Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Group Victoria v. SCO, Part II
Following up on last July's complaint, Elektroschock writes that "The Open Source Group Victoria (OSV) made a second complaint to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). In a similar case in Germany SCO Group received an injunction from the court, so SCO never sold Linux licenses in Germany (tarent vs. SCO, district court Munich). Competition police seems to be a strong weapon against SCO-like action."
SCO never sold licenses in Germany because of an injunction? Have they sold any licenses anywhere? Didn't think so....
Taking them to court may be a violation of their business method patent!
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
It's nice to see that the ACCC are doing their job. Does anyone know what the situation in the UK is with regards complaints to the relevant authorities? I would be very, very surprised indeed if the Trading Standards Authority, in their new guise and with things to prove, allow the sale of Linux licenses to UK residents and companies by SCO before a decision is reached in court with regards the allegations against the Linux kernel.
- an administrative fine from EUR 5 up to EUR 250.000,
- and, in the case that this cannot be collected, administrative detention
or
- administrative detention of up to six months to be enforced in the person of the managing director
in each case of contravention
prohibited
in business relations from claiming and distributing the assertions
as far as such assertions are not proven to be true.
That's clear enough. No more threats by SCO in Germany, or Darl goes to jail.
SCO isn't fighting this. If they had a case, they would.
Competition police seems to be a strong weapon against SCO-like action. ... IN countries that have applicable laws
NO SIG
It is like SCO is saying that you stole their lawn mower because they heard you have an automobile. As evidence they point to your neighbour's RV.
Yes, it is that crazy.
[Stolen from Yahoos Finance's SCOX Message Board]
There once was a man named McBride
Who brought a great case to be tried
His stock was a hit
As Darl talked his shit
But the code he continued to hide.
To lawyers McBride was a debtor
Who sought to sue users by letter
He sued IBM
With facts few and thin
A five year old could have done better.
Darl's *nix was the first in his deal
The clones that came after he'd steal
The clones were his perks
Or derivative works
Like prior art on the wheel.
The press was the court Darl first chose
Didio just brought it new lows
One could not but wonder
Whose sheets they were under
Since both were just Microsoft hoes.
Darl claimed stolen code when he sued
With millions of lines he'd include
He must have deceived
Since no one believed
He could count to twenty one when nude.
To be purchased was Darl's major plan
Then retire and keep up his tan
IBM said, "Fuck off,
You won't be playing golf
But homeless, beside a trash can."
McBride only wanted a fee
For Linux , which always was free
His whole case was hinging
On Linux infringing
On SCO's useless IP.
Darl wanted these fees forever
For hatching a plan he thought clever
With news so infernal
While hacking the kernel
Linus said "what the fuck ever."
Who understood Darl's attack?
Surely he smoked the best crack
We were mostly appalled
Ninety-three called
Wanting their UnixWare back.
In Vegas Darl said it would be
A display of infringing IP
Boy Wonder McBride
Pitched all truth aside
What he showed was all BSD.
Darl sued everyone that he could
With contracts he misunderstood
Not even a shrink
Could teach him to think
These lawsuits just made him sport wood.
(post to be continued in following post due to Slashdot wordcount filter, sorry)
What the hell are you talking about?
NOTICE: SCO has suspended new sales and distribution of SCO Linux until the intellectual property issues surrounding Linux are resolved. SCO will, however, continue to support existing SCO Linux and Caldera OpenLinux customers consistent with existing contractual obligations. SCO offers at no extra charge to its existing Linux customers a SCO UNIX IP license for their use of prior SCO or Caldera distributions of Linux in binary format. The license also covers binary use of support updates distributed to them by SCO. This SCO license balances SCO's need to enforce its intellectual property rights against the practical needs of existing customers in the marketplace.
For further information on how to obtain RPMS/SRPMS for OpenLinux, eDesktop and eServer see:
www.sco.com/support/linux_info.html
For further information on how to obtain RPMS/SRPMS for SCO Linux 4.0 see:
www.sco.com/support/scolinux_info.html or the SCO Linux 4.0 Update Download Page.
From: www.thescogroup.com/support/download.html
Competition police seems to be a strong weapon against SCO-like action.
The most salient observation I have seen for some time on Slashdot. You nailed the point.
Intellectual Property, be it trademark, copyright, patent, trade secret, and the related non-IP causes of action such as anti-circumvention, create limitations and monopolies. Ideally, the monopolies are carefully limited against social needs to yield a net societal benefit, but as with all law, horrifying results can occur. IP is a core source these days of examples of unintended consequences.
While IP and pseudo-IP create monopolies sponsored by the government, the government likewise has another body of law, a different kind of trade regulation, antitrust, to keep enterprises from abusing even fairly obtained competitive advantages to the detriment of society. Like IP, the application of these laws must be careful, because fear of antitrust liability can actually result in highly anticompettive consequences to the detriment of society.
Combine that with the corpus of law governing unfair competition and deceptive trade practices more generally, and it is no surprise that when a company really goes out there, there are a kazillion conflicting policies and issues.
That is why some uses of IP can be so "out there" as to rise to anticompetitive conduct, even though the monopoly given was government-blessed. And why some anticompetitive conduct can preclude a right to assert iP.
Look for that whenever: (i) a company with significant market share throws IP weight around; (ii) a company with a fairly fought ownership of a marketplace governed by IP tries to extend their rights to non-controlled markets; and (iii) a company, though not a market leader or innovator, really stretches some IP rights they do have to control a market beyond any reasonable threshold.
Remember that they're not actually *selling* the license here in the US, only claiming to. More than one person has documented the effort of attempting to buy a license, only to be ignored by SCO.
They probably realize that they have the potential to get into serious trouble here if they do sell a fraudulent license. They can yell about it all they want, however, to keep the stock price buoyed, and the clueless journalists who write about it never seem to think to do a little more research into the process of buying one.
Do you have ESP?