Slashdot Mirror
SCO - EV1, Licensees, Groklaw, Armed Guards
Camel Pilot writes "It looks like the CEO of EV1Servers underestimated the reaction to giving in to SCO demands and licensing Linux. I know we were looking for a new hosting home, and had EV1 at the top of the list, but now they are not even a consideration..."
An anonymous reader writes "InfoWorld has an article with more info on Computer Associates denying being a SCO Linux licensee." Also, Mick Ohrberg writes "Pamela Jones, creator of Groklaw, an independent legal research site, responds to some allegations presented by SCO CEO Darl McBride." Finally, an anonymous reader writes "According to the Deseret News, Darl McBride says he sometimes carries a gun because his enemies are out to kill him. He checks into hotels under assumed names. An armed body guard protected him at Harvard Law School when he gave a speech last month." Update: 03/08 20:17 GMT by S : cdlu writes "Now the SEC is unofficially confirming some interest in the SCO and Microsoft connection, according to Newsforge [part of OSDN, like this site]."
Darl McBride says he sometimes carries a gun because his enemies are out to kill him. He checks into hotels under assumed names. An armed body guard protected him at Harvard Law School when he gave a speech last month
Lets see... one guy pisses off a buncha nerds. He's afraid of firepower?
Uhh... Darl... the only thing you need to worry about is stuff like cracking your servers and DoS attacks. Both of which you have survived.
Really, if frivilous lawsuits caused people to fear for their lives, something is wrong witht his world.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Check out the update at Yahoo.
From the article, The Islandia, N.Y., company, one of the biggest makers of corporate software, said that although it signed the licenses, it didn't pay for them -- and never would
Signed but not paid???
Free XBox, PS2
From the article: ... Any report that we made a cash payment of seven figures is highly exaggerated, and it disappoints me that that quote is out there in the media," Marsh said. "The contract that we signed with SCO specifically prohibits any party from discussing the economics of the transaction. If you have an agreement that calls for certain aspects to be protected, then you would hope that that would be respected." ..."
"
Like, SCO can read, understand, or comply with a contract; that they can be relied upon to disclose factual information, and that they're not in a media war. Give me a break. What the hell did you expect?
so now they can sue SCO and get their money back!
I like microcars
It's not surprising that anything SCO would sign would contain limited disclosure clauses. But, since Darl has clearly tried to claim that EV1 gave SCO $1,000,000+ in cash, and EV1 seems to want to stomp that down... can't EV1 sue SCO for breach of the agreement just a few days after it was signed?
I don't thinks so...I think the SEC thinks we are a bunch of miscreants trying to cause trouble. The fact that they haven't done anything is a problem. What we SHOULD do, is make a coherent case on Groklaw, and refer the SEC to it. PJ could supervise to make sure it is secure.
emerge -DU SCO-SEC-case.1.2.3
Darl wouldn't be carrying a gun, but he would be locked behind bars where he belongs. When you attempt to hijack and subvert the work of thousands of others for your own unjust enrichment through a stream of falshoods and implausable legal proceedings you're a criminal in my book.
Hopefully jail will be McBride's ultimate fate. Crooks should be locked up and Darl McBride is a brazen example of one in my opinion.
This is so over the top!
First lines of the article:
Darl McBride, chief executive of SCO Group Inc., says he sometimes carries a gun because his enemies are out to kill him. He checks into hotels under assumed names. An armed body guard protected him at Harvard Law School when he gave a speech last month.
Linus Torvalds, creator of the Linux operating system, calls SCO 'the most despised company in technology.'
...later...
In January, McBride's unlisted home telephone number was placed on Slashdot.org, a pro-Linux Internet site, which led to harassing phone calls on Super Bowl Sunday. Hackers also targeted the company's Web site with the Mydoom virus earlier this year, causing the company to shut down the site.
McBride said he sometimes carries a gun, declining to specify the type, and travels with armed guards. The gun is licensed, he said. Security officials have told him that convicted felons are behind the death threats, McBride said.
Lookie! It's the juxtaposition trick! Darl says, "I feel threatened," then mention someone (Linus) saying something threatening. Talk about linux advocates attacking making harassing phone calls, then mention unspecified convicted felons making death threats.
A classic example of propaganda I've ever seen one...
Its really our emotional response to threats. No different from any criminal threatening your hopes, dreams, your work, career or family.
EV1Servers should have simply waited until the SCO v. IBM was finished the appeals.
We've been desperately saying this - all we want is facts. Cold hard code with clear attribution and this has not been forthcoming from anyone to date.
EV1Servers have been tarnished because no-one knows who to trust right yet. For me if Torvalds says he wrote that code then he did and it stays that way until he says "Oh yeah I remember, I copied that from an old Computer or DDJ magazine or found it on a FTP site." or something equally absurd.
Speaking as a practicing Counsellor, if I were to have a client say "I carry a weapon because my enemies are out to get me", my civic duty within Canada is to report this person to the nearest Health Facility.
I classify that statement as behaviour within a psychologically disturbed mind, and one which requires neurological re-evaluation.
Just a thought.
Any time SCO comes up for discussion, I have noticed the subtle jibes at Linux usually by AC's. There is nothing wrong with educated discussion but I have a great fear the the FUD is creeping into /. - beware of anybody that posts AC to this forum. If you are afraid to state at least your /. name, then don't post. I have already put AC's at -6.
Stay tuned for new sig...
Darl is so hopelessly outclassed by Pamela Jones.
And I'm so pleased that one woman with motivation and smarts can so utterly rock SCO.
.sigs are for post^Hers.
The way I see it, the last thing you want is to destroy the livelyhood and creative output of a bunch of nerds.
First, we take it personally in ways that other industries who have had attempts to destroy them haven't. Taking the pickaxe away from a coal miner or the torch away from a welder at an auto plant is one thing. Taking the paints away from an artist or the code away from the programmers is another thing.
Second, there are enough geeks who have varried interests in firepower. There's ESR and his "Geeks with guns". There's all of the crazy flamethrowers, flame cannons, high voltage tesla coils, etc. from the burner contingent.
Third, we won't be stopped if you take away our weapons. A gas grill and some machine tools can be turned into a variety of interesting weapons.
Fourth, we have been accumulating this knowlege ever since we found the Anarchist's Cookbook on the local BBS, so restricting further flows of information won't stop us. We have brother geeks in the other engineering fields to draw on as sympathizers. In fact, DeCSS has shown that the more you try to restrict the flow of information, the more folks who may not have cared otherwise now want to help share it.
Fifth, we understand the system better than some of the other displaced groups. The Detroit auto-workers would take out their agression by buying a Honda and publically smashing it. We do not have political ability, but I have no doubts that the angry nerds of the world will be able to pick the right targets.
What's preventing this from happening? Well, right now, there's still a promise on the horizon. People remember the last boom-bust cycles, the last time stuff was outsourced and we were still able to find jobs. Our hacker projects have kept us from blowing up at OS/360 and Microsoft and VMS because there *was* something that we could work on. Take that away, and we'll show all of the other groups that have used terror how things are really done.
Having said that, I think that everybody is currently more interested in Darl being a failed businessman (And indicental picker-up-of-the-soap) than dead. Because, overall, that's just more fun.
Gentoo Sucks
So, we have the gleeful announcement from SCO/EV1 that a seven figure sum has been paid to SCOsource, cushioning the ~10% fall in stock price after somewhat grim financials and announcements of the latest lawsuits. However, we also have the biggest backlash you could possibly imagine; EV1 has kissed goodbye to a few million dollars (a no refund clause is in the contract), lost an unknown amount of custom to its competitors and been tarnished with the same brush as SCO. You'd have to be a complete moron to consider buying a SCOsource license for "protection" and risk having your customers find out now, which leave less funds for the lawyers.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Dirty dirty company. They know that this deal with SCO has a good chance of indirectly benefitting them by fucking over their competition. See, here's the deal...
SCO wants a "big dog" in their portfolio: A high-profile licensee that they can use to scare smaller guys into submission. So they go to EV1 and offer them a really good deal for licenses. And EV1 figures, hey, we're only having to pay pennies on the dollar for these licenses, and it's going to give SCO a lot of ammo for taking out *other* hosting companies...
So what do they have to lose. They pay off SCO for an amount that really doesn't make a whole lot of difference to their financials, and the SCO guys look more credible, giving them a little more of edge for attacking EV1s competitors. This line of reasoning cannot have escaped the people making this deal, and it wouldn't be suprising if SCO explicitly used this argument to convince EV1 to buy.
So basically, EV1 rolled over because by being the first to pay they get the best deal and ensure that other Linux-based companies are going to get fucked worse than they are.
This was an exceptionally greedy and selfish move, and should speak volumes about those in charge of the company. Evil, evil, evil. Shady deals made for the sole reason to screw over as many people in the industry as possible, all for the sake of more power and money.
Does that sound like a company that *you* want to support?
Darl's a Mormon. There are a lot of similarities betwen the Mormon Church and the Church of Scientology. The big differences are that the mormon church is older, better respected, and has a slightly better grip on reality than the CoS. Oh, and they're less focused on fleecing the flock than the elronners.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
That is, if SCO goes under with debt, then Canopy should have to open their coffers for IBM/RedHat/et.al.
I expect that is correct, if IBM can pierce the veil.
The more interesting question is if SCO declares bankruptcy, who gets whatever IP rights they do have. (And realize that based on the Novell contracts, I don't really think they have any.) BayStar and the Royal Bank of Canada both get priority in liquidation--priority over and above IBM with a court judgement, I would imagine.
Do they get it? What if the MS connection alleged in the Anderer memo is proven? Then, do they get it? Does Canopy get it because they have a loan to SCO that is secured and, I believe, their lease to SCO is also secured.
This is an important question.
Let me also just say that when I served as a missionary for the Church in South America, it was one of the hardest things I'd ever done, because it is a work that can only be done selflessly. Anyone who embarks on it with self-interest in mind is destined to fail miserably until they realize that it isn't about them, it's about trying to help people and about forgetting yourself in that work.
Of course, Darl has had more than 20 years to forget all the lessons he learned (if he ever did learn them) while a missionary, and he must have worked quite hard at doing so to get to the point at which he now lives.
Who marked this guy insightful?
You want to win in the business arena, make the best product and convince people to use it. Don't look at it as a holy jihad, because the business people sure as hell won't. He got the product for free? That's great for him. There's no EULA that goes with Linux that requires your loyalty or support. There's no GPL clause that says you must declare your fealty to the Open Source Movement. And that's how it should be, because Linux, if it wins, should win on its merits, not on the religious zeal of its converts.
The only 'right thing for Linux' that business users should be required to do -- or castigated for not doing -- is abiding by the GPL. That's "abiding," as in "not breaking," not "not supporting anyone who doubts the veracity of the GPL."
Security officials have told him that convicted felons are behind the death threats, McBride said. So, if he knows the identities of the people threatening him, why doesn't he a) get a restraining order against these people or b) have them arrested. Or could it be this unsubstantiated claim is yet another part of their FUD campaign? How could you know that they are convicted felons without knowing who they are?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Well no, he's not taking money from people at gun point. However, theatening to sue people unless they fork over $699 per server does qualify as extortion in most states.
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
A person who has sought out the public limelight thereby sacrifices some expectation of privacy. This is a principle well understood by society and by the courts. Mr. McBride has worked very hard to remain in the limelight.
Also, society sanctions those who break rules. While Mr. McBride hasn't been legally convicted of wrongdoing, he is visibly seeking to take wrongfully from others in order to enrich himself.
Inevitably, he suffers societal backlash, ranging from the Utah reporters who no longer give him positive press to the angry teenagers calling him up at home.
An individual's rights can be narrowed by society if he commits wrongdoing. This narrowing can occur formally, as in criminal sentencing, or informally, as in the shunning and hostile attention directed at a pariah.
It's unfortunate that your comment was modded down merely for disagreeing with the mainstream belief here.