Slashdot Mirror


Darl & SCO Overview

HAL9OOO writes "I found an article that as well as giving a good overview of "SCO - The Story So Far" also provides an interesting insight into the character of a certain Mr Darl McBride Esq." It's a fairly lengthy article providing a lot of insight. Necessary reading to anyone new the SCO/Linux thing, and recommended to anyone who just wants some interesting details on SCOs position on the whole thing.

340 comments

  1. I've had enough by bsharitt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    At first I wanted IBM to bury SCO in court, but now I wish they would just buy hem out to get this over with.

    1. Re:I've had enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I agree. SCO needs to buy hemp and smoke it, maybe then they'll see the light.

    2. Re:I've had enough by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 5, Interesting
      At first I wanted IBM to bury SCO in court, but now I wish they would just buy hem out to get this over with.

      Amen to that. Here's what I would do in IBM's position.

      1) Buy out SCO. Hostile style. Buy up enough of the stock to have them vote to merge under IBM.
      2) Fire the entire board of directors. A severance package of one pack of oreos and cab fare
      3) ??????
      4) Profit....or at least not losing money on this crap, which is the next best thing.

      The things SCO didn't realize is that while it is possible for a mouse to annoy an elephant, sooner or later the elephant will just stomp, and all the elephant will think of it will be "how do I get these mouse guts off of my foot"

    3. Re:I've had enough by arivanov · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Fire the entire board of directors. A severance package of one pack of oreos and cab fare

      No need for. Skip the severance package under a breach of contract clause. As the contract sure says something about "protecting the interests of the shareholders". And if the majority shareholder objects... Hm....

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    4. Re:I've had enough by Artifex · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Amen to that. Here's what I would do in IBM's position.

      1) Buy out SCO. Hostile style. Buy up enough of the stock to have them vote to merge under IBM.
      2) Fire the entire board of directors. A severance package of one pack of oreos and cab fare
      3) ??????
      4) Profit....or at least not losing money on this crap, which is the next best thing.



      They'd be losing money based on the current overvaluation of the stock. Even if they fire the directors, they all walk out with pockets bulging from their stock options, etc., don't they? This path also encourages other frivolous or deceitful lawsuits against them.

      No, for substantially less, they should take them to court, stomp on them, drive their stock value into the ground, and make those guys feel pain in their wallets. This costs them less up front, keeps them from having to clean mouse guts off their feet, and certainly shows all the other little vermin that they need to make sure they have a real claim before going against the elephant.

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
    5. Re:I've had enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      No way, not after what SCO has done. No offense, but it's not like you reading these blurbs over the past few weeks is terribly catastrophic to your life.

      At first I didn't care, but now I want SCO to really get it. I don't want a quick death either, I want these people to be humiliated in the public just to show what happens to garbage like this. This latest statement about their recent discovery only proves they're running around trying to play some legal sham on everyone (was there any doubt?). They're drawing this whole thing out. At what cost? They're trying to milk other companies and I'm fully confident the turmoil they're causing is putting a few jobs on the line. This is unacceptable. It stinks.

      The only reason I don't want this stretched out too long is simply because someone in the Linux industry could lose a job over this ('we're moving to Win2k based on the concerns of the board and we need an expert there, here's your two weeks notice).

      I hope these other companies (IBM, Novell, etc etc) get together and collectively rain hellfire on SCO. These people absolutely deserve to lose and lose big.....stamp them into a red paste.

    6. Re:I've had enough by JordoCrouse · · Score: 5, Informative

      1) Buy out SCO. Hostile style. Buy up enough of the stock to have them vote to merge under IBM.

      Lets see. Lets look at our friend Mr. McBride. According to the SEC, he has 8,000 shares that he purchased at $1.13 (thats $9040). If IBM came in on a hostile takeover today, they would probably end up paying about $10 / share (the current price is $9.26, but a hostile takeover is usually a little higher). So, at $10 bucks a share, Mr. McBride is looking for a gain of $70,960 - all for nothing more than acting like a complete asshole.

      That to me sounds like a real good way to get out:

      1) No need for pesky proof
      2) Get rid of a operating system that drags down any company that owns it like a pair of concrete slippers.
      3) ??
      4) Much, *much* profit.

      IBM can handle the heat. I think they should call SCO's bluff and see what happens then.

      --
      Do you have Linux and a DotPal? Click here now!
    7. Re:I've had enough by Zathrus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's not breach of contract since the board was clearly acting in the interest of shareholders at the time of the suit. A hostile takeover is not a cheap thing, and getting 10x your face value for the shares makes it hard to argue otherwise.

      Now the majority shareholder could order them to cease and desist, and if they didn't do so could have them fired and file breach of contract, but that's not going to happen.

      In fact, despite all the talk about buying SCO out, that's not likely to happen either. According to Yahoo! insiders and 5%+ owners own 68% of the company. If insiders own over 50% then a hostile takeover is impossible without someone defecting -- and those trades are usually limited by SEC rules in the first place. This is why hostile takeovers have become a thing of the past - companies have learned that having the majority of shares being held by employees, along with SEC trading restrictions, make hostile takeovers very, very difficult.

    8. Re:I've had enough by TobascoKid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't agree - I think this is a similar situation to negotiating with Terroists/Hostage Takers/Bank Robbers etc - you don't, otherwise it will keep happening. If IBM buy out SCO, then practically every dying tech firm will sue IBM in the hopes of getting bought out. Better to crush them in court - especially if IBM can find a way to countersue and drive SCO into the ground. It will take longer to fight it in court than to buy them out but it will be better for everyone in the long run (except for SCO :-)

      Tk

      --
      At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
    9. Re:I've had enough by Ratphace · · Score: 1


      Yeah, this is like worse than any soap opera I ever seen on television...

      Maybe FOX or NBC should snap up the rights to this new reality tv show potential... :)

    10. Re:I've had enough by JordoCrouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't like to answer my own posts, but think I picked the wrong example before. Consider Mr. Thomas Raimondi, Jr (director). He got 32,885 shares at .01 / share!!! If you doubt SCO's intentions, go ahead and do the math yourself.

      --
      Do you have Linux and a DotPal? Click here now!
    11. Re:I've had enough by cgenman · · Score: 4, Funny

      And after that take out a full-page ad in the Wall Street Journal listing the board of directors, their names, their addresses, and how much money they lost for SCO while contributing to it's demise. Plus any additional tidbits that might make them unemployable in the future.

      You can't just burn. You have to remember to salt.

    12. Re:I've had enough by killmenow · · Score: 3, Funny
      At first I wanted IBM to bury SCO in court...
      I just want someone bury them, period. Anywhere. My back yard is available.
    13. Re:I've had enough by Pharmboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      1) Buy out SCO. Hostile style. Buy up enough of the stock to have them vote to merge under IBM.
      2) Fire the entire board of directors. A severance package of one pack of oreos and cab fare
      3) ??????
      4) Profit....or at least not losing money on this crap, which is the next best thing.


      One of the articles (yea, some of us read them) actually pointed out a rather obvious 3) point, that is the goodwill generated if IBM were to GPL SCO's IP (god, more acronyms than the military).

      As a long time IBM fan, I could see this benefitting IBM in a way that generates profit. Since they really sell hardware and services, this could help to increase sales, partially because of the goodwill, and because they would be able to impliment any useful code gained somewhat faster. IBM has already gained alot of traction by investing 1 billion into Linux, which they claim they recovered in the first year. Adding a few hundred million to GPL UnixWare may be even more profitable, at a lower cost.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    14. Re:I've had enough by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Executives may have stock options but most of them have limitations with the company on how to exercise those options. Besides that there are SEC rules, etc. With IBM's team of lawyers, they can screw the executives. Like buy the company but keep the executives. Just reassign them as janitors. If they have contracts, they just can't leave on their own.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    15. Re:I've had enough by Stomatopod+Punches! · · Score: 1

      Dummy. Hemp ain't marijuana.

    16. Re:I've had enough by Darby · · Score: 1

      You can't just burn. You have to remember to salt.

      Nice. Very nice.

    17. Re:I've had enough by FFFish · · Score: 2, Funny

      How the FUCK did the board justify a penny-per-share incentive package? Where's the fucking incentive? That asshole could sell Sun for a plateful of shit and still profit by hundreds-fold.

      It's time for shareholders to get angry. Really, really angry with jackass boards of directors who are intent only on lining their own pockets with gold. It's outright fucking theft.

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    18. Re:I've had enough by FFFish · · Score: 1

      Guh. c/Sun/SCO/

      I should proofread when I'm upset.

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    19. Re:I've had enough by DjReagan · · Score: 2, Informative

      Dummy. Hemp ain't marijuana.

      hemp n. any plant of the genus Cannabis; a coarse bushy annual with palmate leaves and clusters of small green flowers; yields tough fibers and narcotic drugs [syn: {cannabis}]

      My dictionary disagrees.

      --
      "When I grow up, I want to be a weirdo"
    20. Re:I've had enough by cygnus · · Score: 1
      One of the articles (yea, some of us read them) actually pointed out a rather obvious 3) point, that is the goodwill generated if IBM were to GPL SCO's IP
      that'd be great! then linux could really incorperate SCO's code into the kernel! :)
      --
      Just raise the taxes on crack.
    21. Re:I've had enough by dipipanone · · Score: 1

      Dummy. Hemp ain't marijuana.

      That's right. But we still need to buy the hemp. Then we fashion a noose, form a posse and ride on out to Utah for a good old fashioned Slashdot lynching party.

    22. Re:I've had enough by Angst+Badger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Buy out SCO. Hostile style. Buy up enough of the stock to have them vote to merge under IBM.

      They can't. 80% of SCO is owned by a single shareholder. Grabbing all of the SCO stock out on the open market wouldn't do diddly for IBM.

      From the other side of the equation, if you're that shareholder, what do you have to lose -- considering you've already lost your ethics and basic human decency -- by sticking to your guns? SCO is doomed in any event, but suing IBM gives them a distant chance at having a judge hand them a big chunk of change.

      SCO's move is very daring and audacious -- and stupid, morally bankrupt, and damaging to society as a whole, but I digress -- and the only real alternative to closing their doors sometime within the next 18 months.

      Unless something emerges to radically change the equation, I doubt either IBM or SCO will back down, and the question the rest of us must face is how to mitigate the damage from SCO's IP terrorism.

      --
      Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
    23. Re:I've had enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually this page reports it as .0001$/share. So he picked all 32885 shares for about $32.

    24. Re:I've had enough by The_K4 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Um, that's probably what SCO has wanted this entire time. To get IBM to buy them and let everyone at SCO get even richer. If IBM does buy SCO it proves to the world that you can make money w/ a lawsuit against a big company weather you have grounds or not. If IBM does buy SCO out, it will open the floodgates that much further. I hope IBM and Novell and the Linux community in general stick to their guns and fight this crap. Don't left SCO win by just making them all rich!

    25. Re:I've had enough by JordoCrouse · · Score: 1

      Actually this page reports it as .0001$/share. So he picked all 32885 shares for about $32.

      Oops - you're right. I moved the decimal point in my mind.

      --
      Do you have Linux and a DotPal? Click here now!
    26. Re:I've had enough by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      From what I recall of the SCO Quarterly Reports, most of those guys only make low six digit salaries, not high six-digit or seven digit salaries. So the stock options let the company keep them from moving to some more profitable comapny. You can go look at most or all of their salaries on their quarterly reports. I'm too lazy to go look it up again.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    27. Re:I've had enough by EvilAlien · · Score: 1
      Firstly, don't negotiate with terrorists.

      Secondly, send in a special ops team to wipe out the terrorist group.

      How's that for mitigation? Maybe there are some Linux fans working for Tha Man that could convince Pres. Bush that SCO is linked with al Qaeda...

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
    28. Re:I've had enough by milo_Gwalthny · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, the majority shareholder can't order them to cease and desist. That's not how it works. The directors have a duty to look our for the interests of all the shareholders, not just the majority. In fact, the minority shareholders could sue the company if the directors knowingly did something that was not in the best interests of the company.

      What IBM would do is start a proxy fight (you don't even need 50% ownership for this) and vote their own directors onto the board. These directors would still do what is best for all the stockholders, they might just have a different idea of what is best.

      They would still get sued, though. SCO's market cap is up almost 10x in the past three months, and this must be a big reason. So, if the board scotched the suit and the share price fell back below $1, the board would be sued within hours.

      --
      Milo
    29. Re:I've had enough by Talinom · · Score: 1

      HEY! I like Oreos! Give them a six pack of Fresca or something else nobody likes.

      --
      "Giving money and power to governments is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P.J. O'Rourke
    30. Re:I've had enough by Higman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The board of directors only has a duty to the company, not the shareholders. The only reason board members work with the shareholders in mind is because the shareholders are the ones that vote the the board in.

      --

      --
      -- [insert sig here]
    31. Re:I've had enough by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Sweet...

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    32. Re:I've had enough by crucini · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I keep seeing this comment. Let me point out some issues. An IBM buyout is SCO's happiest ending. All the shareholders would be rewarded because the share price would go up in reaction to news of the buyout. Darl McBride would be an everlasting hero to the SCO shareholders and a legend in the business world as the man who brought IBM to the table and forced them to pay through the nose for a dead company. Second, McBride and friends must have negotiated their severance packages long ago. If IBM buys SCO they will have to honor them. And you seem to think that firing these guys "teaches them a lesson" or something. Absolutely not. These are executives, not hourly employees living paycheck to paycheck. They're playing a high-stakes game with other people's money, and fully expect to land on their asses if the court doesn't go their way. IBM would lose tons of money acquiring SCO at their inflated stock price. It's IBM's last resort.

      Sorry, but your mouse/elephant idea has no relevance once both sides are big enough to afford a legal battle. SCO has Boies. There's not much IBM can do with more money.

    33. Re:I've had enough by ihummel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Work out better for everyone in the long run? I am not so sure. If this thing drags out for a long period of time, then Linux is stuck in a kind of legal limbo for as long as the lawsuit lasts. Many businesses will shy away from using a product the legality of which is yet to be determined in court.

    34. Re:I've had enough by snake_dad · · Score: 1

      The term "decapitation strike" comes to mind :)

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
    35. Re:I've had enough by eniu!uine · · Score: 1


      1) Buy out SCO. Hostile style. Buy up enough of the stock to have them vote to merge under IBM.

      It seems to me that based on the evidence IBM will probably countersue and get SCO as part of a settlement. I wonder what kind of number they'll put on the damage caused by SCO's unfounded campaign in the press.

    36. Re:I've had enough by freeio · · Score: 1

      Those of us in the user/developer community have the source for gnu/linux and all of the parts and pieces, but we do not have access to the SCO source code. So we cannot directly run the analysis to compare what may be similar and why it is that way.

      However, as an SCO licensee, would not IBM have the SCO source code and be able to do a full analysis as to the similarities and where exactly they occur? They most certainly have the computing horsepower to check it every way possible, and in a flat hurry. Assuming this to be true, we can safely assume that IBM knows of each and every match and similarity, and has already done considerable analysis on the results. Perhaps this accounts for their apparent unruffled confidence going into this legal battle. Something tells me that they know what SCO sees, and already know better than SCO where it all came from. 4.4BSDLite? FreeBSD? Caldera during the cooperative period? Hardware manufacturer driver code? Sample code from Knuth? The Dragon Book? Some issue of the ACM Proceedings? We may not know, but IBM probably already has the paper trail to prove the source for every similarity that good software tools could find. IBM is nothing if not thorough in legal matters. Thus, their confidence in the outcome. IBM knows, and is keeping that as a closely guarded secret to be released in due time.

      This also explains SCO's strained unwillingness to point out in public the specific parts of the code which they accuse of being copied. The distributed institutional memory of the entire UNIX/GNU community will find the true source of any similarities in due course (and rather quickly). If the common source is from some published literature, it will be found. If it is from some third party, that will come out. Someone remembers, and the truth will come out. SCO needs the theater to push stock prices up, and so does not want an early resolution.

      (By the way, could this access to the SCO source code apsect be another reason Microsoft recently bought the SCO license? They are most assuredly curious to know the outcome before the trial, and this would give them a leg up. This foreknowledge requires access to the SCO source code, which Microsoft has just purchased.)

      Current SCO management does not appear to understand software development particularly well. (The modern business schools seem to teach that a good manager can manage absolutely anything - a naked lie, but a lie which many of us have witnessed firsthand - i.e. the PHB.) There has arisen a generation which knows finance better than technology,. and this crowd is in control. As such, the possibilities of what actually happened are not apparent to them, and they can only see one-way transfers of their precious code to the unworthies, and not that it well could have occurred the other way around. The fact that CVS repositories could actually prove such a thing has escaped their notice. Discovery should be a hard time for this crowd.

      All we see now is posturing and bluff. But in this battle I would say that IBM is actually the cat and SCO the mouse. IBM now gets to choose whether to go for the quick kill, or play with their mouse for while first. SCO will go down - and will not need to be bought off to do so. It is merely a matter of what torment they will endure in the process.

      --
      Soli Deo Gloria
  2. BSD code? by mikeee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hrm... even if she's right and it's not some strange conincidence, is there old BSD code in Linux? That should be checkable.

    That should be free and clear copyright-wise, but System 5 could well have the same BSD code (quite possibly orignally stolen from BSD).

    1. Re:BSD code? by interiot · · Score: 5, Interesting

      ESR's paper on the SCO thing shows how the relationships between several unixes. Given the large amount of intermingling, it's not surprising at all to find common pieces of code in different versions of unix.

    2. Re:BSD code? by mikeee · · Score: 1

      Right, so based on that chart, one might well find code from 4.3BSD in both Linux and SCO, which was in the SCO codebase first but is nonetheless ok (because Linux got it from BSD).

      So my question is, can we do a diff for matches between 4.3BSD and Linux 2.4, or do people know offhand what might still be there?

    3. Re:BSD code? by tomcio.s · · Score: 1

      quite possibly orignally stolen from BSD
      You can't steal something that if free. You can't even blame Microsoft for using the BSD Network arch.
      BSD is free for any use. You can't steal something that is given to you for free.

      However, I agree, there should be similarities between BSD / Linux kernels, which would lead me to believe that there should be similarities in the Linux / Sys5 kernels as well...

    4. Re:BSD code? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You *can* steal something that is free. First you copy it into your codebase, then you claim that it is your, and then you sue the person you copied it from. If you are successful in getting them to remove it, you stole it.

    5. Re:BSD code? by 11223 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Have you even looked at the issues? Yes, you can steal BSD. It's not in the public domain - it's under a liberal license, but one that still requires attribution of use. If you break the terms of that contract, then you are indeed stealing it, and that's exactly what AT&T did to UC over the decades by not attributing their copyright in UNIX.


      That's why UC won the AT&T / USL vs UC suit of the early 1990s - so much of BSD had been put into AT&T illegally that UC would have had a heckuva lawsuit against AT&T should they have chosen. Instead, AT&T let them rewrite three files and continue on their merry way.

    6. Re:BSD code? by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 4, Interesting

      (quite possibly orignally stolen from BSD)

      How can you steal something that's given away for free?

      BSD was a fork of UNIX with the (TM). The BSD guys gave us insignificant things like Virtual Memory and vi. It's weird to think AT&T sued BSD when so much of UNIX heritage was invented in Bezerkely. "Hey, you there, stop using that thing you invented, cause you're giving it away for free and not allowing us to make money off your work."

      If anyone remembers the original ATT vs. BSD suit will remember the way that UCB/BSD got off was that UNIX with the (TM) had some BSD code that wasn't properly copyright attributed. Then Novell came in, bought up the UNIX mess and dropped the suit. For folks that bang on Novell, this would be the second time they came in as a white knight to help a freeware version of UNIX escape the evil clutches of lawsuits.

      The re-marriage of the BSD code came in SVR4, which brought in a bunch of code and BSD compatible utilities. /usr/ucb anyone?

    7. Re:BSD code? by larien · · Score: 1

      There is almost certainly common code between BSD, linux and SysV. AFAIK, most used the BSD TCP code leading to the problem where the "ping of death" affected most operating systems (including Windows which had also used the code).

    8. Re:BSD code? by ichimunki · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I prefer Cringeley's explanation that SCO/Caldera put the code there themselves.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    9. Re:BSD code? by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hrm... even if she's right and it's not some strange conincidence, is there old BSD code in Linux? That should be checkable.

      Which is likely why SCO won't show everybody. Imagine the egg on their face when developers from around the world step forward to claim their code.... and it's not SCO's code.

      Michael

    10. Re:BSD code? by coder101 · · Score: 1

      The only obviuos things would be /etc/magic and /etc/services which are very simular across all UNIXes. Another thing would be a driver written by a third party for SCO, but also having a Linux driving based on that third party code. Eg. rio driver

    11. Re:BSD code? by unoengborg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And the similarities in the comments could come from some posix documentation that programmers have copied more or less verbatim to describe what they were doing

      --
      God is REAL! Unless explicitly declared INTEGER
    12. Re:BSD code? by DashEvil · · Score: 1

      Not to be a bastard, but freeware != OSS. Freeware is still close sourced, it's just free.

      --
      -If God wanted people to be better than me, he would have made them that way.
    13. Re:BSD code? by ichimunki · · Score: 1

      If you break the terms of that contract, then you are indeed stealing it

      [insert standard response about how that's not stealing, it's either a contract violation or copyright infringement or something like that]

      --
      I do not have a signature
    14. Re:BSD code? by Angry+White+Guy · · Score: 1

      They don't have to show anyone the entire codebase. They just have to compile it and hash the Kernels. If it matches what they shipped in production, then you can at least date the code.
      Also, asking the developers very pointed questions like what outside sources did you use when you wrote the X component of the kernel and Where did this comment come from would preclude the need for developers to sign an NDA.

      The burden of proof is on SCO, make sure that it is indeed a burden.

      --
      You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
    15. Re:BSD code? by Znork · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, with the claims that there is code that is the same in Linux and SCO's products, that should be enough to file a lawsuit against SCO for copyright violation. Then demand that SCO disclose the source (without any NDA) so a review of SCO's code can be done and so it can be determined if they indeed have violated the GPL and by extension engaged in copyright violations.

    16. Re:BSD code? by Jerrry · · Score: 1

      There certainly is BSD code in Windows. For example:

      C>strings \winnt\system32\ftp.exe | grep Regents
      @(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
      All rights reserved.

    17. Re:BSD code? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      Start with the TCP/IP stack. Just about every system in existance uses the BSD stack.

    18. Re:BSD code? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      This "analyst" was not a programmer, and apparently has no knowledge of any of the history of the *nix source code bases. All she can verify is match-ups shown to her, and not where they came from, which is the real issue.
      Cringley (http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030605 .html) has shown where SCO's previous owners spent 2 years unifying their Unix and Linux code bases. Eric Raymond has also pointed out that Unix and Linux share some common source code taken from BSD. Either one of these known conditions would produce match-ups between parts of the source code bases.
      This woman's analysis is meaningless without this context. Unfortunately, techies are the only ones who really understand this. In the financial world, however, this probably counts as real evidence, and people will foolishly look to make a quick easy buck on their stocks. All I can say is, the stock market is best used for long-term investment, and I don't see much of a future for SCO in the long term - especially if IBM is willing to fight it out.

    19. Re:BSD code? by maelstrom · · Score: 2, Informative

      Linux doesn't, Alan Cox wrote the Linux stack IIRC.

      --
      The more you know, the less you understand.
    20. Re:BSD code? by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      Yes, you can steal BSD. It's not in the public domain - it's under a liberal license, but one that still requires attribution of use.

      What do you want to bet that those are the comments that are identical?

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    21. Re:BSD code? by Syberghost · · Score: 1, Funny

      Imagine the egg on their face when developers from around the world step forward to claim their code.... and it's not SCO's code.

      Don't everybody be so sure about this. They don't have to convince experts, they have to convince 12 people too dumb to get out of jury duty.

    22. Re:BSD code? by chundo · · Score: 1
      This whole thing will be nearly impossible to sort out in court. It will literally take years unless something happens to kill SCO before that time.

      Consider the following possibilities:
      • SCO stole code from BSD. So did Linux.
      • SCO "stole" their own code during their Linux initiatives and put it in Linux.
      • IBM stole code from SCO and put it in Linux.
      Anybody, such as the non-programmer who did this review, can identify that blocks of code are identical. But, that does nothing to show the original source of the code. That fact that the code matches does nothing to prove one of the above scenarios over the other two. Only an analysis of each project's source control system will provide something remotely resembling proof, althought that may very well provide legally ambiguous results as well. Not to mention that given SCO's track record of openness on the issues, it will probably take 6 months just to access check-in logs.

      -j
    23. Re:BSD code? by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      That isn't funny, it's true. It's very easy for us to show that this or that code was in our tree at this or that time. But we can't easily say anything about what closed-source company X has in his tree.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    24. Re:BSD code? by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      insert standard response about how that's not stealing

      If they didn't price it so high, I wouldn't have to steal it.
      It's not stealing since I wound't have bought it anyways. They didn't loose any money off of me.
      It's only a backup copy...
      I'll delete it in 24 hours after my "legal" test period.
      I just traded it...
      Information wants to be free!!!!
      They just need to adapt to a modern digital business plan...not my fault if they are not current with technology

      Oops. Wrong window. I thought this was the latest MPAA/RIAA rant page. Did I miss any?

    25. Re:BSD code? by leandrod · · Score: 1
      > How can you steal something that's given away for free?

      By not giving credit.

      BSD in particular quite explicitly required credit, even in advertisements. But even if it never did so, copying withoug acknowledgement of authorship is a violation of copyright laws, besides being immoral.

      --
      Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
      DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
      GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
    26. Re:BSD code? by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 1
      ...that should be enough to file a lawsuit against SCO for copyright violation.

      With Linux, who has the legal standing to engage in such as suit?

      --
      the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
    27. Re:BSD code? by phliar · · Score: 2, Informative
      Hrm... even if she's right ...
      Doing a google search on Laura DiDio, I found this:
      Laura DiDio is an analyst covering Windows 2000 and third-party products and utilities.

      Laura comes to Giga after having spent 12 years covering the networking industry as a reporter in the high-tech trade press. She was most recently at Computerworld where she was the senior editor, networking, from 1994 to 1998. Prior to that, she held similar positions at LAN Times, Network World, Internet Week (formerly Communications Week) and Digital Review. She also worked as an on-camera investigative reporter for CNN and Channel 11 News in Minneapolis, Minn. Her investigative reports have also appeared in such publications as the Minneapolis Star and Tribune and The Village Voice.

      Laura earned a B.A. in communications with a minor in French at Fordham University.

      I'm not sure I'd find her opinions about source code credible.
      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
    28. Re:BSD code? by martyros · · Score: 1
      Anyone who owns the copyright to any part of the Linux kernel. Linus, Alan, Ingo, Andre... any of the big names on the LKML. Maybe someone could start a class-action lawsuit against SCO.

      People don't normally think about it, but most of the Linux kernel IS copyrighted -- just grep for "(C)" in the kernel source sometime. It's just that the owners of the copyrights have agreed to grant anyone a license to copy & redistribute, under certain very generous conditions.

      --

      TCP: Why the Internet is full of SYN.

    29. Re:BSD code? by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Here's a much better UNIX timeline

      and lots of links on the case. Everybody read before posting.

    30. Re:BSD code? by bovinewasteproduct · · Score: 1

      Well anything from a BSD codebase would have to have a BSD Copyright header. Look for those. But from what I've seen, overall Linux developers have avoided taking code from a BSD.

      If there is code from a BSD in there, but no copyright header, there is still a problem.

      As for doing a diff? Forget it! The code in the two kernels is vastly different!

      BWP

    31. Re:BSD code? by DoctorFrog · · Score: 1
      They don't have to convince experts, they have to convince 12 people too dumb to get out of jury duty.

      Or, potentially, 12 people who are smart enough to understand and accept their civic duties, knowing that the idiots who avoid basic responsibilities also have to live in the society they won't maintain.

    32. Re:BSD code? by offpath3 · · Score: 1
      Laura earned a B.A. in communications with a minor in French at Fordham University.

      I'm not sure I'd find her opinions about source code credible.

      Unless of course the comments in question were in French...

    33. Re:BSD code? by tkg · · Score: 1

      And, if you're not a law student, a litigant, or a criminal, it's probably the best education as to the workings of our legal system.

    34. Re:BSD code? by jcast · · Score: 1

      It's either that or /* SUS x.y requires this */.

      --
      There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
      -- David D. Friedman
    35. Re:BSD code? by Syberghost · · Score: 1

      Or, potentially, 12 people who are smart enough to understand and accept their civic duties, knowing that the idiots who avoid basic responsibilities also have to live in the society they won't maintain.

      Nope; we get excused within seconds of the defense's interview.

  3. I almost agree, but... by yaphadam097 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I almost posted that IBM should just give in and buy SCO in an earlier one of these threads, but then I thought about it a little more...

    SCO is sending all these letters to corporate Linux users saying, "Stay away from Linux, because it violates our IP." If IBM buys SCO and open sources Unix it might prevent any further legal action, but it also might appear to lend some credibility to SCO's claims. Thus IBM is a hero to the average Linux geek, but the corporate world still sees the community as a bunch of thieves who got bailed out by the deep pockets of IBM.

    Therefore, let this go to court and let IBM's lawyers prove that SCO is full of it to begin with. That way the Linux community is vindicated and the only people who look like they've done anything wrong are SCO.

    1. Re:I almost agree, but... by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      > let this go to court and let IBM's lawyers prove that SCO is full of it to begin with ...and *then* they can buy them on the cheap, B-F the board and GPL SCO's source

      Hey, I can dream can't I?

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    2. Re:I almost agree, but... by p24t · · Score: 1

      I do agree that IBM shouldn't buy out SCO. If they do, then they're giving in to a little bully with a big mouth.

      If IBM wins, they're vindicated. Don't mess with Big Blue, cause we still know how to play. Linux would be proven in the face of the dreaded 'IP' battle, and if there's anything left of SCO, it'll get sued by so many other people they'll be begging for someone to buy them out for nothing.

      But something not many people consider... what if SCO wins? What if in the end, we've been backing the wrong guy and IBM really did something wrong? Would/could they do something that destructive to the opensource movement? Not like Linux couldn't recover, 2 weeks and whatever offending code would be gone. Most would probably be in the 2.5x kernel, which isn't production anyway.

      If IBM really did take proprietary code, which they were not allowed to use as they saw fit, and put it under the GPL, they they should cough up a billion dollars.

      I doubt it, but we have yet to see one way or the other.

      p24t

  4. mod parent up by Artifex · · Score: 1, Funny
    And after that take out a full-page ad in the Wall Street Journal listing the board of directors, their names, their addresses, and how much money they lost for SCO while contributing to it's demise. Plus any additional tidbits that might make them unemployable in the future.

    You can't just burn. You have to remember to salt.


    Mod parent up for being my new best-Slashdot-friend!

    Ooh, I like you. =)
    --
    Get off my launchpad!
  5. I doubt they could do this by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    Actualy. I doubt the SEC would be happy with a hostile takeover + mass firing of a smaller company in the midst of a larger company. Even if the smaller company was full of shit.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  6. Damn dude.. by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    It's going to take months for this to wind through the courts. It's only been like another week.

    The new aligations, of copied comments do seem pretty bad, though. I wonder how old the code in question is? If it's old, old, System V code from back when AT&T had it, then it's likely that it's been in linux for a long time and someone who didn't know any better put it there. On the other hand, if it's new "Open Server" code written by Caldera there could be a problem, but it seems unlikely that anyone would have put it in other then Caldera, since no one would have had access to it. (Other then IBM, which hasn't actualy put any code in the kernal itself)

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Damn dude.. by Znork · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If it's any AT&T day code it probably stems from BSD, in which case it's already been to court and freed.

      If it's in newer code I'd suggest someone sue SCO for copyright violation as it's probably someone at SCO who's stolen it from Linux. Motive and opportunity... both point quite clearly at them, as they've been constantly left behind technically by Linux since the mid nineties, not to mention it's a lot easier for someone at SCO to obtain linux code than it is the other way around.

    2. Re:Damn dude.. by jcast · · Score: 1

      Look, something has occured to me: how do we know what SCO is putting forth as `evidence' is really SCO code?

      --
      There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
      -- David D. Friedman
  7. Gee thanks, Jayson Blair by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    that's almost the exact same text as the cringly article.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Gee thanks, Jayson Blair by Pharmboy · · Score: 1

      that's almost the exact same text as the cringly article.

      Then they took it from Jack Nicholson. I gave proper credit to the source of the quote, thank you. Did the article?

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  8. Same guy, diffrent decade by autopr0n · · Score: 2, Insightful

    from here:

    The University's suit claimed that USL had failed in their obligation to provide due credit to the University for the use of BSD code in System V as required by the license that they had signed with the University. If the claim were found to be valid, the University asked that USL be forced to reprint all their documentation with the appropriate due credit added, to notify all their licensees of their oversight, and to run full-page advertisements in major publications such as The Wall Street Journal and Fortune magazine notifying the business world of their inadvertent oversight. Soon after the filing in state court, USL was bought from AT&T by Novell. The CEO of Novell, Ray Noorda, stated publicly that he would rather compete in the marketplace than in court. By the summer of 1993, settlement talks had started. Unfortunately, the two sides had dug in so deep that the talks proceed slowly. With some further prodding by Ray Noorda on the USL side, many of the sticking points were removed and a settlement was finally reached in January 1994. The result was that three files were removed from the 18,000 that made up Networking Release 2, and a number of minor changes were made to other files. In addition, the University agreed to add USL copyrights to about 70 files, although those files continued to be freely redistributed.

    Noorda isn't the CEO of Sco, but he founded Caldera, and I think he's involved in this little shananagan.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Same guy, diffrent decade by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      How is he involved in the current mess? I tried to search for info about it, but I could only find Noorda as being in Caldera, not in SCO (or after Caldera became SCO).

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
  9. Look Up BSD LITE by linuxislandsucks · · Score: 2, Interesting

    BSD Lite code is allowed in Linux friedn under the terms of the previous case of System V..as that was the agreement to settle the case..

    --
    Don't Tread on OpenSource
  10. Court time table by jhines · · Score: 1

    I agree sort of, it should be pushed forward in the courts, and let us see what is going on.

    Enough of this bluffing, call it, and show your cards.

    IBM can make an offer any time, and settle any time before a final decision. The suit isn't as much a problem as the FUD in getting there.

  11. NO BUYOUT.....MUST BANKRUPT THEM! by Dr_Marvin_Monroe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To quote many over the top political leaders..."we cannot support this type of terrorism, we cannot agree to their demands"....

    By purchasing SCO, no matter how easy it might make the end of this problem, it encourages others to try the same stunt.

    SCO MUST be bankrupted as a result of this, no matter how much money it takes to do that in court!....Anything less encourages others to try the same style attack.

    Destroy SCO, burn everything, leave nothing standing.....

    1. Re:NO BUYOUT.....MUST BANKRUPT THEM! by alexo · · Score: 1
      To quote many over the top political leaders..."we cannot support this type of terrorism, we cannot agree to their demands"....

      By purchasing SCO, no matter how easy it might make the end of this problem, it encourages others to try the same stunt.

      SCO MUST be bankrupted as a result of this, no matter how much money it takes to do that in court!....Anything less encourages others to try the same style attack.

      Destroy SCO, burn everything, leave nothing standing.....
      Interestingly, I didn't see similar outrage about another instance of corporate/litigious "terrorism" in another topic (see here).

      But then, it had nothing to do with Linux...
  12. First they ignore you... by sacrilicious · · Score: 1
    First you copy it into your codebase, then you claim that it is your, and then you sue the person you copied it from.

    Sounds like something Ghandi would say.

    --
    - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  13. Feathers a duck doesn't make by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

    My set theory disagrees

    Hemp isn't marijuana but marijuana is hemp.

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    1. Re:Feathers a duck doesn't make by DjReagan · · Score: 1

      But hemp *can* be marijuana, which makes a blanket statement of "Hemp ain't marijuana" untrue in some circumstances.

      --
      "When I grow up, I want to be a weirdo"
  14. Those Copied Comments by duck_prime · · Score: 2, Funny
    The new aligations, of copied comments do seem pretty bad [...]
    Yes, especially when you consider that the comment in question was:
    /* You are not expected to understand this */
  15. It's called Danegeld. by HiThere · · Score: 1

    Kipling wrote about it. The Saxons experienced it. It's a bad idea.
    In short
    Once you have paid them the Danegeld
    You never get rid of the Dane.

    (Viking would be a better modern translation, but they came from around Denmark.)
    For a longer exposition, see Kipling's poem Danegeld. (If you've never read it, read it anyway. It's not to be missed. But read it aloud.)

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  16. I wish I was a shareholder by zakezuke · · Score: 1

    or rather I wish I had a contact list of shareholders.

    Near as I can tell, the claim is 18 months ago ibm might have made a booboo. Somehow this may be connected to linux.

    What I don't know is did this eledged code make it's way into linux, or is it much earlier.

    Is there a version number the the kernal that has the inapproperate code? The sent out letters warning people not to run linux, but did they ever specificy a version number?

    If not the kernal then what else.

    I would think that the shareholders need to be made aware of this. Assuming that they are correct, then by not providing basic information as to what specific products are affected, they are serving to compound damages. This can be done without issues of distributing what they consider to be their IP.

    ---

    This is just another reason not to do business with SCO. Any professional company, including microsoft, when issuing a complaint about something they consider to be violating their IP, they contact the person, tell them specificly what product and version number they have issues with, and ask them nicely to resolve the issue. I've seen how this works, while you might disagree with microsoft, in matters like they they are a hell of alot more professional then SCO.

    Seriously, how would you respond to a user who submits a bug report, "Linux crashes" without even telling you what Distrobution.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  17. Microsoft steals Linux code by Mistlefoot · · Score: 1

    In a related story, Microsoft was discovered to have copied "Linux code". The company who wrote the code started the process of suing MICROSOFT. Slashdotters argues that MS should just buy this company out or perform a hostile takeover to shut them up - whether they were right or wrong.

    Oh, hold it. A slashdotter would NEVER request this to happen if MS were the alleged copyright abuser. MS would therefore being abusing there power.

    I am not sure how IBM doing the same thing could be considered proper or moral.

    I too hope this all goes away, but I'm not sure I like your method.

    1. Re:Microsoft steals Linux code by jcast · · Score: 1

      Thing is, nobody really believes SCO could be right---they don't have anything worth stealing, and they've been running a campaign designed more to scare everybody into staying away from Linux than to win in court, which doesn't breed confidence in their ability to win in court.

      --
      There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
      -- David D. Friedman
  18. This is actually quite serious by FreeUser · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You *can* steal something that is free. First you copy it into your codebase, then you claim that it is your, and then you sue the person you copied it from. If you are successful in getting them to remove it, you stole it.

    Why on earth this was modded as "funny" is beyond me. Donning my tinfoil hat for a moment, I should point out that this is actually quite a serious possibility for a number of reasons:

    1) SCO may well have violated the copyright on Linux code and placed it in their OS, violating the GPL, and now leveraging code they have copied in violation to accuse the free software community of their own crime.

    2) An entity which dislikes free software, like an obscure Redmond company none of us have heard of, might seek to poison the well by having one of their agents deliberately release copyrighted code into a free codebase, then return a couple of years later with accusations of copyright violation.

    3) It is quite possible that either of the above scenerios could be combined with an outcome by a relatively uninformed court that finds in favor of the litigant, leaving the original creator of the code in a situation where they are now forbidden from using their own code, while those who violated their copyright are granted ownership of it.

    The fact that the very ill-considered Berne convention requires copyrights to be granted "automatically" with no registration means these sort of 'he said, she said' allegations can be manufactured at will, by anyone willing to violate copyright to achieve their ends.

    And lest one think no large company would ever violate copyrights in order to achieve such neferious ends, I would remind everyone that one large company, Microsoft, was sued and found to have violated the copyright on, among other things, Stacker. It is not at all a stretch to think they could extend such a strategy further ... though I suspect these days if they were to adopt such a strategy, they would do so by proxy *cough* SCO *cough*.

    But, as SCO has shown, it doesn't require anything remotely so neferious as planting bad code, violating copyright and then accusing the victim of one's crime of the same, or any of that. All it requires is that one lay claim to having written code "in secret" first (where "in secret" can include simply proprietary, unpublished code as in this case). Since copyrights aren't required to be registered, there is little defense against such accusations and the FUD and financial uncertainty and harm they can create (and their unwillingness to discose the alleged violations to allow any such issues to be resolved and fixed, ie. any such violating code to be removed and rewritten, belies their clear intent to cause harm to businesses and the community. Clearly they have no desire to reach a resolution, and equally clearly it is profoundly unlikely that they have anything even remotely resembling a legitimate claim).

    Which means no software publisher is safe, now that pandora's box has been opened, from similiar disingenuous attacks.

    It would behoove everyone if every copyright were required to be registerd no later than 1 year after the code/prose was written or the movie/music recorded (i.e. 1 year 'grace'). Unfortunately, the media and copyright cartels have tied all of our copyright law up in international agreements such as the Berne convention and treaties which have empowered the WTO and WIPO to such a degree that any kind of sensible reform is impossible without a nation withdrawing from a number of uncumbering and binding international accords.

    So look for more of this sort of nonsense, directed not only against free software, but against all kinds of published works. Once pandora's box has been opened and the weapon used, one can only expect it to be used again. And again, empowering lawyers and decimating the productive capability of the software industry, be it free software or proprietary.

    This may actually be the beginning of the final collapse of our

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  19. Sounds like a MS tactic by That_Dan_Guy · · Score: 1

    I'm all for sqaushing SCO and all, but buying them out, or sueing them out of existence just sounds like something MS would do. Oh, does, I mean.

  20. Too many witnesses that will say otherwise by The+Monster · · Score: 1
    It is quite possible that either of the above scenerios could be combined with an outcome by a relatively uninformed court that finds in favor of the litigant, leaving the original creator of the code in a situation where they are now forbidden from using their own code, while those who violated their copyright are granted ownership of it.
    Possible, but extraordinarily unlikely. As Ollie North's case taught the non-tech folks in the legal community, e-mail is forever. There are bound to be multiple, independently-maintained archives of LKML (as well as of the lists where non-kernel items are developed) and tarballs of source trees far enough back to establish, whenever SCO finally identifies what they allege was stolen, when that code was first (dis)cussed by the developers. Given the often contentious discussions, there will be plenty of witnesses who recall vividly those events, and can verify that the archives were not tampered with based on their own independent recollections.

    At a minimum, this will prove that the alleged infringments occured before IBM even knew how to spell L-I-N-U-X, or were brought in by Caldera's own people as Cringely suggests.

    And am I the only one who finds it just the slightest bit fishy that after repeatedly trying to buy the copyrights from Novell, SCO suddenly finds some document that seems to prove they did after all, but it is not anywhere in Novell's files nor was the alleged transfer ever registered with the Copyright Office! (Yes, I know, you don't have to register such things, but lawyers always tell you that registering adds validity to your claim when you go after someone.) Excuse me? I don't believe that crap for a minute, and a lawyer who can't get a jury to think it's bogus isn't good enough to work for IBM.

    There is no way SCO's lawers beat IBM's lawyers with such ammunition. SCO doesn't win in court, they win by making it more expensive to fight there than to be bought off or out.

    --

    [100% ISO 646 Compliant]
    SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.

    1. Re:Too many witnesses that will say otherwise by tkg · · Score: 1

      And am I the only one who finds it just the slightest bit fishy that after repeatedly trying to buy the copyrights from Novell, SCO suddenly finds some document that seems to prove they did after all, but it is not anywhere in Novell's files nor was the alleged transfer ever registered with the Copyright Office! (Yes, I know, you don't have to register such things, but lawyers always tell you that registering adds validity to your claim when you go after someone.) Excuse me? I don't believe that crap for a minute, and a lawyer who can't get a jury to think it's bogus isn't good enough to work for IBM.

      Moot point since Novell has essentially publicly ackowledged the validity of the ammendment. Methinks Novell spoke too hastily.

    2. Re:Too many witnesses that will say otherwise by The+Monster · · Score: 1
      Novell has essentially publicly ackowledged the validity of the ammendment
      They've done no such thing. Re-read their statement - it includes weasel-words like 'appears to' and 'seems', which their legal counsel most likely demanded so that they could cover their butts while simultaneously trying to figure out how this amendment (and apparently, any notes on the negotiations that led up to its adoption - lawyers are almost compulsive about that stuff - everything gets archived) exists nowhere other than in SCO files.

      I'd be VERY interested in seeing who witnessed the signatures on that amendment that suddenly showed up after months of SCO negotiating with Novell do buy what it says they've already bought, and if any of the people who supposedly were involved with this amendment, outside of SCO, can recall discussion thereof.

      --

      [100% ISO 646 Compliant]
      SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.

  21. Re:I've had enough (killing Linux) by mab · · Score: 1

    But would it be any better if IBM purchased SCO
    Nott according to this guy

  22. Re:I've had enough (killing Linux) by Robert+The+Coward · · Score: 1

    1) I am sorry but once the code in questions surfaces there will be patched work around out in hours even if it is slower or drops support for certain types of hardware and will be back ported fast. Redhat would have new RPMS for all support OS and might even pruduce patches for older one with hours of the patch releases. If the courts find for SCO then every company would be waiting for that work around and would push those updates out fast. Most companys would be updated within days of the braches being found as this risk aditional money holding off.

    2) There have been cases where indepent code will have basicly the same comments due to aspect of the interface in question. There is only one right way to talk to a 3Com card and so the comments could be documenting the high level aspects that the code below is using also there is only so many ways to write code to set the registers in the CPU for accessing and working with Hardware devices add the fact that basic varibles names are used by most programers like i, j, k for temp int varibles so entire device drivers could look about the same.

  23. "SCO/Linux"? Ouch... by janbjurstrom · · Score: 5, Funny

    Unfortunate choice of words, no? People raise all kinds of hell when "GNU/Linux" is mentioned.. Must say I prefer the latter ;)

    --
    668.5
    1. Re:"SCO/Linux"? Ouch... by Dreadlord · · Score: 5, Funny

      RTFA, Linux devs ripped code off SCO's UNIX and now, after SCO shows the evidence, 60 lines of code or something, Linux belongs to SCO, nothing wrong here ;)

      --
      The IT section color scheme sucks.
    2. Re:"SCO/Linux"? Ouch... by Nasarius · · Score: 1

      Indeed, everyone knows it's SCO/GNU/Linux.

      --
      LOAD "SIG",8,1
  24. Article Text - Formatted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Its taken more than a decade, millions of man hours and an international movement bent on software sovereignty to poise Linux as the fastest-growing player in information technology. Now, on the cusp of punching through proprietary softwares kung-fu grip on the market, a fuming little Utah County company threatens to stomp Linux dead in its tracks.

    Ive been pounding the table here for a year or so saying theres no free lunch, and there is going to be a day of reckoning for every company that thinks they are going to try and sell a free model. Thats Darl McBride, president and CEO of the SCO Group, a perennial loser at selling UNIX and, until recently, Linux operating systems.

    Filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission show that SCO posted hundreds of millions in losses from 1994 to 2002.

    But ever since determining it owns the ark and the covenant to the enterprise software industry, says McBride, SCOs bad fortune is on the upswing.

    Through a series of intellectual property transfers, SCO wound up with the rights to certain dated distributions of UNIX, the proprietary software platform that Linux was patterned after. SCO asserts that code from its UNIXes was copied into recent Linux releases. Now the company is demanding that commercial Linux users cough up licensing fees for the UNIX in their Linux, or prepare for a tussle with SCOs lawyers. And to show it means business, SCO has taken on computer giant IBM in a lawsuit that could reshape the balance of power among software makers. SCO insists Big Blue owes it billions for allegedly illegally contributing UNIX code to the Linux kernelthe core chunk of code underlying most distributions of the Linux operating system.

    Should SCO prevail, besides reaping its own billions, software megalith Microsoft stands to win the war of enterprise operating systems. Linux has crept up on Microsoft, challenging its stranglehold on the server market by offering better prices, performance, security and reliability. And several Linux companies are positioning themselves to take a stab at Microsofts 94 percent hold on desktop operating systems. Its a sign that the open-source software development model is edging out Microsofts proprietary model.

    People are tired of buying cars with their hoods welded shut. Thats what theyve had in the software industry for years, says Bruce Perens, a Linux cheerleader and open-source advocate.

    With Linux software, source code is open for anyone to improve upon or add to, the premise being: the more heads you have working on each problem, the less likely something will be overlooked. Whereas proprietary software is locked up, accessible only to its owner, who isnt necessarily driven to make the best product, but rather the easiest buck. And, as opposed to selling the operating system as a product in itself, open-source proponents see it as the infrastructure upon which valuable applications can be added, and services rendered.

    Leading the charge against Linux is McBride, the blustering executive every Linux dweeb has come to loathe. Hes no geek, says Benjamin Choate, a self-trained Linux user living in Logan. His tans too good.

    Choate is among the Linux devotees calling SCOs claims ludicrous. Whats more, they say the company is embellishing its position to sow fear, uncertainty and doubtFUD for shortin the minds of Linux developers, vendors and users. SCO opponents say its a mudslinging strategy to scare Linux users into paying up, and to make the slingers product look more inviting than the slingees.

    See, SCO isnt really even SCO. Its proprietary claims are for works it didnt create. The veracity of those claims, many critics believe, hasnt stood up to the most trivial scrutiny. And at every turn, those same critics say the company has revealed itself to be inconsistent and unforthcoming, leading them to conclude that SCO is merely extorting Linux users for unwarranted damages. A short history lesson is probably in order.

    In June 2002, t

  25. Perchance did you see it on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    This story was previously linked as http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/22/17 24207&mode=thread&tid=106&tid=185&tid=187&tid= 88

    1. Re:Perchance did you see it on slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just since when is pointing out that a story is a dupe supposed to be off-topic?

  26. Re:Darl. by Gilesx · · Score: 1

    So *that's* what this is all about - steroids.

    --
    Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
  27. It's a dupe by poszi · · Score: 1, Informative

    I has already been discussed here

    --

    Save the bandwidth. Don't use sigs!

    1. Re:It's a dupe by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 0, Troll

      Only on /. could a post be moderated redundant, while an identical subsequent post is moderated insightful.

  28. Duplicate Post by tijnbraun · · Score: 0, Informative

    article was posted here

    1. Re:Duplicate Post by glassesmonkey · · Score: 2, Funny

      I guess fearing a lull in SCO news, or maybe providing adicts with their weekend fix, the editors are keeping the SCO-fires burning with these blatent duplicate articles.

    2. Re:Duplicate Post by S.O.B. · · Score: 0

      The dupe was posted by CmdrTaco. Either CmdrTaco doesn't read Slashdot regularly or unless it's posted by CmdrTaco it hasn't really happened.

      --
      Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
    3. Re:Duplicate Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moderation -1
      50% Informative
      30% Redundant
      10% Offtopic

      I love being able to meta-mod jackasses like this who love using the negative mod points regardless of what it says in the readme. ;)

  29. Cliff notes version by cluge · · Score: 4, Funny


    Darl: Linux bad, they steal

    Linux: No we don't - what did we steal

    Darl: You know, now just fess up and tell anyone

    Linux: Are you on crack?

    Darl: I will get a court order to make you tell me what you stole from me - (I can't seem to find it)

    Judge: Are you on Crack?

    Novell: You ARE on Crack!

    And the saga continues, tune in next week when darl says "Crack isn't good for my big bright smile".

    --
    "Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
    1. Re:Cliff notes version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      You forgot

      Microsoft: We'll take some of your crack.

    2. Re:Cliff notes version by Kiaser+Zohsay · · Score: 4, Funny

      More like

      Microsoft: Here's $50,000. Go buy some more crack.

      --
      I am not your blowing wind, I am the lightning.
    3. Re:Cliff notes version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does everyone keep talking about D. McBride on crack? He is obviously more of an LSD/THC type of person!

    4. Re:Cliff notes version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      If he was on LSD & THC we wouldn't have any problems now would we?

      Like woe man. The kernel...it like...is. Man that so rocks *bubble bubble bubble* Oh man! Its like, free and shit! Hehhehehe.

      Pass the cookie dough.

    5. Re:Cliff notes version by dipipanone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why does everyone keep talking about D. McBride on crack?

      Partly because Linux Torvalds claimed he must be smoking crack, but mostly because of his resemblance to a a crackhead -- someone prepared to lie, steal or even mug his own grandmother to buy another rock.

      He is obviously more of an LSD/THC type of person!

      You seem to move with a very different set of acid/potheads to any that I've ever met before -- although I'll admit that Darl's flurescent white teeth and orange skin tone are definitely confusing in that regard. However, rather than making me think he's an acid head, he makes me feel as though *I've* taken acid every time I see a photograph of him.

    6. Re:Cliff notes version by E_elven · · Score: 3, Funny

      In other news, the Association For Leisure And Addicted Crack Users Of America is 'thinking about' suing Linus Torvalds for libel.

      --
      Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
    7. Re:Cliff notes version by morgue-ann · · Score: 4, Informative

      LSD/THC

      Nah, his symptoms sound more like crack/coke/meth withdrawl-induced psychosis.

      To see the world through Darl's eyes, you might try a "nightmare hallucinogen" like mandrake or jimson weed. An unguided peyote trip could do it too.

    8. Re:Cliff notes version by protogoogoo69 · · Score: 1

      Here are some more SCO courtroom skits for your enjoyment.

      --
      ...small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri...
    9. Re:Cliff notes version by phauxfinnish · · Score: 1

      More like:

      SCO (to Microsoft): Hey man... what do I need to do to get some more crack from you? Want me to suck your FUD?

    10. Re:Cliff notes version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      More like:

      This article is a dupe.

    11. Re:Cliff notes version by wathead · · Score: 1

      Well ol darly mcLied has to smoke something while he is in that tanning bed. I know that the sun is not all that bright in Utah like it is in the great SouthEastern USA.
      And how come no one ever mentions the part about the Caldera class action lawsuit brought on by darlys first stock scam victims???

    12. Re:Cliff notes version by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      So....if Darl's grandmother switches to Linux....

      Let the games begin.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    13. Re:Cliff notes version by ski2die · · Score: 1, Funny

      SCO being located in Utah County (of "This is the Place" fame), I think you mean LDS not LSD. Darl is clearly on a mission from Kolob to rid the world of free software, which is the mortal enemy of all who love milk and mutliple 15 year old brides.

    14. Re:Cliff notes version by morleron · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and having a bummer of a trip, too. I gotta get a new acid dealer.

      Ron

      --
      Impeach Barack Obama for violating the Constitutional requirement to be a "natural born" citizen to hold the office of P
  30. And they're still in business... how? by IchBinDasWalross · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission show that SCO posted hundreds of millions in losses from 1994 to 2002."

    Only a company like AOL could do that and stay in business.

    --
    Mod "Overrated" instead of replying "I disagree with you," you coward.
  31. Overblown. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the text:
    "Should SCO prevail, besides reaping its own billions, software megalith Microsoft stands to win the war of enterprise operating systems."

    Exactly HOW did the author come to this idea?

    Because if SCO were to somehow obtain a victory, the masses who use GNU/Linux would just move over to BSD. But such an obviouus conclusion would have made for a short article.

    Microsoft is more likely to win via software patents than SCO's claims.

    1. Re:Overblown. by N2UX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Darl has already stated that SCO believes there are unstated "problems" with the USL/BSD settlement. If SCO succeeds in their jihad against Linux, I would not be surprised to see them turn their guns on BSD.

    2. Re:Overblown. by SkArcher · · Score: 5, Interesting

      IIRC the possible problems with the BSD settlement were that if USL had pushed ahead, they may have eventually lost far more than the settlement actually cost them.

      --

      An infinite number of monkeys will eventually come up with the complete works of /.
    3. Re:Overblown. by CAlworth1 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I am sure you meant nothing by it, but lets see about another word for lunatic-attacking-something-which-you-don't agree-with other than jihad. Had you used the Christian word for this, 'crusade,' people might think you were be calling it a good thing. . .

      What a world we are in when two words, meaning roughly the same, but for two different, closely linked languages, can imply two very different things.

    4. Re:Overblown. by SkArcher · · Score: 0, Troll

      fatwah?
      scourging?
      head crash?
      format?
      fdisk?

      *shudders*Windows Install...

      --

      An infinite number of monkeys will eventually come up with the complete works of /.
    5. Re:Overblown. by jimicus · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Not necessarily. There's no incentive for IBM, Intel et al to support BSD with open code because the BSD license allows anyone to take their code, benefit from it and NOT release any changes back. Essentially, IBM, Intel et al would very possibly be writing code on Microsoft's behalf with no payment in either cash or further improved code.

      This may not count for much in the enthusiast market but in enterprise, support from the big guys is a big plus.

    6. Re:Overblown. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Darl has already stated that SCO believes there are unstated "problems" with the USL/BSD settlement.

      Provide a link.

      turn their guns on BSD.

      1) That would be a one-sided violation of the old settlement. Judges don't like that. The public part of the wording assures people/companies that the matter was 'done', so making such a move would allow anyone who is re-selling a BSD based product standing. Think about a DOS of SCO via the legal system with 1000's of people suing....would SCO really want that?
      2) SCO has stated in Answer 43 (or so) that BSD was not an issue WRT the Linux claims AND have offered a dollar reduction in Linux licenses if you moved to BSD.

    7. Re:Overblown. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Because if SCO were to somehow obtain a victory, the masses who use GNU/Linux would just move over to BSD." What you mean to say is: Because if SCO were to somehow obtain a victory, the AMERICAN masses who use GNU/Linux would just move over to BSD. Everyone else in the world will begin treating American laws as they should be treated.... with laughter and derision.

    8. Re:Overblown. by MarkusQ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Should SCO prevail, besides reaping its own billions, software megalith Microsoft stands to win the war of enterprise operating systems."

      Exactly HOW did the author come to this idea?

      Hmmm. Let's try it in a different context:

      "If the clone warriors prevail against the Jedi, besides them reaping their pay, the mastermind behind their creation stands to become the emperor."

      The logic looks sound to me.

      -- MarkusQ

    9. Re:Overblown. by dipipanone · · Score: 2, Informative

      Provide a

      link.

    10. Re:Overblown. by Our+Man+In+Redmond · · Score: 1

      Don't kid yourself. If somehow we all fall down the rabbit hole and SCOX wins this case, The Darl has already said he'll go after BSD next, and presumably he'd have the war chest to do it.

      This, however, has zero chance of happening, plus or minus a fudge factor of zero.

      --
      Someone you trust is one of us.
    11. Re:Overblown. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe very few would "move over to the BSD". Stop spreading the meme. BSD license is not good, BSD licensed things lets others steal your work and sell it without you ever getting anything, and that's not good. With the GPL you at least get any changes back (i.e. the functionality).

    12. Re:Overblown. by schon · · Score: 1

      That would be a one-sided violation of the old settlement. Judges don't like that.

      Yeah, and we all know how crazy they are when you deliberately disobey an order to compel discovery, or bring a totally bogus suit with the sole purpose of pumping your stock price, right?

      Seriously, given SCO's acts, I fail to see how this argument is at all relevant.

    13. Re:Overblown. by CAlworth1 · · Score: 1

      My apologies - but keep in mind the manner in which the crusades were conducted - defending the land, after it was taken over, which runs along the lines of attacking in my book. (I could be horribly wrong here, it has been some time since I read history on the manner - and then only for the information on trebuchets...)

    14. Re:Overblown. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh. You mean the 'idea' of Joe Barr's. This would be the same Joe Barr who makes up quotes.

      Please show where SCO officially said what has been claimed.

    15. Re:Overblown. by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      The problem is not in "how would they attack BSD". The problem is that if they win against Linux, you can bet people are going to be more cautious about them. If they start spreading the same FUD they do against Linux against BSD, people will take them far more seriously, and it'll effectively kill BSD. Even if they don't go to court.

      That may be their whole strategy after all.

    16. Re:Overblown. by j3110 · · Score: 0

      No, they'll just remove whatever has been shown to be offending code, replace it, and move on like SCO never existed.

      BSD doesn't even have a GPL license, which will offend some people.
      BSD is Darl's next target.

      I wished it meant switching kernels, because then it would be everyone working on the HURD, which is a designed system, not an ad-hoc bundle of code migrating to a design. Unfortunately, designed systems take longer to make, and thus are abandoned as being inferior because of limited insight of the general population. Most people just want something that works, some of us want something that works, is easily extendable, has a consistent API, and is scalable.

      Before anyone replies with some nonsense about HURD/Microkernels not being scalabale because of context switches, please do shoot yourself in the head for confusing speed and scalability. As for those going to reply about Mosix extensions to Linux, please slap yourself for not reading what I said about Linux evolving toward design. With the proper support, the HURD would probably have had better functionality than Mosix about a decade ago.

      --
      Karma Clown
    17. Re:Overblown. by Sterling+Christensen · · Score: 1

      Actually MS would be very happy about that: the BSD license allows MS take the code and put it into Windows.

    18. Re:Overblown. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please show where SCO officially said what has been claimed.

      Try actually reading the links, and prior articles, you dumbass. SCO has said on more than one occasion that BSD is not totally safe from their suits, and they are "looking into" the situation. It is probably just a ploy to keep people from switching to BSD if they thought Linux was a problem, but get you lazy ass over to google and find it yourself. Its not hard to find.

    19. Re:Overblown. by Pharmboy · · Score: 3, Informative

      I believe very few would "move over to the BSD". Stop spreading the meme. BSD license is not good, BSD licensed things lets others steal your work and sell it without you ever getting anything, and that's not good. With the GPL you at least get any changes back (i.e. the functionality).

      You may not like the BSD license, but when someone uses BSD code for other projects, its NOT stealing. It complying with the license. If Microsoft wants to release a copy of BSD as Windows 2004, and keep the code secret, they legally can, as the license allows it.

      Please go spread your FUD elsewhere. I prefer the GPL myself, but you GPL nazis are getting old. The fact is, the BSD license has more freedom than the GPL license, including the freedom to NOT share the code back. Oh yea, and as you probably know, you only get the changes back with GPL IF they distribute the binaries.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    20. Re:Overblown. by dipipanone · · Score: 3, Informative
      Please show where SCO officially said what has been claimed.

      OK, so you're a lazy ass fuck who doesn't know how to follow links or use Google. I don't mind doing it for you, really...
      "I agree that the more yarn you pull out the more you see," McBride said during a press briefing at the inaugural Enterprise IT Week at cdXpo Conference here. "We have enough sorted out, but we are so focused on the [IBM litigation]. With our limited energies and what our guys are going through, we probably won't file any suits against BSD until sometime in the first half of next year."
      Satisfied now?
    21. Re:Overblown. by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      Actually, I don't think IBM cares about BSD vs. Linux as far as IP is concerned. They just knew that Linux had the momentum in its favor and they had to support some kind of Unix anyway so why not make points with the open source community?

      Of course, they still maintain the largest collection of software patents on earth, but as long as they promote Linux, this fact will probably be ignored.

    22. Re:Overblown. by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

      How is this modded -1 troll? It's taken close to 5 years to convince corporate america that linux is worthwhile, and they're STILL hesitant. A shitty windows may be shitty, but they can count on that, allow for it. If linux were somehow to be harmed by SCO, they wouldn't just magically "switch to BSD". We very well might only have one opportunity to convince them that windows is bad, and if we miss out, it's far from certain that we'd ever get another.

      And that doesn't even take into account that if SCO bribes the right appeals judge, that BSD would be no safer (sure it's in no way infringing... but neither is linux). So modbomb me all you like, you'll be nailed in metamoderation, you stupid fucking zealots.

    23. Re:Overblown. by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      "I agree that the more yarn you pull out the more you see,"

      Darl sure has his metaphors confused.

      What yarn, Darl? Is this invisible monomolecular yarn? Show me your yarn, or shut the fuck up...

      What a putz.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    24. Re:Overblown. by Blkdeath · · Score: 1
      Actually, I don't think IBM cares about BSD vs. Linux as far as IP is concerned. They just knew that Linux had the momentum in its favor and they had to support some kind of Unix anyway so why not make points with the open source community?

      Actually, I'd say they're behind Linux because it's got the most (best) press right now. With its fresh, friendly face it's C[I|E|T]O friendly. It's also got the most momentum, the most vendor support, and probably the highest *N?X adoption rate. Anecdotally, I could attribute some of it to old OS/2 flames and Microsoft nose-rubbing, but I won't. :)

      IBM has been around since before computers were computers; they're too wise not to bet on a sure thing.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    25. Re:Overblown. by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      Well, we mostly agree. I don't think, however, that IBM was really worried that anyone would stop buying their mainframes someday if they didn't run Linux. On the other hand, why not choose the version of Unix that is currently the most politically correct.

    26. Re:Overblown. by AilleCat · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm not so sure about that, it actually allows for IBM, etc. to keep more of its own intellectual property, without ever having to release it.

      IBM is an IP firm, owning thier own IP is attractive to them.

      --
      FreeBSD The Power to Serve
    27. Re:Overblown. by jimicus · · Score: 1
      Very true. The point I was making (not sure if it was clear enough) is under the BSD license, Microsoft could take all of IBM's carefully written code, incorporate it into NT version (whatever) and not give a single thing back. Not so with the GPL.

      The GPL is a great playing field leveller in that respect - OK, you have to give your code (and therefore some control over your IP) away but you also guarantee that no one will, having taken the code, improve/"extend" it and use their improved version to put you out of business.

      Of course, with (the old) SCO, they sold the code to companies who were prepared to actually put some effort into it. SCO, however, simply couldn't keep up - hence why the new SCO has no chance of making money out of selling Unix based on the code they've inherited. Looked at in that light, you understand why the fascination for suing everyone - it's about the only remaining chance SCO have of ever making any money.

    28. Re:Overblown. by E-Rock · · Score: 1

      Perhaps a more relevant difference, is that the last Crusade was in the 13th century. The last Jihad was last week.

    29. Re:Overblown. by CAlworth1 · · Score: 1

      ah yes, but you lovely prez made a comment about how we are "going to conduct a crusade"...

      sorry, too lazy to find the quote at this time...

  32. Word choice by Mieckowski · · Score: 5, Funny

    The article describes Darl as "one angry man."

    Aren't they supposed to use "mad?"

    1. Re:Word choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, that is the sweaty jumping dude from microsoft

    2. Re:Word choice by zonix · · Score: 1

      The article also describes Bruce Perens as a "cheerleader" and Linux Torvals as "quirky".

      z
      --
      What would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
  33. I knew it! I knew it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Darl is working hard these days so that he too can be knighted by the Queen of England. But Bill didn't have to work *that* hard...

  34. Well, I think this repost is *good* by herrvinny · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not to be a troll or anything, but this is a really concise article, with both points of view. Face it people, most articles to date have been clearly biased pro/anti SCO, yes, even Forbes, the various hobbyist sites (even my own, check my sig and SCO Report). I'm not saying that's bad or anything, but the non-nerdy don't want to dive into specific details, they want a clear, concise view of things, and this article provides it. Perhaps it's done by SCO's hometown paper, but it still seems to be balanced reporting.

    This is one repost I don't mind. If anyone asks you what this sco fiaSCO is about, you can direct them to this article.

    1. Re:Well, I think this repost is *good* by Qeantk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Man, we (Salt Lake) don't claim him. He is from a little farther to the south, where all the crack-heads live.

    2. Re:Well, I think this repost is *good* by E_elven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, I get the feeling the author was dancing as close to anti-SCOism as he possibly could considering it was a local company in a fully unresolved case. There are telling uses of words in the text.

      --
      Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
    3. Re:Well, I think this repost is *good* by protogoogoo69 · · Score: 1

      > If anyone asks you what this sco fiaSCO is about, you can direct them to this article.

      AND THEN you direct them to these published Novell vs. SCO correspondances, Make sure to point out McBride's (SCO's) intentions as stated in their own words back in 2002 compared to his open letter a year later. It shouldn't be too hard for anyone not keeping up with /. to come to the conclusions that SCO is seriously smoking Crack, CRaCK, CRACK!. Although, it may just be easier to point them to this simulated IRC chat which seems to epitomize the entire series of events leading to this big mess. Oh and supposedly SCO is suing trees now.

      --
      ...small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri...
    4. Re:Well, I think this repost is *good* by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


      I agree. He came across to me as someone who thought SCO was pulling the worse kind of BS, yet he presented a fair and balanced article. This kind of reporting is exactly what this situation needs.

      Kudos to the author; "Fair and Balanced" journalism is rarely an easy thing, and it *is* a rare thing. We all have our own beliefs. Presenting the other side is a hard thing to do.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  35. RE: SCO's lost path. by fshalor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Funny thing is, I was trying to explain the situation to someone over dinner last night. This article does an awesome job of nailing the key points.

    McBride should note: (emphasis added)
    "SCO wound up with the rights to certain dated distributions of UNIX, the proprietary software platform that Linux was patterned after..."

    That's pretty much as accurate a statement as any about the whole situation.

    It's also calling McBride an unsuccessdul salesman. And there's a juicy comment about "Bruce Perens", as "a Linux cheerleader". I'm sure Perens is happy with that sttement.

    Overall, it really reasserts the lack of sense behind the whole thing. The only possible justification for SCO group's actions is the persuit of money for the sake of money....

    Any chance of them changin their front page? I mean, they should get rid of all that betterment drival and just come clean. The fact that their making money hand over keyboard from selling *linux* licenses right now is absolutly, well... I'm not going to meniton it...

    Pengiuns may be flightless, but they have thick skin and kick some serious ass on ski slopes.

    --
    -=fshalor ::this post not spellchecked. move along::
  36. duped but interesting by shlomo · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ill point this out:
    "We haven't published the exact number yet," McBride said. "It's not in the dozens, but it's, you know, we've had some that have started to sign up."
    is that supposed to make sense?
    Does one count as any?

    --
    sorry officer, left my sig in my other computer.
    1. Re:duped but interesting by Ciggy · · Score: 1
      For months, SCO has encouraged users to take advantage of the promotional price, but there haven't been many takers.

      "We haven't published the exact number yet," McBride said. "It's not in the dozens, but it's, you know, we've had some that have started to sign up."
      By only stating "started to sign up", he is avoiding stating that any have actually completed and paid.

      As soon as SCO publishes any number greater than zero that have paid, they open themselves up for copyright infringement by other Linux contributors - they have violated the GPL (by imposing additional conditions), removing the extra privileges given by the licence and restoring just Copyright control (with no permission to redistribute).
      --

      A rose by any other name would smell as sweet;
      A chrysanthemum by any other name would be easier to spell
    2. Re:duped but interesting by polkadotduck · · Score: 1
      By only stating "started to sign up", he is avoiding stating that any have actually completed and paid. As soon as SCO publishes any number greater than zero that have paid, they open themselves up for copyright infringement by other Linux contributors


      It is no secret that they have sold at least one license to Microsoft. And anyway SCO is already so far out on so many legal limbs that this is probably the least of his worries.

      More likely Darl is concerned that the real number of licenses sold is quite pathetic. He'd probably love to make a number up, but then the SEC is gonna nail his balls to the wall for misleading stockholders as to the true financial position of his company.

    3. Re:duped but interesting by andreMA · · Score: 1
      we've had some that have started to sign up.
      ...but when they saw what we were claiming and selling, they laughed and walked away.
  37. Insight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is zero insight in that article. Quotes from both sides. Darl says that something is in a contract in plain sight. Everyone else says it's not in that contract. Does the reporter bother to check? No. He just reports both quotes. Same think throughout the whole article. Both sides give easily verifiable contradictory information, and the reporter never bothers to look at primary sources, even if they are openly available on the web. It is lousy reporting.

    1. Re:Insight? by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is 'The Salt Lake City Weekly' a freebie? It certainly looks like it. In that case, asking for 'Insights' is being rather optimistic - they did not write the Slashdot blurb on the article.
      What it does do quite well is to summarise what the two sides are claiming in terms that a non-technical can understand.
      If the whole story were completely and obviously cut-and-dried, SCO would be bankrupt already. SCO have at least made an attempt to make it look as though they have a case.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    2. Re: Insight? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > There is zero insight in that article. Quotes from both sides.

      Yessir, it's a fantsy writin' style called Churn a Lizzm. I seen it in a big city newspaper once.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:Insight? by ikekrull · · Score: 1

      What are you trying to say, that if the paper is free it must be inferior?

      I suppose next youre going to say something like:

      'Ive been pounding the table here for a year or so saying theres no free lunch, and there is going to be a day of reckoning for every newspaper that thinks they are going to try and sell a free model.'

      --
      I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
    4. Re:Insight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a free paper - it's Salt Lake's alternative weekly. As far as I can tell, pretty much the same as RTP's Independent or any other alternative weekly from a mid-size city.

    5. Re:Insight? by fermion · · Score: 1
      Oft times the weekly has the best overviews of local events. The big locals can't really do an even job for fear of pissing off their friends. The nationals can't do it because they are too far away to really know the local insights. Once can piece all the reporting together and do your own compilation and analysis, but such overviews probably the best use of these weekly journalistic talent.

      For instance, look at the Houston Press, a weekly rag, for the Enron Overview.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    6. Re:Insight? by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 1

      A free paper can only survive if it has pretty low overheads. 'Overheads' includes paying their contributors so they can spend enough time to do a decent job. I looked at that paper's website and saw the other classic symptom - not very many articles. At least what there was was reasonably well written.

      In theory, a freebie should normally be inferior to a 'normal' newspaper with a decent circulation. However, we all know 'normal' newspapers which set out to disprove that :-)

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
  38. *RingTFA* ...Sh$# you're right! by janbjurstrom · · Score: 5, Funny
    I only got through a 1/3 of it before it scared me senseless though..:
    "Our customers that are buying [UNIX] from us today, we generally don't have a problem with," McBride said. "We have some former customers that have left that are running on Linux, and they are in the crosshairs."
    We're in deep trouble people! There are lawyers, positioned on rooftops, packing sniper rifles, as we speak *shudder*

    Thank God so many of you are quite accomplished CS players. Duck-run-strafe-fire!
    --
    668.5
    1. Re:*RingTFA* ...Sh$# you're right! by Distinguished+Hero · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thank God so many of you are quite accomplished CS players.

      Good. This will get rid of all the bunny-hoppers when they try their "tactic" in real life. Certainly no great loss to the gene pool there. :P

      --
      Uttering logically derived and empirically supported truths to the disciples of the orthodox establishment.
    2. Re:*RingTFA* ...Sh$# you're right! by GMC-jimmy · · Score: 1

      This is a DUPE from an older Slashdot artical on Thursday, January 22

      --
      __________________________________
      Free your mind - Flush your toilet
    3. Re:*RingTFA* ...Sh$# you're right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fucking awpers

    4. Re:*RingTFA* ...Sh$# you're right! by morleron · · Score: 1

      Unless they're a whole lot better marksman than they are lawyers we've got nothing to be worried about. With any luck they'll miss us Linux folk entirely and take out Darl.

      Just my $.02,
      Ron

      --
      Impeach Barack Obama for violating the Constitutional requirement to be a "natural born" citizen to hold the office of P
  39. To the whiners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's offtopic unless it's about Linux.

  40. Reprise:Evidence of origin,ownership,copyright+GPL by NZheretic · · Score: 5, Informative
    What evidence of origin,ownership,copyright + GPL
    by NZheretic : Mon 09 Jun 03:30AM:

    SCO's evidence of origin and Function dictates form

    What proof did SCO present for the origin of both fragments of source code?

    What proof did SCO present to show the SCO code did not originally from old BSD,Linux or public domain publications?

    Who put the SCO source into Linux? - Was put there by Old Novell/SCO/Caldera in the first place?

    What proof did SCO provide to show that the person had access to SCO's Unix sources?

    The latter question raises another issue. The similarity is just as likely to be due to both operating systems performing the same role. Form is often directed by the function it performs. Function and variable names are often dictated by the API and common terminology.

    Both the current Linux and Unix kernel developers have attended the similar university courses and read the same publicly available documentation. The works of W. Richard Stevens are very influential as a reference toward modern Unix and Linux and have dictated the implentation of APIs and TCP/IP stacks in both.

    Copyright WHAT Copyright

    From Groklaw .

    Now that copyright is back on the table in the SCO case, you might like to

    read the law on copyright.

    SCO held another telephone conference today, but you had to be on time. I tried to call in later, when I was free, to hear the recording, but although the operator told me it had been recorded, it wasn't being made available. She suggested I contact SCO and ask to hear it. Meanwhile, someone who did listen posted on Slashdot as "mec" and he or she heard this question and answer :

    [question #3] Stephen Shankland, CNET --

    "Q: Copyright office does not have an assignment on file [for the Unix copyrights from Novell]. 'Is it your understanding that the copyrights have not been registered yet?' A: 'Stephen is correct ... [if we need] we will change the assignment of copyright ...' [we can do that at any time]."

    If this is true, that they failed to register, it puts another interesting twist on this story. (Novell put a twist of its own, by posting a press releaseon its site saying that while the Amendment that SCO sent them seemed to support their claim "that ownership of certain copyrights for UNIX did transfer to SCO in 1996", Novell doesn't seem to have the amendment in its own files, and patents for sure didn't transfer.)

    It's true you can register a copyright any time, but you can't sue for infringement until you have registered and you can't get certain damages for infringement that occured prior to registration: "Before an infringement suit may be filed in court, registration is necessary for works of U. S. origin." Section 411 says it precisely like this:

    " 411. Registration and infringement actions10 (a) Except for an action brought for a violation of the rights of the author under section 106A(a), and subject to the provisions of subsection (b), no action for infringement of the copyright in any United States work shall be instituted until registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title...."

    You are limited as to remedies without registration, as Section 412 sets forth:

    " 412. Registration as prerequisite to certain remedies for infringement11

  41. Still funny... by Fiveeight · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, it's a dupe, but I still find this one funny.

    "I've been pounding the table here for a year or so saying there's no free lunch, and there is going to be a day of reckoning for every company that thinks they are going to try and sell a free model." That's Darl McBride, president and CEO of the SCO Group, a perennial loser at selling UNIX and, until recently, Linux operating systems."

    Couldn't say it better myself.

    1. Re:Still funny... by Phong · · Score: 1

      The only problem with that quote is that it makes it sound like the SCO Group is no longer a perennial loser at selling Linux, i.e. they're succeeding at something, when it's just that they stopped selling Linux.

      --
      ..wayne..
    2. Re:Still funny... by francium+de+neobie · · Score: 1

      oh really? I think the quote actually mean he's still a sore loser at trying to sell Linux.

  42. Tort reform by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reading this article made me sick to my stomach. I get it (finally). Darl won't be stopped until he's either rich or passed on to the great closed source world in the sky.

    Having dealt with these pump & dump attorneys in several ventures, the unfortunate realization one makes is that there is nothing - not a single thing - a good, legitimate enterprise or individual can do to stop these thieves. Try suing them to stop them from stealing assets? They'll stall your legal action out - make it take a couple years (by then, there's never anything left). Only tort reform can make an impact.

    Darl and his kin are the modern equivelent to a roundworm. Their parasitism preys on the output of others. Parasitism's a natural occurance in the competitive dynamic of life, but at least in other systems, the host is allowed to attempt to rid itself of them. In the US, nearly all legal means of dealing with parasites are rendered ineffective by the diseased court system.

    Legal parasites make bogus claims to the results of others work - Linux, patent claims of obvious items or with prior art and increasingly abuse two disasters in the US legal system (continually propped up by one of the political parties):

    1. A distorted, manipulated intellectual property award system that allows parties that contibute payola and/or recognize and reinforce the system to be the beneficiaries of an award of others property. Hire attorney. Grease wheel. Pay off the party. Get patent award snuck through. Hire more attorneys. Sue the rightful owners of your "property" for infringement. Get rich. Pay party and attorneys again.

    2. A judicial system filled with crooks and fools. More than two thirds of the justices are of the same system. On the rare occasion you get an idealist, they're quickly focused on inventing absurd laws (like throwing out constitutional guaranteed rights, or inventing absurd new rights) and kept out of the back room where the money flows. It's like Zaphod Beeblebrox of the Hitchhiker's Guide books, the fools are there to distract the attention from you while your wallet is being lifted.

    U.S. citizens that look to crooked third world nations (e.g Cuba, Venezuela) should realize their legal system no better. The only difference is that the crooks that run the system in the US are richer than most elsewhere.

    So open sourcers, until you're permitted to rid yourself of parasites (which unfortunately means both of your parties - and if you don't think your (D) or (R) friends are bought and paid for, then you know which category above you belong in!), understand that your great open source universe represents a dream host to these people. Darl's only uniqueness is that he's one of the first.

    1. Re:Tort reform by adrianbaugh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Try suing them to stop them from stealing assets? They'll stall your legal action out - make it take a couple years (by then, there's never anything left). Only tort reform can make an impact.

      I'd like to see them stall Big Blue. I agree with your point, but until the law is reformed it's very nice to have the local 800lb gorilla on-side :-)

      --
      "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
      - JRR Tolkien.
    2. Re:Tort reform by adrianbaugh · · Score: 1

      Talking to myself again. Obviously when I say "I'd like to see them stall Big Blue" what I actually mean is "I'd like to see them try to stall Big Blue"...

      --
      "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
      - JRR Tolkien.
    3. Re:Tort reform by wonkavader · · Score: 1

      Ok, that they can stall us for as long as SCO remains seems clear. But what about Canopy group. It seems like they have VERY deep pockets and would not be able to outlast a lawsuit. Can we sue Canopy group for thousands of instances of copyright infringement ($30,000 per infringement) since their spawn (SCO) repudiated the GPL and still sells the software?

    4. Re:Tort reform by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Well thought out, and well said.

      So open sourcers, until you're permitted to rid yourself of parasites (which unfortunately means both of your parties - and if you don't think your (D) or (R) friends

      Won't happen. Not within our lifetimes, anyway. Things have gone too far for that. It'll take a violent revolution, or (probably) generations worth of reform (with attendant losses) for that to happen here.

      I wish I could disagree with myself on that. I can't.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  43. This part is great! by obotics · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The following two paragraphs show what a legal nut this McBride character is: (summary- a while back, McBride questioned why IBM had not indemnified their customers if they were so confident that Linux was free from illegal activity. However, after Novell and HP announced indemnification programs, McBride turned the argument around and stated that their MUST be something illegal in Linux, or Novell and HP wouldn't have bothered :p)

    McBride and company are quick to tout the warranty advantages of proprietary software over public systems like Linux. Ever since taking on IBM, SCO has persistently goaded Linux distributors to protect their end users by offering indemnification--that is, agreeing to foot the bill if some company, say SCO, sues for intellectual property violations. As recently as October, SCO spokesman Blake Stowell reiterated the talking point. "If IBM is so confident that Linux is free and clear, why don't they indemnify their users against any lawsuit SCO could bring against them?" he asked.

    That was then. Novell and Hewlett Packard (HP) have since announced that they will indemnify their Linux customers. However, McBride managed to spin the implications of those announcements 180 degrees to SCO's favor. "By announcing the programme they are acknowledging the problems with Linux. Through the restrictions and the limitations on the programme, they are showing their unwillingness to bet very much on their position," McBride told the online British technology magazine VNUnet.

    1. Re:This part is great! by demon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I found that rather humorous as well. When I first heard SCO talking about how Linux distribution vendors and solution providers should be "indemnifying" their customers, I figured it was only a matter of time before someone would do it and SCO would throw it back in their face and say "Told you! They must have done what we said, why else would they indemnify their customers?" To me, that just proves yet again what a sham SCO's case is - full of cheap tactics that are supposed to make the people they're suing look bad, but just serve to make them look like bigger morons.

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
  44. Re:Dupe by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 1

    Wow, three posts in a row all claiming this article is a dupe. Now we just have to wait for five more people to notice the duplicate dupe claims. It's a never-ending cycle.

    --

    I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
  45. SCO the Bully by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My concern with all of this crap, is the fact that someone hasn't forced SCO to shut the hell up. It reminds me of the Bully in grade school. He would consistantly beat up on kids every day. Some even to the point of actual damage, and he was NEVER suspended. Never. Ever. I think that is what needs to be really focused on. Not so much as "When will all of this madness end?", but rather "How can we prevent this from ever getting this far, if history repeats itself?"

    Also, from the article: "[Darl]I've been pounding the table here for a year or so saying there's no free lunch, and there is going to be a day of reckoning for every company that thinks they are going to try and sell a free model."

    What is with this messianic attitude? Perhaps what Darl does not realize is that folks contribute to Linux and other open source projects through a variety of reasons. Notably, some contributions to open source have happened via tax-payer funded projects from a variety of nations throughout the world. Other contributions are made from the generous and charitable contributions of others who simply want to make a difference. Darl wants to exploit those contributions and leverage his band of merry lawyers to "liberate" Linux from the rest of us. Only his liberation is not for anything other than selfish desires (like any criminal who sees nothing wrong with theft) with no respect to the common good.

    1. Re:SCO the Bully by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      My concern with all of this crap, is the fact that someone hasn't forced SCO to shut the hell up. It reminds me of the Bully in grade school. He would consistantly beat up on kids every day. Some even to the point of actual damage, and he was NEVER suspended. Never. Ever. I think that is what needs to be really focused on. Not so much as "When will all of this madness end?", but rather "How can we prevent this from ever getting this far, if history repeats itself?"

      Y'know just because the article is a dupe, it doesn't mean you should reuse someone else's comment. Some of us read the discussions and moderate too. Fair warning. :)

  46. Whatever you do, don't look at it! by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 5, Funny

    From the article:
    But ever since determining it owns the "ark and the covenant to the enterprise software industry," says McBride, SCO's bad fortune is on the upswing.

    Shouldn't that be "ark of the Covenant"? Maybe that explains their reluctance to actually open up the code and show what was "stolen." I, for one, would love to see Darl's head melt.

    --

    I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
    1. Re:Whatever you do, don't look at it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, he is a Moron... probably a Mormon, too.

      Only folks like Darl get to be called Morons with a capital M.

    2. Re:Whatever you do, don't look at it! by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Yeah, verily :) Methinks the crack is affecting his memory.

      I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.

      What a superb sig. May I use it (elsewhere), Colonel? (I'd subtract the "the" ;)

      SB
      Just a lowly Private...

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  47. The Dupe Poll by heretic · · Score: 0, Redundant

    How long between the original posting and when a note's posted on the story? Place your bets now.

  48. Re:Explosive penguins.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It's nice to fantasize though.

    Sure is. Now what the fuck was the rest of your post on about?

  49. Re:Dupe by YOU+LIKEWISE+FAIL+IT · · Score: 1

    Parent comment is a dupe.

    -- YLFI
    --
    One god, one market, one truth, one consumer.
  50. Come with me, to the dark side of the farce... by LoganTeamX · · Score: 0

    Darl's changed his opinions so many times it's not funny. Now, to incorporate the analogy of marriage and hookers, Darl will give free licensing and prosecution immunity if you ship all able-bodied women to his compound for "education" ;) Darl - he's no geek, cause his tan can't be beat.

    --
    One of the 187.
  51. My Favorite Line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "I want to walk the Court through enough of our complaint to help the Court understand that IBM clearly did contribute a lot of the Unix-related information into Linux. We just don't know what it is," Kevin McBride told the court, according to a transcript of the proceedings.

    I want a copy of the judges' and IBM attorney's face(s) when they made this statement. These guys are priceless. Absolutely BRILLIANT!!! Does the Attorney General have a copy of this?

    1. Re:My Favorite Line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, apparently Ashcroft has applied similar lines of reasoning to his terrorist detection problem and the "you're not american so it doens't matter how we treat you court of law"....

    2. Re:My Favorite Line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thing is... even if you ARE American, it still doens't matter how we treat you court of law... [they can yank your citizenship now if it is a matter of national security]

  52. I've found a better explantion of the SCO situatio by Chas · · Score: 5, Funny
    Right here

    Anybody who's been exposed to even a little television in the last 20-30 years should be able to pick up on this explanation.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  53. new to the SCO/Linux thing? by gyratedotorg · · Score: 2, Funny

    i cant help but wonder who these slashdot readers are that are "new to the SCO/Linux thing."

    --
    Gyrate Dot Org - "Where high-tech meets low-life"
  54. WTF did you call me? by utahjazz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Leading the charge against Linux is McBride, the blustering executive every Linux dweeb has come to loathe

    We finally get to the point where it's ok, pehaps cool even, to be called a 'geek' or 'nerd', and so they start calling us dweebs. What's next? Linux Douchebags? Linux Shitstains?

    1. Re:WTF did you call me? by krumms · · Score: 2, Funny

      Linux Douchebags? Linux Shitstains?

      Linux Torvalds?

  55. we're betting on four cylinders & penguins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    easy bet.

  56. It's both... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Ark of the Covenant contained, among other items, an original of the Covenant text. Thus, Darl can separate and list the items seperately and say he owns both; if he so desires. May he then be struck by lightning or at least contract pestilent, rotting sores as a result?

    Nah, just let him be sat upon by an 800-kilo gorilla and pecked to death by a covey of penguins instead.

  57. Kill all esquires!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I knew there was something funny about that guy.

  58. Intel vs AMD by Barnett · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They are random numbers representing computer error codes, which have been established as international standards.

    If SCO can sue over this, then why can't Intel sue AMD for using the same interrupt vectors, instruction set, etc.

    1. Re:Intel vs AMD by francium+de+neobie · · Score: 1

      Coz AMD had got a "second hand" x86 license a long long time ago. If my memory serves, they've got it from IBM.

    2. Re:Intel vs AMD by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      Your memory doesn't serve. They got it from Intel.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  59. More than a bully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "How can we prevent this from ever getting this far, if history repeats itself?"

    In a lot of respects, SCO's behavior is a lot like that of James Taggert in Atlas Shrugged - especially when James got involved behind the scenes in attempting to profit from Francisco d'Anconia's Mexican mine venture.

    (For those who aren't familiar with the work, the book was author Ayn Rand's "comprehensive" embodiement of her objectivism philosophy into a novel form. While objectivism has its issues and is certainly incomplete in many areas, it provides a contract philosophy basis that is probably best represented by the emergence of the open source world. In a nutshell, the only legitimate way for two people to interact is on the basis of trade, where each is receiving what they perceive as a legitimate and appropriate value for the trade. Coercion, extortation, theft (taking without a consensual trade), intimidation, etc. are all inappropriate forms).

    This behavior is trivialized by calling it "bullying" (though the previous poster's intent was dead on). Recognized for what it is, Darl's behavior is profound parasitism, and all parasitism (which steals life from its host) is nothing more than a polite form of murder.

    So what if Darl steals Linux, taking the livelihood away from thousands of rightful creators? So what if they go unemployed, unable to work on their creation without Darl's consent? So what if they lose that health insurance policy and cannot afford the prescription their children need? So what if they die?

    Out of the tens of thousands of Linux-involved persons, the probability of death being caused by the success of Darl's quest is certain. Even the fear he has induced into the Linux world has had an effect - halting a Linux project here or there and causing honest people to remain unemployed.

    No, the best clue to understanding Darl is this quote from the article:

    "And SCO executives have even taken to traveling with bodyguards, a necessary measure, they say, given numerous death threats."

    Most certainly "perceived numerous death threats." The funniest thing about the James Taggerts of the world is that as righteous as they may sound at times (as they pursue their nihlistic path), deep down they know they're nothing more than a worthless being that preys upon others. They recognize that eventually they will encounter a host that refuses to be consumed, and this paranoia manifests visibly in the hiring of bodyguards, personal security, defamation lawsuits, etc.

    The solution? A GPL with teeth, backed by an open source community that aggressively funds their own legal defense foundation in order to firmly deal with predators and parasites like Darl.

    1. Re:More than a bully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and all parasitism (which steals life from its host) is nothing more than a polite form of murder.

      What is it with you objectivists and double-speak?
      Parasitism is not a form of murder, and there is no such thing as a polite form of murder.

  60. a question UNIX ABI by linuxislandsucks · · Score: 3, Insightful

    a question

    Since according to the rulling on the org BSDI v UCB complaint UNix SsystemV edition 4 through 6 may be public domain..

    exactly what parts of Unix ABi that SCO group uses is new past edition 7 of system5?

    Also according to the same rulling only the IP stack was seen as continaing Unix system5 edition 4 trade secrets.. since no one uses that stack nayomre except for unix licenseees what other Unix IP is out there?

    The copyright and public domain issue is probably why SCOX never made copyrights an issue in the org complaint against IBM..:)

    --
    Don't Tread on OpenSource
  61. Come on! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Enough already. We all get it. McBride is less than ethical and SCO so far has no apparent case as they have yet to produce any real evidence. How many more of these overview articles do we need to read? We all get it already. Until something new happens in the case it is overkill to report on it. Enough of daily SCO related stories with no real new tangible info.

  62. HAL9000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh-oh. Hal's going to be sued for republishing Darl's material sans his permission.

  63. I'm sorry... by Kjella · · Score: 1

    Necessary reading to anyone new the SCO/Linux thing,

    ...but if you qualify for that, it disqualifies you from reading this site. This is "Slashdot: News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." Any nerd with respect for himself has heard more than enough about the SCO case already.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:I'm sorry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But new nerds coming into the system need to be educated!!!

  64. For the Pre-Darl Management View by craXORjack · · Score: 1
    --
    Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
  65. Re:Yet Another Racist Linux User by E_elven · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Well, responding to a troll here, but there are no intelligence tests out there where education isn't an (big) advantage -if the test doesn't outright require some taught skills, at least having been exposed to similar logic requirements earlier in their life.

    While the above will explain most of the variation, another matter must be considered, that being evolution at work. Cultures and locations still have their own perils and challenges in everyday life, and a fair assertion is that in a somewhat hostile, agriculture-centered society, physical prowess is more important than intellectual, and therefore these individuals have a greater chance of survival and reproduction.

    Which is why, without demeaning the value of said physical aptitude, we need to act fast to bring everyone to the same level of sophistication and education as the 'best' of the world.

    --
    Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
  66. Friday... by ShawnDoc · · Score: 1

    So what happened on Friday? Wasn't that the day the court was going to comment on what SCO provided to IBM?

    1. Re:Friday... by danb35 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The hearing was delayed until Feb. 6. The reasons for the delay seem uncertain.

  67. It takes more than one court. by Martigan80 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It does, so does SCO have enough money to carry this out? I mean how long and how many appeals did the first Anti-Trust for MS take? Besides SCO vapor-evidance is still the big thing right now. I wish the media would tell Mr. Mc to STFU untill you produce the evidance on your own.

    --
    This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
    1. Re:It takes more than one court. by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 1

      Well, it's likely that MS is supporting SCO in this case. For MS, it doesn't matter how much it will cost, as long as there is trouble for Linux. I strongly suspect that when SCO runs out of money, MS will buy some more "licenses" from them. I also suspect IBM knows this, so they won't settle out of court - they will take this case as far as it needs to go to get a judge pronounce Open Source, and Linux specifically, completely legitimate.

    2. Re:It takes more than one court. by undef · · Score: 1

      If the Microsoft investment continues... Evil

  68. SCO is bad ....mkay by qoquaq · · Score: 3, Insightful
    What is worse is the profiteering from the whole "scandal". No one is going after these pin heads but watch out for Martha Stewart!

    She should be in jail ... mkay. Cause insider trading is bad ... mkay. We gotta put that on TV ...mkay. Gotta get the message out ...mkay

    Linux Communiy: Well, trashing a whole software movement to gain financially is not network worthy news?

    Software is too technical ... mkay. Most folks don't understand why the little blond haired Linux boy is that important ...mkay. We need to get Martha mkay, she's bad ... mkay.

    The whole thing is very frustrating!

    --

    "They say travel broadens the mind, so I went over the falls in a barrel." -Thomas Dolby

    1. Re:SCO is bad ....mkay by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      The insider trading charges were dropped. She is essentially being prosecuted for saying that she was innocent of a crime which the government decided it could not prove that she committed.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  69. HURD shuffle, BSD today? BeOS? Plan9? by puzzled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Linux is a kernel. GNU is an overall Unix replacement. GNU/HURD is a potential kernel replacement. BSD should be untainted by this and you've got three major and two minor varieties from which to choose, with FreeBSD being the easiest transition for Linux users.

    The ecological niche here is *open* - even if Linux goes extinct over this, GNU+HURD or FreeBSD is going to slide right into that position, and if there is further trouble from the SCO camp I don't think *anyone* can impinge the likes of Plan9 or BeOS. Sure, it'll be a huge change, it might set us back another ten years, but Stallman opened Pandora's box a long time ago and no one is going to be able to close it now.

    Not SCO with their frivolous lawsuit, not Microsoft with their billions in cash reserves, not silly US Patent law, not Digital Restrictions Management in BIOS; no one can stop it now - profit motive and customer demand are going to grind those things into the dust as surely as the automobile did to tack and harness shops.

    The internet is global and the desktop is strategic. I mean military/industrial strategic - look at the Pacific rim and their government's backing of their own Linux distribution. Europe is more low key about it but they're equally pleased to have local boys making a more stable product and freeing them from possible NSA/CIA/FBI sanctioned intrusion.

    GNU came into being when I was a highschool senior. I'm old enough now to have a child that is a highschool senior but I started reproducing later in life. I'm sure that by the time my son is a college freshman Microsoft's OS offerings will look as quaint as QEMM/386 or OS/2 looks today.

    Drawing a blank on QEMM/386? Don't know who Quarterdeck is? Never actually seen OS/2? Both stories are instructive but OS/2 is probably the most relevant - what *IS* the fate of an overweight, closed OS when a more nimble competitor comes into the arena?

    --
    I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
    1. Re:HURD shuffle, BSD today? BeOS? Plan9? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Puzzled wrote:
      GNU+HURD or FreeBSD is going to slide right into that position, and if there is further trouble from the SCO camp I don't think *anyone* can impinge the likes of Plan9 or BeOS.


      GNU Hurd still isn't ready for prime time; from the FSF's own page at http://www.fsf.org/software/hurd/hurd.html:

      The Hurd, together with the GNU Mach microkernel, the GNU C Library and the other GNU and non-GNU programs in the GNU system, provide a rather complete and usable operating system today. It is not ready for production use, as there are still many bugs and missing features. However, it should be a good base for further development and non-critical application usage...On the negative side, the support for character devices (like sound cards) and other hardware is mostly missing. Although the POSIX interface is provided, some additional interfaces like POSIX shared memory or semaphores are still under development.


      Gee, it's only taken them over a decade. In that time,

      -Micro$oft has gone from Window 3.1 and Windows NT to Windows XP, earning tens of billions of dollars every quarter.
      -Minix (RMS's original choice for the GNU kernel before he pissed off its author) begat Linux.

      BeOS doesn't have adequate networking support.

      But I think you are spot on for FreeBSD.

    2. Re:HURD shuffle, BSD today? BeOS? Plan9? by starseeker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "I don't think *anyone* can impinge the likes of Plan9 or BeOS"

      Ah. You fail to grasp the most fundamental property of the lawsuit as a weapon. Their claims to Linux have to date not been proven publicly in ANY way, and yet they make trouble. The same tactics work just as well for any OS.

      Even if we were to develop a new OS from the bit level up, they could still say they own fundamental OS concepts and by definition any working OS owes them money. It doesn't have to make sense - you just need lawyers to try it.

      Welcome to the law as a killing tool. Merit isn't the issue - it isn't even of interest. It's what can you say, how loud can you say it, and who will believe you.

      --
      "I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
    3. Re:HURD shuffle, BSD today? BeOS? Plan9? by shadowbearer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Welcome to the law as a killing tool. Merit isn't the issue - it isn't even of interest. It's what can you say, how loud can you say it, and who will believe you.

      Yes. I'll add:

      and what is killing our country, our society, and our culture, slowly, methodically, and for no other reason than pure greed and the distorted belief that being rich somehow makes you a better person.

      Bastards.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  70. Re:I've found a better explantion of the SCO situa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mod parent up

  71. Best Quote of the Story by jmt9581 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Straight from the article:

    For months, SCO has encouraged users to take advantage of the promotional price, but there haven't been many takers.

    "We haven't published the exact number yet," McBride said. "It's not in the dozens, but it's, you know, we've had some that have started to sign up."


    This makes it sound like absolutely nobody has taken SCO up on their offer. Is there anyone here on Slashdot that will admit to it? :)

    --

    My blog

    1. Re:Best Quote of the Story by Rorgg · · Score: 1

      Some that have started to sign up?p?

      Well if it takes months to sign up, no wonder fewer than 12 people have been interested.

  72. how? Here is How by bstadil · · Score: 4, Informative
    Only a company like AOL could do that and stay in business

    Why do you think so? When Caldera went public as a Linux company they raised $250M. They can piss away that amount, before they face a liquidity problem. As a matter of fact that is precisely what happened. They were running out of cash and the IBM suit was a last desperate Hail Mary act.

    Sad the Linux community and IBM has to pay for it. To some extend it is good that Royal Bank of Canada stepped in (Behest of MS?)as there is a chance that case gets thrown out before their $50M infusing is gone.

    This means IBM and RedHat can collect something, plus the corporate shiled to Canopy might just have been pierced meaing they can be held accountable as well as the offecers personally.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re: how? Here is How by jasonditz · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that on top of IPO money they got a decent sum from MS out of the Digital Research lawsuits.

  73. esq!? by wo1verin3 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    >> Mr Darl McBride Esq

    Esq?? Damn I need to get one of those watches so I can have that at the end of my name

  74. Dealing with all these dupe posts... by strAtEdgE · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Since Slashdot is mainly a series of posts about articles on other web sites, why don't they add to it a database of links referenced in previous posts. That way, before a new article is posted, it's links can be checked against the database to determine if a similiar article has already been posted.

    It can work like a spell checker, merely suggesting links that have appeared before, so you can identify the links that should be unique and ignore the ones that you know aren't (ie to project web sites, company web sites, and the like).

    --
    ----- sXe
  75. Big fat tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it just me, or does the photo of Darl on the cover of that magazine make him look like a great big tool?

  76. Linuxless Linux? by beni1207 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    From the article:
    SCO insists Big Blue owes it billions for allegedly illegally contributing UNIX code to the Linux kernel--the core chunk of code underlying most distributions of the Linux operating system.

    Boy...that's interesting. Anybody care to point me to a Linux distro whose underlying functionality comes from somewhere other than the Linux kernel?

  77. I wouldn't sell them a paperclip or turn on their by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    power.

    I would boycott them completely.

    We reserve the right to refuse service from anyone.
    That includes REFUSE like SCOX.

  78. Any? One? Some? by handy_vandal · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "We haven't published the exact number yet," McBride said. "It's not in the dozens, but it's, you know, we've had some that have started to sign up."
    is that supposed to make sense?
    Does one count as any?


    Yes: "one" does couny as "any". Also, "some" counts as "any" -- although "some" is more that "one".

    The part about "We haven't published the exact number yet" is particularly annoying. Surely McBride knows the exact number. And the word "yet" is supposed to clue us that SCO will publish the exact number. But I'm left with the impression that the exact number is an embarrassment to SCO. Indeed, the whole business of SCO litigation smells of embarrassment. I'm glad I'm not those guys -- humiliating myself in public for the sake of money.

    -kgj

    --
    -kgj
  79. Favorite Quote :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "[T]he ownership with Novell has absolutely been legally decided. We've got all the documents in front of us. Anybody who has any legal sense here says 'I don't get it, can Novell not read the English language?'" McBride said.

    I'd like to read McBride's definition of 'Here'.....
    Planet McBride? Fantasy Island?
    While you're at it, define 'any legal sense' because
    Hell, I have a LITTLE bit, and if I'm the only
    one 'here' than I guess, well he just might be
    telling a slim shade of his truth that looks
    great from his narrow fucked up view of the
    world.

    Poor McBride... Everyone hates him....
    Ever hear the term "Persecution is usually EARNED!"
    (ask a mormon about their history. LOL)

  80. EWWW - I've got Darlness on me!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linus Torvalds chose to err on the side of caution. "The less I have to do with Darl McBride, the better off I am ... I dont want for that Darlness to rub off on me."

  81. Back to the Future....? by reydar · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is it just me, or does Darl McBride share a striking resemblence to Biff from Back to the Future?

    --
    ------- "I must create my own system, Or be enslaved by another man's" -William Blake
    1. Re:Back to the Future....? by mrsev · · Score: 1

      Agreed and time travel is about the only way that he could have the evidence he needs to win.

  82. yawn *shrug by tetrahedrassface · · Score: 1

    This story is nothing but flamebait, and it really bothers me that Slashdot posted it. With submissions like this maybe Slashdot is getting dumbed-down. Is that even possible? Not only is this story complete crap, but it also is stale, and offers nothing new, and is boring, and is biased. Not to mention it has been out for a few days now ao anyone that is even remotely independanty interested in the SCO mess has already seen it.

  83. Ayn Rand by rcs1000 · · Score: 1

    Now, I know this is completely off topic, but was I the only one who thought that the sex scenes in Atlas Shrugged were more like rape scenes.

    And the charectarisation? Uggghhhh, awful.

    --
    --- My dad's political betting
    1. Re:Ayn Rand by Inspector+Lopez · · Score: 1

      For confirmation, check out Howard Roark's approach to sex in The Fountainhead (also by Ayn Rand, of course).

      At the start of the book I thought Howard Roark was pretty estimable --- but by the end, I thought "jeez, what a jerk."

  84. Probably not by maroberts · · Score: 1

    ..but if Microsoft, (or even another company owned by Gates or others), invents a licensing issue to ensure SCO gets another $10m or so to pursue this then it could go on forever.

    [Actually, I don't really believe Microsoft is behing this, but if you like conspiracy theories the above is a good way to go]

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

  85. This part here was a real kicker for me by Vicegrip · · Score: 3, Insightful

    McBride says SCO has shown plenty. "They're disingenuous on that or they would be ripping out the million lines of code we've already pointed to," he said, adding that the violations are too far-reaching to simply rip out anyway. One million lines amounts to roughly 20 percent of the entire Linux kernel. McBride says SCO revealed the offending code last August at its Las Vegas SCOForum. "Truly, and then they just ignored it," he said.
    If this isn't the most baldfaced lying I've ever seen in my life I don't know what is. I feel like a passerby overhearing a wacko prothelysizing absurdities whose obvious falseness is apparent to even the children laughing at him; then the loon complains that nobody takes him seriously.

    --
    Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
  86. Mad Darl's disease. by Malcontent · · Score: 1

    You know it's coming.

    --

    War is necrophilia.

  87. put up by Ravenrage · · Score: 0

    i think it is about time that sco shows this psuedo-evidence or shuts up i am tired of hearing this crap. if linux has offending code i am sure every linux programmer will work day and night to fix this if not every linux distro should sue sco for slander(i don't know if that is legal) and if i get a letter from sco i am certainlly going to press charges for extortion. if all the linux "extremists" want to kill microsoft i think we should start an aol-esque distro mailing program with a user friendly interface maybe partner with a isp or something of that like. i don't know why lindows didn't do this when they were trying to be able to run windows programs with wine(netzero already has a port of the software for lindows) also i am working with my friends and i am going to make a bunch of disks with knoppix and put them in those demo computers at compusa and other places like that.

    1. Re:put up by Ravenrage · · Score: 0

      sorry if this is hard to read i am kinda sick right now and can't think really well

  88. Quote... by mellonhead · · Score: 1


    "...And that's when we got our war paint on and said, 'We gotta go back and take this thing head-on.'"

    This guy has to be suffering from one of the worst cases of little-man syndrome in history.

  89. DUPE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This same, damn post was a highly mod'd post from a past SCO article.

    I smell troll... :/

    Hmmmm....
    http://slashdot.org/~110010001000/jou rnal/

    Yup.

  90. Re:Any? One? Some? by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Insightful

    you should also note the wording of 'have started to sign up' which could mean _anything_.

    like, 'they have received the empty threats' could count as that.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  91. mandrake, cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    methinks parent deserves a informative mod because of the mandrake reference

  92. Oh yeah.... by Geek+of+Tech · · Score: 2, Funny
    "And SCO executives have even taken to traveling with bodyguards, a necessary measure, they say, given numerous death threats."

    Yeah, but most of the death threats are from their lawyers, wanting something worth diddley, instead of SCOX Stock.

    --
    Stop the Slashdot effect! Don't read the articles!
  93. Re:I've found a better explantion of the SCO situa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    jesus fucking christ, hasn't this stupid link been posted enough?

    fuck sco, fuck the dukes of hazard, and fuck you, Chas, for wasting our time.

  94. Post is a dupe by anurup · · Score: 1

    The link to The Salt Lake City Weekly story was first mentioned in a previous post.

  95. An Even Better Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An even better summary can be found at this site. Yeah. Much "better".

  96. Separated at birth? by Tanami · · Score: 1

    IANAG (I am not a genealogist), but after reading the assorted quotes in the article, I think that I might have spotted Darl's long-lost brother .

  97. And you say this like it is a BAD thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Actually MS would be very happy about that: the BSD license allows MS take the code and put it into Windows.

    Look at the Microsoft TCP/IP implementation history.

    The 'we did it ourselfs' version was considered horrid and broken.
    The 'Lets port BSD' version was just broken.

    It took a few years of working at it for Microsoft to get it compatible. I would rather see implementations that work than pure shlockly crap.

    But why *I* don't understand is for all the talk about how "we don't want people 'stealing the code'" that goes on, where were all these idealists and big talkers when it came to the Virgin WebPlayer infringement?

  98. RICO? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SCO's actions seem rather hard to distinguish from organized shake down techniques. What would it take to get a RICO investigation started? The Feds seem to have little trouble with another three-letter acronym for fraud - maybe another few months and they'll get to the latter part of the alphabet?

    Or does hiring a U.S. Senator's son automatically indemnify SCO from RICO prosecution?

  99. Scoatse McBride's Face by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ...the judges' and IBM attorney's face(s) when they made this statement

    Can't help you there, but here is a picture of Darl opening his trap for you...

  100. What Daniel Webster has to say by ocie · · Score: 1

    from m-w.com

    caldera: a volcanic crater that has a diameter many times that of the vent and is formed by collapse of the central part of a volcano or by explosions of extraordinary violence.

    McBride thinks that SCO group (formerly Caldera) owns UNIX, which just goes to show that he doesn't know UNIX from a hole in the ground.

    --
    JET Program: see Japan, meet intere
  101. Very much a bully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just look at McBrides statements.

    From the article:

    "And anybody that says we don't have any claims there, yes, I guess they will be going home with a sock in their mouth,"

    "We have some former customers that have left that are running on Linux, and they are in the crosshairs."

    From the Groklaw Quote Database
    ( http://www.groklaw.net/quotes/showperson.phtml?pid =1 ):

    "That's like saying, 'show us the fingerprints on the gun so you can rub them off.'"

    "It threw Novell out in front of the bus a couple of weeks ago and Novell got run over."

    "To the extent that we have to take it down and put it (Linux) on its back, we're fully prepared and willing to do that."

    Darl phrases things in a very threatening, violent manner. How anyone can take this psychopath seriously is beyond me.

  102. Lawyers with sniper rifles? by raehl · · Score: 1

    Suppose I should duck when the guy standing next to me gets shot, eh?

  103. Last Line of the Article by Bilbo · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I always look at the last line in an article like this to tell me what the author is really thinking. I love the Linus quote he put there:
    "The less I have to do with Darl McBride, the better off I am ... I don't want for that 'Darlness' to rub off on me."
    I have a feeling that, while the author takes the accusations seriously (Copyright infringement, if it really is in there, is a serious thing), he doesn't give much to Darl's credibility in the situation.
    --
    Your Servant, B. Baggins
  104. Re:Yet Another Racist Linux User by E_elven · · Score: 1

    My post states that the so-called third world suffers from the first world's dominance and calls for improvement. Racist? Right.

    --
    Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
  105. Can't we just buy SCO and sack McBride? by adelayde · · Score: 1

    Surely we could start a fund and if every Linux user, supporter, developer etc world-wide put somewhere between 1 and 10 dollars into it we'd have enough cash to simply buy-out SCO, own UNIX, sack McBride, make all rights to anything SCO has public domain, drop all law suits and then put the forlorn company out of its and our misery?

    1. Re:Can't we just buy SCO and sack McBride? by Quila · · Score: 1

      No, because that's what he wants. He used the suits to pump up his failed company for a buyout. The contract with the lawyers even says they get a cut in case of a buyout, so you know they were planning for it.

  106. here is the best quote by waspleg · · Score: 1

    [T]hose who believe software should be free cannot prevail against the U.S. Congress and voices of seven U.S. Supreme Court justices who believe that the motive of profit is the engine that ensures the progress of science, McBride wrote.

    there you go people
    the man is pure souless evil, but be glad he exists so that you know what you are not

  107. Re:Explosive penguins.... by MesiahTaz · · Score: 1

    I guess that's what I get for trying to be funny. Sorry.

    --
    Are you an open source warrior?
  108. who gave Darl the idea.... by Sfing_ter · · Score: 1

    Now, somewhere, there is a team-killing fucktard that went to Darl and said, "hey, these guys are using the ip we own... etc, etc". One day, all beings will turn on him Darl and his lawyers will eat him, if they haven't already. It is possible he has been evicerated, and Team-Darl is making money at this point so they don't really care, cuz the money is rolling in, not from licensing but through stock... when it all goes down, it will be a "We heeded his technical advice", him and the supposed MIT group that "found" all the heisted code.
    Hastur, Hastur, Hastur... ouch!

    --
    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
  109. Re: SCO's lost path. by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

    Pengiuns may be flightless, but they have thick skin and kick some serious ass on ski slopes.

    s/ski/slippery/ ??

    Hee hee.... :)

    SB
    *Ow! Stop hitting me!* :)

    --
    It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
  110. Well, the proof is in the pudding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just as I said, any comment that points out the truth is modded down. I did just that and it happened!

    There are some bad people in the community who are racist and pointing out this fact will get you modded down.

    If thats not analogous to the 1960's jailing of civil rights fighters, then I don't know what is.

  111. BeOS? WTF?? by donscarletti · · Score: 1
    BeOS?

    BeOS is half written with poor network support. Apart from that it is completely closed source so we have no more reason to use it than windows.

    MacOSX is more similar to linux in the way it functions so even that would be a more viable replacement for linux than BeOS. MacOS is also activly maintained which is more than I could say for BeOS.

    As for OpenBeOS: it is hardly even started, it can barely boot, let alone be used. We would be better off writing a successor for linux from scratch that jump abord that band wagon at this point in time.

    --
    When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
  112. Let me explain why your observation is wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If linux were somehow to be harmed by SCO, they wouldn't just magically "switch to BSD".

    Sure you can.

    No user cares about Linux.

    Let me repeat that.

    NO USER CARES ABOUT LINUX.

    What the users care about are things like Web Browsers, email servers, Web Servers, Database engines, Java, and the list goes on and on.

    "Linux" is nothing but the way the programs that people USE get loaded. FreeBSD as an example has over 10,150 programs 'ready to run'. These are programs like Mozilla, Apache, Sendmail, PostgreSQL, Java.

    So to switch from "Linux" to "BSD" is:
    1) Load up, say, FreeBSD on some hardware.
    2) scp/ftp/cut and paste the config files from the "Linux" box to the FreeBSD box.
    3) copy the data over
    4) Regression test for the paranoid
    5) Turn off Linux box, put FreeBSD box in place

    With the 5 above steps, Darl is no longer able to claim he's owed money. The users keep using the programs, the web keeps a-flowing, and Darl is left holding a big bag of NOTHING.

    Tell ya what. Load up the Linux kernel Darl is so keen about. Just the kernel. (And the kernel is really all Linux is.) Now, post your reply on /.

    1. Re:Let me explain why your observation is wrong. by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

      Haha.

      Maybe it was the BSD zealots who modded me down, instead of the linux zealots.

      Now, think very carefully with me. Let's imagine something almost unbelievable. That thing being SCO winning a case against linux. Maybe bribery, or bought laws, or stupid judges, the "how" isn't important.

      Do you think that when this happens, can you imagine it in your head, that SCO would allow BSD to escape? Do you think that BSD would somehow be immune to these magical voodoo judgement powers that Darl has acquired?

      You're still stuck in "users will like it just as much land". Duh, I never said they wouldn't. Only that that option will be denied them also.

      Am I the only non-stupid person on planet earth?

      Am I the only one who doesn't fail to anticipate simple things like this?

      What the fuck gives? Honestly. Mod me down if you must, but let it stay at 2 long enough that a smart person might reply. Or at least someone not *too* stupid....

    2. Re:Let me explain why your observation is wrong. by Eivind · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The problem with your argument is that it reads alot like "What if 2+2 is really 5?"

      There's a long chain of events required, and every step of it is highly unlikely:

      • SCO manages to prove that IBM contributed code to Linux, and that doing so violated a agreement they had with SCO.
      • SCO manages to convince the court that they own the 3-decades-old unix-code to begin with, and not only limited rigths to it as Novell claims.
      • The Linux kernel-hackers does not manage to rewrite, replace or live without the contributions of IBM.
      • SCO manages to proove that it owns BSD code that was released years before they acquired any rigths to any historic unix.
      • SCO convinces the court that the fact that they themselves distributed, and contributed to Linux under the GPL does not mean they actually meant to give away their code under the GPL.
      • SCO manages to convince the court that all of its mutually exclusive statements are true at the same time. That is, public on-the-record statements from Darl made *after* the current cases started should be disregarded. Statements like: "users have a choise - they can go back to using 2.2, we don't have a issue with that" conflict rather badly with current claims to own ABI's that have been in Linux since 0.01
      • SCO manages to convince the court that public facts, publically known and used for decades are subject to copyrigths. (Normally copyrigth covers only the *expression* of an idea, not the idea itself) #define ENOACCESS 3 cannot normally come in under copyrigth-law.
      • They manage to proove all of the above also in other countries, not only the US. (If not, Linux-development will thrive in the rest of the world, and at most the US will suffer a setback.)
      IF, and only IF, they manage ALL of these, there migth be a problem. That is, assuming there aren't any obvious ones I missed.

      Ofcourse you don't need a law-degree to estimate the probability of this as pretty darn close to zero. Infact, my guess is that they will not manage to establish a single one of these points.

    3. Re:Let me explain why your observation is wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the error is yours and it seems to be shared by the vast majority here. This whole fiasco isn't about SCO winning anything. It's all about spreading FUD anywhere and everywhere they can. It's all about convincing CEO's that Linux=lawsuits and that MS/Windows is the safe choice.

      The powers behind this whole SCO fiasco win the first time a corporation elects to go with a non-Linux solution to avoid all of the frivolous lawsuits that I imagine will pop up all over the place if they get away with this without doing any jail time/fines/suspicion. This was just the first shot across the bow, and rather then congratulate ourselves on the ineptness of the other sides gunners we need to open our eyes to the broadside that is about to hit point blank.

    4. Re:Let me explain why your observation is wrong. by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1
      Now, think very carefully with me. Let's imagine something almost unbelievable. That thing being SCO winning a case against linux. Maybe bribery, or bought laws, or stupid judges, the "how" isn't important.


      Do you think that when this happens, can you imagine it in your head, that SCO would allow BSD to escape? Do you think that BSD would somehow be immune to these magical voodoo judgement powers that Darl has acquired?


      I thought this was rather straightforward. In case it's not clear enough, I'll say this explicitly. In any logical, reasonable, or fair trial, SCO would be laughed literally out of the courtroom. It's senior executives charged with multiple SEC violations, perjury, and quite possibly even fraud (in the courtroom no less), none of the guilty would be allowed to go free. There would be an FBI investigation to see if there were other culprits too (maybe starting in Redmond?).

      All of that said, it should still be obvious to anyone, that in whatever bizarre parallel universe it is that would allow SCO to win, BSD would be no safer.

      C'mon guys, think just for a few seconds. I promise it won't hurt. If they beat the 0.00000001% odds that let them win against linux, the odds for them then beating BSD in court would be much higher (maybe not guaranteed though?)... maybe 60, or even 80%.

      This should be so obvious, that people should be making fun of me for having to say it. It's a given.

    5. Re:Let me explain why your observation is wrong. by Eivind · · Score: 1
      Well, that was sort of the point of my comment: It's not sufficient for SCO to win this case if it wants normal Linux-users to start paying licenses, or BSD to start worrying.

      To accomplish that, a lot of other things, unrelated to this case, also has to come true. Such as the kernel-hackers being unable to replace, rewrite or do without code that is SCO-tainted.

      That was my point. Even in Bizarro-world where SCO wins a full victory over IBM. Even there they don't get to influence Linux or BSD at all, unless multiple additional very unlikely things *also* occur.

  113. You need to check your meme at the door. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BSD licensed things lets others steal your work and sell it without you ever getting anything, and that's not good. With the GPL you at least get any changes back (i.e. the functionality).

    So the "GPL is better"?

    Please explain how the "better" GPL prevented the Virgin Corportation from releasing the WebPlayer with its GPL violations.

    And, point to all the legal action taken by the GPL licenseholders to address this "wrong" that was done.

    While you are at it, please explain the WILLFUL removal of the FreeBSD copyright in the Linux kernel, as done in the past. Please also explain how RedHat released its pre 1999 versions of GNU/Linux and chose to not obey clause #4.

  114. Uh, because...? by r_j_prahad · · Score: 1

    If SCO can sue over this, then why can't Intel sue AMD for using the same interrupt vectors, instruction set, etc.

    Because unlike SCO, Intel has a real product that they derive a real revenue stream from.

    Oh, and Intel are not corporate assholes (for the most part anyway).

  115. Then we build something else. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    I would even learn to program (shudder), but the Pandora box is open, they can't sue free software out of existence.

    It may take a while for idiots to realize this, but in a free society there is no way you can forbid somebody to share their work with others as they see fit.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  116. Re:Reminded me of a lawyer joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Offtopic?

    A joke about lawyers and SCO considered offtopic? esp when its about lawyers that would say anything to get paid?

    ~GoAT~

  117. Could somebody help me understand... by velska · · Score: 0

    why McBride isn't downloading the Linux kernel code from the Web and then pointing out exactly what are the offending lines? Worst of this is, judges are probably not up to ruling on issues as complex as sowtware source code copyright. You'd have to understand the underlying principles. Although, it's pretty funny that SCO is trying to cash in on code they've already distributed under GPL copyleft. Isn't it kind of late? Here's my Score:0 musings - I'm too busy for karma whoring...

    --
    --v
  118. Software patents 'threaten Linux' by tomcrick · · Score: 1

    Interesting info relating to recent threats against Linux on BBC News Online. An interview with 'open source advocate' Bruce Perens about software patents, not the SCO lawsuits, being the biggest threat in the future.

    Bruce Perens has also used the now famous phrase '...2004 - the year of Linux on the desktop...', but it seems quite interesting exploring the ramifications of the flood of software patents for pretty much anything (e.g. FFII v Amazon Gift Ordering patent ).

  119. Re:Democrat President Candidates support Reparatio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    exactly. the whole pointof equality is *equality*. if we are oto be judged by the content of the characters and not the color of our skins, AA is really only slowing the process. reparations, certainly. employment laws, absolutely. butI simply see AA as detrimental to the whole cause of equality!

  120. where Daisy Duke fits into the SCO affair by CafeBabe613 · · Score: 1

    I came accross a pretty amusign approach to explaining the controversy in laymen's terms. Here's how it begins: ----------------- I know this whole SCO/Linux thing can be very confusing, so I created this summary page to explain what's going on. To make it easier to understand, I put it in familiar terms. Cast: Daisy - Linux Roscoe P. Coltrane - SCO Boss Hogg - Microsoft Bo - Free Software Foundation Luke - Open Source Initiative Cooter - Bruce Perens Uncle Jesse - Novell Here's the whole thing: http://www.arie.org/doh/

  121. Re:Democrat President Candidates support Reparatio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but

    If your government has acted to take away your rights then you should be able to have that government make amends for their tresspass.

  122. Hey, nobody MADE you click the link bitchboy. by Chas · · Score: 1

    If you're sick of seeing it, turn off your computer and chuck it out a window.

    Do us all a favor.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!