Slashdot Mirror


SCO Postpones Lawsuit, Now Threatening Two

zzxc writes "In a surprise turn of events, SCO says that they need more time to prepare an announcement of who they are going to sue. According to SCO, the lawsuits will be announced tomorrow morning shortly before a phone-in conference in which will be outlining their financial report. You can call 1-800-818-5264 code 141144 Wednesday at 9:00am MST to join in with your questions, or listen to the webcast. They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses. (EV1.net servers or Lindows?)"

532 comments

  1. Oh my God by iswm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What a surpise! Sheesh, this is never going to go anywhere.

    --
    Buckethead
    1. Re:Oh my God by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When SCO does finally sue someone, it will not be for using a Linux distribution like they want you to think. When the court filings are examined, it will probably be a breach of contract suit for some silly violation, which means they will have to sue a current SCO Unix customer. But they will do their best to spin it to the press as a Linux IP infringement suit, and lots of dumbasses will eat it all up and buy more SCO stock.

    2. Re:Oh my God by enrico_suave · · Score: 3, Funny

      they must have demotivator posters at the SCO home office...

      Procrastination Despair Demotivator

      Despair litho Idiocy also fits...

      e.

      --
      Build Your Own PVR/HTPC news, reviews, &
    3. Re:Oh my God by hdparm · · Score: 4, Funny

      Right. SCO lawyers use this formula:

      S=(1+X)i

      where

      S= number of Lawsuits they're going to file
      X= number of days following the original announcement
      i= no explanation needed

      Thus, S is always going to be an imaginary number.

    4. Re:Oh my God by c1ay · · Score: 2, Funny
      In a surprise turn of events....

      That's a laugh. Can I mod the article +1 Funny?

      I still think someone should drop Darl a line and suggest suing Canopy Group. The press release could read something like, "Since we've already shot ourselves in one foot trying to sue IBM we've decided to shoot ourself in the other foot by suing our parent company." I'll even copyleft this post so they can use it to make the announcement. This should save them that extra time they claim to need.

      --

    5. Re:Oh my God by moberry · · Score: 1

      err.. MyDoom should have done a better job.

    6. Re:Oh my God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      i= no explanation needed

      I'm an electrical engineer, you insensitive clod!
      i is for current! We use j for sqrt(-1).

    7. Re:Oh my God by mark-t · · Score: 1
      Actually, that would make S a _complex_ number, not an imaginary one.

      Imaginary numbers are the set of complex numbers with no real component.

    8. Re:Oh my God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah, the only person in my entire university education who complained about that, was a 55+ yr old professor, who just hung around to supervise grad students. Everyone else uses i.

    9. Re:Oh my God by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      Only whenever X is complex.

    10. Re:Oh my God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I studied EE we used I for current.

    11. Re:Oh my God by Flingles · · Score: 0

      What if somehow the number of days following announcement is i?
      S = (1+i^2)
      S= 1+ -1

      ---
      oh wait, even then this is a foolproof equation. (hence my fooling didn't prove anything)

      --
      Karma: -2^0.5 . Mainly due to the imbibing of dihydrogen monoxide
    12. Re:Oh my God by Ckwop · · Score: 1

      Actually, that would make S a _complex_ number, not an imaginary one.



      Well, unless i'm missing something.. S=(1+X)i where X equals the number of days. X is obviously a natural number. So S= would always have a strictly imaginary component??



      Simon

    13. Re:Oh my God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..and now he's posting on /. as an AC. Would you believe?

    14. Re:Oh my God by hdparm · · Score: 1

      Heh, then S ==> $ and you get actual value of SCOX.

    15. Re:Oh my God by madprof · · Score: 1

      It's not just that - they're suing their own customers! People who bought licences!
      Who in hell's name is going to buy a licence now?

    16. Re:Oh my God by EvilJoker · · Score: 1

      Didn't I just see something from them about how they WEREN'T going to do the same thing the RIAA is doing?

    17. Re:Oh my God by jjohn_h · · Score: 1

      This rhymes well with the recent agreement between SCO and a
      small LInux company in Germay. In it, they oblige they will
      not threaten Linux users with litigation except (!) users of
      SCO/Caldera Linux.

      There were quite a number of jokes here on Slashdot about
      this clause and how ironic it was. It turns out to be quite
      serious for those who decided to buy their Linux from
      SCO/Caldera when it was available.

      The morale of the story: keep your distance from SCO. If you
      are running any SCO software, start now your migration to
      safer shores. It is not only about escaping the parasites.
      It is about keeping in synch with updates. Will there be a
      new gcc version with SCO support? The odds are against, SCO's
      dropping has started: version 6.1 of Midnight Commander does
      not support SCO any longer. The link is:

      http://mail.gnome.org/archives/mc/2003-December/ ms g00019.html

  2. I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    They freak me out.

    1. Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by Shut+the+fuck+up! · · Score: 5, Funny
    2. Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by Surazal · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow... the first web cartoon to ever cause me to spontaneously grow three new limbs.

      My parents were mystified as to where those guys came from when they saw the Quizno's commerials... me being the regular FARK guy I am these days of course I had the explanation for them in full.

      "Yeah the guy who did those animals really is a weird guy."

      End of story. :)

      --
      --- Journals are boring; Go to my web page instead
    3. Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We like the SCO.

    4. Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by mackman · · Score: 0, Redundant

      In case you haven't got enough of them, here's the original rat song, "We like the moon"!

      http://www.rathergood.com/moon_song/

    5. Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by mog007 · · Score: 1

      Darl scares me more... we should set him on fire.

    6. Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      No. Furthermore I'll probably stick to Firehouse Subs for all of my sandwich needs. Mainly because of that commercial.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    7. Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by Ironica · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one that found the thought of eating at Quizzno's right after that commercial unappetizing?

      Possibly... me, I actually didn't think much of Quizno's until I saw those commercials. Now I want to give them another shot. Because after all, "We like the moon."

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    8. Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I thought the commercial was so funny it actually inspired me to get my butt into a Quiznos and try it.

      The commerical was more creative than their menu, but it wasn't bad at all.

    9. Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by nizo · · Score: 1

      Holy crap, this sounds exactly like the last convo I had with my fiance after being screamed at by this obnoxious things on a Quiznos ad. It was so bad, I logged into their website and complained (with bogus info tho, since I don't want them having my email/address/phone number).

    10. Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.rathergood.com/moon_song/

  3. Ummm.... by I_am_Rambi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They are going to sue 1. Ev1servers.com 2. Microsoft just kidding. Google is probably on the list. Didn't SCO have a ceast and desist lawsuit until its proven?

    1. Re:Ummm.... by toltas · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's only in Germany and other smarter countries.

      And im an American =\

    2. Re:Ummm.... by nmoog · · Score: 5, Informative
      Google, which uses thousands of Linux servers to power its search engine, is not the target of the initial suits, Stowell added.
      Nope. Not google. Then again they said they'd sue someone today, and they lied about that as well.
    3. Re:Ummm.... by TheLinuxSRC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They won't sue EV1. That is the only company that will validate their claims publicly. Suing M$ would be "biting the hand that feeds them" so they are out. My guess is the suit will not even be about "SCO IP" in Linux. It will be some bastardization of a contract dispute. *sigh*

    4. Re:Ummm.... by Suhas · · Score: 1

      Google Uses Linux, Not SCO Unix.

    5. Re:Ummm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're so open-minded that your brain fell out.

    6. Re:Ummm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Uhhh, You mean like the communists during the McCarthy Era? Or how about the Taliban or Al Queda now?

      Get your head out of your ass, you troll. The Nazi Party is no different than the Taliban.

    7. Re:Ummm.... by zurab · · Score: 5, Informative
      Google is probably on the list.

      Ahh the magic of the linked article:

      Google, which uses thousands of Linux servers to power its search engine, is not the target of the initial suits, Stowell added.

      Besides, I don't know what legal principle they can use to sue any Linux user. Copyright violation? No. Contract violation? No, most don't have any contracts with SCO. Patents? They've never said anything about those. Trade secrets? Nope.

      So, what are they mumbling? Anyone they can sue has to have a contract with them, i.e. be a licensee, so they can allege a contract violation (like IBM). Maybe SGI? Novell? Sun? Who knows. They have exactly nothing to go after Linux users in general.
    8. Re:Ummm.... by hackstraw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Does anyone in the justice system have any common sense?

      The whole thing that SCO is trying to "sell" is a binary runtime license(WTF-TM). Yet SCO will not distribute the binary to you, nor will it supply any support for the "product". Notwithstanding that there is no legal grounds to support SCO's ownership of said intellectual property (yet).

      Is this a new business model or a non existant one?

    9. Re:Ummm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      very nice said. I can't for heaven's sakes figure out how they are charging for intellectual property they weren't involved in creating?

    10. Re:Ummm.... by Monkelectric · · Score: 1, Funny

      you sound more like a terrorist to me!! Thinkforyourselfer!!!

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    11. Re:Ummm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is this a new business model or a non existant one?

      It's a brilliant business model. They don't have to actually claim ownership of anyone else's product because they aren't distributing or granting anything related to that product. They don't have to follow the terms of the GPL, because they aren't actually using the GPL. They don't have to cease distributing GPLed products, because they aren't actually violating the GPL, just loudly and constantly threatening they will violate it.

      They are selling you a license from SCO to use someone else's product. Can they do this? Well, yes, they aren't actually licensing you anything. It's just a piece of paper that says "SCO says it's okay for you to use Linux". And they can certainly give you a piece of paper that says SCO says you can use something. The trick is that they're then trying to create the impression you're required to have an SCO license to use linux but never actually *DIRECTLY* saying those words-- and seem to be pulling it off.

      It is like McDonalds was selling licenses to eat Subway sandwiches and strongly implying it was illegal to eat at Subway without one of these licenses and doing absolutely everything possible to convey this impression without actually saying the exact words "it is illegal to eat at subway without one of these licenses" (which would open them up to a preliminary injunction).

    12. Re:Ummm.... by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Maybe they're going to sue Slashdot? ("I'll get you my pretty, and your little goatse too! Ahahaha!")

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    13. Re:Ummm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Is this a new business model or a non existant one?

      It's like that BASF commercial that makes no sense:

      We don't make X, we make X better!

      Only in this case it's:

      We don't do software, we sue people who do software!

    14. Re:Ummm.... by Ironica · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is this a new business model or a non existant one?

      This is a pretty old business model, but it's been cleverly retooled to remove the reliance on pilfering of underpants.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    15. Re:Ummm.... by drooling-dog · · Score: 1

      Maybe they'll sue someone who's already agreed to lose the case in exchange for...?

    16. Re:Ummm.... by morgajel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you have to ask yourself- does microsoft have more to gain by being sued by sco, giving sco money for reparations, and legally proving linux is a huge risk, or not being sued at all?

      MS has already given sco money- I'm sure they wouldn't mind giving them some more if it furthered their cause.

      /me adjusts his wooden sword and tinfoil hat.

      --
      Looking for Book Reviews? Check out Literary Escapism.
    17. Re:Ummm.... by Ironica · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is like McDonalds was selling licenses to eat Subway sandwiches and strongly implying it was illegal to eat at Subway without one of these licenses

      I can see it now...

      "McDonald's has proof that Subway sandwiches incorporate trade secret and copyrighted elements of the Secret Sauce(TM). Because it is a trade secret, we cannot divulge this proof. Consider this notice that consumption of Subway sandwiches is tantamount to theft of McDonald's intellectual property. By the way, because of Subway's use of the 'lose weight' advertising gimmick, all of their sandwiches are now public domain."

      "McDonald's is now prepared to release information that will demonstrate incontrovertibly that Subway is in violation of our Secret Sauce(TM) copyright. We can demonstrate that Subway uses this particular pickle recipe in their sandwiches, which is clearly the same used in the Secret Sauce(TM)."

      - Followed by announcement from Heinz Corp. that those pickles are their product, have always been their product, and predate the birth of Ray Kroc.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    18. Re:Ummm.... by xs650 · · Score: 1

      Flash! Day after tomorrow they will sue three people....not.

    19. Re:Ummm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the best explaination I've ever heard regarding SCO and Linux. Somebody needs to package the above into a press release, and send it to every major media outlet in the USA - even THEY can understand this!

    20. Re:Ummm.... by jrumney · · Score: 1
      It is like McDonalds was selling licenses to eat Subway sandwiches and strongly implying it was illegal to eat at Subway without one of these licenses and doing absolutely everything possible to convey this impression without actually saying the exact words "it is illegal to eat at subway without one of these licenses" (which would open them up to a preliminary injunction).

      ... Then McDonalds makes lots of noise about suing a Subway customer, and when it comes down to it sues a McDonalds customer for putting sachets of McDonalds salt on their Subway sandwich.

    21. Re:Ummm.... by timbit · · Score: 1

      Not only is it a brilliant business model, it's been proven (mostly) succesful. Look at Rambus. Granted, they're headed down the drain now that DDR is mainstream and DDR2 is on the way, but they survived without actually supporting or distributing a product.

    22. Re:Ummm.... by TheDigitalRaven · · Score: 0

      1) Get sued by SCO 2) Lose the case 3) Get an in on the pump'n'dump 4) Profit!!!

  4. Wha? by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 4, Funny

    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses. (EV1.net servers or Lindows?)"

    Huh? That can't be right. How could they be suing EV1 when they've already paid their extort^K^K^K^Klicense money.

    1. Re:Wha? by prat393 · · Score: 4, Informative

      EV1 holds a linux license. Unix licensees are people who pay to use Unix, i.e. AIX, Solaris, etc.

    2. Re:Wha? by amitti · · Score: 1

      Umm.. Yeah, I second that. This article is just not clicking with me. Am I just an idiot or is this article bull shit..?

      -Aaron

    3. Re:Wha? by eddy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't think they'll sue EV1... yet, but they'll definitely go after current or former TSG customers (for running the compatibility layer on linux)

      So this isn't actually directed directly at linux, it's more about SCO following through on their slogan:

      "Contracts are what you use against parties you have relationships with" -- http://e-businessadvisor.com/doc/12514

      They'll just hope the press will go with them and focus on the Linux part not the "SCO Unix(R)" part.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    4. Re:Wha? by TheLinuxSRC · · Score: 4, Funny

      The also said:

      "We'll have at least one suit that's filed today before the end of the day," Stowell said Tuesday, with two suits more likely. "There is a high possibility we will be announcing two."

      Now, where I learned to count (and you can correct me if I am wrong here) that would be three suits (?). But it does follow SCO logic... Look at the wookie....

    5. Re:Wha? by UnixRawks · · Score: 0

      you dumba^H^H^H^H^Hsmartass.

      --
      I
    6. Re:Wha? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm often quite good at prediction and conjuring up near-reality from piles of steaming horseshit, so I'll try it now:

      EV1.net didn't pay for any Linux licenses. The "licenses" were bought for them by Microsoft.

      It was not only a propaganda move to convince the ignorant that somebody will actually pay SCOX for its bogus licenses, it also allows microsoft to funnel more anti-Linux cash to SCOX (through EV1.net this time) similarly to the way it paid for SCOX's expensive lawyers by pretending to buy licenses from SCOX. This may not have actually happened yet, but if EV1.net suddenly "sells" something to MS, the scheme is completed.

      What nugget(s) will appear next?

    7. Re:Wha? by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      "At least one, but more likely two" does not equal three. Where exactly did you learn how to count? Or is the problem with where you learned how to read?

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    8. Re:Wha? by TheLinuxSRC · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      "We'll have at least one suit that's filed today before the end of the day," Stowell said Tuesday, with two suits more likely.

      One today, two more likely. Sounds like three to me, jackoff.

    9. Re:Wha? by Mr+Guy · · Score: 1

      Filing one suit, announcing 2 suits.

      Announced and filed = 1

      Not announced x2 = 2

      1 + 2 = 3

    10. Re:Wha? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "SCO has declined to identify which companies it has targeted for lawsuits, but it has said the first two will be aimed at companies that hold Unix licenses."

      So I guess I missed something here. Why are they going to sue a company if they bought a licence?

      If you use Linux you're violating a copyright, so buy a license or we'll sue you. Now we'll sue you anyway!

      Did they use the license thing as a ploy to find out who was using Linux, er...Unix.

      They're either too dumb to understand, or I'm catching their stupid.

    11. Re:Wha? by p00ya · · Score: 1

      "with two suits more likely"
      This is different from "two more suits likely". He's saying that "two suits [is] more likely [than one]". Sure, the wording is ambiguous, but I read it as two and so would most educated people.

    12. Re:Wha? by Linker3000 · · Score: 1

      IANAL (etc. you know the score)..

      Ok, so SCO sues EV1.

      EV1 says 'gee, you got us, we admit we're in the wrong, you're right, but please don't be too hard on us because we did show willing and buy a licence or two'

      SCO seeks punitive, nominal damages ($1?) but has now had their case proven...time to steam in to the big boys with a precedent already set???

      --
      AT&ROFLMAO
    13. Re:Wha? by tolan-b · · Score: 1

      *None have been filed yet

      *It says "with two *suits more* likely." NOT "with two *more suits* likely."

    14. Re:Wha? by TheLinuxSRC · · Score: 1

      First of all, my objective was not to incite a flamewar here. I don't see the point in flamewars.

      RTFA, asshat. It's very clear what they mean to anyone with about a 3rd grade reading comprehension level.

      Ok, let's look at the statement. ""We'll have at least one suit that's filed today before the end of the day," Stowell said Tuesday, with two suits more likely." I think we can agree on "We'll have at least one suit that's filed today before the end of the day,"; that part is pretty obvious. Now the last part "with two suits more likely." which could be read one of two ways:

      1. ...with two suits [being] more likely.

      2. ...with two suits more[,] likely.

      My point was that the last part of the statement was ambiguous and that SCO is famous for using ambiguous statements to distort their meaning.

      I am willing to apologize for the jackass bit - I might have been out of line. However I did RTFA and did not consider there to be only one way to read that; especially when considering the source of the original statement.

  5. Oblig Info Minister Comment by Knunov · · Score: 4, Funny

    "We will sue TWO of them against the gates of the courtroom...IN ONE HOUR!"

    Knunov

    --
    Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
    1. Re:Oblig Info Minister Comment by Valar · · Score: 5, Funny

      The open source zealots are committing suicide by the thousands in front of the borders of Utah!! No infidel penguinistas will ever devaluate our stock! Never!

    2. Re:Oblig Info Minister Comment by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      "Never try to extort more than it would cost to have you killed."

      Your sig is strangely appropriate for this article.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    3. Re:Oblig Info Minister Comment by Popageorgio · · Score: 1

      I know, a whole two...You'd think Darl would try to top Hilary Rosen and go for 252 lawsuits, but I guess you can't just look for Linux users by browsing Kazaa.

    4. Re:Oblig Info Minister Comment by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 1

      Careful. Darl is trying to make it look like he's actually been threatened. Your post could be considered a threat (although it's certainly a happy thought)

      Ok don't be careful.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    5. Re:Oblig Info Minister Comment by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      LOL.

      What is the point of asking questions, tho?

      Darl & Co. have already demonstrated their dance steps. They'll likely dance even in court with the SEC. /rant

      I suspect that only a really severe cluestick (of whatever form, but something that threatens their livelihood directly) will intrude into their fantasy world.

      It's an indication of the fantasy world they live in that they feel that they needed to hire bodyguards. Against whom? What, does Darl think he's worthy of a bullet, like some thought JFK was? Like the president does? Does Darl think he's some freakin' *important* person? (Nevermind, obviously he does; or at least he'd like to think that, judging from his releases. Then there's his syncophants, but I won't go into that here, there' pages of material there)

      Apparently Darl thinks he's one of the most important people in the IT world nowadays. Oh, fer fucks' sakes. Darl, get off the crack already - you do know that paranoia is one of the symptoms?

      I hope this ends soon - tho I'll miss the funnies, repetitive as most of them are getting - I just want it to end in a virtual nuking of SCO, TCG, and all those other greedy, narcissistic assholes who seem to think that they can extort enough money to support their crack^H^H^H^H^H money habit for the rest of their lives, regardless of street prices^H-^23 rise of living due to inflation....or whatever. I'm just sick and tired of hearing the latest bullshit from SCO. We need a international cluestick organization (thanks Germany) that can bitchslap idiots like these greedy fucks without prejudice.

      Fuckin' A, Darl, what the hell would you do for a living without your connections, your suit, and your tan? Screw you. You wouldn't survive a day in my job. You aren't worth the time I'd spend to teach you how to fix your fucking toilet. You are a useless piece of shit. You aren't worth the cost of your pretty, slicked hair and your overPR'd, cockeyed smile face.

      DIRECT TO DARL;

      Darl, Bite my Cobwebbed, Dull Overworked Ass. FUCK YOU. SUE ME. I RUN LINUX. I WILL ALWAYS RUN LINUX. YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, COME TO MY HOUSE AND DELIVER IT TO ME IN FUCKING PERSON. IF YOU AREN'T WILLING TO DO THAT, (AND YOU AREN'T) YOU ARE A COWARDLY MISERABLE PIECE OF BUFFALO DUNG. FUCK YOU. I AM SICK OF YOUR BULLSHIT. Does that get the message across???
      /rant, and pardon my bitterness NOT

      SB

      PS I take the bit about Buffalo Dung back; I'll not malign buffalo that badly.

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    6. Re:Oblig Info Minister Comment by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Well if Darl really beleived that what he's doing isn't extortion then he shouldn't have any concerns as to what I imply about their little operation.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
  6. .. the aftermath.. by Seek_1 · · Score: 1

    .. does anyone ever wonder what we /.'ers will ever do once SCO finally succumbs(sp?) to their demise?

    1. Re:.. the aftermath.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      After being in the revenge business for so long....

      How about being the Dread Pirate Roberts?

    2. Re:.. the aftermath.. by cryms0n · · Score: 5, Funny

      Probably the same thing we did before SCO came onto the scene.

      Masturbate furiously.

      Huzzah!

    3. Re:.. the aftermath.. by cperciva · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ... does anyone ever wonder what we /.'ers will ever do once SCO finally succumbs(sp?) to their demise?

      No, but I do wonder what /.ers would do if SCO won.

      (I'm not saying that it's likely to happen, but it would be amusing to watch the bleating.)

    4. Re:.. the aftermath.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure some nutball will bomb the SCO offices. Ohh...wouldn't that be a tragedy! Boo hoo

    5. Re:.. the aftermath.. by El · · Score: 1

      Actually get some work done at work?

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    6. Re:.. the aftermath.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Resume plans for world domination!

    7. Re:.. the aftermath.. by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      The streets will be filled with nerds doing the Penguin Dance. (I don't get any music of this page, poot!)

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    8. Re:.. the aftermath.. by theparanoidcynic · · Score: 2, Funny

      The difference is what happens with the ethanol. Most likely we'll be drinking it, but there's a slight chance that SCO will win and we'll end up using it as an accelerant to get the SCO bonfire started.
      Mmm . . . . . evil-and-cheap-liquor-flavored marshmallows.

      --
      Only in a Slashdot fantasy can a Slackware install turn into several hours of sex . . . . .
    9. Re:.. the aftermath.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Hmm. I think I'm going to get a head start on that, if that's ok with everyone.

      *loads up 4chan.org*

      -- Super Ugly Ultraman

    10. Re:.. the aftermath.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4chag.org?

      Pshaw!

      Best site for you, young man, is teen2003.com. An AMAZING amount of video clips and stills, all nicely categorized. Every young hormone's, er man's, wet dream.

      And, no, I'm not affiliated.

    11. Re:.. the aftermath.. by MyHair · · Score: 3, Funny

      Before??

      Why do you think so many Slashdotters are aware of the one-handed Dvorak keyboard layout?

    12. Re:.. the aftermath.. by Pyrometer · · Score: 1
      Probably the same thing we did before SCO came onto the scene.
      Masturbate furiously.

      What you mean you stopped when this whole SCO thing started? Man you have some serious staying power! Next you will be telling me you read the article too :)

    13. Re:.. the aftermath.. by cryms0n · · Score: 0

      I can stop masturbating for months, no problem. Working up the gumption to actually *read the article* is another story entirely.

  7. irresponsible by porkface · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Somebody get on the call and ask them "If you have such a strong company and case, why do you feel the need to couple lawsuit announcements with your financial call?"

    1. Re:irresponsible by Mechanik · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Somebody get on the call and ask them "If you have such a strong company and case, why do you feel the need to couple lawsuit announcements with your financial call?"

      I would LOVE to see the Slashdot effect at work on this conference call. I don't suppose we're so lucky as for SCO to have set this up on a system where they pay per user connected, are we? :-)

      That and it would be great having 10,000 slashdotters heckling them :-)


      Mechanik

    2. Re:irresponsible by kommakazi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This actually seems like a really good idea, it's like a DOS attack just over the phone...we can easily have them swamped with questions they really don't want to answer.

    3. Re:irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you know, remember, ATM lawsuits are SCO's entire business and product line. This is akin to a new product announcement would be at any other company.

    4. Re:irresponsible by Sparky77 · · Score: 1

      I say let them have their "little meeting". They can dig their own grave.

      --
      One bad monkey spoils the whole barrel.
    5. Re:irresponsible by brain159 · · Score: 1
      "... ATM lawsuits are SCO's entire business and product line. "

      How true... Just the other day, all of the hole-in-the-wall cash machines here were out of action, with pieces of paper jammed into the card slots and other openings.

      (for this piece of appaling postifying, I passed up the chance to moderate this thread)

    6. Re:irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      I don't suppose we're so lucky as for SCO to have set this up on a system where they pay per user connected, are we? :-)

      We are. Conference calls are typically billed per line, per minute.

      That and it would be great having 10,000 slashdotters heckling them :-)

      Your lines will be muted, so there won't be any heckling. Also, after a thousand lines or so, the system would busy out. It would run up SCO's prices, but don't forget about the peons who have to answer all one thousand lines in five to ten minutes. They'll be expecting (and staffing for) maybe fifty to a hundred lines, and they never did anything to you.

    7. Re:irresponsible by cpghost · · Score: 1

      I would LOVE to see the Slashdot effect at work on this conference call

      Ah, that's what the $1M from EV1 is good for! Paying the bills for a slashdotted telcon...

      Or have they an bought insurance against slashdotting (as another means of making even more dosh)?

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  8. My bet. by Jaywalk · · Score: 4, Insightful
    EV1.net servers or Lindows?
    Since SCO seems to be acting as SCO's catspaw and EV1.net seems to be in league with them both, I'm betting on Lindows. Another chance for SCO to do Microsoft's dirty work for them.
    --
    ===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
    1. Re:My bet. by Wakkow · · Score: 1

      Why would Lindows "hold Unix licenses"?

    2. Re:My bet. by One+Louder · · Score: 5, Insightful
      That seems unlikely.

      Lindows is a technology company, and isn't in the Fortune 1000, which doesn't seem to match the profile of the targets announced yesterday.

      Of course, SCO has said one thing and done another many, many times. If they did attack Lindows.com, then that would certainly dismiss any notion that they aren't shilling for Redmond. Given the potential multi-year delay in the MS trademark litigation, there are probably more than a few experienced IP lawyers on retainer by Lindows.com that are looking for someone else's leg to chew on. And certainly Robertson would love to squeeze more than a little PR out of such a suit.

    3. Re:My bet. by DavidBartlett · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, Lindows also licenses form them (there was a pre-existing contract)

      --

      -DB-
      E-mail is like a prison: a prison with no walls... and no toilet. -Strong Bad
    4. Re:My bet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not? SCO has probably agreed to pay EV1.net's damages for them if EV1 pleads guilty.

    5. Re:My bet. by frission · · Score: 1

      they can't sue lindows.com now, it's lin--- :) they beat them to the punch!

    6. Re:My bet. by LuxFX · · Score: 1

      That seems unlikely.

      I don't know. You make good points, but still.... Throughout this whole long drawn-out drama, I've had the underlying sensation that Microsoft is pulling SCO's strings. And what better for SCO to spend their Microsoft settlement money on than to force a Microsoft opponent to battle on two fronts.

      --
      Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
  9. I know I need to suspend logic with SCO... by metallicagoaltender · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Obviously logic hasn't played a big part in any of their actions, but why in the hell would they sue EV1, one of the few companies that bothered to buy an SCO license, not to mention the fact that they admitted it!

    It's not exactly case of biting the hand that feeds you, but it certainly be a case of alienating an ally that probably doesn't need to be alienated.

    1. Re:I know I need to suspend logic with SCO... by Curtman · · Score: 1

      one of the few companies that bothered to buy an SCO license

      Nobody said they *bought* a license BTW.

    2. Re:I know I need to suspend logic with SCO... by JudeanPeople'sFront · · Score: 1

      Obviously logic hasn't played a big part in any of their actions

      Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it doesn make sence! But look at Chewbacca here ...

  10. Suing SCO licensees? by Aardpig · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses.

    When a company or organisation starts suing its own customers, then it's a sure sign that its business model is completely fucked. Look at the RIAA: suing Joe Teenager, to try and offset the fact that their profits are dropping like a lead balloon.

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    1. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by beware1000 · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Thank you for your loyalty, have a lawsuit"

    2. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by SphericalCrusher · · Score: 1

      Exactly! That makes NO FUCKING SENSE.

      When I got home from school today, I was sort of hoping to have a Subpoena laying on my bed... I USE LINUX, SCO! Oh well though, I guess since I don't use Unix-Ware... I'm not cool enough to be sued.

      --
      "Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
    3. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Avoiding the entire piracy issue... the RIAA isn't suing as a revenue generator, they're suing to scare kids into not copying and distributing songs. 'tis a different animal thadoing it to make money.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    4. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by CeleronXL · · Score: 1

      What do you mean? This is an awesome way for them to really make people want to buy their licenses. Fucked? Pfft, this was an awesome business move.

    5. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by justMichael · · Score: 5, Insightful
      You mis-quoted the article...
      ...it has targeted for lawsuits, but it has said the first two will be aimed at companies that hold Unix licenses.

      There is no SCO before Unix in that sentance.

      Further up the article you will see
      SCO, which owns a disputed amount of Unix intellectual property, inherited the agreements by which inventor AT&T and its successors licensed the operating system to IBM, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Silicon Graphics, numerous universities and others.

      It's a safe bet that who ever they are going after is in that list.
    6. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by M00TP01NT · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The only thing that would make sense in this context ("making sense" of course in a fskd up SCO way...) is that the suit will be a breach of contract suit vs a copyright infringement case.

      What I mean by that is that SCO will claim that the defendant is breaching its UNIX license by NOT paying the Unix per-server fee for Linux servers. Said another way, if the defendant has agreed to pay SCO $X per UNIX server under its SCO Unix license, and has been calculating the license fees assuming that Linux servers didn't count, then SCO would claim that -- because Linux is UNIX (don't ya know) -- the licensee/defendant has been underpaying SCO.

      SCO is likely to get more bang for its litigation buck by suing customers under this theory (however wack that is) then suing companies who have no contractual relationship to it.

      But then again, I am not an IP lawyer.

    7. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by jeffkjo1 · · Score: 1

      >Look at the RIAA: suing Joe Teenager, to try and
      > offset the fact that their profits are dropping
      > like a lead balloon.

      Lead balloon, that sounds like a good name for a band.

      </Dave Barry Mode Off>

    8. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by sroddy · · Score: 1

      You can probably also bet that it won't be Sun, since I believe that they have paid money to SCO also. Not positive, but I think they have.

    9. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will probably be Sequent and Data General.

    10. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congrats successfuly integrating an anti SCO post with an anti RIAA. If Mod points weren't caped at +5 you'd probably go into the stratosphrere. If you could somehow manage to add some Soviet Russia, Hot Grits, GNAA references you may even make it higher!

    11. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by jnicholson · · Score: 1

      That German judge told them they were only allowed to sue their own customers. Maybe they thought that sounded like really good advice...

      --
      "Do not drill any holes in your cat - it will not like it."
      -- Nick Davies
    12. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Snoopy77 · · Score: 1

      ...it has targeted for lawsuits, but it has said the first two will be aimed at companies that hold Unix licenses.

      So they'll sue them and then say, "and while you're at it why not switch to SCO Unix. Have a nice day."

      Whatever business school McBride went to must be laying pretty low at the moment.

      --
      "She's a West Texas girl, just like me" - G.W Bush Iraqis
    13. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      >> It's a safe bet that who ever they are going
      >> after is in that list.

      I'm not sure about that. Does the Vatican run Linux? That's about as close as we can get to: "SCO sues God" which seems to be the logical conclusion to all of this. ;-)

    14. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by GOD_ALMIGHTY · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was wondering when someone was going to catch that. I think the first 50 guesses on this thread could be modded off-topic.

      My personal guess is SGI and HP. Sun already bought a license and SCO is already suing Novell and IBM. I doubt they would go after a university, they want a quick settlement to fuel their pump and dump scheme and a university might fight longer.

      Anyone got odds?

      --
      Arrogance is Confidence which lacks integrity. -- me
    15. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was sort of hoping to have a Subpoena laying on my bed

      You must be in good with your mail carrier..

    16. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by goldspider · · Score: 1

      Of course, Joe Teenager who has downloaded hundreds and thousands of MP3's isn't a customer of the music industry. 'Customer' implies that the music was paid for. Not quite a relevant comparison.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    17. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by SphericalCrusher · · Score: 1

      You're saying it's not possible for my mom to bring in the mail and lay mine on my bed?

      --
      "Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
    18. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he seems really stupid, just read his comment. what a tool. i'm putting him on my foes list. OMG School, OMG SCO, OMG i use teh LuNiX :O GG~!

    19. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by iabervon · · Score: 1

      I thought SCO already claimed to have retracted HP's license. Does Novell have a UNIX license? It would be pretty weird to have a license to something you own. My guess is SGI and Microsoft.

      Microsoft seems to me to be the perfect target: they are reportedly using Linux and they have UNIX license. SCO (as Caldera) has beaten Microsoft in court before. Microsoft's not as big as, say, IBM. And suing Microsoft might hush the rumors that they're colluding.

    20. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by MrByte420 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well..

      It appears, Yes..
      Lets see what SCO does with this one...

      sh-2.05a$ telnet www.vatican.va 80
      Trying 212.77.1.243...
      Connected to www.vatican.va.
      Escape character is '^]'.
      GET / HTTP/1.0

      HTTP/1.1 200 OK
      Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 04:11:56 GMT
      Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.8.9 OpenSSL/0.9.6g PHP/4.2.2
      Last-Modified: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 15:30:18 GMT

      --
      If religous zealots don't believe in Evolution, then why are they so worried about bird flu?
    21. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      BM, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Silicon Graphics, numerous universities and others.

      It's a safe bet that who ever they are going after is in that list.


      Safe bet? Thank you, Captain Obvious! :)

    22. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Ironica · · Score: 1

      the RIAA isn't suing as a revenue generator, they're suing to scare kids into not copying and distributing songs.

      But I thought the point was that copying and distributing songs was "stealing" revenue from the RIAA?

      In which case, they *are* suing as a revenue generator... under the unproven assumption that if people don't copy and distribute songs, they will buy them instead.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    23. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by tftp · · Score: 1

      SCO can sue MS and, by mutual agreement, SCO wins. This can establish a precedent.

    24. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Dumbush · · Score: 1

      I hope SGI can render SCO useless...

    25. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      dropping like a lead balloon.

      You mean a Led Zeppelin.

    26. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      oh noes we will all be on AC's foe list! teh horror!

      Ill put u on my foes list first OMG looser!!!11!

    27. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sue god?

      Only in America!

    28. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      # nmap -sT -O -p 80-90 www.vatican.va

      Starting nmap 3.50 ( http://www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) at 2004-03-02 23:04 MST
      Warning: OS detection will be MUCH less reliable because we did not find at least 1 open and 1 closed TCP port
      Interesting ports on 212.77.1.243:
      PORT STATE SERVICE
      80/tcp open http
      81/tcp filtered hosts2-ns
      82/tcp filtered xfer
      83/tcp filtered mit-ml-dev
      84/tcp filtered ctf
      85/tcp filtered mit-ml-dev
      86/tcp filtered mfcobol
      87/tcp filtered priv-term-l
      88/tcp filtered kerberos-sec
      89/tcp filtered su-mit-tg
      90/tcp filtered dnsix
      Device type: general purpose
      Running: Compaq Tru64 UNIX 5.X
      OS details: Compaq Tru64 UNIX V5.1 (Rev. 732), Compaq Tru64 UNIX V5.1A (Rev. 1885)

      Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 15.349 seconds

    29. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by TheViffer · · Score: 1

      When a company or organisation starts suing its own customers

      Not exactly. Many people here are thinking big names that SCO is targeting (Google, SGI, etc). But its not going to be so.

      Off hand I am taking a shot in a dark here but I believe it be a medium size business such as West Teleservices. West runs thousands of VRUs each with a copy of SCO on it. Well that was the case. Recently they have started migrating those machines to Linux.

      The lawsuits will be targeting those companies that are already trying to shit-can SCO in a feeble attempt to stop them from doing so.

      --
      -- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
    30. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by clymere · · Score: 1

      What about that makes you assume they are running Linux? Apache runs on a lot of things, not just Linux. Read the child Nmap post, and its pretty evident that they are in fact not running Linux at all.

      --
      once you go slack, you never go back
    31. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 1

      Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.8.9 OpenSSL/0.9.6g PHP/4.2.2
      Erm.. -----------------^^^^

    32. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try telneting into any Linux Apache server, and you will see the same thing.

      Linux uses the Unix port of Apache (as is the case with 1000's of other programs).

    33. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by MrByte420 · · Score: 1

      slashdot just can't take a joke sometimes...

      --
      If religous zealots don't believe in Evolution, then why are they so worried about bird flu?
    34. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 1

      My point was that it could be either Unix or Linux.

    35. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by kalidasa · · Score: 3, Funny

      Connected to www.vatican.va.
      Escape character is '^]'.
      GET / HTTP/1.0

      HTTP/1.1 200 OK
      Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 04:11:56 GMT
      Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.8.9 OpenSSL/0.9.6g PHP/4.2.2

      Well, there it is, folks, final proof: God runs UNIX. You Windows folks had better repent, and right soon.

    36. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by platipusrc · · Score: 1

      According to Netcraft, The Vatican runs Tru64 Unix.

      --
      And the muscular cyborg German dudes dance with sexy French Canadians
    37. Re:Suing SCO licensees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.8.9 OpenSSL/0.9.6g PHP/4.2.2


      Wow, God needs to upgrade. PHP is up to 4.3.4 at least now, and apache 1.3 is so early 90s.

  11. News? by ObviousGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All this play by play of SCO is really tiring. It's like a bunch of fleas issuing flyers every time the dog takes a walk. Yes, something's happening. No, it's not that important.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:News? by Xtifr · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually, slashdot blew a perfect opportunity to post a dupe that wasn't a dupe (for once). "SCO says they'll sue an end user tomorrow" was a headline yesterday and could have been an equally valid headline today. :)

      In any case, I'd explain how you can set your preferences so you don't have to waste your time on SCOldera stories if you don't find them interesting, but since you're "ObviousGuy", I don't have to point out something so obvious to you, do I? :p ;)

    2. Re:News? by MrLint · · Score: 1

      SCO will sue a linux user in n+1 days.

    3. Re:News? by MrCreosote · · Score: 1

      It's like a pile up on the freeway. Even if you are on the other side, going the other way, you just gotta slow down and take a look.

      --
      MrCreosote Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump! "You're right! There isn't enough room to swing a cat in here!"
  12. Prediction: by jasonfncsu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I predict that SCO will be heavily traded tomorrow: People intellegent enough to know when they see the horrid profit reports to drop the stock. And a bunch of saps who will buy up the stock (ooh! litigation! money!). Oh, and I'm starting a pool on who will be sued: My guesses: SGI and HP

    --
    Jason Faulkner
    Old Os Administrator
    jason@oldos.org
    oldos.
  13. Jeez, this is getting old. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could someone teach these guys how to play fetch and roll a ball out in the street?

  14. Why doesnt sco stop bitching.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And produce the goods that say, they have been wronged, so that the world can get on.

  15. Hello, my name is George by BoneFlower · · Score: 4, Funny

    And I'm addicted to SCO news stories.

    1. Re:Hello, my name is George by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hello George.

      My name is Anonymous Coward. I spend all my time on slashdot, groklaw and the yahoo SCOX board reading and writing about newSCO.

      Unlike you, I'm not addicted. I can stop any time, it's just that I don't want to.

      This makes me a better person than you. HTH.

    2. Re:Hello, my name is George by hackstraw · · Score: 1, Funny


      Hi George!

    3. Re:Hello, my name is George by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Must be something with the name, for I am also known as George, and the only times I knowingly read YRO articles is when they include a SCO icon.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    4. Re:Hello, my name is George by dmaxwell · · Score: 1

      If I go six months without reading or posting to SCO stories do I get a chip?

  16. slashdot the telecon? by sroddy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'd hate to pay the bill for that telecon. Considering it usually costs $1 per minute per participant, perhaps we can put a dent in their extortion fund!

    Seriously though, I hope the company that is hosting the telecon has a lot of lines reserved.

    1. Re:slashdot the telecon? by prat393 · · Score: 1

      I really want to listen to a transcript of some kind; it's almost certain to turn violent.

    2. Re:slashdot the telecon? by TheTomcat · · Score: 1

      $1 per minute?

      The company I work for has conferencing for $0.12/min (toll free)

      </plug type="shameless">

      S

    3. Re:slashdot the telecon? by sroddy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I know there are much cheaper companies out there, but I was quoting what AT&T usually charges. Most telecons for stockholders and the like are hosted through someone like sprint or AT&T...

      I know AT&T is anywhere from $.80 to $1.00/minute.

  17. The only logical choice.... by overbyj · · Score: 4, Funny

    is for SCO to sue SCO. They are not a tech company but they use Linux. (go check Netcraft....they have actually dabbled in BSD for a bit on www.sco.com)

    --
    No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
    1. Re:The only logical choice.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They are not a tech company but they use Linux. (go check Netcraft....they have actually dabbled in BSD for a bit on www.sco.com)


      It's really pretty trivial to change that stuff you know. My server is running IIS on Solaris right now.

    2. Re:The only logical choice.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      They could sue themselves for an infinite amout of money and settle out of court.

    3. Re:The only logical choice.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, I love the sig, but you have a spelling error: it's inconvenienced, not inconvienced.

    4. Re:The only logical choice.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Thanks. I guess more electrons were inconvenienced than I thought.

    5. Re:The only logical choice.... by the_womble · · Score: 2, Funny

      They could then show an infinite amount of revenue but show the cost as a capital expense and therefore make an infinite profit.

    6. Re:The only logical choice.... by toga98 · · Score: 1

      Isn't it possible in Germany or some other EU country to sue an individual/entity on behalf of another entity for trademark/patent/ip/contractual violations or some sort w/o their consent. I remember seeing some article on slashdot similar to this in the not too distant past.

      If that is the case, I propose that a company in the EU sue SCO on behalf of SCO for violations related to the SCO's recent operations. I am sure some bright minded individual here at slashdot can come up with an amount of money to start with.

    7. Re:The only logical choice.... by thepoch · · Score: 1

      it won't work. knowing SCO, both sides will have proof that they are infringing on Linux code. both won't want to show their proof. they'll keep on delaying the proof-showing, even if a judge has required it in 1 month. since both SCO and SCO believes they are correct, why settle for a measly sum when you can get that infinite amount of money the first SCO is suing for.

    8. Re:The only logical choice.... by kasperd · · Score: 1

      go check Netcraft....they have actually dabbled in BSD for a bit on www.sco.com

      www.sco.com doesn't exist anymore. However sco.com does still use Linux.

      --

      Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
  18. Basically by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is the second announcement about an upcoming announcement today by SCO, right?
    Meanwhile PJ at Groklaw is busy tearing them a new one over mentioning her in one of their propaganda blasts. Good reading. Hate to have her as one of my enemies.

    1. Re:Basically by Unoti · · Score: 3, Informative

      That is good reading. My favorite part is where teh SCO PR guy says, "I find that there is so much misinformation on Groklaw that is misconstrued and twisted that it's probably one step above a lot of the ranting and dribble that takes place on Slashdot.'. . ." Isn't is drivel, not dribble?

    2. Re:Basically by zerocool^ · · Score: 1

      Isn't is drivel, not dribble?


      The funny part is that it's either one or the other.

      ~Will

      --
      sig?
    3. Re:Basically by Zocalo · · Score: 1
      Actually, I think Blake Stowell has a valid point about Groklaw and twisting the facts that PJ seems so irate about in that post. I've noticed that the objective focus PJ had when she started the site has been steadily eroded since she really hit the big time. For someone whose web site banner proclaims that she is not a lawyer but a researcher, she doesn't seem to be doing very objective research anymore.

      This story is a pretty obvious example of this kind of thing. It's basically a report dated mid February on an article from Bloomberg about a huge upswing of spam in January in which there is the line "As much as 15 percent came from home PCs infected with computer viruses such as the MyDoom worm, said D. K. Matai, chairman of Mi2g, a computer-security consulting firm based in London, citing reports from law-enforcement authorities and discussions with companies.". Fair enough, but take a look at how PJ spins that, bearing in mind the allegations that SCO was making about MyDoom: "I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so. MyDoom was programmed to send spam, and it is.", and also: "Will Darl apologize for leaping to ugly conclusions before all the facts were in?"

      Err, no. This was mid-February, remember, and at this stage MyDoom was still spreading and had not yet gone dormant and entered zombie only mode. (As an aside, I have yet to receive a *single* spam from an IP that sent me a copy of MyDoom.) Also, the report was about an upswing in spam for January, so how could MyDoom account for that anyway, given that it wasn't even released until the end of that month? Clearly the writer was just using MyDoom as an example since it was in the news and people were talking about it, so what was that about research and jumping to conclusions again?

      I still find Groklaw to be a valuable reference site, and there is certainly a hell of a lot of effort by PJ in bringing all that together, so kudos to her for that. Editorially however, many of her posts have slowly sunk to the kind of thing I'd expect to see from Slashdot; blinkered SCO bashing without any attempt to see what the other side's take might be interspersed with the occasional +5 post. Sure, Groklaw is catering to the site's primary readership demographic, but I think it's prudent to read Groklaw with an open mind an a pinch of salt.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    4. Re:Basically by phiwum · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile PJ at Groklaw is busy tearing them a new one over mentioning her in one of their propaganda blasts. Good reading. Hate to have her as one of my enemies.

      In my humble but honest opinion, PJ comes off a touch embarrassing in that article. At least, I cringed a bit when I read the following.

      Frankly, I think they should pay to relocate me. And Linux Insider needs to print a retraction, making it clear that they were mistaken about my having any ties to IBM. As for SCO's immoral attacks, and that of others, I leave that to God and to history. But one thing is for sure, if anything bad happens to me, you will know who is responsible.

      As usual, I appreciate what PJ does. She really provides a great service for the community. But in all honesty, I wish she hadn't come out quite so paranoid in that piece.

      --
      Phiwum's law: anyone that names an obvious law after himself and then puts it in his own sig is just pathetic.
    5. Re:Basically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, do you really expect to see both spam and an infection attempt from the same PC?

      You might want to check your sample size there.

      And MyDoom was about spam. After all, its attack on SCO was incredibly weak and ineffective, anyhow.

  19. I was afraid we wouldn't have more SCO Stories by HappyCitizen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can't believe they are still around. Other countries take control and don't let them spread their junk. Why can't they be stopped here in the US too? I mean, it just urks me that after producing no evidence and spreading FUD, they haven't been required to stop, and in fact will file another backless lawsuit (or so the claim). Atleast its a good sign that they are taking so long. It shows that they're running out of juice

    --
    http://www.beyourowneviloverlord.tk
    http://www.frozenchickenthrowing.tk
    http://www.killercamel.tk
    1. Re:I was afraid we wouldn't have more SCO Stories by Pengo · · Score: 3, Insightful


      No kidding.

      Racketeering is alive and well here in the good old USA, and frankly I am about fed up.

      I have no idea what the fuck our legal system is doing even entertaining these crooks..

    2. Re:I was afraid we wouldn't have more SCO Stories by Cytlid · · Score: 1

      I mean come on! They think they're making money. It's not like Darl tried to go marry some guy named Mike. Then they'd try and stop him.

      --
      FLR
  20. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The SCO lawsuit will begin immediately after DOOM 3 is released.

    Yes, that's the game industry term for "never".

    1. Re:In other news... by Blic · · Score: 1

      I think you mean Duke Nukem Forever...

  21. They are suing SCO customers? by hashish · · Score: 1

    They must be pretty sure that they are gonna win then, why else would you risk alienating your customers? This just all reeks of a publicity stunt that is gonna be waisting the time of a court.

  22. the SCO hotline by beware1000 · · Score: 0

    they forgot to mention that calling into the conference will be charge at $5.00 per minute, of which will fun their rediculous legal battles.

  23. Haha! by cliffy2000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses." Wow. That's a great business plan. Alienate your few and diminishing customers.

    1. Re:Haha! by 4b696e67 · · Score: 1

      I think that was just the SCO Linux license not the SCO Unix license for not getting sued. If I remember correctly Darl, said that contracts/licenses were to be used against your customers or something to that effect. I'm not sure rather they consider all the AT&T/Novell carryover licenses SCO licenses. Knowing SCO, they probably do. So it could be anyone that has or probably ever has had a Unix SysV license. My bet is one of the unlucky companies will most likely be SGI.

    2. Re:Haha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Imagine Darl dressed like an Indian)

      We're gonna sue like the R.I.A.A.
      We're gonna sue like the R.I.A.A-yay...

  24. Lars Ulrich is working for SCO now? by tulmad · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses."

    Wow, sounds like they're taking a page out of Metallica's book for this one.

    --
    "In case of emergency, break glass. Scream. Bleed to death."
  25. Why "may be EV1" ? by lazy_arabica · · Score: 2, Insightful
    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses. (EV1.net servers or Lindows?)


    I don't see why they may sue EV1. Perhaps is it me, but EV1 paid for their "Linux IP License", which should protect them. And anyway, it's about companies with SCO UNIX licenses, which is not the same, simply because it is a different product.
    1. Re:Why "may be EV1" ? by Dunark · · Score: 2, Funny
      ... but EV1 paid for their "Linux IP License" ...

      Yeah, so that means they're one of very few companies that's stupid enough to be a suitable defendant.

    2. Re:Why "may be EV1" ? by lazy_arabica · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, sure. You must be right ; that's their kind of logic.

    3. Re:Why "may be EV1" ? by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Suing EV1 less than 72 hours after they bought an SCO Linux IP License would be completely illogical, even for SCO. Everyone, including the Deutsch Bank anal-ists and Laura Didio, would then see the entire case as a big sham. They would completely lose the propaganda battle, which is the only battle they have a chance of winning in the first place. The entire scam would unravel as people realized there was no chance of SCO making money on Linux licenses, since nobody would buy one just to get sued 3 days later.

    4. Re:Why "may be EV1" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right. Most It's more likely that SCO was a million dollars or two on the red, or below whatever they call "acceptable" and convinced a partner (MS, Sun, some personal friend of Darl's) to give SCO some money in the short term via EV1.

      Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if SCO themselves gave them the money to buy the licenses with just so they could claim a new licensee in the conference call.

  26. I really don't understand by dancedance · · Score: 1

    Could someone explain to me, why would they sue their own customers? Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like going after someone who isn't paying sco would be a more logical choice.

    1. Re:I really don't understand by TykeClone · · Score: 1

      Logic has long since left this conversation

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
  27. EV1 by trungson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    EV1 already bought the licenses from SCO (what a shame!) why does SCO want to sue them?

    --
    Son Nguyen
    1. Re:EV1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because "Contracts are what you use against parties you have relationships with" -- http://e-businessadvisor.com/doc/12514

      You can't get good juicy lawsuits until after you've contracted up good and tight.

      (no, I don't think EV1 is a target yet, just explaining the reasoning)

    2. Re:EV1 by aug24 · · Score: 1

      You need to check out the licence conditions SCO is offering. It would appear that they make EV1 (and any other shill / moron who pays up) *more* at risk of being sued than less!

      Justin.

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
  28. And then... by xSquaredAdmin · · Score: 1

    on the next day 3, then 5, then 8, then 13, etc.

    --
    Crushing dreams at the speed of sarcasm
  29. Letter from SCO by vinit79 · · Score: 1

    Thank goodness !! I was busy collecting 679$ for the linux license , cos I thought I might be the lucky one to be sued. (Since IBM didnt pay they might decide to sue me and get 680$ so that they can afford to place an advertisement to sell of their property(I mean the real estate and not the linux rights .) Now I guess I'll need to wait a few more days to get the letter from SCO.

  30. EV1.net or Lindows? by Aardpig · · Score: 3, Funny

    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses. (EV1.net servers or Lindows?)"

    Since EV1.net is in the process of climbing into bed with Microsoft, and SCO has been warming itself under the same blankets for quite some time, I think it more likely that Lindows will be sent to the doghouse.

    Then again, in a vain attempt to turn back the tide of hatred directed at it, SCO might turn around and sue Microsoft. What a twist that would be!

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    1. Re:EV1.net or Lindows? by El · · Score: 2, Funny

      SCO might turn around and sue Microsoft. What a twist that would be! That would be just like Miss Piggy attacking and brutally beating Frank Oz, wouldn't it?

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    2. Re:EV1.net or Lindows? by MoronGames · · Score: 1

      If SCO sues Microsoft, who do we cheer for??

      --
      hey!
    3. Re:EV1.net or Lindows? by Aardpig · · Score: 3, Funny

      If SCO sues Microsoft, who do we cheer for??

      Mutually-Assured Destruction!!!

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    4. Re:EV1.net or Lindows? by dmaxwell · · Score: 2, Funny

      Then again, in a vain attempt to turn back the tide of hatred directed at it, SCO might turn around and sue Microsoft. What a twist that would be!

      But they could just settle the whole thing out of court quickly. After all Microsoft respects Intellectual Property. *nudge* *nudge* *wink* *wink*

    5. Re:EV1.net or Lindows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is going to be the first to make a dutch oven?

    6. Re:EV1.net or Lindows? by TioHoltzman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think it more likely that Lindows will be sent to the doghouse.
      We could only be so lucky!
      Michael Roberts would have a field day with this. As much as I think the guys is sort of a goof, I'd love to see this happen. The potential comedy factor alone would be well worth it.

  31. Still by kaizenfury7 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Interestingly enough, although their stock (SCOX) ha s been in a decline for the past few months (it was 16+ the last time that I saw) it jumped quite a bit today. Up 1.15 to 13.42. Any reason why?

    1. Re:Still by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More buyers than sellers.

  32. SCO's legalesse has me confused... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as a baby in a topless bar.. :(

  33. How the lawsuits are going to go in court by NZheretic · · Score: 0, Interesting
    Since 1994, both Caldera ( which only changed its name to The SCO Group in 2003 ) and the Santa Cruz Operation ( The original SCO which changed its name to Tarentella ) have accepted, profited from and redistributed copyrighted source code from hundreds of developers under the terms of the GPL license.
    http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl.html
    The SCO Group has failed to put forward ANY substantial legal theory why the SCO Group should not be obligated to abide by the terms of the GPL.
    http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/sco/sco-without-fear .html
    The SCO Group obligations under the GPL has been reiterated and reinforced in the legal positions of IBM, Redhat and Novell in their respective cases against the SCO Group.

    It is a criminal offense to claim, with fraudulent intent, that you have a copyright if you do not. The SCO Group does *NOT* hold the copyrights to the UNIX source code. Novell has *NOT* transfered the title for the works that the SCO Group fraudulently filed for copyright in 2003. The SCO Group do not have the right to sue anybody for violation of copyright works without the assent of the title holder.

    The SCO Group claims the right to sue for work in standard UNIX and POSIX interfaces that AT&T and Novell granted full rights to use royalty free in perpetuity for the ISO, ANSI and FIPS federal standards.

    The SCO Group's contract claims against IBM and others based upon the AT&T license in respect to rights of so called derivative works is in direct contradiction to evidence presented to the SCO Group by Novell.

    The SCO Group though the press and SEC filings, has bolstered the share price of the SCO Group based upon demonstrably false claims to the contrary of above points 1,2 and 3. The SCO Group CEOs and legal agents were notified by Novell and IBM *before* making these false claims and presenting them as fact. The actions of the SCO Group must be in violation of several SEC regulations.

    So how is the lawsuit going to go if it gets to court?
    Eben Moglen's Harvard Speech
    http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/p.cgi/speakers.html [harvard.edu]

    The Transcript
    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200402260 03735733

    The McBrides, jointly -- I feel sometimes as though I'm in a Quentin Tarantino movie of some sort with them [laughter] -- the McBrides have failed to distinguish adequately between dicta and holding.

    I do not like Eldred against Ashcroft. I think it was wrongly decided. I filed a brief in it, amicus curiae, and I assisted my friend and colleague Larry Lessig in the presentation of the main arguments which did not, regrettably, succeed.

    Oddly enough, and I will take you through this just enough to show, oddly enough, it is the position that we were taking in Eldred against Ashcroft, which if you stick to holding rather than dicta, would be favorable to the position now being urged by Mr. McBride. What happened in Eldred against Ashcroft, as opposed to the window dressing of it, is actually bad for the argument that Mr. McBride has been presenting, whichever Mr. McBride it is. But they have not thought this through enough.

    Let me show you why. The grave difficulty that SCO has with free software isn't their attack; it's the inadequacy of their defense. In order to defend yourself in a case in which you are infringing the freedom of free software, you have to be prepared to meet a call that I make reasonably often with my colleagues at the Foundation who are here tonight. That telephone call goes like this. "Mr. Potential Defendant, you are distributing my client's copyrighted work without permission. Please stop. And if you want to continue to distribute it, we'l

    1. Re:How the lawsuits are going to go in court by cynical+kane · · Score: 1, Informative

      Haven't you posted this before?

    2. Re:How the lawsuits are going to go in court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's not going to court. It was never intended to go and it's never going to. It's nothing more than a pump-n-dump scandal with their stock. n.b. Remember, they paid a good portion of their legal fees in stock. Now why would the company propose to do that and why would the landsharks agree to receive payment [in that format]?

      Win some licensing battles, collect a little money, and raise some Wall Street eyebrows after they realize the outstanding potential and sign on to SCO, raising the price.

    3. Re:How the lawsuits are going to go in court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      mod this whore down, he stole this from some other guy yesterday. mods, you deserve to have your genitals bitten off for that.

    4. Re:How the lawsuits are going to go in court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haven't I seen a story about the SCO lawsuits before?

    5. Re:How the lawsuits are going to go in court by yog · · Score: 3, Informative

      Moderators found this interesting, but it's still off topic.

      And how many times do you need to repeat this posting before everyone gets your point, Mr. Karma Whore?

      --
      it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    6. Re:How the lawsuits are going to go in court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Eldred vs. Ashcroft failed because there is nothing unconstitutional about extending copyright law by 20 years every 20 years. That's all it is. Plain and simple. The constitution gives congress a lot of power when it comes to granting rights to writings and discoveries, and you can't blame the founding fathers for not foreseeing our information-based world.

      It sucks, yes. But the Supreme Court can't make the constitution say something it doesn't. Ginsberg said it best when she asked: "This flies in the face of what the founding fathers intended. But is it unconstitutional?".

      We now return to your regularly SCO-duled programming.

    7. Re:How the lawsuits are going to go in court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But this ruling also suggests* that it would be constitutional for congress to re-calibrate copyright back to 14 years, past promises be damned.

      *If congress were to ever reduce the copyright term it would not surprise me in the least if the supreme court found that unconstitutional.

    8. Re:How the lawsuits are going to go in court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, Darl. Your comments are always welcome. Say hello to Bill for us, won't you?

  34. It's like the source code all over again... by sharlskdy · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think SCO is waiting for the media outlets to sign and return the NDA before they let them know who the lawsuits are against.

  35. No Surprise by mj2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who really expected them to follow through? There continual refusals to provide proof of Linux infringing on SCO patents is ample evidence that their lawsuit has no basis. They (SCO executives) would be wise to not further expand their lawsuits, as each company they sue can countersue for defamation. Overall this seems like a big scam - intimidate businesses into giving SCO money for linux licenses,causing SCOX to rise, and enriching McBride & co at the expense of the clueless investors who continue to buy worthless stock.

    1. Re:No Surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Holy crap. If you don't know what you're talking about, just shut the fuck up. Patents have nothing to do with anything except IBM's countersuit. I don't know who is worse, know-nothing posters who insist on displaying their ignorance or the moderaters who mod them "insightful".

    2. Re:No Surprise by Pieroxy · · Score: 5, Funny

      each company they sue can countersue for defamation

      And so? What exactly do they have to loose in the process?

    3. Re:No Surprise by baggins2002 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So what, a company that is broke that gets counter sued is still broke.
      SCO has nothing to lose, that's the main reason they are doing this.
      They just found a loophole in our legal system and are abusing it. They didn't get that 50M infusion to piss it away trying to sell a product. They already proved they couldn't make money doing that.
      But they can can take that 50M into court and cause a lot of problems and increase the FUD.

    4. Re:No Surprise by HrothgarReborn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would not paint the investors as being innocent babes along for the ride. Anyone who would invest (or stay invested) in a company that produces legal action instead of product is just as crooked as the CEO.

    5. Re:No Surprise by Ironica · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't know who is worse...

      The worst may be ACs who fly profanely off the handle because someone accidentally said "patent" instead of "copyright..."

      I mean, correct the guy, sure. But frankly, it was a minor mistake in context; I didn't even notice, probably because I expected to see "copyright" and so I didn't realize he used the wrong word. It's not like the extensive posts that go on about patent infringement and the limitations on patents and how they're abusing the patent process and will get sued under whatever patent law when they actually mean copyright...

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    6. Re:No Surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Thier loose ass, you loser.

      (loose and lose are not the same word)

    7. Re:No Surprise by avgjoe62 · · Score: 2, Funny
      each company they sue can countersue for defamation

      And so? What exactly do they have to loose in the process?

      Thier loose ass, you loser.

      A better answer, I think, would have been "Their pants. So they can prepare to take it up the wazoo from all the pissed off companies they've needlessly sued. Loose does not mean lose."

      --

      How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?

    8. Re:No Surprise by mandolin · · Score: 3, Funny
      Who really expected them to follow through?

      I did, because SCO has a history of doing the dumbest thing possible, and suing another huge company is even dumber than not suing after they said they would.

    9. Re:No Surprise by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      each company they sue can countersue for defamation

      Unfortunately the worst enemy is one who has nothing to lose. SCO knows all their bases belong to IBM and if they lose (which they will) there will be nothing else left.

      This example should have people questioning the protection that a corporation provides. When it comes to reckless and slanderous behavior the liability needs to extend to the perpetrators personally and the officers of the corporation.

      If the board felt that their own fortunes could be threatened by Darl and crew's actions you would see some a very different course of events.

    10. Re:No Surprise by jhylkema · · Score: 5, Funny

      Quoth the poster:

      Unfortunately the worst enemy is one who has nothing to lose. SCO knows all their bases belong to IBM and if they lose (which they will) there will be nothing else left.

      Excuse me, sir, but I must ask you for your geek card.

      All their base are belong to IBM.

      IBM to SCO: "You have no chance to survive make your time."

    11. Re:No Surprise by gujo-odori · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not necessarily.

      For example, let's that about the time SCO announced this whole fiasco, I had gone out and bought some SCO stock (I didn't, ain't go no money, but let's say for the sake of argument that I had).

      First, I have not invested in SCO per se. I have invested in stock, but SCO didn't get my money, the person I bought the stock from got it. Whatever money SCO got from that stock came the first time they sold it. They got nothing from any sale after that. Now, if my buy was part of a general pattern of buying, then that pushes the price up and Darl can sell some of his stock and make money, or SCO could issue some new stock (AFAIK the didn't), although that would tend to push the share price down (supply and demand).

      So, here I sit with some SCO stock that I bought, but I have not really invested any money in SCO. The money is invested in the stock, but SCO doesn't get any of that money.

      Now, am I crooked? Or do I just think that whatever SCO's chances, some fool is going to come a long later and be willing to pay a lot more per share for this stock than I did, allowing me to sell it at a profit before the trial is over and walk away. SCO later goes down in flames and the stock is worthless. I made my profit, and SCO benefited not at all from my ownership of their stock.

      Is anything about that crooked, or even supportive of SCO? No, not at all. Is it a gamble? Yes. Perhaps less of one than sitting down at a table in Las Vegas, but a gamble nevertheless. I suspect that most of the holders of SCO stock are not particularly supporters of SCO, except to the extent that their hope of having the stock go up makes them hope that SCO prevails; most of them are probably simply people who believe (or at least hope) that the stock will go up and they will therefore profit.

      Oh, and in the meanwhile, my owning stock would give me voting power in shareholders' meetings; a hostile takeover of SCO could have stopped this suit dead in its tracks. Imagine if Linux supporters had bought all available SCO shares :-) Of course, that's what an IBM buyout of SCO would have achieved, and what they may well have been privately hoping would happen.

      Now, of course, it would be a bad time to buy. However, anyone who could and did buy SCO stock back when this first started to brew up made a shrewd move, and if they have since sold, a tidy profit. There's nothing wrong with that, and certainly no support of SCO in it. It's just buying a thing and later selling it for more than the purchase price. SCO gets nothing of either.

    12. Re:No Surprise by nametaken · · Score: 1


      Its my understanding that gross negligence pierces the veil of liability... leaving the players personal assets vulnerable?

    13. Re:No Surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try getting the courts to accept that, though.

      B'stards.

    14. Re:No Surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Darl and friends can also be sued personally. If their company is kaput, it cannot compensate them.

      This and related personal swords of Damocles are probably why they are persisting in the suits now that they are past the point of no return.

      IANAL

    15. Re:No Surprise by DrSkwid · · Score: 3, Insightful


      The action of you buying the stock supports the price or even raises it.

      SCO and their employees own the same stock.

      Thus : you buying the stock helps SCO and can even make them money if you are one of many such buyers who push the price upwards by generating demand.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    16. Re:No Surprise by LittleBigLui · · Score: 2, Funny

      SCO: "Somebody set up us the lawsuit."
      IBM: "You don't know what you doing."

      --
      Free as in mason.
    17. Re:No Surprise by ZeeTeeKiwi · · Score: 4, Insightful
      SCO doesn't get any of that money.

      Oh yes they do. Companies with an inflated market price can use issue new stock as payment for real assets. Witness AOL buying Time Warner.

      SCO can use its new found wealth to buy next-to-worthless Canopy group assets theyreby rewarding Canopy in a method which passes muster at the SEC.

    18. Re:No Surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Who really expected them to follow through?
      Well, considering the amount of shit they've been producing recently... I'd have thought that follow-through would be quite natural for them.
    19. Re:No Surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe just:

      Their loose ass, you loser.

    20. Re:No Surprise by prgrmr · · Score: 1

      This example should have people questioning the protection that a corporation provides

      I thought Enron and WorldComm were doing that.

    21. Re:No Surprise by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 1

      Update: The company being sued is Autozone.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    22. Re:No Surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "There lose ass, you looser"?

    23. Re:No Surprise by jhylkema · · Score: 1

      Quoth the Reagan^Wposter:

      Now, am I crooked? Or do I just think that whatever SCO's chances, some fool is going to come a long later and be willing to pay a lot more per share for this stock than I did, allowing me to sell it at a profit before the trial is over and walk away.

      That's exactly what the market is betting on.

      A lot of people feel that, win or lose, IBM will buy SCOX out. Either way, the stockholders get paid. That's why their stock hasn't tanked . . . yet. Now, when it becomes obvious that the game is up and SCOX will neither win nor be bought out, well . . .

    24. Re:No Surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you meant

      IBM to SCO: "Resistance is futile."

  36. Doesnt this amount to Racketeering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isnt this illegal for corperations/people to go out and just start sueing, threatening for lawsuit sake? I believe thats still illegal.

  37. Seems pretty specific to me. by shaitand · · Score: 1

    I mean really, how many companies still have SCO Unix licenses running anywhere? I'm willing to bet you'll find it's about two that still have a couple servers they haven't bothered to move to linux yet.

    Check the last few years for sco unix sales and you'll find the companies getting sued, you'll find it's BOTH purchasers of SCO licenses!

    1. Re:Seems pretty specific to me. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      a shitload of companies are still running sco's flavors of nix in quite a few places(for billing, salary and similar stuff). they're running it because they've been running it for years and years(you know, back when it was a choice that actually made any sense)..

      consequently, for most of these companies linux is a very good platform to move to(and many have).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  38. Prediction of tomorrow's announcement by Pentagram · · Score: 4, Funny

    We are going to postpone our suing of two companies but tomorrow we are going to sue THREE!

    1. Re:Prediction of tomorrow's announcement by MoronGames · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, it's four companies. It's going to double each day...

      --
      hey!
    2. Re:Prediction of tomorrow's announcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does that remind me of this?

      "I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today." -Wimpy

    3. Re:Prediction of tomorrow's announcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are going to postpone our suing of N companies but tomorrow we are going to sue N+1!

    4. Re:Prediction of tomorrow's announcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the day after that... EIGHT! Powers of 2!

    5. Re:Prediction of tomorrow's announcement by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Yes and if you'll give me one hamburger today, I'll gladly pay for two tomorrow... ;-p

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    6. Re:Prediction of tomorrow's announcement by thirdrock · · Score: 1

      We are going to postpone our suing of two companies but tomorrow we are going to sue THREE!

      Nobody expects an SCO lawsuit. Our main weapon is secrecy ... and threats. Our two main weapons are secrecy and threats .... and a fanatical devotion to our stock price. Our three main weapons are secrecy and threats and a fanatical devotion to our stock price ... and a gullible media. Amongst our main weapons are ...

      --
      >>
      I am the director, and this is my movie ...
  39. So the logic is... by someguy42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...buy a SCO licence, have SCO slap a lawsuit on you anyway?? How do they expect to sell licences after this insanity?? Kinda a matter of shooting oneself in the foot.

    --
    The probability that someone is watching you is directly proportional to the stupidity of your actions.
  40. Wired News 2004 Vaporware list... by Radi-0-head · · Score: 5, Funny

    The #1 spot for Wired News' Vaporware Awards in 2004 goes to:

    SCO for their "still pending" lawsuit! Congratulations guys!

    1. Re:Wired News 2004 Vaporware list... by Kippesoep · · Score: 1

      The lawsuit is vaporware #1? Really, I thought the top spot would've gone to SCO's irrefutable proof that millions of lines of copyrighted trade secrets have gone into Linux.

  41. Bass Ackwards by z0ink · · Score: 1

    The new business model for OSS: 1. Sell product that isn't yours .. as your own 2. ??? 3. Use profits from your non-product to sue your customers

    --
    Steal This Sig
    1. Re:Bass Ackwards by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      Dieing company strategy

      1. Sue everyone for anything
      2. ....
      3. Profit or die trying

      It's old school business, nothing new here.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    2. Re:Bass Ackwards by ThogScully · · Score: 1

      I don't think you're plan requires a step 2. It's working for SCO without one.
      -N

      --
      I've nothing to say here...
  42. back stabbing? by bored1 · · Score: 1

    "has said the first two will be aimed at companies that hold Unix licenses" Is it just me or is SCO suing its customers? Yet another similarity between them and the RIAA

    1. Re:back stabbing? by Foolhardy · · Score: 1

      Hey, SCO duped their customers into buying licences in the first place, mabye SCO thinks they can convince their customers to settle.

  43. Nelson by unsigned+integer · · Score: 1
    Ha Ha!

    I guess that's really the only thing you can say about the SCO license holders who are about to be sued.

  44. Pixar? by AndyFewt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Could it be Pixar? Dont they have a huge render farm of linux boxes chugging away.. not an isp or net services and its a pretty well known company (Toy story, Monsters Inc, etc)..

    However, I don't know if SCO had a unix contract with them which I believe was one of the things Darl said they would use against the company/companies.

    1. Re:Pixar? by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd love to see how many companies drop their SCO support contracts if this actually does happen. Its pretty hard to justify keeping an overpriced contract with an obsolete vendor that is likely to use the contract against you to help with a stock scam. In any case, any company that still uses SCO servers needs to make plans to switch so they won't be without support once SCO folds in a year or so.

  45. license didn't indemnify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you had read the article the other day on Groklaw it stated that (I'm paraphrasing) that purchasing this license doesn't allow that user to actually USE SCO's intellectual property. All it really does is say "look, we know we're in the wrong here, so let's settle up".

    Now because of the fact these people signed up for their license that shows they "admit guilt". So not only did they pay SCO the $799 (or whatever it is now) extortion fee, they also paid SCO to sue them. That's how the legal system works, my friends. EV1 and Lindows (if it's actually true) will get a first hand lesson now.

    In a sense, buying a license under these methods and terms is basically the same as signing a confession to a crime that wasn't even committed.

  46. And tomorrow... by kundor · · Score: 2, Funny
    They'll go double or nothing again!

    in two months they'll be threatening to sue everyone on the planet the day after.

  47. I get it.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By purchasing a liscense, EV1 has already admitted to doing something wrong. Now SCO has grounds to sue on.

  48. Wow . . . by dorlthed · · Score: 0, Redundant


    I really didn't see this coming!

  49. Sue your customers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow - they copied* that move right out of the RIAA's playbook: sue your customers. Actually, not only did the copy it; I think that they may have perfected it. They're suing someone that they know is a customer unlike the RIAA who isn't sure.

    * tomorrow's news from the-lesser-of-two-evils dept: RIAA sues SCO for copyright infringement

  50. /me is confused by RoadkillBunny · · Score: 1

    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses.

    Wait, they are going to sue their customers?

    --
    Cheers,
    RoadkillBunny
  51. SCO had a really good excuse... by fltsimbuff · · Score: 1

    Too bad they didn't use it:

    "Well, we were going to sue someone today, but they Paid us off (EV1.Net)."

  52. A /. first????? by jgregs75 · · Score: 1

    Has a conference call ever been /.'d??

  53. Licenses by Fubar420 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    (Mods check if this is redundant but...) As far as I read, its SCO unix licensees, not Linux IP licensees.. While i think sco is full of it on Linux IP, I doubt they'll hit the people that have paid for linux licensees, only those using SCO unix as well as linux in their operations... Honestly tho, I have to agree w/ the earlier posts saying its very similar to RIAA suing the same bloody people that pay for their CD's..

    --
    -- (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
  54. SCO won't Sue Lindows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Because originally SCO architected and did the preliminary work as a Service deal. Part of the contract that SCO delivered to Lindows stated that SCO would 'take care' of the GPL aspects of the code and would not provide anything that might get Lindows into trouble such as tainted source code etc etc etc.....

    Lindows later went their own way and pursued a more debian focused route, however the contract still stands, though is ulimately open to interpretation

  55. My God That's Deviously Clever by Sean80 · · Score: 1

    Did EV1.net just admit their own previous culpability by buying the licenses?

  56. ideas by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses. (EV1.net servers or Lindows?)

    Stop giving the terrorists ideas!

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  57. More time... by uberkuba · · Score: 1

    Perhaps someone should sell SCO the time they need to prepare their legal arguments. They seem to function on a modified form of M$ time (as indicated by M$ time remaining bars).

    For Darl, our dear frined, this could be done by even giving him some time... in a small cell with a large man called Bubba. This should give Darl enough time but instead of hassling the world he might want to consider some 'internal' matters.

    For all intensive purposes I also postulate that Tomorrow(tm)SCO will never come.

  58. Please let one of the defendants be IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    It would be over so fast that Darl's head would be spinning like Linda Blair's in "The Exorcist".

    1. Re:Please let one of the defendants be IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Darl's head would be spinning like Linda Blair's in "The Exorcist"

      If only...

  59. Trying to stop the shares from dropping? by mobiux · · Score: 1

    Ok, they will announce these lawsuits shortly after thier financial reports.
    Is this to try to fool investors that might be ready to dump the stock.

  60. Next on HBC... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're going to have a whole night of "must shit TV"

  61. What about... by Tuxedo+Jack · · Score: 1

    How about suing the RIAA or Microsoft? They've made more than their share of boneheaded moves already - this would just be one more.

    --

    Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
  62. Excellent PR skills by overbyj · · Score: 1

    This whole PR stunt reminds that they at least are following the major points of a giving a presentation. There are basically three steps to presenting to an audience.

    1. Tell them what you are going to tell them
    2. Tell them
    3. Tell them what you told them

    It appears that SCO is telling us what they are going to tell us about the lawsuit and now they have told us that they are going to tell us that they told us so.

    --
    No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
  63. slashdot the phone grid by shaark78 · · Score: 0

    for the first time in the history of slashdot we'll be slashdotting the phone system. phone company's beware.

  64. I'm scared hold me by segment · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wonder if my SCO spoof will be the target

  65. Re:Oh my God - by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 1
    No, it's going *somewhere*.

    The question is where. This is just part of the MO by MS.
    Stir up shit weekly, create FUD.

    --
    You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
  66. Brilliant business move! by El · · Score: 1

    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses. If there is any justice in this world, this should result in a flurry of calls to SCO asking "Any chance that I can cancel my SCO licenses before 9:00am Wednesday?"

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  67. Right.. by iswm · · Score: 1

    Scare people into buying licences.. Sue them anyway..

    --
    Buckethead
  68. Please, Let It Be McDonald's.... by Homebrewed · · Score: 4, Funny

    Could they, would they, please be incredibly stupid enough to sue McDonald's, whose German operations are moving to SuSE. Talk about being crushed....

    1. Re:Please, Let It Be McDonald's.... by JasonStiletto · · Score: 1

      that would be fun. I like this quote from their founder.. "What do you do when your competitor is drowning? Get a live hose and stick it in his mouth." - McDonald's founder Ray Kroc (Fortune 8/96)

    2. Re:Please, Let It Be McDonald's.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they want their BILLIONS SERVED sign.

  69. I will be suing somebody tomorrow by I-R-Baboon · · Score: 1

    But it will take me a few years to figure out exactly *WHO*...and try to fabricate a reason with no proof or evidence.

    Employment model my ass, this is where the bank is!

    --
    -1 Overrated (Too many big words for me to comprehend)
  70. Hmm... by c0dedude · · Score: 1

    I'm just trolling for opinions here, anyone think this is a good time to hop on scox? I'm in it to make $$$$ and am wondering if the stock will go up. What do you think?

    --
    Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
    1. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes! I believe you should mortgage your house to the ground and buy SCOX. Also, see if you can liquidate any collage-funds or similar that you have for your kids. Throw those in too.

      Then when you've supported SCOX buy throwing money at them....

      ... I fucking hope you'll lose everything!

      Idiot.

      (and no, going 'short' isn't too smart either)

    2. Re:Hmm... by lithron · · Score: 1

      I think you're at the wrong place if you want a serious answer to that question.

  71. SCO License by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought a SCO license was supose to prevent a lawsuit by SCO?
    I guess they desided to stop pestering thoes that deny their claim to everything under the sun and go after their customers instead.
    Now all they need to do is align them selfs with Al Gore since he says he invented everything they can sue everyone that uses anything.

  72. Deja Vu all over again ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=98927&cid=8437 030

  73. SCO Unix != SCO IP by Tony · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses. (EV1.net servers or Lindows?)

    Seems like they are saying they are going to sue someone who has already licensed Unixware or some other SCO-sold Unix OS, and *not* someone who has already licensed their "SCO IP," like EV1.

    I bet they go after someone who has used SCO's OS in the past, but has been migrating to Linux. Nothing like a little retribution.

    Of course, it's hard to tell with these bastards. They don't seem to be too.... stable. Mentally. Financially. Whatever.

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
    1. Re:SCO Unix != SCO IP by Build6 · · Score: 1

      Seems like they are saying they are going to sue someone who has already licensed Unixware or some other SCO-sold Unix OS

      That's what I thought too. But that seems really short-sighted. Who on earth would, from this point on, ever want to buy anything from SCO? You'd have thought that their customers are the ones they'd be MOST friendly to.

      Then again, maybe the way they see it, nobody's ever going to want to buy anything from SCO ever again anyway, so might as well do it.

      Maybe they can find some contractual basis for the lawsuit due to the licensing terms the licensees had had to sign - like how they sued IBM and not Red Hat etc. because they had a contract with IBM that they thought they could use.

      Whatever the case, this seems very much like "eating the seed corn", or "eating your young" - the final act before the end. Suing your paying customers? Good grief.

  74. We can only hope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That somehow it backfires such that when the press spins it, it comes out with headlines like "SCO begins suing own customers".

    All this would take is the press paying any attention to anything not directly from SCO's mouth. But maybe that's wishful thinking.

  75. It's ^H you dumbass! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    It's ^H you dumbass, not ^K.

  76. SCO's Amended Complaint... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...also was recently posted at Groklaw. Their lawyers really did a decent job in making most Darl's rantings nice and legal like.

    BSD users might find paragraph 84 interesting, since SCO basically claims it was impossible for Linux to achieve "complex multi-processor functionality" without SCO's UNIX code.

  77. *has the sensation of running into a brick wall* by Malek+the+Damned · · Score: 1

    Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaait wait wait...

    They're SUING their _own customers_!?!! .... someone PLEASE tell me I read that wrong...

  78. to whom? by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

    In a surprise turn of events...

    Surprise to whom? Seriously, they've been "postponing" this since last year, why would anyone be surprised?

    1. Re:to whom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Engage irony detector.

  79. What would make more sense to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    They could sue Novell. They are using/selling Linux after all.

  80. "Neither company is in the technology business." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1541393,00.as p

  81. The first rule of SCO. by MrFreshly · · Score: 1

    You don't talk about SCO.

    I am Linus's complete lack of surprise.

  82. Sheesh.. by CashCarSTAR · · Score: 1

    That's a big Whisky Tango Foxtrot...

    I was WAITING for that announcement. Just to see what these people are up to. How big will they go?

    And do they have another patsy to settle with them to give their stock more legitimacy?

    I vote for the second.

  83. You're courting an IP suit from a rock band. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Look at the RIAA: suing Joe Teenager, to try and
    offset the fact that their profits are dropping
    like a lead balloon.

    Lead balloon, that sounds like a good name for a band.


    Don't try it. You might find yourself on the wrong end of a trademark dilution suit vs. Led Zepplin. B-)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  84. Meeting Notes by Sparky77 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Darl: "Thanks everybody for listening in on this financial meeting. We've got some really good numbers to talk about today. Our core product, Turbo Litigation Plus, is doing very well right now. We've got more penetration in the court room market than any of our competitors and we feel that things are only going to get better from here on out."

    Investor: "Can I just say that I love what this latest release had done to stock prices. I'm sleeping on a bed of money at home right now."

    Darl: "That's great to hear. We're glad your happy, but please hold your comments until I'm finished speaking."

    Investor: "..."

    Darl: "Right now I'd like to announce a couple more features that we've added to Turbo Litigation Plus."

    Listeners: A hush....Pent up excitement...Maniacal greed...

    Darl: "First, we've decided to add Hasbro to our list of targets. We've discovered that the substance that give's Nerf(TM) toys their "Nerfiness", if you will, is actually part of the Intellectual Property of SCO in a very literal sense. It's what makes up 90% of our brains over here."

    Investor: "Excellent!"

    Darl: "Please man! *slaps the table* Let me speak!"

    Investor: "..."

    Darl: "Secondly, after a toss up between Ronco, the maker of the indespensible Door Saver(TM) which of course was actually invented by Billy over here, and McDonalds, maker of the McDarl, we've chosen to add, wait for it, ourselves!"

    Listeners: Gasp!

    Darl: "Yes folks, we're going to sue ourselves. I mean think about it, we own all our own Intellectial Property, we only have to pay half as much in lawyer fees, and I love to cross examine myself."

    Listeners: Applause

    Darl: "Thank you all for your time. SCO Rules!"

    Advisor: "Darl..."

    Darl: "Sorry."

    --
    One bad monkey spoils the whole barrel.
  85. Re:Look up Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mental midget.

    While I have your simple half witted attention, interested in some incredible swamp land in Florida?

  86. free beer tomorrow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    kinda reminds me of that joke sign that says "free beer tomorrow".

    "sue you tomorrow!"

  87. More time ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    SCO says that they need more time to prepare an announcement

    Didn't know it took so much time for making up a Chewbacca Defense.
  88. AutoZone by ceswiedler · · Score: 5, Informative

    I bet one of them is AutoZone. SCO is pissed that AutoZone switched from SCO Unix to Linux, and claims that couldn't have been done without violating their IP. The meat of their argument is on groklaw here (Supplemental #8), and if you scroll down you can see some AutoZone employees refute the argument. Search for the comment by 'jbgreer'.

    1. Re:AutoZone by -tji · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's hilarious..

      For autozone, the claim that IBM copied libraries from SCO Openserver, to allow their old apps to work in Linux. Okay, there is some logic there.. that could feasibly violate licensing terms.

      But, they also claim that IBM violated their software licensing agreement with Sherwin Williams and Target, by inducing them to switch to Linux. What the hell kind of License do they have?? It forbids users from switching to competitive products? I kind of doubt it.

      The hilarious part is that customers are fleeing from SCO as quickly as they can. And, SCO claims it is because of IBM's involvement - not the fact that SCO have abandoned any hopes of competing with their products and switched the whole company focus to litigation. You would have to think that any responsible organization currently using SCO is putting together plans or actively moving to another OS.

  89. They missed a detail! by El · · Score: 2, Funny

    "There is a high possibility we will be announcing two!" said Blake Stowell Tuesday, while placing his pinky in front of his mouth as pictured here

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  90. MOD PARENT UP by SIGFPE · · Score: 0, Redundant

    The moderators obviously haven't watched Spartacus!

    --
    -- SIGFPE
  91. In Other News, Calculus Teachers Thrilled by levin · · Score: 5, Funny

    Although SCO's actions have attracted some negative attention from the Open Source Community, many High Scool teacers are exhuberant about the company's recent actions. Bob Frampton, High School calculus teacher at Frederick Davis High said of SCO's recent actions, "It's just great, they're literally changing the way we teach mathematics to our future leaders. It's only thanks to SCO that we can ask exciting new problems such as, 'If every day SCO doubles the number of lawsuits they claim to file the following day, how many days will it take before nobody cares?' or, 'If SCO doesn't play this thing out right, how long will it take before the Fed nails them with fraud? Extra Credit: how many board members will get caught? Support your answer by proof.'"

    Not just math teachers are thrilled, though. Says Jane Yargood of another local High School, "Darl McBride really deserves a cookie, it's so great that we can teach students about logical fallacies through real world context!" With the end of this somewhat less than momentous case nowhere in sight, it's good to see that some of our educators can find the silver lining in any situation.

    --

    `which fortune`
  92. MOD PARENT +1 MOTIVATOINAL ! Re:slashdot the ... by compactable · · Score: 1

    A swarm with a purpose! With great power comes great responsibility. Consider attending this your civic duty (-;

  93. So? by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The more bizarre and outlandish their statements are, the more their stock price goes up.

    I bet if they announced they were suing EV1, their stock price would hit 40 before the call ended.

    --

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

    1. Re:So? by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      Imagine how high it would climb if they announced they were suing Microsoft!

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  94. My first response to this article was.... by metroid+composite · · Score: 1
    My first response to this article was: "if I had mod points, I'd give this funny. Oh wait: it's an article."

    Could SCO be this comically stupid? Nah, I must be dreaming. I'm going to wake up.... Any minute now....

  95. Re:your sig... by donnz · · Score: 1

    Slashdot: where racism against Indians is OK...

    You noticed that too, can I sign you up?

    --
    -- Free software on every PC on every desk
  96. Tired of these SCO articles. by ^DA · · Score: 0

    You should be able to filter them out, but get the article that says SCO has gone down in flames and D. McBride has been flogged in public.

  97. They said they'd announce on Tuesday... by mark-t · · Score: 4, Funny
    But they never mentioned exactly *WHICH* tuesday they were referring to.

    This reminds me of the "Free Ice Cream Tomorrow" sign that a guy had at his ice cream store in the early 1900's... when asked about why he wasn't giving ice cream away even though the sign had been up for over a day already, his response was always the same "because it's not tomorrow yet... it's still today".

    1. Re:They said they'd announce on Tuesday... by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      'Jam to-morrow and jam yesterday - but never jam today'

      Lewis Carroll said it first.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  98. Bagholders Inc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yeah, they're known as "bagholders". These are the imbeciles that know nothing about the company, the case(s) or in fact anything, except a) that the PR says "We'll sue" and b) When companies announce that they'll sue, they go up. Also, there was the "We sold an IP license" thingy, you might remember? The one that noone know if it brought in any money for SCOX, but it sure made a lot of PR!

    Anyhow; The bagholders are then sold into by insiders, which make a tidy profit.

    The job of the bagholders then is to sit around and watch the stock slowly fall down again.

    Typically they'll panic and sell at a big loss. Some bagholders are smarter and hang around for the second wave of bagholders and make it out at plus/minus zero.

  99. Hotline by lazy_arabica · · Score: 5, Funny
    You can call 1-800-818-5264 code 141144 Wednesday at 9:00am MST to join in with your questions
    And tomorrow we'll read that this damned open-source community has organized a DDoS attack on SCO hotline !!
  100. Yap Yap Yap by sashang · · Score: 2, Funny

    "You gonna bark all day little doggy, or are you gonna bite?" -- Mr. Blonde "Reservoir Dogs"

  101. Evans Data Group survey by prostoalex · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Evans Data Group survey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      8% of Linux developers think SCO's case has merit


      9% of the world's geologists think the world is flat. I pulled that statistic out of the same place you pulled your's ;-)

    2. Re:Evans Data Group survey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you the 'armageddon' guy?

  102. This McBride dude is hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    He is becoming the laughing stock of everyone.
    What have we had -
    - lies
    - more lies
    - hilarious claims
    - court battles, ridiculous by any account
    - accusations that he will sue (lies again)

    Sigh... This guy is so strange. Is it something that can be traced back to mormonism? Does multi-wivery rot the brains?

  103. Darl's an ass by codefungus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He spent 2 years in Osaka trying to convert Buddhists to MORMANS and the most intellegent thing he can say about it is that he got free Japanese lessons?

    And the reason why Darl is the way he is?

    "I am absolutely driven by people saying I can't do something."

    Read more:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/29/business/ yourmon ey/29boss.html

    --
    -- A cat is no trade for integrity!
    1. Re:Darl's an ass by cheshiremackat · · Score: 1

      Hey Darl... I bet 'cha can't give up and go home... or maybe... I bet you can't defraud your shareholders enough to face criminal charges...

      --
      Bad spellers of the world untie!
    2. Re:Darl's an ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "He spent 2 years in Osaka trying to convert Buddhists to MORMANS"

      That must explain his current activities; he's had prior experience in pushing utter crap to a hostile audience and believing it's gospel :-)

    3. Re:Darl's an ass by k_head · · Score: 1

      This guy has given the mormon church such a black eye. Every article I read about him makes sure to mention that he is a devout mormon. If I was the head of the church I'd call him and tell him not to mention his religion in the press.

      --
      The best way to support the US war effort is to continue buying American products.
    4. Re:Darl's an ass by Eastree · · Score: 1

      Maybe he should have done the same thing in Turkey, where it's illegal to try to persuade others to your own beliefs. At least if he had been sent to a Turkish prison for a few years, it might have set off a chain of events so none of this would have ever happened.

    5. Re:Darl's an ass by BananaJr6000 · · Score: 0

      He should get kicked out and banned from saying he ever was. ...sheesh, and Mormons are advised not to file frivolous or excessive lawsuits.

    6. Re:Darl's an ass by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      "I am absolutely driven by people saying I can't do something."

      Having seen it in action, tenacity is not just beneficial in the "business environment" -- it's necessary. Due to the combination of people attacking you while others fail to defend you, you have quite a battle on your hands.

      This doesn't excuse McBride's choice of combat methodology, but it does explain why he isn't stopping.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  104. Suprise??? Really??? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 2, Interesting
    In a surprise turn of events, SCO says that they need more time to prepare an announcement of who they are going to sue.

    I hope this is a joke, I mean a suprise??? The announcement did exactly what SCO et al intended, it turned around their falling stock price just prior to a quarterly finantial announcment. Just more FUD.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  105. Re:Look up Sarcasm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mental midget.

    I wasn't the one who was about to invest in SCOX!.

  106. Re:Ummm.... SGI by glk572 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sgi is the only party that I can think of that Sco has any real beef with, if they're smart that's who they'll go after.

    Then again when you assume you make an ass out of u and me, and assuming that Sco is smart is risky.

    --
    Well art is art isn't it, but then again water is water; and east is east; and west is west; and if you take cranberries
  107. Thank you, Blake Stowell by El · · Score: 1

    What else would you expect, coming from a man whose very initials are "BS"?

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  108. This is good, Sue thy Neighbor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish the stupid mo's at Canopy Group actually keep their stupid lawsuit activities confined to actions against their fellow mo's like Novell and in this case Lindow's Michael Robertson.
    Hey Darl, go to the Passion and then come back and tell us what a big saint you are.

  109. Slashdot the 800 number? by danwiz · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Don't toll-free 800 numbers cost the company money on a per-user basis? What would the financial impact of everyone with an interest in Linux dialing in to listen?

    The slashdot-effect on an 800 number?

    1. Re:Slashdot the 800 number? by johnpaul191 · · Score: 2, Informative

      just remember caller-ID blocking does NOT work on 800 numbers in the USA.... i don't think it really matters but it's worth mentioning since people seem to forget that before they mouth off to Miss Cleo and wonder why she knows who they are.

    2. Re:Slashdot the 800 number? by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 2, Funny

      So find a payphone, if you still can. Everybody find a payphone and give Darl a call.

      --

      They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
  110. I bet they sue Linus Torvalds next... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would you put it past them?

  111. Re:your sig... by Aardpig · · Score: 1

    You noticed that too, can I sign you up?

    Your piece articulates many of my reservations concerning the whole outsourcing issue -- so yes, sign me up!

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  112. Free as in Beer by zaba · · Score: 3, Funny

    The "ever-pending" lawsuits remind me of the sign you see in some bars:

    Free beer (tomorrow)

  113. tim, read slashdot, ev1 paid the protection money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does timothy read slashdot?

  114. Declare Jyhad by sadler121 · · Score: 1

    *if* SCO win's (highly unlikely) we must declare holy Jyhad against the infidels Darl McBride and company.

    Who's up for being the first to suicide bomb Lindon??

    1. Re:Declare Jyhad by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Careful there Sparky, the spooks are "serious (tm)" about terrorism these days...

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
  115. Real -life /.-ing ? by BlueTrin · · Score: 1, Redundant
    You can call 1-800-818-5264 code 141144 Wednesday at 9:00am MST to join in with your questions, or listen to the webcast.
    Well now that this story has been posted here, I really hope for them that they hired enough phone operators ...
    --
    Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?
  116. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  117. Hmm amazing SCOX up 1.15 today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pump it Darl pump it! Making mad bank off of you so keep coming out with the announcement of no announcements of legal action for something you don't own.

  118. Re:Ummm.... -Yup.. it will be microsoft... by CSIP · · Score: 1

    after all, that would make about as much sence(and headlines) as anything else they've done.

    might be difficult to call microsoft a linux user however ;)

    --
    "Nyquil - The stuffy, sneezy, why-the-hell-is-the-room-spinning medicine."
  119. Because EV1 can sue SCO or SCO want more publicity by PiotrK · · Score: 1

    SCO knows that the licence sold to EV1 is illegal, and either they are afraid (EV1 can sue SCO first) or SCO wants more headlines like: "The fu***n SCO, sold the license".

  120. SCO Unix licences - Not SCO Linux IP licences by Builder · · Score: 1

    I really don't think EV1 is up for suing here... They are saying that they will be suing someone who has a SCO Unix licence. That implies someone like SGI or IBM.

    They're talking about their Unix licences here, not their Linux IP licences.

  121. Good Management by El · · Score: 2, Interesting

    SCO was unprofitable last quarter but would have been in the black if not for a $9 million payout to its attorneys, In most companies, wouldn't this be grounds for a shareholder lawsuit?

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    1. Re:Good Management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not when the shareholders are complete morons and only listen to what the know-nothing analysts they see on cnbc or fnn or what they get fed tell them is a good stock to buy due to pending litigation where they could make 20-50% profit on their investment. Whats 9 mil if they somehow pull it out of their ass and win a few billion here and there?

    2. Re:Good Management by El · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If they spent the $9 million on lottery tickets, they would have a better chance of winning... and it would still be grounds for a shareholder lawsuit.

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  122. I think he's a pine user by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In pine, ^K means "delete entire contents of current line". It doesn't move the line the cursor remains on though, so pressing it multiple times has no effect. I guess he's just trying to imply the multiple ^Ks are meant to indicate the PANIC DELETE EVERYTHING impulse.

  123. Pixar Retaliates... by MonkeyGone2Heaven · · Score: 1


    Sully from Monsters, Inc. charges out of Darl McBride's bedroom closet at 3am, and believe you me, it's not to make him laugh.

  124. Top 5 comments you'll hear. by pherris · · Score: 5, Funny
    If you listen carefully you'll most likely hear someone yelling:

    5. "Darl McBride, -1 Troll!"
    4. "New SCO docs at www.tubg...."
    3. "Can someone help me fix a Perl script?"
    2. "Bad news everyone, Stephen King is dead."

    And the number one comment will be:
    "Fuck you Darl!"

    BTW, I'll be the one with the air horn.

    --
    "And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
    1. Re:Top 5 comments you'll hear. by liquidsin · · Score: 1

      Seriously, this sounds like the funniest party ever. I wonder if I can convice the boss that I really *need* to be on the phone for this call because it's vital to our business or something. I'm just imagining an actual attempt at a real teleconference going on in the background of everything you just listed, and more, as a few hundred slashdotters tie up the lines.

      --
      do not read this line twice.
  125. Anyone else sick of support SCO's stock? by runswithd6s · · Score: 1, Informative

    I'm not an advocate of the "ignore the problem and maybe it will go away", but I can't help but feel that the highly public coverage of SCO's charade is nothing more than a method to inflate their stock. I honestly don't care any more.

    Perhaps I'm placing too much faith in IBM, Linus, Red Hat, Novell, and numerous parties in their fight against the cancerous SCO, but I honestly believe that SCO has absolutely no chance of winning. If they did, we may as well quit our jobs right now before the market crumbles under their letigious ambitions drive us into the ground.

    Let me reitterate. SCO, you have no chance of winning. Quit now and forever hold your peace.

    --
    assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */
  126. You don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fleas don't want to ignore all the news about the dog. They just want to hear real news about it. They can't do it by blocking the dog news altogether.

  127. A clear demonstration... by ranos · · Score: 1

    ...that SCO doesn't know what it's doing from one day to the next.

  128. Just more breach of contract lawsuits? by bartwol · · Score: 1
    "They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses."

    It seems to me that the benefit of going after Unix licensees is that those parties are bound by the terms of those licenses. Perhaps this is just a replay of their IBM breach-of-contract strategy, and another sign that they lack a valid claim against Linux users/GPL?

  129. The lucky Ones by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 1

    Suing just one or 2 companies for using Linux would be like suing random people for breathing and or drinking water....You really can't just pick and choose when suing someone can you? (Unless you are the RIAA....but at least they are going after teenage "thiefs" rather than respectable companies.)

    --
    (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
  130. Where's the asteroid where you need it? by tjstork · · Score: 1


    Really, isn't there some kind of button we could push to make SCO go away?

    --
    This is my sig.
  131. Interesting Darl interview video on news.com by linuxguy · · Score: 3, Informative


    Look for it on the right side of the front page.

    1. Re:Interesting Darl interview video on news.com by dvNull · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Wow HUGE ..

      Darl actually suggested that if Drug companies come up with a new formula for a drug on a linux machine they would have to license the formula under the GPL.

      This guy clearly wins the "No Clue" award when it comes to licenses. Now at least we know that he most likely has misintepreted the Unix contracts

      dvnull

    2. Re:Interesting Darl interview video on news.com by TRINITE · · Score: 1

      In the interview, he directly says that Groklaw is "supported" by IBM!!! A blatant lie. Couldn't this be construed as slander???

    3. Re:Interesting Darl interview video on news.com by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 1

      Couldn't this be construed as slander???

      A lot of the statements attempting to portray PJ as an IBM shill could potentially be construed as slander, were she to eventually go the legal route. If so, McBride, Stowell, and the rest of the Verbal Diarrhea Brigade may want to be careful where they open their mouths, as slander is a criminal offence in Utah.

      I smell schadenfreude in the offing...

      --

      Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
  132. Walmart customer! by ldj · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was in Walmart today, and the friendly greeter dude told me that Walmart struck a deal with SCO such that the 10th and 17th customers to order Linux pre-install systems tomorrow are getting sued for $14,345! A little surprise from Darl & Co.

    --
    Open Source: I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
  133. I wouldn't get too comfy with that $64M, Darl... by rah1420 · · Score: 1

    ... especially when you dropped $9 million on David Boies. You won't be able to do that for very long if you are suing, and being sued, by just about everybody.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
  134. Re:your sig... by HrothgarReborn · · Score: 4, Funny

    Slashdot: where racism against Indians is OK...

    I think this is an unfair generalization. Geronimo, Cochise, and Sitting Bull are some of my favorite figures in history.

    It's as bad as saying we're totally US centric. Sheesh.

  135. Parent is correct. by eddy · · Score: 1

    Seconded. It's pretty interesting. Good to see someone with a little bite-back, not the regular "Yes Master McBride, We Do Believe You Unconditionally".

    (Though I thought the joke about the wife-murderer was a little too obvious to deserve laughter)

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
  136. SCO need a new direction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because the investors are not accepting this crap anymore. The SCO stock price continues to plummet. Joy.

  137. They don't have any confidence in their own future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just look at the insider transactions. There have been no buys since this whole thing started except through the exercise of options. And they turn around and sell those shares. Look at the titles of these people. If it were just a vice president or two, I would read this as a couple of guys who expected their division was about to get outsourced. But the CFO, Controller, and at least one Director have joined in with the VPs to get their money out while they can.

  138. Won't work by TrentC · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I can't find the Groklaw article now, but a summary from a Groklaw reader who "attended" one of their conference calls said that it was pretty obvious that SCO wasn't letting anybody ask questions that they didn't know (and therefore couldn't predict or spin to their advantage).

    No sense in upsetting the investors with those questions they don't want to answer...

    Jay (=

    1. Re:Won't work by barzok · · Score: 4, Interesting

      SCO pretty much has to do this. The last time I listened to a conference call my company's top brass gave, they had about a half-dozen callers basically ruin the party. Management stuck to their BS story, tried to brush off the queries, but it was obvious they were in a major bind because they simply couldn't handle having to answer those questions in such an environment.

    2. Re:Won't work by kommakazi · · Score: 1

      Well we can at least "slashdot" their phone lines and run up SCO's phone bill :)

    3. Re:Won't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whats stopping you from claiming you will ask x, then actually ask y? Are the questions prerecorded? Not much sense in a phone conference then.

    4. Re:Won't work by barzok · · Score: 1

      They could have a delay system in place to catch that. You call in, say you'll ask X, and when they can tell you're going to ask Y, they hit the delay and it's like you never were there.

  139. it could happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someday this story will make for a compelling musical complete with a score from Slayer. SP's Kenny will play the role of Darl. And finally Satan will have a new love interest.

  140. SCO sues two more of their own customers by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 4, Interesting
    According to the news.com.com article, SCO is suing two more companies that have contracts with them... That makes 4 companies that they've sued in the last year -- all of whom have previous contracts with SCO (IBM, Novell and the two unnamed SCOldiers).

    At the same time, they're claiming that the best way to avoid litigation with them is to sign a contract that acknowledges that they have more power over you (and Linux code) than most people believe they have any hope of proving in court.

    Come into my parlour, said the spider to the fly.
    You'll be so much much safer when I've baked you in my pie.
    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  141. huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if they delay another day does that mean they'll sue 3 companies?

  142. Blaze of Glory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    From the rumor mill. Suicide CEO Darl McBribe sues Merill Lynch and Credit Suisse First Boston, announced at a financial press briefing for the embattled company. Sends Wall Street reeling!!! Analysts left scratching their heads.

  143. I have visions of a lottery. by TCaM · · Score: 2, Interesting

    a big chamber with 1000 ping pong balls in it. These of course correspond to the top 1000 linux using companies in the US. Woohoo.

  144. They also have said that these first two lawsuits. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses.

    Damn, there go the last two SCO customers.

  145. Sounds exactly right by Animats · · Score: 5, Insightful
    That sounds right. They might actually be able to make a semi-legitimate contract claim against a customer who was an SCO licensee. No way are they going to win against a Linux user on copyright grounds alone.

    Since they scheduled the announcement for their earnings call, the numbers must be truly awful this quarter. If they had good numbers to report, they wouldn't need a distraction like this.

  146. SCO's conference call by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    Disclaimer: IANAL. I am, however, a teleconference operator.

    Do you want to ask Darl McBride an embarrasing question or two in front of most of the financial world? Sure, we all do!

    The problem, however, is this: In a financial results call, not just anyone is allowed to ask a question. The people presenting the call get to pick and choose who gets to speak. Usually, private investors, media, and anyone from a company that has generated bad press do not get called on. So what can we do to weasel our way to the front of the question queue?

    Well, if SCO has set up their call intelligently, nothing. The access code, 141144, might be the public access code, with a different code (or even a different phone number) given to people who can be trusted to ask "good" questions. But if everyone is coming in on the same number, then we have a chance.

    You'll know you have a shot at a question if, instead of being joined to the call immediately after entering your access code, you instead talk to an operator. The operator will most likely ask you your name, your company's name, and maybe your phone number. If this happens, lie to them. Make up a name and phone number, and tell them that you are with an investment firm. Just pick something: CIBC World Markets, Deutsche Bank, Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse First Boston, Goldman Sachs, anything like that will do. Bonus points if you pick a company that has invested in SCO. Write down your information so that you can remember it! The trick is to make yourself look like you'll ask a safe question, so that they'll look at you in the queue and say, "Hey, let's take that Eddie Smith from CSFB next..."

    If you do get called on for a question, remember:
    1) Be polite. "OMG Darl SUXXORZ!!!" will just generate a "There are no further questions at this time" from the operator.
    2) Ask a difficult question that Darl hasn't answered before. Let him hang himself, it'll sink in better with the investors that way.
    3) Keep going until they cut you off. They're not likely to let many more unfamiliar names ask questions after this.
    4) If anyone asks, you didn't get any of these ideas from Slashdot.

    Here's hoping for a great conference tomorrow!

    1. Re:SCO's conference call by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I completly agree with that. I used to work for a teleconfence company as well. In fact It is the same company that SCO still uses. Back when I used to work for them they had maybe 200 lines and when they had that many people call in it was a nightmare for everyone.

      Now if one was so inclined to do such a thing i would make sure that you also gave a fake name with a fake company name such as UBS Warburg, Merrill Lynch, etc.

  147. Oh joy! Could it be? by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 1

    Could I have gotten so lucky as for SCO to have taken up my offer to sue me for selling and using Linux?

  148. IP Confusion by The+Monster · · Score: 4, Insightful
    someone accidentally said "patent" instead of "copyright..."
    Given the way that SCO keeps changing its story
    It's about trade secrets.
    No, it's about copyrights.
    There are millions and millions of lines.
    Well, there's <errno.h>
    We won't sue end users.
    Yes we will.
    I can't fault anyone for confabulating patents and copyrights in decribing what their contention du jour (de l'heure?) is.
    --

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

  149. SCO worried, Geeks happy.. by Yo+Grark · · Score: 2, Funny

    Here is a little lawsuit we wrote
    You might want to read it code for code
    SCO worried, Geeks happy..
    In every court we have some trouble
    When you got IBM on your back it's double
    SCO worried, Geeks happy........

    Ain't no way to take back what we said
    We slept in it, now we have to make our bed
    SCO worried, Geeks happy
    The land lord say our rent is late
    The irony is, he may have to litigate
    SCO worried, Geeks happy
    Look at me I'm unhappy
    SCO worried, Geeks happy
    The press got ahold of my phone number
    Nonstop pissed off people call me
    Makes Slashdot so, happy
    SCO worried, Geeks happy
    Ain't got no cash, ain't got no style
    Ain't got no code, makes you smile
    SCO worried, Geeks happy
    We doing nothing but worry
    Our stockholders faces all frown
    And that will bring our stock price down
    So don't worry, SCO's unhappy....

    There is this little company summons we wrote
    I hope you tear it apart code by code
    Like good little Slashdotters
    SCO worried, Geeks happy
    Listen to what I say
    In your life don't expect no trouble
    But when a company drives you to worry
    DDOS them on he double
    SCO worried, Geeks happy......
    Don't worry just do it, be happy
    Put a smile on your face
    Bring our website down like this
    Don't worry, we're almost bankrupt and this nonsense will pass
    SCO worried, Geeks happy
    SCO worried, Geeks happy

    Yo Grark

    --
    Canadian Bred with American Buttering
  150. Justice, delayed, but not stopped by Animats · · Score: 2, Informative
    If you haven't been following the aftermath of Enron and WorldCom, here's how that's finally unwinding.

    At Enron, Glisan was convicted and is in the pen. (He's inmate #20293-179 at FDC Houston.) Fastow has pled guilty and is awaiting sentencing, which comes after he has "cooperated". He's cooperating. Skilling, the former CEO, has been indicted. Ken Lay is still unindicted, but that may yet happen.

    At Worldcom, Sullivan just pled guilty, and Ebbers, the former CEO, has just been indicted.

    It takes a while. But there is some justice left. Let's wait and see what happens with SCO.

  151. Tomorrow's Headline: SCO Sues Microsoft by mdechene · · Score: 1

    It's so genius, it might actually work.

    --

    Karma: Not Particularly Funny.
  152. I'm going to guess McDonalds by BeBoxer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    McDonalds is my guess. Someone else guessed AutoZone because they are also moving away from SCO Unix. But I think McDonalds will have better PR punch, so that's where I'm putting my money. I think it's also realistic to assume that they will also make the announcement during the "earnings" call itself so as to minimize the amount of time they have to spend discussing just how horrible their balance sheet was last quarter.

  153. obviously he does not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    They are going to sue a SCO UNIX license holder not Linux IP license.. but then again.... who can still keep track of all the happenings recently?

  154. russian roulette 2 by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

    like I stated before it's like playing russian roulette with an unloaded BB gun...and this time, they removed the CO2 cartridge, or trying to mug someone with a whiffle bat....a NERF(r) one at that.
    And this just proves it, they only kept the handle of that whiffle bat.

    1. Re:russian roulette 2 by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they are fighting back for Microsoft in the same style that we attacked them.

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
  155. Let's Dare Darl by dmaxwell · · Score: 4, Funny

    I am absolutely driven by people saying I can't do something.

    Remember that kid we all knew when we were growing up that would take any dare? It was fun at first but you had to watch what you said around him after a while. Who wanted to explain to the kid's mom that he dared him to jump in front of a train? Darl seems to be just that sort of easily manipulated hothead.

    Darl is no little kid. He's a rather nasty adult. He's already walked up to the biggest bully on the block and punched him in the nose. What else can we goad him into doing?

    I like another poster's suggestion.

    Hey Darl! We know you read Slashdot. So I'm going to make a dare with you. McDonalds is your largest customer. They even have a contractual relationship with you. And we all know what SCO says contracts are for. McDonalds has also been piloting Linux POS terminals in Germany at least. ..quite possibly with an eye to migrating from SCO's products. Darl, there is no way in hell you would win a suit against McDonalds. Their legal department would burn the SCO pimple right off of Utah's ass. Go ahead Darl. Sue McDonalds. I double dog dare you. You can't sue McDonalds and win.

    1. Re:Let's Dare Darl by glassesmonkey · · Score: 1
      You can't sue McDonalds and win.
      I don't think the goal ever was to sue AND WIN.... The strategy is --

      lawsuit & free media attention/PR

      lawsuit & pump and dump

      lawsuit & get money from MS

      lawsuit & keep stock afloat

      lawsuit & see my overly vain name in print

      lawsuit & slander GPL

      lawsuit & damage companies reputations

      lawsuit & damage open source momentum

      lawsuit & make CEOs question using Linux

      lawsuit & get people get angry, nervous, or upset

      (in case you haven't caught on, by having three stories every day about SCO, you are helping them accomplish their goals)

  156. See if I buya SCO Unix licenses by BobPaul · · Score: 1

    "will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses"

    I thought we were all supposed to buy licenses so we DIDN'T get sued by SCO... So they're trying to turn the open source community into paying customers by SUEING those who play by their rules...

    good game, SCO.

  157. oh my by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since EV1.net is in the process of climbing into bed with Microsoft, and SCO has been warming itself under the same blankets for quite some time

    well now, there's an image that'll last all night!

  158. Ebay Auction #6661313 - SCO's Number!!! by s-orbital · · Score: 1

    For a starting bid of $666, you can be the owner of the very number used for SCO's litigation announcement! You will have the number 818-5264 transfered to your cell phone anywhere you live....

    --
    Patent: from Latin patere, to be open
  159. sco binary Licences by sydres · · Score: 1

    The Ultimate vaporware

    1. Re:sco binary Licences by cavac · · Score: 1

      Sorry to disagree with you, but SCO might never beat 3D Realms and their "Duke Nukem whenever". They even managed to get the Wired's first "Vaporware Lifetime Achievement Award", see here.

      At least, SCO hasn't reached the stage where they simply set their release dates to "When it's done" :-)

      --
      Look, this thing is totally safe! Built it myself, you know. You just press that button like this and then turn that lev
    2. Re:sco binary Licences by sydres · · Score: 1

      actually all I was trying to point out was the fact that the sco licences, oh never mind

  160. Accounting Professionals, Too by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 1

    They've had to invent new General and Special Theories of SCO Financial Statements. We can only hope that Darl needs to spend a year dead for tax reasons.

    --
    the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
  161. SCO launched DOS attack against itself by Gary+Destruction · · Score: 1

    In recent News, SCO Group launched a Denial of Service Attack against itself. It used raw sockets in Linux. SCO now plans to sue Linux because the code to make the raw sockets was really SCO's code. And SCO said that its employees didn't say they allowed code to be used in Linux because those employees don't exist.

  162. Wait, I think I'm confused by jonathanduty · · Score: 2, Interesting


    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses


    I'm confused So are they saying that they are going to start by prosecuting their own customers? How, in any form, is that smart??? Am I not understanding this remark??

    Seems to me if I was a SCO Unix customer, this would be evidence that I need to take my business somewhere else and fast.

  163. Nobody by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    expects the SCO Inquisition!

  164. SCO's new trademark by Skapare · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Lawsuits Pending [tm]"

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  165. Who's up first? by linuxguy · · Score: 3, Informative

    I generally dont spend a lot of time reading parodies, but this one was good. I highly recommend it *after* watching the Darl interview video, posted on news.com front page today. Look for it on the right side of the page.

    Who's up first

    Higly entertaining content.

  166. sue god? by sgtron · · Score: 1
    --
    No todo lo que es oro brilla
  167. GPL projects should pull the license for EV1.net by louissypher · · Score: 1

    GPL projects should make exceptions and restrict the use of their software for EV1.net or anyone else that support SCO by paying similiar to what the author of NMAP has done. See how much they "protect" their users when they can't use glibc or the Linux kernel.

    --
    www.bleepyou.com
  168. Re:Ummm.... -Yup.. it will be microsoft... by Curtman · · Score: 1

    might be difficult to call microsoft a linux user however

    Not as difficult as you might think.

  169. The correct term... by The+Monster · · Score: 2, Informative
    Who really expected them to follow through?
    Someone over at Groklaw described this perfectly...
    VaporFUD
    Which, while theoretically redundant, captures the essence of what we're witnessing.
    --

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

  170. SCO will sue it self ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is true SCO will sue it self to prove that linux vendors can be sued. :)

  171. YOU SCARED ME by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1

    For a second there, I was afraid that I might be about to click on a goatse mirror, since you were talking about him placing his pinkie over his MOUTH.

    --
    Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
  172. If the Windows Media player doesn't work try real by linuxguy · · Score: 1

    If the Microsoft Windows Media Player doesn't work (it stopped working for me, too much load maybe) try the Real video option. It worked for me.

  173. What? Again? by Elpacoloco · · Score: 1

    SCO these days seems to be all bark and no bite.

  174. " zzxc writes "In a surprise turn of events, ..." by gordguide · · Score: 2, Funny

    OK, I give.

    How do I feign surprise?

  175. You just have to love SCO by Pan+T.+Hose · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have more and more emphaty for this company, because they turn out to be just like me...

    Boss, this new program I'm writing will have ten million innovative features!

    Did I say ten million? What I really meant was ten thousand, but they are really great!

    Those two hundred features I've been talking about are really awesome, you'll see when it's done!

    For example, take a look at this brilliant idea of mine! I have hundreds more!

    Ken Thompson? Of course! I didn't say that this particular idea was mine! I was only saying that my ideas are at least equally brilliant! It was only an example of innovative cutting edge idea! In the seventies? So you have to admit how innovative it must have been back then! Wow!

    I only need some time and money... To finish the whole thing, you know.

    It will be ready tomorrow, I promise!

    No, not today, I said tomorrow!

    Did I say it yesterday? No, I would have remembered that...

    It might be ready the day after tomorrow. I only need more time to prepare an announcement of the features it's going to have.

    Not yet, but Real Soon Now!

    So, as I've said, I just have to love SCO, because they are just like me. In fact they are just like most of us working here on Duke Nukem Forever. We are working forever...

    --
    Sincerely,
    Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
    "Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
  176. Definitely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We'll have at least one suit that's filed today before the end of the day," Stowell said Tuesday, with two suits more likely. "There is a high possibility we will be announcing two."
    Definitely. Definitely a high possibility.

  177. Couldn't quite understand... by Hrothgar+The+Great · · Score: 1

    Could you perhaps put a few more acronyms in your post so it's EVEN MORE CLEAR?

  178. Did I read this right? by u-235-sentinel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses"

    So if I read this correctly, if you purchased a SCO license then SCO can sue you? huh? Pardon my ignorance but wasn't the whole reason these guys purchased licenses was to be protected from lawsuit?

    Signed... really confused SCO hater.

    --
    Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
  179. Doesn't that defeat the point? by Code+Dark · · Score: 1

    I mean, doesn't it defeat the point of having a DEADLINE if you're not going to follow it? Again, and again, and again...?

    --
    - Code Dark
  180. SCO has narrowed down its list of possible targets by fanatic · · Score: 2, Funny

    Actually, they will wait 10 days, then sue 1024 users.

    --
    "that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
  181. Listen to the conference call online by SoLO · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can listen to the call online here, once it starts:

    http://biz.yahoo.com/cc/3/39693.html

  182. Shit, I can't take part in phone conference by Knuckles · · Score: 4, Funny

    When I open the link, Epiphany pops up a Window telling me

    You should only accept the security information if you trust "www.thescogroup.com" and "www.sco.com".

    --
    "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
  183. Come On some one Sue SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Distros Have to be been hit with market damage.

    Basicly Sue them for a base less claim. Basicly a prove it or shut up case. FUD is not really legal. This would make a great test case. Fraud is against the law and FUD depends on it.

  184. Sue me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sue me, fuckers...

  185. Sue Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I am pretty sure, there is a Linux box or two at Microsoft. Maybe even a line of code, lifted from Linux. And they've got money to pay...

  186. Convenience in lawsuits. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 2, Funny
    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses.

    It must be a new trend for companies to sue their customers. Perhaps in fifty years, someone will look at this from an historical point of view...

    The organization which invented the strategy of suing its own customers was the RIAA. Some time later, SCO began to sue its customers. This innovative business strategy grew increasingly popular through the first decade of the 2000's. Today, nearly all organizations sue their customers, and increasingly, customers demand to be sued upon completion of each transaction. Photograph 1.9 shows customers swiping their "So Sue Me!" cards at the checkstand of their local grocery store.

    By 2015, the volume of lawsuits climbed to hundreds of millions occuring every hour. To handle this load efficiently, the U.S. government shut down court houses, where cases were tried before a human judge, and the plaintiff and defendant had to make an appearance, either personally or through a human attorney, in a physical courthouse. Cases could take days, weeks, or many months to resolve, depending on their complexity. Today, lawsuits are carried out by computer, where software programs carry out the legal motions of each party, and the results are decided automatically by a computer program. Photograph 1.10 shows a government data center. At this center, cases which could have taken weeks under the old system are opened and closed within a few microseconds.

    Payment of damages has also become convenient with the advancement of technology. Before, the winning party of a lawsuit had to expend additional time and effort in enforcing a judgment. Today, however, damages are automatically debited to the losing party's bank account upon completion of the trial. If the defendant is unable to pay, all property owned by that defendant is immediately seized by the government. Computer programs automatically lock defendants out of their cars, houses, or other properties they may own. All of this occurs quickly and conveniently, without the intervention of either plaintiff or defendant.

    Microsoft. Where do you want to go today?

    All properties are the property of their respective owners.

    The above document is an excerpt from a book not yet published, brought to you compliments of time travel.
    1. Re:Convenience in lawsuits. by cavac · · Score: 1

      You could adapt well-known game-shows to that trend.

      Jeopardy would be a nice example:
      Gamer:"I take Sueing Jokes for 500"
      Moderator:"'We sue tomorrow'"
      Gamer: "What is SCO?"

      --
      Look, this thing is totally safe! Built it myself, you know. You just press that button like this and then turn that lev
  187. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  188. Re:Ummm.... SGI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sgi is the only party that I can think of that Sco has any real beef with, if they're smart that's who they'll go after.

    if they're smart... problem is they're dumb... and they'll probably still go after SGI.

  189. Translation by bonch · · Score: 1

    Translation: let's basically DDOS their phone system.

    If it was their website, you'd have a bunch of moralists telling you how bad it is to be doing it.

  190. The Mouse That Roared by rixstep · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... In Lindon, Utah.

    It's incredible. I mean, there is no way, I repeat, no way, these guys can be expected to be taken seriously. Without serious (M)$ backing them, how can they go on?

    1. Re:The Mouse That Roared by cavac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's incredible. I mean, there is no way, I repeat, no way, these guys can be expected to be taken seriously. Without serious (M)$ backing them, how can they go on?

      The more SCO goes on with this load of crap, the less i believe that Microsoft is responsible for all this. I mean, yes, Microsoft is selling Vaporware too, but at least they know how to really make money out of it and they handle better in court. And, oh yes, they do have a product they can base their business on...

      --
      Look, this thing is totally safe! Built it myself, you know. You just press that button like this and then turn that lev
  191. Annie II by mlush · · Score: 1
  192. Advice from a lawyer:Buy a bundle from SuSE/Novel by Uzull · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hi, we have been in the discussion with being a high profile candidate for SCO (advertising our Linux Support for our customer's solutions)... Our Lawyer said simply : Buy a set of Linux CD Boxes and Support from SuSE, now Novell! The older, the better!
    If SCO or their Lawyers show, up show them that you are using this system, and friendly point towards the case between Novell and SCO, and that once the issues have been resolved between those 2 parties, you would be willing to comply with whatever the outcome is.

  193. Confabulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    There are many synonyms for "to confuse", but "to confabulate" is not one of them. To confabulate means to fabricate a false memory based on your after-the-fact logical beliefs about what must have happened.

    1. Re:Confabulation by TimMann · · Score: 1

      Right. I think he meant "conflate".

      --
      I shall not ask Jean Jaques Rousseau
      If birds confabulate or no. --Cowper.

    2. Re:Confabulation by valisk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well... Dictionary.com has the following for confabulate:

      #1 To talk casually; chat.

      #2 Psychology. To fill in gaps in one's memory with fabrications that one believes to be facts.

      I'd say number 2 is without a doubt the correct use for the word. Also Sco can be realistically refered to by the euphemism number two

      --

      Economic Left/Right: -0.62
      Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.69
    3. Re:Confabulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      To fill in gaps in one's memory with fabrications that one believes to be facts
      In this case, it's filling in gaps in the memory of the various fabrications SCO has come up with, adding more fabrications in a vain effort to make sense of it all
  194. mdr by dago · · Score: 1

    that was a gorgeous "SCO of the day"

    ("mdr" translates to "rotfl", but literally means in french "Death 'cause of laughing") ...

    --
    #include "coucou.h"
  195. Not unheard off by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Bioware released neverwinter nights for linux. Well kinda off. Their license with their windows installer supplier forbids them from using other installer software. Meaning someone else had to write an installer script. Not to difficult for the linux community but still prove that idiotic contracts keep getting signed.

    Granted this was using two different products at the same time but close enough.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  196. I agree, but the other one... by glassesmonkey · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It seems very likely, for AutoZone to maintain their same functioning infrastructure, they re-used some SCO interface or something that is considered an IP contract violations. (reasons to never sign anything in conjunction with SCO)

    The other company has to be something approved by Microsoft, and presumably serving Microsoft's plan for world domination. It would also have to be another knock against Open Source, and a SCO contract/license holder.

    Maybe this is all a big orchestrated move by EV1 & SCO to "sue" EV1 over linux usage, and then EV1 moves all linux servers over to SCO-approved binaries and SCO drops the lawsuits. (Why the hell else would EV1 be the first company to come out of the closet publicly regarding giving SCO extortion $$)

  197. Excellent! by Maljin+Jolt · · Score: 1

    So other SCO Unix customers should drop that platform quickly ASAP, to avoid legal troubles.

    --
    There you are, staring at me again.
  198. MST? by hardcode57 · · Score: 1

    Just so I know when to start looking for news, what's the time difference between MST and GMT? TIA

    1. Re:MST? by FishermansEnemy · · Score: 1

      Google is your friend

      http://www.timetemperature.com/tzus/time_zone.sh tm l

      --
      -- If you think my attitude stinks, you should smell my fingers.
  199. That's why you need... by ksp · · Score: 3, Funny

    Open Sauce!

    Thank you, I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip your waiter.

    --
    What is the sound of one hand clapping?
    cat /dev/null > /dev/audio
  200. MOD PARENT UP by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

    that's so frightening that it to me sounds like the worst case scenario almost. and that, tied with Murphey's Law (or one of it's perversions), it should be closer to the truth then anything we've heard as of yet.

    --
    GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  201. No, not EV1.net servers by Oddly_Drac · · Score: 1

    They settled and ponied up to SCO for licenses a while back.

    Gutless. Utterly gutless.

    --
    Oddly Draconis
    Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
  202. Sweet Buttery Jesus by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sweet buttery Jesus, man. You claim you're a teleconference operator, but you sound like a guerilla political activist. That is an awfully effective-sounding idea.

  203. The $64,000 Question... by Aluminum+Tuesday · · Score: 3, Funny



    "SCO: Who Do You Want To Sue Today?"

  204. Oh my GOD! That means by Daath · · Score: 1

    Oh my GOD! I got it! I know who they're gonna sue!! Are you ready for it? You're not gonna believe this! ... IBM.

    --
    Any technology distinguishable from magic, is insufficiently advanced.
  205. Offtopic Note to the moderator that put "Offtopic" by da5idnetlimit.com · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Dear M. Moderator,

    1/ Being funny is quite hard on itself.
    Are you ready to put extra points because this guy is funny and on topic at the same time ?

    2/ Being funny, even if not on topic, means he get +1 funny, being on topic and having something interesting to write means extra points...

    3/ Metamoderation being what it is, I'll make a point of finding your mod and putting it as unfair, just as in "offtopic" (/me dreams...)

    4/ I have Karma to burn, and you can only remove me a -1 "Stupid blatant Idiotic Poster". + I am sure you don't follow the posts you moderated, so I'm doing this post as a pure futility training, and will probably lose that 1 karma point... well, so be it. I'll even maybe reincarnate as a moderator...

    5/ Sad we cannot sign our mods... Sad there isn't a "TOP 100 Best Moderators" with a listing of ppl that have, say, 95% of their mods metamoded as fair. Sad I'm posting this in the middle of nowhere where nobody of importance (moderators ? /. Editors ? the Pizza Delivery Boy ?) can note how witty I am and how you should follow my words as Evangile and give me the goddam right to rule on moderators, and bind them all in the dark...

    Well, sorry Monkelectric that that dork modded you offtopic...

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
  206. It's all about scoping rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > with two suits more likely

    The question is whether this should be read as "(two suits more) likely" or as "(two suits) (more likely)".

    The punctuation of the sentence suggests the second reading is correct, since "two suits more, likely" would be the typical way to write the first reading.

  207. I'm shocked - NOT by cavac · · Score: 1

    In a surprise turn of events, SCO says that they need more time...

    Yeah right, and they lived happily ever after, or what?

    They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses.

    Wouldn't that companies have already enough problems having to work with crappy SCO "Unix"? Why making things even worse by sueing them?

    Dear SCO: What do you expect? That companies make the same mistake twice by buying another one of your licenses; this time for a product you can't even prove you own?

    I must have taken the wrong drugs or something to have this prolonged nightmare. Can somebody please wake me up?

    --
    Look, this thing is totally safe! Built it myself, you know. You just press that button like this and then turn that lev
  208. yikes by Jonathan+Platt · · Score: 1

    I just can't belive the gov isn't investigating SCO yet. Surly no one really belives SCO belive what they are doing is in their shareholders best interest. That alone is enough to have them put in jail.

    --


    VENI, VIDI, VICI, DIXI
  209. Tomorrow's news today! by Mixel · · Score: 2, Funny

    In a surprise move Thursday, SCO said aain that it needs yet more time to prepare an announcement of who they are going to sue.

    They also have said that these first FIVE lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses.

  210. Cheeseburgers by interlingua.ro · · Score: 1

    Anyone else waiting for the webcast? I had the window opened, waiting for the call to start, and at 6:30 AM EST a conversation started on the subject of cheeseburgers and bad fast food availability in the area.
    If anyone got a better chance of listening to that conversation, please share it with us!

  211. Pulling it off? Are you joking? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    On or two idiotic companies have taken thei generous offer, with who knows which ulterior motives unknown to us.

    All the rest of the Linux community is just ignoring them and waiting for the legal outcome which most certainly will mean their end as a company and the complete and irreperable tarnishing of the reputation of the individuals and companies involved in this scam.

    Frankly I don't see how they are pulling it off. It is only the legal passivity of the Linux hackers what is allowing this to go as far as it has.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  212. Conference Call webpage by glassesmonkey · · Score: 1

    To save you from a soon to be slash'd registration page (they don't need anymore fake emails)

    SCO Group First Quarter 2004 Webcast and Conference Call (Wed, March 3 - 9am MT)
    Windows Media Player
    Real Player

  213. Wouldn't wash in the UK by Phil+John · · Score: 1

    you could report the vendor for false advertising as , no matter how much the vendor protests that it is not yet tomorrow, it is.

    That's probably why I have never seen a sign like this ;o).

    My favourite is the "Credit only given to those over 80 years of age who are in the company of both parents.".

    --
    I am NaN
    1. Re:Wouldn't wash in the UK by mark-t · · Score: 1
      Of course you could.... _NOW_...

      Back then, such laws didn't exist, so he couldn't be prosecuted.

      My understanding was that this incident was among those that ultimately led to the creation of such laws that we now, as your response so beautifully illustrates, often take for granted.

  214. Hmmm... The 2nd amended complaint has a clue... by Vancouverite · · Score: 1

    as to who it may be. Specifically, this complaint shows that Auto Zone and Sherwin Williams are referenced by name in the IBM complaint as having been (as it were) convinced by IBM to commit copyright infringement against SCO.

    Looks like good odds to me....

    --
    We are the Music Makers, and We are the Dreamers of Dreams...
  215. WTF? by MikeD81 · · Score: 1

    Weren't the SCO licenses were supposed to protect ppl from SCO lawsuits? SCO won't get far in business if its customers fear lawsuits even after they buy products that are supposed to free them from that risk, and from the same company they bought them from no less.

  216. Darl's new idiotic claim by choconutdancer · · Score: 2, Informative

    from the msgboard at
    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mb?s=SCOX

    "In the news.com video Darl makes an utterly rediculous claim about GPL, claiming that if drug companies come up with a new formula for a drug on a linux machine they would have to license the formula under the GPL."

    and this:

    Anyone who has an interest in this case should watch this video.

    The interviewer is well prepared and asks the hard questions. He makes Darl look like a bit of a clown.

    He brings up the hard stuff.

    Darl claims :
    - they own unix
    - that the contract covers copyright xfer & deriviative works
    - lawsuits, wont name company, but the company does not know.
    - seems to have a 'green eye' attitude to Redhats success.
    - says that SCO unix is the same as linux (ROFL LMAO)
    - continues to claim that the license is customer driven (yeah right)
    - mentions mydoom has connections to organisations that are funded by IBM ??? Groklaw is funded by IBM ??? Interviewer points out that SCO is basically funded by MSFT.
    - Darl brings up Eldred/Ashcroft and private ownership and profit motive. (what about Redhats profits Darl?).
    - Darl talks about GPL, mentions that GPL should == BSD. (Yeah so you can steal my work you thieving scumbucket).
    - Darl talks about Open source == terrorism because of source access. Interviewer brings up Usenix letter nixing this idea.
    - Darl confirms the NSA is NOT the target :-).
    - Darl agress they TOOK OUT trade secrets. Introduced copyrights in IBM case.
    - tomorrows lawsuit IS copyright related.

    Intervierwer mentions:
    - that sun & msft are making the big payments and alludes that MSFT is the puppetmaster, but does it in a way that its 'not possible' :-).
    - asks why should people pay when SCO themselves dont know if they own the system.
    - asks if I license now, do I get a special deal (Darl dodges)
    - mentions Linus's rat comment, Darls IBM puppetmaster comments, but mentions that IBM is quite whereas SCO carries on.
    - letter to congress. quotes from it. Darl goes on FSF/GPL rant.
    - interviewer goes onto GPL. Darl talks about the cisco case, but without details.
    - asks what it takes to get SCO respected. DM mentions Maccas, I responds thats a legacy from old SCO. Darl cries about Linux stealing his lunch (boo friggerty hoo - adapt or die).
    - mentions that SCO blew services.

    Darl comes across as personable, but clueless. The interviewer was super sharp, steering the interview the way he wanted it. However he WAS fair, giving Darl the chance to speak, and came across as willing to listen ,but a little sceptical.

  217. Well SCO have sued AutoZone by BJury · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hot of the news feed! SCO Files Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Against AutoZone

    Lawsuit Alleges Copyright Act Violations for Infringing Uses of SCO's

    Copyright Protected UNIX System V Technology

    LAS VEGAS, March 3 The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX), the owner of the UNIX(R) operating system and a leading provider of UNIX-based solutions, today announced it has filed suit against AutoZone, Inc., for its alleged violations of SCO's UNIX copyrights through its use of Linux.
    SCO's lawsuit alleges the following:
    * AutoZone violated SCO's UNIX copyrights by running versions of the Linux operating system that contain code, structure, sequence and/or organization from SCO's proprietary UNIX System V code in violation of SCO's copyrights.

    The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Nevada, requests injunctive relief against AutoZone's further use or copying of any part of SCO's copyrighted materials and also requests damages as a result of AutoZone's infringement in an amount to be proven at trial.

  218. http://www.thescogroup.com/company/feedback/index. by elfguy00 · · Score: 1

    be sure to tell them how you feel! (remember they have a vulgarity filter)

  219. AutoZone sued by Surreal_Streaker · · Score: 1
    It looks like AutoZone is one of the companies that is being sued.

  220. Hydra. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SCO threaten a law suit with nasty big pointy teeth.

    Hero user cuts off its head, and suddenly there is a threat of two toothsome law suits.

    The evidence suggests that the law suits are cutting off their own heads. If this is the case then the world will be overwhelmed by infinite lawsuits!

  221. Expect a patsy by flacco · · Score: 1
    whoever it is will either be:

    - a prominent competitor or strategic threat to microsoft, or

    - a willing patsy ready to lose the case.

    they're trying to establish precedent.

    i wouldn't be too surprised if powers greater than those immediately obvious are trying to cripple the F/OSS movement. there are all kinds of power arrangements and financial interests at stake, and not just in business.

    --
    pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
  222. AutoZone not sued for *using* Linux by walterbyrd · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is important.

    Scox has stated that they have grounds to anybody for just *using* linux. For several months scox has been threatening to sue a company for using linux. Supposedly, this would prove scox has a case.

    But, in this case, the suit is about copying SCO owned libraries, it has nothing to do with using Linux. AutoZone has allegedly copied some SCO software onto an OS that happens to be Linux. AutoZone is *not* being sued for using Linux.

    This is classic scox-speak.

  223. Sorry, what? by Karem+Lore · · Score: 1
    Quote from original:

    "They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses. (EV1.net servers or Lindows?)"

    Let me get this right, SCO is first going to sue the companies that bought their licenses to protect themselves from being sued? What's wrong with THAT?

    Is "purchase of license"="proof of use" in SCO's mind? The irony is laughable

    --
    When all is said and done, nothing changes...
  224. buy 10 shares of SCO and demand resignation CEO by Corrupter · · Score: 1

    If you really want to get this done, people: quit complaining and buy 10 shares of SCO, call in to the investor conference and voice your will as a shareholder. Put your money where your mouth is! Demand the resignation of the current board of SCO!

  225. Autozone should buy a half million shares of SCO by Corrupter · · Score: 1

    The best protection for Autozone is instead of spending millions with lawyers, buy a half-million shares of SCO and demand the resignation of the board of directors! Any company that feels threatened by SCO should do the same. They should appoint their own board and liquidate the company.

  226. Re:Nothing to lose by A55M0NKEY · · Score: 1

    They must feel they have nothing to lose. Instead of suing random ppl, they sue their own customers. They must really not give a damn about any business they may have been trying to run before these suits.

    --

    Eat at Joe's.

  227. I'm Logged In by iammrjvo · · Score: 1

    I dialed in 40 minutes early. I want the best seat in the house.

    --
    Ha, ha! Nobody ever says Italy.
  228. More news!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the news:

    Today SCO sued a new bunch of organisations and countries:

    The city of "San franciSCO"
    "KellogS COrnflakes"
    "DiSCOs" all over the world
    The region of United kingdom called "SCOttland"
    The county of "SCOtlandville"
    The city called "SCOtt City"
    Users that pronounce SCSI as "SCOossi"
    The city of "SCOttsdale" (Australia & Arizona)
    Everyone eating "SCOnes"
    "SCOttburgh"
    Any inhabitants of "SCOtt island"

    and many others in a "we are grasping for straws because we are falling of a cliff" manouver.

  229. Congrats !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems you lost that karma point after all :)

    And proved the moderator to be clueless, at the same time...

    cheers mate !

  230. Mod Parent Up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If only I wasn't out of mod points...
    (+5, Funny)

  231. Sweet Jesus by H8X55 · · Score: 1

    "SCO Postpones Lawsuit, Now Threatening Two

    I read that as.

    SCO Postpones Lawsuit, Now Threatening Tivo

    Moving along, nothing to see here.

  232. Daimler-Chrysler Is Next! by EzInKy · · Score: 1

    Just announced by Darl on the conference call.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  233. stock fell by 13.64% today by MMHere · · Score: 1

    Yesterday's close: 13.42
    Today's close: 11.59

    Percentage decline today: 13.64.

    So maybe the call didn't go so well?

  234. Re:Offtopic Note to the moderator that put "Offtop by Monkelectric · · Score: 1

    yea I thought that was an unusual mod to ... you just earned a friend :)

    --

    Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

  235. Re:Offtopic Note to the moderator that put "Offtop by da5idnetlimit.com · · Score: 1

    np, was a pleasure 8) and I did it quite selfishly too...after all, you made me laugh, so it was well worth it.

    And I even got that karma point back from another moderator, so you're welcome 8)

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker