Slashdot Mirror
SCO Identifies EV1Servers as Linux Licensee
jasonhamilton writes "EV1Servers.net has been identified as a Linux licensee, giving them the dubious title of being the first dedicated hosting company to have a licence agreement with SCO. Rather than 'eliminating uncertainty from our clients' hosting infrastructure', as Robert Marsh (CEO of EV1Servers) claims, some users of EV1 appear to be somewhat upset."
You tell EV1 that you're taking your business elsewhere, you take your business elsewhere, and you tell your friends to stay the hell away from EV1 as a hosting company.
Code or be coded.
We should boycott EV1Servers for contributing to the SCO legal fund.
Indeed. Show that sponsoring the terrorists is not tolerated.
No doubt Darl et. al will bring this up as an example of how the Linux Community (tm) attacks everyone that deals with them, but hey, there's nothing wrong with that.
Show the world that SCO is a disease that infects everyone that touches it.
Bring out the torches!
BTW, I hope nobody is moronic enough to DDOS them. It's a losing strategy. Boycott is much better.
(Obviously these guys could also be out friends, and this might be a scheme to get to SCO, perhaps for selling what they don't own or whatever, but that seems rather far-fetched).
Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
For those of you who aren't customers of EV1, like I am, you might want to notice that they can't take very many new servers right now because their one operational datacenter is full. However, their new datacenter more than doubles their capacity and opens this week. Oh, and a 2-week long $1 setup fee special starts soon after that new datacenter goes online.
Considering that they didn't pay the "going rate" of $699 per server, and likely got a huge discount for allowing SCO to use their name, I'm pretty sure this one's being written off as an advertising expense. Slashdot and the rest of the tech media is taking the bait hook, line, and sinker.
That's a nice theory and for a minute there I briefly considered buying an SCO license, but in reality I doubt there will be any meat left on them bones by the time IBM is done with them. Of course you could play vulture and hope that IBM gets full and leaves a few scraps for you -- but I suspect there won't be anything left of SCO other then a bloody stain on the ground where they went down. IBM will probably grind up the bones and use them to make soup before it's all said and done ;)
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
As much publicity as ev1servers.net is going to receive (negative, positive, regardless) having their servers not respond to a rush of traffic is not saying much for product...
Note in all the articles & releases that 1: there is no mention if these licenses were purchased for any amount of money 2: it only covers "SCO Intellectual Property" and 3: it makes it seem like this is a Fortune 1000 company that's involved. The release states "EV1Servers.Net joins other Fortune 1000 companies that have signed up for a SCO IP license". Go take a look at any list of Fortune 1000 companies and check for yourself if EV1Servers.Net is listed. It's not even close.
In reading this press release it looks to me like the SCO FUD Machine is working at high speed.
[From Groklaw]
Sadly, that last link seems to be slashdotted already via Groklaw. The old "too many connections" PHP error. Heh.
I was apparently a bit late in submitting this article, but I have to wonder, would this action not terminate SCO's license to Linux under Section 4 of the GNU GPL?
Section 4 reads:
Of course, IANAL.
Well, that's still better than them displaying a whole lot of PHP mysql command errors. Strictly speaking, that one remaining error should go, also...
At least it shows that whoever coded the thing could at least think a little bit of this "error handling" thing. I wonder why so many PHP coders don't care enough to check if they actually have successfully got the connection and, if they haven't, bail out gracefully...
Check out their homepage, they are opening a new datacenter in less than 48 hours. With thousands of servers ready to go, these should sell like hotcakes with all the free publicity. People running a business don't care about "sticking it to SCO". They want a cheap server (which EV1 offers) and this newly added protection from SCO will be seen as a bonus.
Also, someone from EV1 said on the (now Slashdotted) forum that they bought a site license, not a per server licence, so they did not pay $700 * 20,000 servers. Hell, for all we know they could have paid zero. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours, right?
While it might have the effect of making other companies choose to buy a license, legally it has no weight. If I set up a scam and you fall for it, and I get caught, I can't tell the judge "Look, this guy bought one, so it must be legit!" That would simply not fly in a court of law in the US.
Karma: Frotzed (mostly due to the Frobozz Magic Karma Company)
Indeed. Show that sponsoring the terrorists is not tolerated.
Oh, for crying out loud, does every irritating jackass who uses intimidation tactics have to be called a "terrorist" now?
What a great idea, let's treat being litigious and greedy the same as being insane and murderous.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Guys,
...
Letters like this can help. However, if you're going to send an email purporting to be CTO, can we at least get some decent grammar in a letter written as a professional?
Contrary seem to open yourself up
weaving nothing but lies and decept in
fear that your going to have
Maybe there are something to those college degrees after all...
So they paid SCO's mobsters. Disgusting, yes, but I see it as insurance... like having a plan for a second backup generator in case the fail-proof first backup generator fails. The chances of SCO prevailing are slim, but non-zero... just like the chances of the backup generator failing.
... the rest of us are not in this position, SCO rhetoric and nonsensical ravings aside.
It is not insurance, it is anti-insurance. Now they have a contractual relationship with SCO, a contractual relationship which gives SCO the power to sue EV1, but does not offer EV1 any tangible protection whatsoever. See the groklaw analysis of the SCO licensing terms for specifics.
EV1 is now in a position where it can be sued by SCO and not have the lawsuit thrown out immediately
I'd say EV1 is likely in for a world of hurt, and their customers would be well advised to be looking around for alternatives.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
People complained that Wal-Mart was killing off mom and pop stores. Nothing was done and Wal-Mart indeed killed off mom and pop stores.
People complained that tech jobs being outsourced to India will hurt the job market. Nothing was done and jobs were outsoured, causing massive layoffs.
Boycotts never happen on its own.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
Well, I for one, would not be surprised if SCO PAID EV1Servers to be able to use their name.
Real life is overrated.
Since the company did it without your knowledge or consent its hardly your fault, but it is your fault if you keep giving them money to give to SCO.
"Mission Accomplished" -- George W. Bush May 1, 2003
"EV1Servers.Net joins other Fortune 1000 companies"
The word "other" implies that EV1 is also a Fortune 1000 company, and it is not. SCO's ability to write misleading crap remains intact.
Regardless of whether your estimate on the money involved is in the ballpark (I tend to think it's high in fact) your final conclusion is wrong. SCO couldn't do anything about the server to begin with. Now they can. The license gives them grounds to sue that were non-existent before. It's made the situation less reliable, not more, and that's the reason that if I were doing business with EV1 (I'm not) I would terminate that relationship ASAP. I don't care if the 'license' was free, or even if SCO paid them $150,000 US to take it for that matter, it's still overpriced. It gives the buyer nothing, and gives SCO a contractual relationship on which a lawsuit could later be based where there was none before. Taking that license at any price indicates severe incompetence on the part of EV1s counsel, or even more severe incompetence on the part of their executives if they did this over the contrary advice of their counsel.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
In addition to EV1's documented spam support, this act makes for a very good argument that the management of the company is clueless. Do you really want people so stupid as to give in to SCO's bullshit running your webserver?
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!