Slashdot Mirror
Linus Speaks Out, Calls SCO 'Cornered Rat'
dexterpexter writes "In an interview with Business Week, Linux founder and guardian Linus Torvalds had, in his usual brand of blunt humor, the following to say about SCO: 'They're a cornered rat, and quite frankly, I think they have rabies to boot. I'd rather not get too close to them,' and 'There are literally several levels of SCO being wrong. And even if we were to live in that alternate universe where SCO would be right, they'd still be wrong.'" In the same issue, there's also an interview with Darl McBride where he admits that the company was failing and the Linux-related lawsuits were a last-ditch effort to prevent bankruptcy.
Should I leave this MyDoom worm on my machine for a few days... Sure.
I can't see this whole thing lasting very long, I mean, hopefully someone will realize the SCO has absolutly no case, and are just full of malarky. I want to see how this will turn out though, And what will happen to SCO and it's silly licenses....
Setec Astronomy
I just can't imagine what it must be like to be constantly having to explain the same damn thing over and over again.
Hang on, my first job here was helpdesk. Nevermind.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
SCO were a few quarters away from running out of cash so...they decided to utilise their Unix IP rights, except looking at the quality of their argiument so far this looks like staggering desperation.
How unfortunate that the ethical bankruptcy is tied so closely to the fiscal one. Where was it written that this *had* to be so painful?
C|N>K
In the end, I think we'll all look back on this as the time where Linux went from sort of a fringe software in the minds of a lot of people to a mainstream player, where corporations learned they shouldn't mess with the OSS community and when the idea of open-source really started to make people ask "Why *am* I paying for this software?"
After all, that which doesn't kill us, etc. etc.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
I'd say right now the open source community might look like the bigger rat with the new worm spreading and DDoSing SCO. It's not funny, it's not justice, and it just makes the open source community look like the cornered rat in the eyes of the masses. The first thing Linus should've done was to speak out and condemn this sort of behavior.
While it may be humorous to some of the immature individuals on this site, a worm to DDoS SCO is a terrible blunder. It just strengthens SCO's arguments that the open source community is made up of troublemakers that need to be stopped.
When all is said and done with this case I think Darl McBride will be making a fast exit... to South America.
Other people have said it and I agree with it... those attempted extortion, excuse me, licensing letters they sent out are should be pursued as federal mail fraud, and the SEC should take a long hard look at Mr. McBride and his lawyers, and how they're playing their own company's stock.
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
..is unfairly demeaning both rats and corners with such a comparison.
Yikes! And they claim the GPL is viral, nothing compared to their rabies though... :)
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
what will we talk about on Slashdot?
We need two RIAA stories, stat!
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE
ok"In the same issue, there's also an interview with Darl McBride where he admits that the company was failing and the Linux-related lawsuits were a last-ditch effort to prevent bankruptcy."
Way to make it sound very sordid. The company was falling towards bankruptcy, yes. It was a last ditch effort, yes. But.....oh.....
"I said my goal was to get a return on the initial Caldera IPO, when it was trading at $56 per share...."
I'm sure everyone would like their money back from the tech-bust, but there's this little thing called reality. Unless you're Darl, of course.
|>
Here be Dragons
Why is Linus feeding Darl, the ultimate troll?
The owls are not what they seem
You may remember my attempt at starting a GoogleBombing where "litigious bastards" links to SCO as the first hit. (see this
Way to go! It's a good day for slashdot and the net as a whole.
Trolling is a art,
Hopefully and finally SCOX will now start showing the true worth of the company. BTW, does anyone know what the top execs have cleared thus far from this scam? Was it worth it and is this going to be an unforunate part of doing business like SPAM?
Well, and in the financial sector, which seems to cling to the stubborn belief that there might be something to their tactics and/or allegations.
It's quite likely that "truth will out", as they say, but if public opinion has any bearing on the outcome of this struggle IBM and Linus need to get better visibility in the more widely consumed (and moronic) news channels. I haven't seen anything but negativeish stuff there, but it's what gets out to the masses.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
You gotta love that guy's way of making a point.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
The BusinessWeek/Information Technology/Online Extra is pretty slick. As I read it, it appears that if McBribe is a cornered rat, then it's by his own devices.
Within 30 days he leaps into action. He then sandbags IBM after he sends out a Shareholder's letter
Then he get's all pissy, claming IBM goes ballistic when Big Blue flexes it's muscles.
The more I read about this the more and more it's clear to me that McBribe isn't leading this company into profitability, but a death march
Sounds to me like SCO has no one to blame but themselves here.
--- have you healed your church website?
"They say if you want to get into an argument at the dinner table, start a conversation about religion or politics. I would argue that Linux is a cross between religion and politics."
This is the first intelligent thing I have heard Darl say throughout this process.
This guy actually believes in a blanket statement like that?
"Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
Darl:
In concept it was great, it wasn't until December when we came out and said here's where the problems are with Linux, and we have a program where you can deal with that.
Q: What was the reception to that?
A: It seemed everyone in the industry was either positive or neutral to that, except for IBM. IBM had a violent reaction to it, even though it wasn't targeted directly at them.
Everyone was either positive or neutral to it? What are you smoking today Darl? Give me an f'en break.
Casual Games/Downloads
from the article...
.. But they are, in that case, Fortune 500 companies.
: Have you had direct talks with customers yet?
A: Very carefully over the last quarter, instead of sending out mass invoices, we stepped very carefully and really had a lot of direct one-on-one meetings with 15 or so companies. In the process of doing that, we learned a lot. We listened. We talked. And we went back and forth. About 20% of those companies signed licenses with us.
Q: Can you name any of them?
A: We have taken the stance not to,
let's see 20% of 15, that's what.. ~2. so let's see, Microsoft and Sun perhaps?
SCO can do absolutely anything they want. Lie, steal, commit slander and fraud. There are no repercussions.
The linux community, meanwhile, has to be absolutely perfect and saintlike and have not a single user do anything that could be interpreted as unethical, or they get blasted as scary anarchists.
This is even more funny when you consider SCO is a singular organization which can enforce ethical standards, whereas "the linux community" is an open ended, uncontrollable group of people that basically means everyone who downloads a certain program.
We need a media that knows how to do more than reprint press releases.
Wow! They were down to their last 75 cents and they were able to come back this far!
That's quite an accomplishment indeed.
Calling them just "rats" transmit the whole concept we all have about them.
From the McBride Article: "it becomes a question of whether you're going to protect your rights or back down from a set of folks you believe are going to come after you with pitchforks." Why didn't we think of this earlier? These DDoS attacks are far too nerdy to scare Darl. Pitchforks... sweeeeettt!!!
Like Gollum in LOTR, I almost feel sorry for the litigious bastards. Almost.
Concievably, if everyone steps up and buys a license, we don't need to.
This is absolutely hilarious when you consider that if you are one of the hypothetical companies that actually bought a license, SCO's response has been to threaten you with more litigation.
SCO is basically treating "UNIXWare Licensees" as "people we can stomp all over". Recently they sent a letter to all of their licensees stating that they have to prove they aren't using a version of linux that contains SCO code-- thus opening themselves up to a lawsuit if this can be shown to be wrong-- or lose their license.
Now, think about this-- SCO is saying publicly that if you buy a UNIXWare License, you get to use the linux infected with hypothetical SCO code without fear of lawsuit. Then when they buy one, you demand you stop using the linux infected with hypothetical SCO code or face a lawsuit!
WTF?
The whole SCO case really is just one level of lies built onto another, just as Linus claims. My wife is in law school specializing in intellectual property law, and even she couldn't make any sense out of what I told her about the case. Bascially my explination went something like this, "Even if this were true, which it isn't, that would imply this, which isn't true, but even if that was true, ...."
They've dug such a web of lies and confusion, and I think that is actually helping them keep their garbage claims going for so long!
"The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
'Even if x were true, it'd still be false.'
:-P
I don't care who is he is, that offends me as a programmer.
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
"Q: There has been a rumor in Silicon Valley that you're going to sue Google. A: Yeah, Google gets brought up a lot. They're high-profile, and they're one of the largest users of Linux. They have nearly 10,000 boxes, from what we can tell. They're a poster child. I think what's interesting about them is they have been able to develop a low-cost operating model because of Linux. If your model is going to hold up, you better make sure you don't have any infringing code in there. Otherwise, you need to adjust your financials based on how much you pay for your servers. "
The emphasis is mine. This is SCO's trump card for going after google. You see, any lawsuits based on IP would look VERY bad for potential investors when google wants to go public. I mean, licensing all of their 10k boxes would cost $6,990,000, but any amount looks bad to shareholders, especially since if SCO were to win (yeah yeah I know) they could basically say " we don't care how much you offer, we're not letting you use our IP" and google would be in a tight spot, and probably have to spend a LOT more than 7 mil to fix it.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
In a way SCO has already won, because the debate is no longer about if copyrights are right or usefull in the information age, but rather is Linux in violation of copyrights.
It's sorta like arguing if a speech I wrote violates the Kings laws, rather than asking if the king should have the right to restrict peoples speech at all to begin with.
What an [interesting interview]! The [subject of the interview] was [interesting].
[Several paragraphs of, more or less, praise for BW Online's work]
[This post edited by BW Online.]
Ryan Fenton
"...he admits that the company was failing and the Linux-related lawsuits were a last-ditch effort to prevent bankruptcy."
I'm sorry, I just don't see that. Nowhere in that article did I see an admission that it was a last-ditch effort to prevent bankruptcy. I see him talking about "protecting UNIX IP rights"...I'm not even touching that part.
Let's let people read the article and draw their own conclusions instead of making some up to make Darl sound worse. He can do that all on his own.
Jeremy Baumgartner
it's almost like a poker bluff - they're betting like they have a great hand, hoping the others will fold, cut their losses and just let SCO have what's in the pot. However, they didn't realize there's some old timers at the table with deep pockets willing to see their bet and call them on it. Eventually SCO is going to have to show their hand.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
I'd say right now the open source community might look like the bigger rat with the new worm spreading and DDoSing SCO
I find it hard to believe that the "open source community" could be responsible for this DDOS against SCO.
My guess is that the SCO attack is a red herring -- what better way for the spammers to divert your attention from the fact that this virus enables remote access of infected computers than to get people all in a huff about the supposed "baddies" in the open source community.
If anyone knows what's in Linux, it's Linus Torvalds. He did the first work on the open-source operating system
;).
My god, RMS will be breathing fire at this I bet.. but for god sakes can we just understand that the opensource movement was a derivative of the Freesource movement.. its not allot to ask really.. stop and learn the facts.
1, Linus developed a kernel, a good one.
2, His followers use FREESOURCE apps to make it into what we know as "Linux" but really is GNU+Linux.
3, MOD me down and you prove just how little you know
moo
'They're a cornered rat, and quite frankly, I think they have rabies to boot. I'd rather not get too close to them,'
Linus, you're overestimating them. Rabbies only occurs in warm-blooded animals.
Did anybody else notice how Linus never uses the term "intellectual property"? Everytime it appears in the interview it is in square brackets, meaning the editor replaced such coneceptually hard words as "source code" by "intellectual property". Darl OTOH employs this stupid term several times throughout his interview. Maybe he and the editors should try to understand this.
In the end, I think we'll all look back on this as the time where Linux went from sort of a fringe software in the minds of a lot of people to a mainstream player, where corporations learned they shouldn't mess with the OSS community and when the idea of open-source really started to make people ask "Why *am* I paying for this software?"
/. much, they read the Times and CNN.
The problem with this is sometimes a few bad apples make the OSS community look like a bunch of crazy lunatics. Take the nice worm that is going around now... CNN already has an article which pretty much blames the OSS community for the worm. In fact, a quote like this: "Virus experts suggested MyDoom's author was a fan of the Linux open source community..." can be damaging to getting Linux and OSS recognized in a good light.
It is too bad that this has to happen because PHBs do not read message boards or surf
You don't go all in in Texas Hold'em when your cards suck and your opponent is obligated to call your bluff.
Is Darl really bluffing, or is there something we're missing? Linus did not code the entire kernel all by himself - what if someone slipped some copied code in there and passed it off as orginal? Possible?
What if, to use Linus' map maker example against him, SCO has found a code bug that in Linux that matches a code bug they own?
As someone said in previous Slashdot comment, Darl is betting the bank. As a CEO, you only do that when it's your only option, when your case is rock solid, or when you intend to defraud the public. Which is it, Darl?
post. But as to the being surprised, you should read his biography. Linus is much more quirky person then I'd have imagined. Possibly on an evil genius level. Definitely a good mix attention dodging super star and good old fashioned black humor. God bless Europe!
Quack, quack.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Darl McBride speaks:
We came out last summer and put out some code that the Linux community on one hand said, preposterous, that's [Berkeley software]. On the other hand, some people in the Linux community said, hold on, you may have some copyright issues there.... There are 2.5 million servers out there today that have this code in it. When are Linux customers going to clean that stuff up? So that's one issue, Linux is tainted, even by their own admission.
Amazing. "some people in the Linux community said... you may have some copyright issues there..." Um, who, exactly, said this? And he leaps from that to "Linux is tainted, even by their own admission."
"When are Linux customers going to clean that stuff up?" Well, given that this code had already been removed from the Linux 2.5 kernel before SCO showed it in obfuscated form, and given that even the 2.4 kernels have had it removed now too, I'd say it has already been cleaned up.
"There are 2.5 million servers out there today that have this code in it." This code only ever existed in Itanium kernels; are there even 2.5 million Linux Itanium servers in the world? Of the Linux Itanium servers, how many are still running an old kernel with this code in it? (Not many, I should think, since there are some security holes that have been fixed in newer kernels.)
It's like studying a fractal. The more you look at the details of what he's saying, the more wrong stuff you find.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
literally has a meaning beyond just meaning ink and a pen and some writing. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=literally
**Usage Note: For more than a hundred years, critics have remarked on the incoherency of using literally in a way that suggests the exact opposite of its primary sense of "in a manner that accords with the literal sense of the words." In 1926, for example, H.W. Fowler cited the example "The 300,000 Unionists... will be literally thrown to the wolves." The practice does not stem from a change in the meaning of literally itselfif it did, the word would long since have come to mean "virtually" or "figuratively"but from a natural tendency to use the word as a general intensive, as in They had literally no help from the government on the project, where no contrast with the figurative sense of the words is intended.**
anyways I didn't read the Linus's comment.. but 'literally','kirjaimellisesti' in finnish is almost never used in the sense of meaning that you got something in written(well, maybe sometimes, but mostly it's used that something is almost exactly as written), if you had something on paper you would say "minulla on mustaa valkoisella asiasta"(I got black on white about the issue", meaning that you literally have something on paper to back your opinion, which is what darl is saying).
well that was a ramble and didn't mean much beyond that 'literally' is sometimes used like you wouldn't except if it just meant some writing on paper(actually come to think of it 'literally' is sometimes used in english when you would use 'in practice' in finnish).
Now, if you have issues about the incosistency of the english language I'd suggest that you move into some country that has their own language and is sufficiently small that you actually even can say which way of saying something is 'right'. in finland for example there is an instituion that literally has the final say-so in which way of saying something is the officially approved way and should be teached in schools, english has spread too wide for such institution to be possible for it. also modern english is actually a quite young language.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Why does business week always crash mozilla. I'm running 1.2 on win '98.
evanchik.net
Horrors. Besides the slick-meister tan, this creature actually talks like this?
Remember, cubicals are for closers:
"We're going to go out and shine this company up."
Quick Martha, order me a set of those fancy word talking tapes:
significant asset base...Unix intellectual property...wasn't being optimized.
As if switches came in decimal or octal:
it wasn't like a binary switch
Complete mastery for metaphors:
that's like beachfront property...that's still on the beach. An elephant on a table...
Looks like those mail order degrees are good for something after all.
Why settle for trillions when you can have... [pinky to mouth] MILLIONS?
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
THE MICROSOFT FACTOR
But who stands to gain the most from an SCO win? Microsoft. Linux is the primary force standing between Microsoft and domination of the computer world. The software giant is happily fanning customers' fears with an anti-Linux campaign while pumping money into SCO. Even though neither company has disclosed a dollar figure, sources close to SCO say Microsoft has spent more than $12 million on SCO licenses. Microsoft says it needs the licenses because it sells technology that allows its customers to run applications that were designed for Unix, the operating system Linux was modeled on. Critics believe it is just helping SCO finance its lawsuit.
[A number of files SCO claims to own] were written from scratch for Linux.... SCO also doesn't hold any copyrights to the BSD code [software developed at the University of California at Berkeley that SCO says contained copyrighted material that was passed on to Linux], nor is it actually in [SCO's version of Unix]. So SCO is wrong.
The [use of brackets to indicate editorial summary] throughout the [BusinessWeek interview with Linus] is a little [excessive]... I [really wonder] what the [uneditted transcript] looked like. For all we know, [Linus] could have said [bite me Darl you little weasel].
Gerald Holmes, yes that Gerald Holmes, has provided yet another lucid and in depth analysis of the SCO situation at this excellent site.
I highly recommend it.
Me too. I laughed and I cried.
The two best things about the article: First, it immediately points out that shortly after Darl came on board, his primary focus was to start up the litigation machine. Second, it spends a good chuck of time making a persuasive case for the M$-SCO connection. Very good article in a well-respected forum for those who have not paid close attention to this fiasco.
That ain't liver; that's beef kidney!
"Linus Torvalds had, in his usual brand of blunt humor, the following to say about SCO: 'They're a cornered rat, and quite frankly, I think they have rabies to boot." Wow. That's the biggest insult to rabied-infested rats I've ever seen.
I don't think anyone has purchased an SCO license with the intention of really using it, certainly no one big enough that SCO couldn't just return their money. If (when) SCO loses the case, the company is just going to fold. They've pissed off too many people to ever do business again. Look at how they destroyed United Linux. Who in their right mind would have anything to do with a company that does crap like that? When a company folds like that, it just about impossible to get your money back. It'd probably cost more in lawyers than it's worth. Going after Darl's not going to happen. He's too well shielded by corporate law (you'd have to prove he knew his claims where bogus, which is very hard). So you're not gonna get your money that way.
Besides, right now lawyers are running the show over at SCO. You really think they're gonna let the licensees get paid before they do? Once that company folds, the lawyers get paid first, probably creditors next and then anyone who threatens to sue last.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I've looked all over the web, and I just can't find the source files for myDoom. The project isn't hosted at SourceForge, the GPL isn't included in the distribution, and Stallman isn't ranting about how it should be renamed GNUDoom. MyDoom doesn't even start with a K or a G. Is it from Mozilla? It's spelled correctly... That's creepy.
I've got some crazy ideas that would make this worm even slower / more bloated / more error-prone, and would love to try and split the community with a fork. It would be so much better if it was recoded in obfuscated Perl on an XML base with full x86, Sparc, NeXT, and Amiga source compatibility. Besides, the current maintainer is a power hungry jerk. When I find out who he is and where his sources are hosted, his project will be obsolete.
Where did you hear that this worm is part of the open source community again?
The ______ Agenda
From the article:
Emphasis mine. Uhh.. how about when you prove to us that it, in fact, exists by SHOWING US WHERE THE FUCK IT IS!
I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
Q: Have you had direct talks with customers yet?
A: Very carefully over the last quarter, instead of sending out mass invoices, we stepped very carefully and really had a lot of direct one-on-one meetings with 15 or so companies. In the process of doing that, we learned a lot. We listened. We talked. And we went back and forth. About 20% of those companies signed licenses with us.
15 companies x 20% = 3
So, ABOUT 3 companies have signed the licenses. I'm inspired. I'm going to throw money at SCO and drive up their stock even further.
Jeez Daryl! Those Linux guys are walkovers compared to the hardcore GNU people.
Just wait until you start sueing Richard Stallman - it won't be pretty , and you'll be begging for your mama!!
Regarding the CNN.com article: "Experts: Vicious worm 'Linux war' weapon" found here:
o om .spread/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/01/27/myd
The author, Jeordan Legon, stated that 'virus experts' suggested that a 'Linux fan' was responsible for the creation of the myDoom worm. The title of the article clearly implies both that a 'linux war' exists, and that the worm is somehow a direct weapon of that war. Yet the only attributed quote to back up this assertion is from Chris Belthoff, who says, "The MyDoom worm takes the Linux Wars to a new intensity" and "It appears that the author of MyDoom may have taken the war of words from the courtrooms and Internet message boards to a new level by unleashing this worm which attacks SCO's Web site."
Unless Mr. Belthoff is a witness to the crime, or has other direct knowledge of the criminal and his/her activities, his 'expert opinion' on this matter is no more informative than what any random person taken off the street might have to say - which is. not informative at all.
No one knows who wrote the worm, what his or her intentions were, nor what relationship - if any - the worm author has with Linux or the Open Source community. Of course, Mr. Legon doesn't assert such a relationship in his article, he only implies it, leaving factual statements about the worm and how it works several paragraphs down from the top.
Mr Legon, may I ask you: Just what is the job of a reporter? Is it to report facts or spread gossip in the form of irrelevant and nonfactual 'expert opinion'? Because, if your job is to report facts, than may I say that in my 'non-expert opinion' you badly missed the mark with this article.
Thank You,
J. Maynard Gelinas
Eric Raymond has mentioned on a number of occasions, here and elsewhere, that he has legitimate copies of several historic Unix source trees and that he's compared them to Linux. He's also developed an automated comparison process for just such applications. See this NWFusion article for example.
"Q: Have you had direct talks with customers yet?
A: Very carefully over the last quarter, instead of sending out mass invoices, we stepped very carefully and really had a lot of direct one-on-one meetings with 15 or so companies. In the process of doing that, we learned a lot. We listened. We talked. And we went back and forth. About 20% of those companies signed licenses with us."
20% of 15 = 3.0
Why did I lurk so long before registering for a Slashdot account? I could have had a Slashdot ID of less than 100000.
Even if x were true, it'd still be false.
No, it makes sense in logic, though it's an awful way to put it. He's just stating the final step before the introduction of an inverse proof rule in proving the SCO is wrong. "If you assume that SCO is right then one can still demonstrate that they are wrong."
Remember that if SCO is right about its claims (which include Linux not being legal to distribute and them being able to legally distribute Linux), then they themselves are in violation of many copyrights?
So, let SCORight represent the truth of all of SCO's claims. Then:
1. SCORight => SCOViolatesCopyright. Given
2. SCOViolatesCopyright => ~SCORight. Given
3. SCORight. Assumed.
4. SCOViolatesCopyright. Transitivity(1, 3) | 3
5. ~SCORight. Transitivity(2, 4) | 3
6. ~SCORight. Inverse Proof (3, 5)
He's just talking about step 5. Even if SCO was right, they'd still be wrong. All this means is that the truth of "SCORight" is self-inconconsistent -- Darl has made self-inconsistent claims.
May we never see th
SCO deserves all of the criticism and more because they are using the legal system to abuse other businesses. They have not supported their copyright claims and yet they continue to press their financial claims against Linux users in a manner just short of outright fraud.
On a side note, I'm just amazed by IBM's social conscience. It's plain how few companies there are that recognize opportunities to invest in community for the benefit of the company and the community.
IBM doesn't necessarily (well, as a company) have a social conscience. IBM, however, is smart enough to realize that dealing with the OSS community can be phenomenally profitable -- that acting as if it *does* have one is marvelously beneficial. There are, very many differences in dealing with OSS versus traditional software. Here are some of my guesses as to what to do differently:
* A feeling of good will matters. Goodwill only matters normally as far as wining and dining a negotiator to try and get him to sell out his company a little. The OSS community is *extremely* sensitive to companies, treating them like people, whom are either friendly or unfriendly to OSS. A cohesive positive-sounding OSS company policy does a tremendous amount to keep a company in the good graces of the OSS folks. Press releases about how said company uses OSS, and thinks it's a good idea. Periodically releasing some code as OSS is a nice icing. (Take OpenAFS -- IBM only benefits from having that around, and it generates lots of good will.)
* Legal issues need to be minimized. Dealing with a company, you have lawyers who can hammer things out. The OSS community likes things pretty simple and clear.
* The OSS community doesn't demand masses of money. It's appreciated, like IBM's ongoing investment in open source development (which was probably done for strategic reasons, improving software that they needed worked on, as much as PR value), but a positive attitude toward OSS can count more than donating masses of money toward OSS.
* You don't need to worry about getting screwed over legally, in general. OSS folks are not generally out to shaft people over licenses. Legally, things are simple and nice.
* The OSS community can jump to conclusions quickly, and needs to be spoken to publically when misconceptions start going around. You have a lot of people with individual opinions. If a major Linux Ethernet player, like Donald Becker, writes a letter to, LKML saying that some chipset made by a company is lousy, said company needs an official, public response quickly. If there's a Slashdot story out about how your company is discontinuing production of Mindstorms (and the story is wrong), you should probably have a press release out within the day.
* The OSS community values specs. Take a page from Matrox, who decided what they could and couldn't release (couldn't release source to some on-card microcode, which had to be distributed in binary, but *could* release specs to much of the rest of the card.) Matrox's older G200-G450 series are still among the best supported of video cards under Linux and X.
* Maintain an official presence on relevant public forums, since so much OSS-related stuff takes place in the open. You might just have a mail filter that drops any email on major mailing lists containing your company name or product names into your PR department's inbox.
* Little of the OSS community accepts legal liability. This should be noted -- however, problems like illegal code copying do not seem to be prevalant, simply because of the high visibility of doing so. There are times when you may want indemnification of code you use -- the OSS community doesn't do that.
* Giving gifts can be inexpensive and valuable. In healthy Linux tradition, if someone runs out and implements a driver for your chipset, send 'em something nice in the mail. In rich Linux tradition, a case of beer seems to work well. It also costs you about a ten thousandth of what it would to implement the thing commercially, and ensures future good will. For driver writers, it's frequently a really, really good idea to just send along a few other products that you make (ones without drivers). This encourages people who have already demonstrated willingness to produce, wi
May we never see th
No, but he sure is going to look like him after Novel, IBM and the others gang bang him with litigation.
"There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
I found a site that put a nice little twist on this whole SCO vs. Linux thing. The site is http://www.linuxstolescocode.com, it is very new and the site is not completely up yet, but the first page is hilarious! You have to look at the first page very carefully and don't be to quick to hit the back button on your browser! (hint) Read carefully!
I'm going to throw money at SCO and drive up their stock even further.
Please let me know when you do, so I can short it afterwards.
while (!asleep()) sheep++