematic code.
Why?
Because they can't make you pay for something you aren't using. And, if they identify the code, it will be removed. And... so would their potential income.
Its the Linux Bigots in the world that will destroy the software movement. They dont know how to market, or even how to code very well.
The software movement started dieing when MS stopped including BASIC in the OS. This was their first move towards making programming a commercial activity .
Open Source, and Linux, puts software development tools back in the hands of every computer user that wants them and is actually causing a resurgence in the software movement.
Their strengths are in their shear numbers, and the fact that they value their work at nothing (which would be true for the majority of coders)..
Last time I looked, Linux users were outnumbered almost 10 to 1 by Windows users. And, I bill out at $50 an hour, I'm sure my customers would disagree with your assessment about that being "nothing".
Stupidity reinforcing stupidity.
That happens. I don't believe this to be the case... nor is it specific to Linux.
Im sure some Holier-than-thou I know everything but I dont have a real job linux user will come up and try to argue with what I've said.
Right on the money... unless you count the $60,000 I made in 2003 running my own business and only working 30 hours a week as a job.
;-)
But to tell you the truth, I've heard it. I've heard it a 1000 times on this fucking website, and It didnt make sense the first time I heard it, and it just keeps getting louder and whinier.
Then... go away.
Read a book... Get a life... Listen to music... make love... whatever.
Why in the hell would you voluntarily do shit you don't like?
--Phillip
Can you say BIRTH TAX
I just got finished reading Darl McBride's letter to Congress about the evils of Open Source software and would like to provide an alternative view. I've been working with different flavors of UNIX since the early 80s. I graduated from my first computer school while serving in the U.S. Army in the early 70s.
Darl McBride's assertions are the most outlandish use of "national security" claims I have ever seen.
SCO (formerly Caldera Linux) has become a litigation company starting with their purchase of DR-DOS, which they sued Microsoft over immediately. Now they have purchased SCO's UNIX assets and again filed law suits to make a profit.
The President says we need tort reform because run-away litigation is hurting the economy, and SCO would be a perfect example to make that case.
Addressing his assertion that "free software" hurts the economy and companies that publish commercial software I suggest the following. There is another popular free software license called BSD, which doesn't restrict commercial vendors like SCO and Microsoft from integrating code into their products without "giving back to the free software community", which both MS and SCO have done repeatedly. What Darl McBride really doesn't like about the GNU GPL license is it doesn't allow him to tap this large resource of free programmers.
SCO still distributes free software (SAMBA, SENDMAIL, etc) with it's commercial flavors of UNIX, which brings into question his assertions about the dangers of free software.
Sun Microsystems realized this and manages to stay in business giving away copies of Solaris knowing that people calling in for "paid support" and/or buying their hardware will be the real cash cow. Also they will gain new customers and software developers that they would otherwise not have with pricing like SCO has on it's products.
Now to explain how free software has had a positive effect on my computer career. As a UNIX devotee I found it a bit frustrating that I could not make a decent living writing software for UNIX because my customer base (small to medium size businesses) could not afford my software and an expensive copy of commercial UNIX (often $1000 to $2000). This left me writing my applications for Microsoft Operating Systems because they are low priced in comparison.
Since "available applications" is a selling point for any Operating System commercial UNIX has often been hurt by it's own pricing.
Once free flavors of UNIX became available I was finally able to work on my OS of choice, and give my customers a superior product in the process (anyone who has used Windows knows about how it likes to crash).
In my humble opinion Free Software has created many more jobs that it may have displaced, so PLEASE don't let one company that loves to litigate it's profits ruin the fastest growing software market in the USA today.
Note: Since 1987 (and currently) I have made part of my living supporting SCO based commercial applications (Lightspeed, medical management apps, etc) written by other programmers, so assuming I'm just anti-SCO would be reaching. However, I am NOT happy with their current business model of suing for profit.
"Some readers, at this point, may be somewhat surprised that I am talking about legaleze and lawsuits regarding a humble churchy program. I have to do this in order to protect my freedom and your freedom. There are a lot of greedy people out there who would take the community's hard work, which they have made free, and make their work non-free in order to make money and/or to take power. The GPL is designed to keep that from happening, by leveraging existing copyright law to protect the code."
Amen to that.
I wonder if Darl is on their mailing list?
Hi, I cannot compete against this, a better product that costs less. Please outlaw it as soon as possible. Competition is just so un-american!
Funnily enough yes. The strangest part though is that Darl thinks that killing OSS in the US will kill it worldwide. I forsee a problem with this particularly with respect to France and Germany who have Mandrake and (Novell owned) SuSE in their back yards. An attempt to kill off homegrown products in countries that are already wary of the US following the Iraq business could lead to WTO complaints, trade wars, import tariffs on US made software and an even greater determination in the rest of the world to replace proprietry software that would be percieved as being forced on them.
Even in Microsoft friendly Britain this would have an impact as tariffs applied across the EU would hit all the EU states making OSS a better value choice. I also can't see China, Russia and India reacting too well to the US seemingly attempting to force Linux out of existence in order to provide MS and SCO with a better cash cow. There are 6 billion potential computer users in the world of which 250 (ish) million are in the USA. Making too many other countries feel like they're choice as consumers is being dictated from Redmond/Utah may not be as good for the US economy as Darl thinks.
With a diminished US software presence in Europe, China and Asia Mandrake, SuSE, Red-Star etc. would probably see a boom in profits and an industry providing support would develop that would generate cash that wouldn't head to Gate's wallet improving home grown companies positions.
OK so this is a bit doomsday but shit happens and unpredictability is part of the modern world. I mean a year or two ago most people had never heard of Darl McBride, now he's he's one of the most famous arseholes in the IT world.
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.