Slashdot Mirror
Today Is SCO's Deadline To Sue Linux User
herrvinny writes "As proprietor of SCO Countdown, I just wanted to remind people that today is the deadline for SCO to sue a Linux user. As everyone should know, SCO, 3 months ago, promised to sue a Linux user within three months. Well, that day has come. Who is SCO going to sue, if it is even going to sue?"
Actually, it's a no-brainer -- they will sue Google. And before you say "ahh yes, Google, a huge Linux user" you should instead think to yourself "ahh yes Google, the premiere search engine." Because when the suit comes, that's what it will really be about. SCO is just a Microsoft puppet being used to do the nasty things M$ can't do in public.
What is Microsoft's next "big thing?" Web searching. And who have they set their sights on? Google. Fortunately for Microsoft, Google also happens to run Linux, so they can dispatch their little lap-dog on a smear campaign. Does it really matter if Google is vindicated or not if Microsoft can make businesses think "IP theft" when they think "Google?" You heard it here first...
Or perhaps someone small who will settle easily and then they can have a press release that says:
"Linux users begin to bow to SCO's claims of infringement as witnessed today by settling..."
It might prop the stock up for a little while.
How about this... Google is the biggest major user of Linux who is still profitable post-bubble. We don't know exactly how profitable because they're not public yet, but we know they have to be looking good to be thinking about an IPO.
At this point I think it would be too dangerous for them to sue anyone who would put up much of a fight. I imagine an unamed user, or one of their few remaining friends. Perhaps a Microsoft shell company.
The suit can be filed. Vague statements can be made. Face can be saved. The recipient of the suit might not even contest it. More smoke and mirrors.
I dont think even Darl McBride is foolish enough to risk a big name with the legal problems they're having.
LS
Hints and other juicyness can be found here
Apparently a Feb 11 S-3 Filing by SCO includes the following
"Additionally, we have begun notifying selected Linux end users in writing of violations we allege under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act related to our copyrights contained in Linux."
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
As an amusing aside, the other day I was visiting a friend of my wife's at her work. My 1 year old was with me, and, having wandered away for a second or so, my ears picked up the sound of SCSI hard discs spinning down. Fearing that I might be in the running for a few hours unpaid work bringing up some ancient Netware box (they're a bit low-tech where this gal works), I hastily powered the box back up. What had my 1 year old accidently powered off...? A SCO Unix box! Good on 'yer mate!
Like tinyurl, but one letter less! http://qurl.co.uk/
Well, since a couple decades ago it was IBM we were supposed to hate, it's only fitting that we cheer them on as they defend us from the latest Great Evil(tm).
From Groklaw
I think there would be a large list of very negative outcomes for SCO and very
little positive if SCO were to file a lawsuit against an end user.
1. Getting involved in another lawsuit will cause attorney fees to drain their
limited cash even faster
2. The lawsuit will likely take years to even go to trial, much like the IBM
suit. Since SCO must win the Novell lawsuit first (itself years away from
beginning, much less ending) to secure undisputed System V copyrights, any end
user lawsuit would probably have to be put on hold until the end of any appeals
in the Novell suit.
3. Unless an end user is distributing the Linux kernel, they are not guilty of
copyright infringement. Copyright law governs copying and not use of code.
Section 117 of copyright law also specifically excludes installing and running
software from being infringement.
4. The money that they can get from one company for unintentional copyright
infringement is limited and likely less than their attorney fees in many if not
most cases. Lack of registered copyrights limits awards to actual damages, which
are likely to be minimal or negligible. Even with registered copyrights, damages
for unintentional copying are severly limited.
5. SCO's failure to mitigate damages since at least May 2003 limits or
eliminates any damages they can collect
6. SCO themselves distributing any infringing code in their own Linux products,
especially under the GPL, limits or eliminated any damages they can collect
7. In the event that there really is SCO-owned code in the Linux kernel, SCO
will be forced to document any infringing code and prove their ownership, which
will allow it to be removed or replaced
8. It will increase ill will toward SCO from a greater number of companies and
individuals, including their own customers, who will likely abandon SCO in
significant numbers
9. The act of filing a large number of frivolous lawsuits may be used against
SCO and its executives in a shareholder lawsuit at a later date
---
Darn, thought of some more after I submitted.
10. In the event that SCO proves there is non-GPL code in the Linux kernel, they
simultaneously prove themselves guilty of violating the GPL and willful
copyright infringement. SCO has been distributing the kernel on their FTP site
for years, even after they were aware of the allegedly infringing code.
11. SCO and/or their attorneys may be fined for filing frivolous lawsuits.
12. SCO potentially opens themselves to prosecution for fraud or extortion by
state attorneys general, the FTC or other state or federal anti-fraud or
consumer protection agencies.
13. Any portions of Linux that SCO alleges are illegal may be covered by
AT&T's failure to add copyright notices, or the code in BSD-Lite, or the
ancient Unix code that Caldera previously released under a BSD-like license.
actually I heard it here first...
This online poll currently has a small but worrying percentage of people ready to buy SCO licences.
Co-operation beats competition
We can't find "www.sco.com"
It never existed. The Almighty says it has no old record.
Actually, its interesting that Google cache reports "Content removed at the request of the site's publisher".
Free XBox, PS2
Actually, Lehman was just one of the 1500 companies they sent threats to a while back. Red Hat just picked them as an example.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
After looking over the article at Groklaw I'm slightly worried. IANALP (Linux Programmer) but they do look like they're presenting a lot of substantial evidence. Is anyone else here worried?
All I have is debt SCO. I'm not a 14 year old like the RIAA likes to sue but I'm still a student. You can have 50% of my debt!
Hell maybe I'll settle with you and you can have it all!
--Thei Antispamist A useless endevor that will cer
Unless Microsoft included some of *cough* SCO's code into Windows, I don't think you will have a chance of being sued.
Searching Google "Windows Source Code"
Wow what's this?
windowssourcecode.tar downloaded sucessfully
Well form the looks of it, Microsoft might be the first to be sued by SCO!!! (not flamebait, joke)
It would be interesting to see who's the first linux user they sue.Most of the biggest users of linux are much bigger than SCO themselves leaving aside a few million single users who downloaded a copy n installed it on their home desktops or whatever.Sco vs Google would be real nice.
Lord of the Binges.
So let me get this straight:
They are suing an unknown party, whose name they will not release.
And they are suing for an undisclosed violation of Intellectual Property.
Anway, you mystery user, who knows not how you infringe, please step forward to be sued.
HAND
Patent: from Latin patere, to be open
Any change a Linux user/using company could sue SCO for slander?
SILENCE ALL!! I have a linux tattoo on my right shoulder (seriously). I want to be sued, goddamnit!!
Some of the latest news in the RedHat case, is that Lehman Brothers came forward with an extortion letter which accuses them of copyright infringement.
Now, if you'll notice the regular press, they pretty much publish SCO's press releases verbatim, and rarely is any mention made of the controversy surrounding their status.
If you look at the financial press, you will see NOTHING about the controversy.
RedHat and IBM are just tech stocks. Nothing there is going to get much attention from the press. I mean, it *is* IBM, but it's still just a tech stock to them, and the whole controversy is a mess. Maybe it's obvious to you and me and PJ, but, to them it's all speculation and rumor.
The fact is, the stock has been climbing. So when the analysts said "strong buy", they were right. The lawsuits don't matter. The fact that they are going down in flames, perhaps even with the execs going to prison, doesn't matter until it happens. Right now it looks like we all should have been buying the stock when they said "buy" (and probably selling off about now!)
But now, SCO has thrown down the gauntlet at the feet of Lehman Brothers. I think that is an even worse choice of adversary than IBM! Lehman Brothers, a financial house. The sort of place that will have SEC auditors on full-time staff, and Secret Service agents for security. NOW the financial press will be forced to pull their head out of the sand, or wherever it's stuck, and report that there might just be a problem here.
Because Lehman Brothers isn't just a tech stock. This isn't something the financial trades can ignore, pretending the issues are too technical or whatever excuse they have, because it's getting on THEIR turf. Also, the brokerage house has the sort of connections that should easily start the press machine reporting on their side of the story.
Threatening Lehman is absolutely the wackiest thing Darl &Co. have done to date. Even dumber than filing a lawsuit against IBM with no evidence. *WAY* dumber. Who are they gonna sue next? Charles Schwab? Are they TRYING to taunt the SEC into investigating? What could be a more foolish move, when you're doing a pump-n-dump scheme, than to make loud (possibly perjurous) threats in the face of the very people who have the ear of the SEC? A company that employs brokers who are the folks that make those "Strong Buy"/"Strong Sell" recommendations that the traders follow? What could possibly be more stupid or suicidal?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Just because they said they'd sue someone within three months doesn't create any legal obligation for them to meet that deadline, so counting down those three months is useless. They can sue anybody anytime they damn well please.
Furthermore, if you actually read the Techweb article that's linked to in the headline, you'll see the clear implication that the estimate of 90 days was approximate ("I think you'll certainly be seeing that within the next 90 days").
I mean, come on: Of all the things to call SCO on, this is one of the least constructive.
There's more than Google. How about Amazon ? They're profitable as of the last year, and publicly traded as well.
One big one is Pixar, or another animation studio. They use a lot of Linux for rendering farms, and some also have used SGI and other UNIXes in the past. They're moving to Linux in a big way.
And what about a large finance company on Wall Street? Most of them started experimenting with Linux years ago, and some have a lot of systems running it.
I guess we'll find out by the day's end. It's a sure thing, since SCO would never let its PR face say something and then contradict it in its actions.
If they tried to do this, IBM or some other large company with interests in Linux would pay his legal fees. I guess this might be what you meant by someone else paying, but I think that a company (e.g., IBM or Redhat) would step in right away, and it woudn't be a question of how much public sympathy there would be.
I also think that SCO understands this and will avoid this path accordingly.
I'd rather be lucky than good.
A friend of mine was looking through it yesterday (the leaked source code to Windows). He said from what he could tell it was for IE & that it had a lot of headers that started with GNU*
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.