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.
So when will SCO be lobbying God to stop all these bad things? Seems like the next logical step in that fantasy world Darl lives in.
Human nature is the same everywhere; the modes only are different. -- Earl of Chesterfield
SCO will have a major impact I'm sure. They can make their political contributions in stock options.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
IBM's lobbyists are a helluva lot better paid and effective than SCO's will be...that's a place where SCO will lose in the FUD war. Can't bullshit a bullshiter..
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!
Is that what he is saying?
1. Open source software is free, leading management and general users to believe that no one ever should pay for anything software-related.
2. Open-source products are available to anyone, which led to outflux of jobs out of United States, since a developer in Tanzania knows Apache or MySQL just as well, but is willing to work for 2 kilos of rice a day, unlike their greedy American counterparts.
3. Open-source projects have never been tested and approved by Microsoft or other reliable software vendors with market cap over 100 billion and public trust behind them.
4. All open source companies are either bankrupt, or litigating, or in the process of bankruptcy/litigation process.
5. Open source companies contributed more to the job losses in the software industry than any other company sector. Microsoft had always been hiring and so have other closed-source companies.
6. Open source does not have a vital business model.
7. There are many software shops that write little Access-thingies and make thousands of dollars per month. Microsoft had made thousand of millionaires in the software business. Linux so far only earned money for IBM and HP.
8. As Linus himself shamefully admitted, errno.h was shamelessly copied from SCO Software Development Labs. Thus the terrorist organizations around the world know the error codes for any Linux system and potentially coudl disrupt nuclear reactors and spaceships.
Run. RUN!!! Run to your local lawmaker and have them change the rules. A play right out of Darl's CEO 101 Handbook.
Its too late, Darl. You can't preserve your house of cards by hoping someone will change the laws of physics for you.
sPh
SCO doesn't mind using Samba.
i don't like style guides
"You can lead a man to congress, but you can't make him think."
- Milton Berle
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.
I'm just wondering. It'd be awfully funny if it is.
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
They claim that Open Source threatens "[The US] continued ability to lead the world in technological innovation/[The US] international competitive position in the global software industry".
Well, yes, it does. That is only because up until now we have been talking about what amounts to a closed protectionist system via closed formats, software patents etc. Welcome to the free market. That's not to say that the US position in the software industry won't be very competitive, merely that they'll actually have to compete with everyone else on a level playing field.
Is he arguing that free markets are against US ideology? Interesting take - might even be true from the point of view of some elements of congress.
Jedidiah.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
This is a sign that SCO believes they might not win in the courts with existing laws, and so must lobby to change the laws to their benefit.
How they can hope to do this in the face of much better funded and more experienced lobbyists who are opposed to them is a mystery.
I think it's also a sign that their whole strategy is running out of steam.
HCG 50a = 2MASX J11170638+5455016
11h17m06.4s +54d55m02s
...if any Congressmen agrees with Darl, and if so, their names. Why? So I can campaign for whoever's running against them, and if they're in Texas, I'll vote for one of their opponents too.
Not only is supporting SCO's actions unethical, but agreeing with Darl's statements re: open source (regardless of who says them, Darl or not) is just plain anti-freedom. And the idea of someone who hates freedom being in Congress scares me.
I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
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()?
# $version 0.01$
my $funds = get_money('src'=>'microsoft');
$funds += get_money('src'=>'sun');
$funds += get_money('src'=>'baystar');
$funds += get_money('src'=>'hapless_investors');
while ( $funds > 0 )
{
$funds -= pay_legal();
sue_someone('target'=>rand);
public_release('threat'=>rand);
}
die;
  ;
Noooo, Microsoft isn't behind this at all! Not even a little bit! :P
SIGFEH
1. The threat to the U.S information technology industry
"Please legislate to save our industry so we can send it to offshore sweatshops and make gazillions (and those election campaigns ain't cheap hey Mr Congresscritter )."
2. The threat to our international competitive position.
"Forget anthrax - Linux is the real WMD!"
3. The threat to our national security.
"Forget Saddam - Linus is the real enemy of humanity, and you can add Finland to the axis of evil! Those Finns, what have they done for us recently, with their weird language and dinky little phones."
We would lose less from an intelligence standpoint if we sent Darl instead.
Physics makes the world go 'round.
You do not, in our capitalist republic, have the right to make money. You instead have the right to attempt to make money.
What's the difference? Simple.
Right to try to make money: "I'm going to make a product, offer it for sale. What I make from selling it, minus any taxes, expenses in making the product, and employee salaries is mine to keep."
Right to make money: "If I don't make $x in profits, it's all open sources fault! So I'll sue everyone who makes it, everyone who defends it, and everyone who even thinks about it, because it's my right to make $x, and no one can take that away from me, no matter how unsellable my product is!"
The first argument is capitalism.
The second is fascism.
Santa Cruz uber alles, Darl?
What the hell were the UNIX companies doing during that time? They could have remained competitive. They could have kept up with the times. They could have written the GUI apps that their users wanted. They could have incorporated new coding techniques into their code bases. They could have kept the desktop market. If an unpaid rabble of amateurs could do it, why couldn't these companies, collectively worth billions of dollars? Nevermind Apple, merrily rubbing their faces in how easy it is for a for-profit company to do exactly the same thing.
If I were a shareholder of the big UNIX companies, upper management would have a lot of 'splaining to do.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
They are lobbying the same people who gave their blessing to the DMCA. It is obvious that FUD works on politicians, because when it comes to technical issues they don't know shit from shinola.
Send it to your favorite congressman, err woman, err entity. Point at the words Linux and GPL.
It might be worth its bucks after all.
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.
I've got to hand it to McBride, he's finally pushed my buttons. Up until I read his letter, I'd been watching this SCO fiasco from the sidelines. I hadn't been too worried, because I'd been convinced that IBM would prevail in court.
I have a bit less faith in the average politician's grasp of these issues, though, particularly with McBride going out of his way to spout about "national security" and suchlike. Like any good showman, he knows his audience.
I'll need to spend a day or two getting the tone and wording just right (polite, reasoned, and respectful), but my Senators and Representatives will be receiving an alternative viewpoint by next week.
Well, maybe more than one...
Here is an interesting article that is in the Salt Lake Weekly:
4 -0 1-22.cfm
http://www.slweekly.com/editorial/2004/feat_200
In this article, which is really above average, Darl McBride is quoted making the following interesting statement:
"McBride says SCO revealed the offending code last August at its Las Vegas SCOForum. "Truly, and then they just ignored it," he said."
Now, I must point out Bruce Perens put his analysis of the Las Vegas SCOforum with hours of it ending last August 18th.
Link to Perens analysis:
http://www.perens.org/SCO/SCOSlideShow.html
Also, Darl misquoted Perens' website so Darl knows it exists. Therefore, for Darl McBride to say that the Las Vegas SCOforum's showing of code "was ignored" is to make a lie that can be documented quite easily.
Darl McBride: documented liar
That giant sucking sound that was in the news a few years ago (about NAFTA) would be back, but this time, it would be real and it would be all the software and services jobs going to India, China, etc., maybe even Europe. Anywhere that was not so stupid as to ban FOSS.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
"But a computer expert in North Korea who has a number of personal computers and an internet connection can download the latest version of Linux, complete with multi-processing capabilities misappropriated from UNIX..."
It's a free market. If you get things just right, you are free to make tons of money and get filthy rich. (Microsoft) And if you get it wrong, you are free to go the way of the dodo bird and free up capital for those who have a better idea.
Next, the Oil companies try to outlaw bicycles?
Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.
Not to mention the PR standpoint. I don't think PETA would be very happy with the chimp idea, but SCO execs...?
...we are firm in our belief that the unchecked spread of Open Source Software, under the GPL, is a much more serious threat to our capitalist system than US corporations realise.
I dunno, I think the huge US corporations pose a greater threat.
> I wonder when Microsoft is going to come out behind SCO's curtain?
When the hard-on goes away.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
I mean, seriously. You can scoff at it all you like, but this is *the most* likely way that SCO will win.
I think it is very important for each and everyone to take 10 minutes to write your congressman/woman about why Open Source is important and why you feel strongly that they do *not* vote for any bills limiting open licensing.
Frankly, money talks, especially in Congress. And although SCO isn't wealthy by any stretch, they do have more money than you.
I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
Then the claim could be made that it is faith based and since that is the thing that the administration likes best (after wars, oil and Profit!) it might serve as some level of protection.
Sadly, a full text search of the King James Bible fails to turn up either the term "copyleft" or "gnu". Though there is the "Gnu Testament", but I don't think that will convince anyone. (Though there may be a connection. Amazon.com tells me that : "Customers interested in The Linux Bible: The Gnu Testament may also be interested in: Free for Christians " Everything is for Christians. Everything is free. . Though that web page seems lacking in much in the way of "Free" software. )
up to a point. Open source is going to drive down the value of software. It prevents lock-in while allowing practically anyone to enter the market for a relatively low capital investment. Perhaps worst of all (from a shareholder's perspective) it allows people to bypass the market entirely, getting the software to run their computers for free.
Companies based on Open source software are just not going to be as profitable as proprietary software companies with a lock on the market. If they try to be, someone will come along and do it cheaper and just as well.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
--Stephen
Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
"Red Hat has agressively lobbied Congress to eliminate software patents and copyrights. (see http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html)."
is demonstrably a lie. If you follow the link Darl provides, you find no mention of copyright (ok, except the copyright notice at the bottom of the page =p).But! In the interest of fairness I hit Google to see if I could find any statement from RH that'd support Darl's quote. I found nothing, but maybe you can turn something up? If not, it's a pretty good weakness to point out...
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
Myself, I am still waiting for them to sue me over use of their code with a license...
Been modded interesting, insightful and funny. Why does real life have to be so different?
This is the same type of anti-Linux FUD that Microsoft was pandering a couple of years ago. Microsoft was, at least, smart enough to realize that the FUD wasn't working and decided to switch tactics.
SCO has the same mis-interpretations of the GPL, where the term free, to them, means no money. Their whole arguement appears to be based on the incorrect interpretation.
The GPL, to the best of my knowledge, allows for source code to be freed, and all subsequent products based on that source code be freed as well. It does not, however, preclude any company from using that code in a product, charging for said product, and, God forbid, make a profit from that product.
Heck, it doesn't forbid private companies from writing add-ons and charging for those, and they aren't required to license the new code with the GPL.
Darl's logic is so flawed and full of holes that you could drive a truck through it. I have to give him credit though, he uses all of the right FUD-words on our congressman. This is the saddest part, as most legislators, like equity traders, don't do enough research on the issues and pass bad laws.
It's 11PM, do you know where your pants are?
Oh, I get it now! "We don't like free software, except on our terms - i.e. when we're using it exclusively, it's O.K., but otherwise, get rid of it already!"
Geez. They must really, really want to be disliked...
Although some slashdotters may diagree with the underlying premise, the way to fight this is by making a private property argument.
A developer who writes a piece of software, like any author, "owns" his work. It is the fundamental right of every American to dispose of their own property however they wish. This includes the right to give it away.
McBride argues that congress should essentially sieze any property that is not being used for "conventional" economic gain. This is quite a socialist agenda, and regardless would be prohibited by the fifth amendment of the Constitution.
Property arguments are very persuasive in the halls of power, and given this argument no congressmen would give Darl the time of day.
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.
Its very interesting to me that someone from a New Zealand domain is so concerned about American politics. Its doubly interesting when that person claims that without US IP law (blah blah I just don't feel like typing it all out everytime), American entities cannot compete in the "free market".
My question is, how does what American entities do affect you, and why do you care? Can entities from your country (not just NZ but any other) not compete against the American entities in your local markets?
If they cannot I would say that is a testimony in favor of the American IP system. If the American IP system leads to such innovation that the only way to compete with it is to tear it down and sell it to the lowest bidder, that actually says alot.
Is this a comment on this SCO issue? Not really, just my thoughts on your currently +4 comment. In summary, if other entities cannot compete with American entities, maybe those peoples should be looking within instead of without for reasons and solutions rather than attacking a system that actually gets results.
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
pardon my ignorance, but isn't Lobbying supposed to be done less openly? or is Lobbyist some kind of profession in USA?
And China.
And India.
And Germany.
It won't just be jobs that disappear from the US: it'll be business, trade, and a lot of skilled people.
If the lobby succeeds, it will show just how bad and shortsighted the political system in this country has become.
This is a serious question. That document, if it represents the way McBride really thinks, should be considered prima facie evidence that McBride is completely insane. Loopy. Out to fucking lunch. He's one Beagle short of a lander. Asserting the GPL violates the Constitution? I'm no fan of the GPL myself, but holy shit, I wonder what the hell McBride is smoking.
The salvation army is similar threat to our economy, values and way of life.
The salvation army frequently uses volunteer labor to help out with social problems and in doing so competes with the US governments established social services programs. These services our designed by our professional in Washington. The Salvation Army is essentially "dumping" their product for free and it will create an unstable situation that could cause our entire social services to collapse.
Also, I hear that the Salvation Army exports these services to foriegn countries and let me inform you that not all these counties that the Salvation Army deals with are those we classify as our friends.
We believe that you should be informed of these issues and the impact they have on the institutions we hold dear.
How do insane laws like the DMCA go into effect? Big money lobbies for it. Folks, if you are inclined against SCO at all, it is very important to get a letter off to your representatives in Congress. The EFF has a good page to help you write a letter. If no voice opposes SCO in this then they (and Microsoft) just might get their way. And if they do, what then?
An outcry then would be too late. OSS would be ghettoized. IBM's business model would shift to fit the new environment and OSS's colossus of an ally would vanish.
This must end now. I am writing my congresspeople. They're OUR civil servants. WE are their bosses. They really ought to know what we want them to do with this.
This is obviously just the tip of the iceburg. Anyone have more?
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
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.
This is like saying that women should not be able to give sex out for free because it competes with the rights of hookers to rent what they got at exhorbitant prices.
Way to go SCO!!!!
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...
The RIAA has a decent point... their product IS being illegally bootlegged. No matter how "illegal" you feel this action is, you cannot deny that it is.
You've missed the whole point of the RIAA's panic. They have no objection to people hearing music from bands they control for free--heck, they even pay to get them played on radio stations, in movies, etc. That whole line is sham/FUD--even they know that file sharing actually promotes CD sales.
The reason file sharing scares them so is that it lets people hear music from bands that they don't control. It's exactly the same problem MS/SCO has: their market share is being threatened by outsiders who can survive on much less than they can (see "The Innovator's Dilema" for a detailed explanation of the problem) by cutting them out of the equation.
And they have hit upon the same solution: Take advantage of the market's ignorance to claim that they are only trying to protect "their" property when in fact they are trying to destroy someone else's.
-- MarkusQ
P.S. I have a toddler and it is amazing how much the corporate world's view of "Market Rights" resembles a toddler's view of "Toy Rights"--e.g., I want it, I was playting with it, it's mine, and I will hurt anyone who tries to say otherwise.
If one decides they wish to write a letter to their representative they should also include how voting against open source software can negatively affect their campaign. If you take a look at the current job openings for say the Dean campaign you will see they are looking for people with experience using Firebird, Mozilla and many other non-Microsoft open source products. Voting against Open Source means the politician will have to spend precious dollars on software than on campaigning next time they need to be re-elected.
Remember, find ways Open Source directly effects the politician and they will be more likely to listen, or tell them how voting against it will cause people to be out of work. They hate that just as much.
---- Fight to protect your right to keep and arm bears! ummmm... ya I think that's right....
If Darl really beleives what he has written here that there really is no hope for him, he's lost touch with reality, poor guy. I don't know where to start... ..Open Source software that has gained many of its capabilities through the illegal incorporation of code "borrowed" from the rightful owners...
Those who designed the GPL readily admit that they created this licence to have the effect of "freeing" software - taking it out of the realm of copyright protection by placing it in the public domain...
WRONG: The GPL asserts the right of the creator's ownership by restricting the use of the code - it just gives permission for others to read, modify and distribute the code under strict provisions. GPL software is not public domain at all.
The GPL is carefully designed to have a viral effect - it "frees" the software that is proprietary, licenceable and a source of income from the companies that developed it
WRONG! - GPL'ing someone else's software is theft as much as giving it away. GPL'd software is licenced as such by the companies and individuals that created it and it is their right to allow their work to be used in whatever way they wish.
The second problem with Open Source software is that it is not all original
PROVE IT - If someone has stolen your code, then prove it! To assert it without offering any evidence is dishonest. You may have "taken legal action against those who have misappropriated their corporate assets but they don't seem to have succeeded in even raising a case, other than threats and misinformation.
Free, or low cost Open Source software, full of proprietary code, is grabbing an increasing portion of the software market
UNPROVEN! - Darl, you're asserting something you've not proven then said it's unfair. If it where true, then it would be scandalous. But, it's not true. The problem is you can't cope with low cost competition. But free newspapers compete with regular papers that cost, because they offer more, which is what SCO should be trying to do rather than throwing it's toy's out the pram.
Why should a software company invest to develop exciting new capabilities when their software coud end up "freed" as part of Linux under the GPL?
MISLEADING! - GPL software is not propriatary software that's been freed - it's been developed by the people that chose to releas it under the GPL - it's not been "freed" or "stolen". This is just scare words to make the GPL feel illegal.
Instead of UNIX from any number of U.S.companies or Windows from Microsoft, governments throughout Europe and Asia are using Linux, often downloaded free from the internet. I find this particularly galling because that Linux software contains thousands of lines of my company's proprietary UNIX code - for which we recieve no revenue. SCO has a strong, involuntary presence in certain non-U.S. government markets - but this is only through the unauthrised use of our code in Linux software
BALONEY Once again you assert something you have not even been able to illustrate let alone prove!!!
WRONG! - if I was going to steal code, I would hardly publish under the GPL where it's owners lawyesr would have unhindered access to proof of my crime! No, if I had stolen code I might choose to fail to show my code to anyone, even if I was accusing others of stealing mine in an attempt to divert attention from my crime....
The threat to our national security...
WRONG and ALARMIST! - If Open Software didn't exist I don't see that would stop a Libian Terrorist popping into CIrcuit City and buying a PC with Windows XP or SCO unix on. ANd if I was trying to overthrow the US government I would think my budget would stretch to a few hundred pounds for a SCO unix licence...
I'm not going to comment on the rest of this pile of detrietus because I may lose the will to live in the process.. I do hope the SCO board and shareholders realise what complete idiots Darl is making them look like. I hope Congress send him off with a flea in his ear, but somehow I fear they will not.
*--BigMan--- Time flies like an arrow.. but personally I prefer a nice glass of wine!
There's a very important part of the document that everybody needs to be aware of.
SCO argues that the authority of Congress under the U.S. Constitution to "promote the Progress of Science and the useful arts..." inherently includes a profit motive, and that protection for this profit motive includes a Constitutional dimension.
There it is, in writing. SCO is claiming the Constitution implies a right to profit. One twist of bad logic later, and you get the concept that only those making profit have a right to intellectual property. This idea, even more than the attack on FOSS, is extremely dangerous.
Damm commie countries have it easy these days when was i spy for mother russia I had to steal secrets using russian microcamera, then walk 15 blocks in the snow.
You know what sleeping dogs I'm referring to don't you? No? Well, let me refresh your memory. Hackers! That's right, Hackers, Geeks, Software Engineers, G-P-Lers! Oh, now you remember. Well, do you also remember a few years ago when we all talked about how the Hackers were going to take over the world and how every household would be run by Hackers and their filthy free software? Oh, yeah, we feared the Hackers back in them days and for good reason too. Now, all I hear is poor little Geeks, they've got no money. Poor little Hackers, they've been arrested. Poor little Nerdies this and poor little Coders that.
Don't you get it? Am I the only one that gets it? It's a trick! Free software never dies. Free software is a cancer. A cancer that is sleeping, waiting to devour our freedom. Devour democracy.
Oh, I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, "This guy's just some money-grubbing, lawsuit-filing wannabe-attorney who had a horrible upbringing and whose father beat him every day with a bible." Well, that may be true, but it never did me any harm!
All I'm saying is, a few years ago, people listened to what I had to say. I fit in. Well, listen to me now. The Hackers, they're going to try to take over the world again. Don't you forget that for one second, friend, or else you'll be lining up for source code in a God-less world.
There's one more thing I'd like to say. Linux! You forgot about it, didncha? Well, that's just what they want us to do, that's right. The Hacker GPLers, the Linux Geeks, they're like this!
So when people say to me, 'Let sleeping dogs lye." I say, to them, 'Friend, sleeping dogs, they eventually wake up and chew out the throat of democracy! Don't think I don't know what you're up to, Hackers. Don't think I'm unaware that Sam Palmisano or should I say, l33t5killz is one of you! (pulls up Sam from behind the desk)
Sam: (tied up with a gag in his mouth) He's crazy!
Crazy like a fanatic -- FOX, I mean! (pushes Sam back down behind his desk) Down you fanatic geek! (starts beating Sam with a stack of legal briefs) One man, one consumer! One man, one consumer!
-----------------------
You are what you think.
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.
Otherwise, lying to Congress is illegal. If you received sexual favors and lied to Congress about it, then it's like double-secret illegal.
It's far simpler than that.
If you are a Republican and you lie to a Democratic congress, you are breaking the law (c.f "Iran-Contra").
If you are a Democrat and you lie to a Republican congress, you are breaking the law (c.f. "I did not have sex with that woman").
If you are a Republican and you lie to a Republican congress, you get a standing ovation (c.f. the "State of the Union" address 2002, 2003, 2004).
If you are a Democrat and you lie to a Democratic congress, you may or may not get a standing ovation, but you certainly won't get into trouble.
You will note that this is orthogonal to what precisely it is you are lying about. Arms supplied to Pro-US Central American terrorists in order to arm and pay off Anti-US Middle-Eastern Terrorists got Reagan into trouble with a Democratic congress, but lying about weapon's of mass destruction as a pretense to launching a preemptive war, contravening two centuries of US policy and philosophy, was of no concern to a Republican congress (while Clinton's picadellies in the Oval Office earned him an impeachment).
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
to outlaw something that has been deemed by the courts to be free speach? Outlawing Open Source Software would be like outlawing a book on how to fix a car or be a carpenter because it takes away money from mechanics and real carpenters.
Microsoft: It's OK for us to give away intenet explorer for free.
SCO: They can't give away linux for free.
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-----
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!".
I predicted something like this pre-DMCA, where American laws (like the DMCA) and American litigiousness would drive most of the software industry overseas. This was at least five years ago (and posted here on slashdot as well as USENET), and if I recall correctly I said something along the lines of "in five or ten years we will be decrying the loss of high-tech jobs to those overseas, bashing whatever up-and-coming country has usurped our technical lead, and wondering why all the money and jobs had left the US economy.
I didn't know it would be India (though I speculated India, China, or even Europe would be possibilities), and I didn't know it would happen via outsourcing, but I am unsurprised at the result.
And yes, I do think the actions of monopolists such as Microsoft and their litigious hired thugs, such as SCO, will drive the remnants of US software innovation overseas, just as the DMCA has already done to some degree (DVD player software and video encoding technologies developed in Europe) and just as the idiotic encryption policies did (gnupg and others are still developed overseas).
It is a very short step from being an "outsourcing" company for HP to becoming a foreign competitor of HP (perhaps using insider info garnered through previous outsourcing, but more likely simply exploiting the natural expertise gained from doing someone elses work for them and learning to do it better and cheaper than they can).
This is the decline of the American technology sector, and it is almost a picture perfect imitation of what happened to the American automobile industry. Instead of Shoddy Ford Pintos blowing up we have Shoddy Microsoft Windows contracting every bug and virus under the sun, and instead of Detroit protectionism we have the likes of SCO and Microsoft creating a ripe environment for a competitor.
That competitor is Free Software, and banning it in America will not make it go away at all. It will simply mean that America has no competative product, while every other nation on the planet does. Sianara American preeminence in software engineering.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
SCO is soooo not even relavent anymore.
The scary thing is that SCO, no matter how wrong thier case may be, is more relevant now than they've been in years. The fact that SCO's execs know the language of finance, marketing and business makes them relevant, as that is the language that most of our representatives in Congress speak every day. The fact that thier parent company (The Canopy Group) is a well known investment house owned by a board of influential, respected, and well connected investors makes them relevant. And the fact that we live in a culture where very few people can see worth in something that has not been paid for makes SCO relevant.
Not everyone yet understands what Open Source is about, and not everyone who does understand Open Source views it as a "Good Thing(tm)". There are several reasons that the Open Source community should not be lulled into taking SCO's actions lightly, as the bigger picture that is being presented by this lobbying effort is that this dispute is not simply about a "breach of contract", nor is it simply a licensing dispute, but is more about a group of people that extends far beyond SCO and Microsoft that view the GPL and other Free Software licensing as a threat to thier way of life and thier controll over sections of the ecconomy.
To those of us who learned on Linux, and to those of us who have been using Linux for a very long time, Linux seems like an innocuous part of the computing landscape. But to the established software industry, (and to the publishing, media distribution, and entertainment industries) Linux and other Free and Open Source technologies are considered to be "Disruptive Technologies" that have the potential to change the landscape of "thier" portion of the economy.
Read, L
First off, we have the standard "some believe the GPL is in violation of the Constitution". W00t. Way to get as vague as possible and to point out that really only SCO (and perhaps Microsoft) believe this (oddly enough, to their benefit as a company).
Second, SCO's constant misrepresentation of the Free Software Foundation and the Open Source community in general is very disturbing.
Funny that the FSF itself defines proprietary as software whose use, redistribution, or modification is restricted or prohibited. I believe what Darl was trying to refer to was commercial software, which can easily derive profit and still be free. Damn, shot yourself in the foot there, eh Darl?
In reality, again, GPL'd software can derive profit from support contracts, installations, and the like. But nowhere in the GPL does it say that you should link in or otherwise include proprietary code; that's not the goal, the goal is to create BETTER code that does the same thing, and also happens to be free. Yes, perhaps it can "free" a source of income from a company which developed a proprietary alternative, but THAT'S BUSINESS, Darl. There's nothing in the constitution that can get you out of the fact that we live in a capitalist society and if you can't find a way to compete, get out of the business.
And then, of course, we get to SCO's main point of business, or "proof" that Open Source software is evil; code has been stolen from them and imported into Linux without authorization. For the last time, everyone is asking, WHAT code, and WHERE is it? We will replace it! There's a whole community ready to fix any wrongdoings inside Linux in the blink of an eye. Oh, but wait, telling that would be "freeing" you of your litigation profit stream. I apologize.
Free or low-cost [ed. contradicted yourself there] Open Source software, full of proprietary code
And a second contradiction to round out that paragraph.
Because of a number of reasons. First and foremost, if they have the superior software, they will continue to own the market. You think Adobe and Photoshop are suffering a lot due to The GIMP? Secondly, because "freeing" software doesn't mean stealing it, even though you blatantly infer that. If any new software is put into Linux, it's either already been released free by its ORIGINAL developer, or it's code that volunteers have created, all their own. There are no bad-faith copyright violations in Linux because nobody knew about SCO's IP "rights" in the first place, and we still don't!
Hehe... coming from SCO... hehehe.
The rest of it is BS, mostly (national security?), so I'll leave it at that. Really though, SCO should present something a bit more substantial if they want us to think they're anything more than moneygrubbing lawyers.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Apparently SCO sent letters to our congressmen, now we should also do the same. Our side of the story shoud be heard too! On the Electronic Frontier Foundation web page they have an anti-SCO form letter that can be used. It does not specifically refer to the SCO lobbying. But, it does talk about the SCO litigation and their plan to sue Linux users even before the validity of their claims has been established.
t em =2775
The form letter is automatically sent to the the appropriate senator and representatives who represent you in your district. You do not need to bother looking up their e-mail addresses. You can add your own comments before the letter is sent. Here is the link to the anti-SCO form letter:
http://action.eff.org/action/index.asp?step=2&i
Let congress now we care about our legal rights as Linux users.
Dear Senator/Representative:
While I have not read the letter from SCO disparaging the GPL (after all, this is Slashdot), let's discuss for a moment what the proprietary software market has done.
When you purchase Microsoft Office, your check for $350 goes to Redmond, Washington. Ditto for everyone else in your state who buys a Microsoft product.
When you pay a consultant to install OpenOffice for you, your money (probably) stays in your state.
If you would like your constituents' money to remain in your state, then you should support the GPL.
If you are a Senator/Representative from the state of Washington, well, tough luck.
I believe in Open Source, and I will not allow any government to keep me from using it and contributing to it.
Not much could turn me into a revolutionary, but something like this just might.
I am generally quite content, living a comfortable lifestyle in a reasonably comfortable country, with a decent paying job, my toys, a nice home in a nice city, a woman I love, and just about anything else contentment requires (including that one important prerequisite, a measure of freedom). Any anger or annoyance I feel toward the world is easilly vented here or elsewhere online and purged from my system, after which I continue on just as reasonably content as before.
However, banning free software could seriously make me reconsider that (scratch the job, and with it likely the home and the plane. Take away the freedom and no amount of toys or perks will bring contentment again). Whether I would become a true scorched-earth revolutionary I doubt, but I would certainly sell the condo and the airplane, emigrate from this country, renounce my citizenship, and use my talents to enrich a nation more deserving than the United State's will have become if our leaders even seriously consider doing something like this.
And I mean it.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
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.
"When a fellow Mormon is mentioned in the media I usually feel excitement for the accomplishments of that person. However Darl McBride's behavior is hardly something to feel pride over. I feel his business ethics are questionable and embarrassing to his religious community. I hope no further reference in the media will be made to Darl McBride and his religion for the sake of all Mormons."
Actually he's not an embarrasement. He's a joke. There is something called "ex-communication" in the Mormon church. By going against the church teachings he is basically pushing himself into a position of facing this.
Oh and there are Temple recommends. Basically one of the questions for a church Temple recommend asks "Have you been honest with your fellow man?". This is just one of many questions that Daryl will face as he is grilled by his Bishop (original or extra crispy?). Since this is very public, I doubt he could lie and get away with it. I feel sorry for the guy. He basically proves that some people will do anything for money. Even sell his own soul
(Sorry for the OT.. read the article refered and couldn't let it alone)
Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
Come on, SCO. We know, we know. Here's a blanket, you poor, poor man. Have some hot coffee, and a nice warm plate of turkey and gravy. You remember Linus? Your social worker? We were all worried about you. We heard you yelling and carrying on. Linus is glad to see you.
"He's full of... LIES! He's one of them!"
There, there. Linus is your friend, remember? He gave you all that nice Open Source medication--
"Tried to POISON me, he DID! He, he stole those magic pills from ME! You hear me? ARF ARF! Call the guards! Guards! Help me, this man POISONED ME!"
I understand. You're cold and confused. Off your medication. There, there... we'll make it all better. Now, hand me that butter knife, put poor Mrs. User down, and we'll have a nice chat..."
"LIES! ALL LIES! I'LL SUE YOU ALL!!!"
Oh dear. Well, he'll go to sleep eventually. Just keep an eye on him so he doesn't hurt any of the the others, and he'll be fine. Mrs. User, can you just be patient and humor him for a while? He's had a bad business deal, and he's all out of sorts.
"SCO Senior Vice President Chris Sontag said there are millions of lines of offending code involved and that it's highly unlikely the matter could be resolved by removing that code."
yet in this letter, Darl is only claiming *thousands*: "I find this particularly galling because that Linux software contains thousands of lines of my company's proprietary UNIX code..."
Gee, I guess the magnitude of the issue has just be cranked down by 3 orders of magnitude -- the claimed infraction is now just 0.1% of the original claim. Do you think we will see SCO adjusting the $3B claim on IBM down to $3M ?
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.)
This is obviously more than a political stunt, or an attempt to gain corporate welfare from Congress. This is hatred, deep-seeded passionate hatred of OpenSource and hatred of the GPL. The language of the letter is hateful, vengeful, vidicitive and furious.
Does this intense, unrelenting hatred come from SCO or Darl McBride? No, I don't believe it does. SCO hasn't been especially hurt by OpenSource, and has even contributed signficiantly to the movement during their Caldera days. SCO Unix may compete directly with Linux, but so does HP-UX, AIX and Solaris, yet those OS's respective companies are embracing the OpenSource operating system, just as SCO once did. Obviously, SCO doesn't have a great deal to gain directly from eliminating OpenSource, not enough to make them so emotional about it.
I believe this hatred eminates from the only company with the means, the motive and the opportunity to disseminate this hatred (through SCO). I belive this hatred eminates from the fact that Linux and OpenSource is the only force standing in the way of this company's objective to dominate the world by owning everyone's data and controlling their computing experience. This raw ambition cannot be fulfilled successfully unless the only real computing alternative in the age of decline of propriety unixes is eliminated. This is a war not just about dominance of the computing world, but about infinitely diverging philosophies of building information technology. It is a war of almost religious overtones.
That hateful, vengeful entity can be none other than Microsoft. Microsoft is the only company in the world with the means (billions of dollars), the motive (absolute dominance of computing) and the opportunity (rapid convergence of computers and the entertainment, finance and other industries) to be guilty of this initiative.
Go to TheLinuxShowwebcast from LinuxWorld today and listen to segment 2 (Interview with IBM).
Then ask yourselves if IBM will let the little Piss Ant SCO put this in peril.
Not a chance
PS Use MPlayer in Lieu of the horrid RealPlayer
Help fight continental drift.
"Iran-Contra"
"I did not have sex with that woman"
Yes, but compare the amount of money spent investigating matters related to the latter quote, and the congressional response to it, with the former quote. The reactions to each seem to have been inversely related to their importance, because Americans seem to care more about blowjobs than national security. (Heh.).
(Actually, for a while I thought Clinton should resign, because I thought the whole mess was generally indicative of mental instability and inability to be trusted - not the personality type I wanted controlling our nuclear arsenal. However, Oliver North, Caspar Weinberger, and others should still be in prison. Bush. . . wouldn't have even made it to Texas governor if he didn't have a famous name.)
Congress will never pass a law that censors computer code. It is a classic case of prior restraint if ever there was one.
Dawn of the Dead
If Darl does not go to jail, his next gig will be a lobbyst for MS. Trying to ban, what? Charitable software work?
Head hurts, honestly, even a paranoid schizophrenic makes more sense that this insane "company"...
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Before anyone wastes their time pointing things out to our "servants" in congress, be sure to read this article first. They don't care about your opinon. And note that SCO is now doing the lobbying dirty work for Microsoft. Such a surprise. Not. I'll say it one more time: better burn cd-roms of your favorite Open Source products, because the end of their legality in the US is coming soon and there's nothing you can do to stop it. The resources of IBM, Red Hat, and the OSDL are nothing compared to Microsoft's >$9 billion cash reserves, and they will continue to manage to slip it to SCO and our government "servants" as needed.
But no-one seems to question its authenticity?
The least you'd expect from a news item ANYWHERE would be to quote the source.
.sig
I've really been thinking about why this situation is so frustrating to me, personally. I think at the bottom of the whole thing is how I feel about Linux, Open Source, and the whole Gnu project. They are each examples of the power of the little guy. I mean this not in the sense of "little guy vs. big corporation," but rather the ability of one person to have a literal positive impact on the whole world. I don't make my OS a religion, but I'm definitely proud to be a Linux and open source user. I feel as though I'm supporting those who are driven to make the world a better place by using their skills. I remember reading an interview with Don Knuth several years ago. He said (paraphrasing from memory), "we had a sense in those days that we were advancing civilization with our work. Money wasn't a part of it." That sentiment had a profound impact on me, and I like to think that's the prevailing sentiment in the world of open source. When viewed from that perspective, SCO and its arguments seem less than petty. So there it is, for me anyway: it's SCO (who want to save themselves and their bank accounts) vs. people who are making the world better.
- It ties the "problem" to all the issues that either party is trying to make the focus of the presidential campaign.
- It truthfully identifies open-source software as "controversial"... which is true, but only because they (and Microsoft and a few others) are making it so.
- It describes the movement (OSS), identifies an I've-heard-of-that example to establish that it's real (Linux), and links them together as "Open Source Linux". (Like Communism and Russia became "Communist Russia".)
- It then ties the entire thing to one of the fathers of the movement (Stallman) and equates the whole of it with his ideology, which - as is typically the case of founding ideologues - is a bit more radical than bulk of those who (vaugely) follow in his wake. Like connecting any Communist state or Socialist party to Marx, or to Lenin.)
- Likewise, it disparages the GPL by referring to "copyleft", associating it with "leftists" and implying to those without a grasp of geek irony that it seeks to annihilate copyright rather than (in the minds of many advocates) balance it.
- It uses words like "abetted" and "scheme" with their sinister, criminal overtones.
- It even uses the "some believe" construct, which passes something that should be tagged "IMHO" as if it were a commonly-held viewpoint. "Some believe that the moon is made of cheese," is true... but so what?
- And for good measure, it tosses in SCO's unproven allegations about theft of code as if they were admissable evidence.
Joe McCarthy would have been proud to read this from the Senate floor.**That's my own bit of demagoguery.
When you appeal to their paranoias ( loss of taxes, homeland security, etc ) you set things up for another DMCA type of bill, but with a goal to effectively ban OSS projects.
Don't laugh.. they can do it.. Regardless of how stupid it might be, or how impractical it would be to enforce.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
A child of six could rebut evey single point made in this pathetic dross.
I sincerely hope the recipient reads it, checks up on it and tears the author a new arsehole for wasting his time.
I wish at was Friday, but I dont want to wish my life away. So I wish it was last Friday.
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
The US needs to be on the bus ASAP IMHO. If anything threatens the US economy its guys like this who use money, influence and dirty tricks to maintain the status quo. It didnt work for the British Empire did it?
I wish at was Friday, but I dont want to wish my life away. So I wish it was last Friday.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Note the phrase "petition the Government..."
Yes, SCO is still full of shit, but they have the right to advertise to Congress that they're full of shit.
Every time I think Darl has hit the low point, he makes a bigger fool of himself than I thought possible. I honestly have to wonder where it's going to end.
Do you have ESP?
And IBM has lobbyists too, plus they could easily donate the entire value of SCO to political campaigns if they wanted to.
But what would anyone really want with 47 cents worth of stock options?
Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
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
...cause it sounds like their getting/smoking some of the finest shit money can buy, I mean you'd have to to write that kinda stuff. As soon as they can get that stuff on the streets, we'll all be better off. /cheek/tongue
rm
(Hint: read the top job)
I've seen the following passage attributed to Heinlein, and quoted in various blogs and pages, and I thought it fit perfectly here:
"There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the idea that just because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with guaranteeing such a profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is supported by neither statute or common law. Neither corporations or individuals have the right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back."
Appropriate, I think, as it sounds like SCO is trying to get the government to mandate profitability for SCO.
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
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.
I don't know about the officers of Novell however if there is a legitimate complaint then it goes to the High Council for the local stake in which the person lives (generally). It's called a "Bishops Court" in which his Bishop presides. It's very much like our legal process (minus the liers .... errrr lawyers I mean). Evidence is presented (should be easy in this case to come up with some) and testimony is taken.
Once all this is completed, the High Council deliberates and renders a decision. Disfellowship, excommunication or some other punishment.
I was involved with helping a bishop years ago as ward clerk and had some involvement in this once. The process is VERY private. The person IMO needs help and this is the beginning of that process. Once this goes to court and when SCO loses, Daryl could end up with a lot more trouble than he bargened for.
Again, this is a private process not designed to freak anyone out. It's designed to put someone on the path of healing.
Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
If you are a Democrat and you lie to a Republican congress, you are breaking the law (c.f. "I did not have sex with that woman").
You are yet another one of millions of people who just don't get it. IN COURT they defined 'sexual relations' as COITUS, Bill Clinton DID NOT HAVE COITUS with that women, so he had to say "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" when in court - otherwise he would have actually been commiting perjury.
Right now i'm twenty.. this issue happened in what.. 1997? I would have been what was it... 13 and I understood this at that time.
If you cannot keep politics out of your moderation remove yourself from the Mod Lottery.. NOW!
"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?
No use working on Linux anymore guys, or any GPL'ed project for that matter. These projects are not driven by profit and are therefore not innovative.
Sorry to bring you the bad news.
"She's a West Texas girl, just like me" - G.W Bush Iraqis
Most non-technical articles I have read about the SCO affair seem to emphasise his Mormon connection and making big of the "Hard-working and Independence" traditions. As this seems to be a regular part of the articles, I doubt this is a coincidence, and he may be trying to play the religious angle.
The official court status listing doesn't show any change. The calendar for that judge is up for Thursday, but Friday's calendar isn't online yet. It looks like the court only posts the calendar a day ahead. So we'll know tomorrow, around the end of the day.
"Has he done any harm to you personally?" Do you have any index funds or technology stocks in your retirement portfolio? If so, the answer is quite possibly yes, he may have harmed you personally in terms of your finances.
Well, the government is now firmly into regulating what happens in the tech industry, and doing what they do best- making uninformed decisions which no intelligent person would make. An making sure you comply with those decisions.
This is the future! Hope you like it.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
... might be to point out to congress how much SCO themselves have profited from the GPL and Open-Source-Software in the past, and how much value it adds to their products even now. The best example is probably gcc and other development tools for UnixWare, even SCO admits that gcc is the compiler of choice if you want portability.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
It seems that anyone that has their code in the Linux kernel version 2.4.13 has been personally harmed by SCO since they are (were? dunno) illegally distributing it because they have recused their ability to distribute that code under the GPL. There is probably a member of the Church of JC of LDS that fits in with that group somewhere.
And the muscular cyborg German dudes dance with sexy French Canadians
Dear Congress,
Be wise, listen to SCO, and make Open Source illegal in the USA.
The First and Third world will probably not be so insightful and will continue to allow Open Source and its products, such as Linux.
Our businesses will suffer because we can't make any money anymore from programming commercial software for billions of users. Instead we'll have to rely on (admittedly cheap and trustworthy) software to drive our businesses and get money from building dedicated software and more tangible products. OK, we may get rich, even filthy rich, but we will never get disgustingly rich.
In the meantime, in the USA you will be safe from the Open Source evil and can trust in your home-produced, expensive (and therefore obviously excellent) Microsoft products. We are very sorry that the export of those same products will come to a halt, but such is life.
You can be sure that we will examine the papers of any Open Source geeks that want to emigrate from the USA closely. We wouldn't want the USA to lose their tech potential. Of course, we can't guarantee anything, since many countries would welcome them, but be ensured that you have our sympathies.
And anyway, litigation is much more lucrative than producing actual goods. Too bad here we have not yet been able to latch on to the litigation bubble, but it is certainly the way of the future.
Regards,
When I was consulting for a large international defence organisation, I got a lot of questions on open source software, open source software security, open source legal aspects, but no questions about the current SCO misery. Apparently people (in that specific organisation) just don't care.
They are getting more and more insane with their claims. And they're shouting quite a bit at a lot of different sources.
I still think their main focus is hoping to be bought out by IBM or other large Open Source corporation...just to shut them up.
Why else would they be acting so bizzare? Do they REALLY think they're going to gain back the Unix market this way? They're making public every little thing they do...including this little lobbying thing...for the world to see.
It's like they're screaming "stop us before we do more harm! we want to be caught! buy us out to end our insanity!"
I kinda wish that IBM would buy them out now, to make this all go away. I'm sick of it.
"Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
I less Identify myself as a Republican than as a Conservative and while that leads me to vote republican more often than democrat the policies of bush cause me to vote third party usually (during the state of the union I heard ka-ching every time he said something that I know will mean federal dollars.
What gets me is the hatred of the person that the left has, I did not hate Bill Clinton I hated his policies and that never translated into "I hope he dies" or painted my view of what he did do right. Bush says he wants the US to go to the moon and mars and people here rant about him when in their heart they like the idea.
And here we have SCO in the lobby and everyone hits bush when DRM$ money went to Fritz Hoillings..
Do sleepless nights count? I remember one after reading one of Darl's previous ventings... it's hard to fall asleep on a cloud of adrenaline.
"Sounds like Darl is following the teachings of Joseph Smith to the letter."
^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^
This is called innuendo. I do not ascribe to 99.99% of the religions on the planet and yet I refuse to engage in any attempts to belittle any of them. Show some character if you would Sir.
Besides, we are not discussing LDS teachings. This was a discussion regarding Daryl's harming the OSS community and how this might affect him when it's over. Personally I believe he has harmed me personally and the OSS community. He has committed fraud and will be punished.
I'm ending now. This conversation has gone way beyond where it was intended.
Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
In July I asked a personal friend of mine, who is associated in several capacities with many of the current and ex leadership of Novell, and who is also a recognized scholor of church history, if we should persue a course of action that would lead to Darl's excommunication from the church.
His immediate response was: "Has he done any harm to you personally?"
That pretty much ended the discussion.
Unless Darl does something to harm someone personally or commits a felony offense, it would be inapropriate to make a church case against him.
If you do not use and never want to use Linux he has not harmed you personally. If you do not feel harm in paying higher prices for worse software then he has not harmed you personally. If you do not care how many tax dollars are wasted on poorly made expensive software he has not harmed you personally. But it is unlikely all of these things are true of very many people.
Darl has publicly claimed that all linux users are thieves and terrorists and anti-american communists. He has tried to claim that SCO owns Linux and that people will have to pay SCO for Linux. He has written to congress asking that they outlaw GPL software because it is a threat to national security. All of these things, besides his many other adventures, have harmed me personally, and they may have harmed you.
...not to the court, but to the public.
Two issues were deliberately obfuscated by the Republicans in their constitutionally-dubious attempt to impeach Clinton:
1) Clinton, as you correctly point out, told the factual truth in court (he did not have sex with that woman, where sex is defined as intercourse).
2) Clinton most assuredly lied to the American people (who wouldn't when confronted with an illicit affair, and since when would it have been anyone's business anyway, but that is a rant for another day) when he told them on television he had not had sex with that woman, knowing full well that "sex" in the common parlence he was using to address the nation most certainly did include oral sex.
Clinton should never have been impeached. He most certainly did not break the law, and even if he had, its breakage would be on par with that of a speeding ticket, not a "high crime" for which a president should be impeached. And before someone cites "and misdemeanors" I should point out the absurdity of impeaching for a misdemeanor: we could get Dubya on jay walking, speeding, cocain use, and what not if we were to apply the same standards, and as much as I want the warmongering usurper out of office, impeachment on that basis would be highly inappropriate, and something I would personally raise my voice against.
Clinton lied. If that makes him unfit for office (and one can make a reasonable argument that it does), then clearly Dubya, his father, Reagan before him, Nixon and Ford before them, etc. ad nausuem are even more unfit for office, for they lie not just about their private affairs, they lie about public policy, creating fabrications to start wars that cost people lives and sap the military strength of the nation and, in the latest episode, burn up alliances and diminish our diplomatic strength as well.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy