Slashdot Mirror


SCO Aims For The Feds

MoFoQ writes "News.com reports that SCO is now targetting the Feds and their supercomputers (the Beowulf clusters, etc.). Looks like they bit off more than they can chew, even before winning a single case "

136 of 492 comments (clear)

  1. SCO vs The Feds?? by Quazi · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't know who to root for?

    1. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? by hercubus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      hmm, to choose between a lying pack of useless weasels, or, uhh... i guess i see your point but seriously, shouldn't the guys in white coats at Livermore get a fellow-geek vote of confidence when going up against the well-dressed, soulless jackals in Armani suit-coats? are you pro-SCO?

      --
      -- How I want a drink, alcoholic of course, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.
    2. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you are a US citizen, you had best root for the Feds. Whatever it costs them will come directly out of your pocket. That is why our economy is refered to as a system.

      Darl is off his rocker if he thinks open source software helps our enemies. It helps humanity as a whole. His remarks sound like he's trying to appeal to our current neo-con regiem's inability to comprehend issues that affect anyone except fellow members of Skull & Bones fraternity.

    3. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? by JWW · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But you would think if they want to curry that sort of favor with the current adminstration, then they wouldn't sue them!

      I love the way they put that "open source helps our enemies, and our laboratories can't use open source".

      Who exactly is helping our enemies?

    4. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? by soybean · · Score: 4, Funny

      root them all. let god sort them out.

    5. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I was trying to put my finger on exactly why Darl's assertion just seemed so absurd (well, in addition to the many obvious reasons), and your post just crystallized the thought in my mind.

      According to the quote attributed to him in the news.com story, the "export" of open-source software could be used by enemies of the U.S. -- he cites a North Korean computer specialist as an example. (Never mind the fact that he is implying that the U.S. is the only nation contributing to the propagation of open-source software, which is ridiculous on its face.)

      But by that same logic, the U.S. should immediately cease all exports of, say, wheat -- because terrorists outside the U.S. can use that for sustenance, which means they can grow up to be Big, Strong, Healthy Terrorists as a result of those exports.

      OK, so it's a stretch, but then so is pretty much everything McBride has said in the past year.

      -Brian

    6. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? by mog007 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Who owns the patent office? The Feds. Who has unrestricted access to all patents in the same office? The Feds. Who's out of their friggin mind? SCO.

    7. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
      Darl is off his rocker if he thinks open source software helps our enemies. It helps humanity as a whole.

      And our enemies are part of humanity as a whole. In fact, at the moment the net enemies/nonenemies for the US may be greater than one. In that case, you may not want to help humanity as a whole, since you could be hurting yourself...

    8. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Since we live in a democracy, technically the feds ARE us. We controll them, they serve us. The problem is, we aren't nearly involved enough in our government, so sometimes it doesn't seem that way. Your comment make me sad that our government isn't like this anymore.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    9. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? by TheSpoom · · Score: 2, Funny

      Imagine a Beowulf cluster of... oh wait...

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    10. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? by phliar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It'a also so hard to keep track of who the enemies are. We know now that Saddam's Iraq is an enemy, whereas it was a friend in the 80s. I think Iran is a friend, at least until a month before the elections when I think they will become an Immediate Threat to Democracy and Freedom (tm). But what about Spain? Are they our enemies, or are they still part of the COW (coalition of the willing)? Perhaps we need to invade, I mean liberate, Catalonia.

      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
  2. They need to do this by ultrabot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have you seen their stock price recently?

    They need to make as much noise and annoy as many as possible, and they need to do it now. The bigger and more controversial the opponent, the better.

    If they don't make noise, Microsoft doesn't get much value for their investment, right? So they need to capitalize every second SCO is still alive.

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    1. Re:They need to do this by Xenographic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I remember someone saying that a certain stock price (in the $8 range?) would trigger a number of events which could hurt SCO financially (note that the effect I'm thinking of is from more than just a low share price--it triggers some clause in their contract with Baystar or one of those investors).

      Does anyone here remember that price, or how badly it would hurt SCO? :]

      They're at $8.71, and I want to know what price to root for...

      That and I keep wondering what some of the odd numbers mean, just look at this from Yahoo finance (via Google) --

      After Hours (RTM/ECN): 8.60 0.11 (1.26%)
      Last Trade: 8.71
      Trade Time: Mar 19
      Change: 0.04 (0.46%)
      Prev Close: 8.75
      Open: 8.43
      Bid: 0.01 x 100
      Ask: 9,000.00 x 100
      1y Target Est: 25.00

      Do I read that right that someone was asking $9,000 for 100 shares of SCO? Sheesh! Talk about being out to lunch... I have to think that some people are screwing around here or something, though... Does any of this stuff influence the share price?

      Ironically, somehow I feel like the $0.01 bid is reasonable, though, even though I have to figure that someone is goofing off...

    2. Re:They need to do this by Snowspinner · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why do you think their stock price has fallen off from its previous high? When they were just going after IBM and what was percieved by many as a disorganized group - the Linux creators - it looked like a saner bet. It was still risky, but investors accept risk - if SCO was right in their claim to own Linux, there was a lot of potential value there.

      But now SCO is acting like they'll sue anything that types. Furthermore, their IBM/Linux cases are falling apart. That's no longer a risk - that's just madness.

      What they need to do is pull back to a core of managable cases and claims, and work on actually making credible cases on those.

    3. Re:They need to do this by SeXy_Red · · Score: 4, Funny

      On a related note, SCO filed a lawsuit today against the former pop king Michael Jackson; SCO claims that Michael Jackson used parts of there unix source code when he create many of his popular songs, including "Bad" and "Beat it".

      --

      This sig was generated by a barrel of trained kittens for SeXy_Red (550409).

    4. Re:They need to do this by tetrad · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bid and ask prices for stocks are pretty much meaningless outside of market hours.

    5. Re:They need to do this by jyoull · · Score: 2, Insightful

      afterhours quotes like that don't mean anything... all the market-price bids and asks were pulled, leaving the outliers. I always wonder if the guys who enter those just like to look at their own orders sitting there, or if they're hoping for someone to miskey an order in the middle of the night.

    6. Re:They need to do this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      someone was asking $9,000 for 100 shares of SCO? Sheesh! Talk about being out to lunch...

      Lemme explain how this works. Having experienced the joys of a pump and dump scheme first-hand, there are a few common strategies probably being used by SCOX's capital team:

      - keep the public relation newswires busy with misinformation that misdirects strategic setbacks, court losses, and other negative information. This is especially important when you're expecting a major setback. It's a sort of "watch the monkey! keep an eye on the monkey!" misdirection.

      - negotiate third party buy deals with market makers. Under the table stock transfers and other mechanisms help load these parties up and allow them to take a partial loss from stock purchases such as these. When this is well coordinated, using a good amount of "buyers" instructed to follow a release like this, it can push a stock like SCOX up $2-$3.

      - funnel money in via Reg-S deals: Reg-S, similar to Reg-D private placement deals, allows SCO to sell shares directly to international investors who have a shorter holding period. Watch for a large amount of Reg-S as a clue for pump & dump. These folks are likely buying at a steep discount but are able to beat the market by dumping well ahead of the decline. SCO's 10Ks show a good amount of Reg-S activity.

      Incidentally, has anyone found an offshore bank being used by SCOX yet? I've been looking but haven't yet found the usual Bermuda/Turks/etc. channel for funneling money beyond US control.

    7. Re:They need to do this by thales · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I Have been following SCO prices during the decline over the past two weeks. If you look at the Yahoo page you are quoting from you will notice a sharp rise started at 3 o'clock, one hour before closing where it went up 20 cents in the final hour. This rise at the last hour has been a consistant feature for the two week period that I have been watching them and it occurs every day even if just before the rise the high bid is considerably lower. On Friday just before the last hour spike the price was 8.51. The high bid was 8.43. The stock still rose 20 cents between 3 and market close at 4.

      4 Minutes after close a buy went thrugh that was for 8.60, 11 cents under the offical close.

      The pattern over the past two weeks looks like someone is attempting to pump the price in the final hour of trading to get a more favorable closing price.

      --
      Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est
    8. Re:They need to do this by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I Have been following SCO prices during the decline over the past two weeks. If you look at the Yahoo page you are quoting from you will notice a sharp rise started at 3 o'clock, one hour before closing where it went up 20 cents in the final hour.

      That sort of thing has been going on for the past year. It's most likely one insider trading to another to help prop up the share price. SCO is mostly owned by insiders, and most of the publicly traded stock is owned by a few organizations, so the price is easily manipulated. This is in part how the stock maintained its anti-gravity status for most of the past year.

  3. This is just rehashed old news ,not a new event. by Chmarr · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is a bit of bad reporting by news.com (surprise!). It's just referring to the letters SCO sent out in December, and it's JUST been released NOW that two of those targets were Federal institutions.

    Just more lame press releases by SCO. Nothing out of the ordinary. Move along, please.

  4. Angry Bee Hives by dolo666 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I remember my mom used to tell me never to hit bee hives with my hockey stick. SCO never listens to this kind of advice, which comes up every time there's a story here about them; so what's their major malfunction? I just want it to end!

  5. C'mon Bush by Will2k_is_here · · Score: 5, Funny

    He calls for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, he should call for an amendment to ban SCO.

    Or... cue the shock and awe campaign.

  6. NSA by Mad+Marlin · · Score: 4, Funny
    Darl: "Hey, let's sue the NSA."

    Same scene, later that day.

    Random SCO employee: "Umm, Mr. McBride, sir, there are a whole lot of people in ill-fitting suits who want to 'talk' with you ...."

    1. Re:NSA by ddimas · · Score: 4, Funny

      Silly rabbit, Darl will just dissapear one day. 10 years later a news item will appear about him dying while vacationing at Guantanamo Bay...

    2. Re:NSA by dickiedoodles · · Score: 2, Funny

      Darl: "Hey, let's sue the NSA." Same scene, later that day. Random SCO employee: "Umm, Mr. McBride, sir, there are a whole lot of people in ill-fitting suits who want to 'talk' with you ...."

      Reminds me of a horoscope I once got from BBspot

      "Suing Linux users may have seemed a good idea at the time but now there are 10,000 penguins waiting in the lobby and they look pretty pissed"

      --
      In Soviet Russia Slashdot cliches use you
    3. Re:NSA by Hungus · · Score: 4, Funny
      Umm you know who the NSA is right? What you describe is the FBI. Piss off the NSA and you are more likely to find out some or all of the following have occurred:

      All your assets are frozen and or transfered

      you have posted child porn to a Jesuit newsgroup

      Gay photos of you and Osama bin Ladin are on the cover of Time

      Your burth certificate shows you are really the bastard child of Hitler and Stalin.

      Photos of you and Jane Fonda at an anti war rally have been mailed to several quasi fringe groups in Texas and Montana.

      You haven't actually paid taxes for 14 years.

      /me Waves to all my friends out at Ft. Meade - You know who you are.

      --
      Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
    4. Re:NSA by Admiral+Llama · · Score: 3, Funny

      Darl - "Today SCO is announcing that in order to protect our rights to UNIX we are bringing a lawsuit upon the Yakuza..."

      SCHING!!!!

      Darl - "...... (ugh...)"

      Top half falls off.

  7. Re:OK, I am paranoid - BUT by dacarr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, but this is the Federal Government here we're talking about. All they have to do is come at them with the big guns.

    --
    This sig no verb.
  8. Am I the only one... by JayBlalock · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...who's just laughing his head off and thinks no commentary of any kind is really needed?

    --
    Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
  9. Obligatory Princess Bride Quote by hawkstone · · Score: 4, Funny

    You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The first is never get involved in a land war in Asia. The second, only slightly less well known, is this: never go up against a nuclear weapons laboratory when death is on the line!

    1. Re:Obligatory Princess Bride Quote by imnoteddy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Once upon a time a U. S. Army base was trying to get some customer support from a software company. The software company said "You'll have to wait - we have other customers, you know." The guy from the Army said, "Yes, but we're your only customer with tactical nuclear weapons."

      --
      No electrons were harmed creating this post, though some may have been subjected to electrical and/or magnetic fields.
    2. Re:Obligatory Princess Bride Quote by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Funny

      Singing...

      Oh.... I put my own backdoor
      in the Man's ICBM
      so when he pushed the button
      it would fall right back on him.
      When they come after me
      for all the life that's lost
      I'll tell them "Hey it wasn't me
      it was all Microsoft!"

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  10. SCO v USA by pholower · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Okay, this is just a little more than SCO to handle, even if they do have funding from Microsoft. The government, although horibly expensive and utterly dumb to most things geek, has their fair share of the alpha-geek. Besides, the government already has a thing for suing Microsoft and winning. Hopefully this will transend to SCO as well.

    --
    -- johntracy.com, because everybody else is wrong.
  11. Re:OK, I am paranoid - BUT by Progman3K · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah, we can only hope they do!
    But why are they doing this, then? It does seem suicidal...

    --
    I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
  12. Groklaw covered this yesterday. by Aluminum+Tuesday · · Score: 5, Informative

    Groklaw covered this yesterday - it's nothing more than confirmation that those institutions received the threatening letter that SCO's been sending out.

    1. Re:Groklaw covered this yesterday. by tanguyr · · Score: 4, Informative

      mod parent up, i just got back from there and Groklaw did a hell of a job

      --
      #!/usr/bin/english
  13. Reality check time by Wister285 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It was once said after World War II that the United States should be ready to fight two and a half wars at any point, anywhere in the world. Other conflict management is just like this idea. You can only have so many fights before you will not effectively be able to handle them all. SCO not only has too many fights right now, but their fights are way too large for the relative size of their company. Anyone who takes on IBM, an assortment of other companies, and then the United States Federal Government needs to have their heads checked.

    1. Re:Reality check time by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're correct so far you go, but what you've said doesn't really apply if your ultimate goal isn't to win any of the battles. SCO can talk all they want about how they are simply "protecting valuable intellectual property" but I think we all know that they don't care if they win any of these courtroom conflicts or not. That would be icing on the cake, but I doubt they expect it. This is all about damaging the competition (Microsoft's competition) and keeping stock prices as high as possible for as long as possible. You can bet that when SCO's house of cards finally tumbles McBride and Co. will cash out, move to the Caribbean somewhere and the company will fold.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Reality check time by gmkeegan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except that they only need one or two of the cases to settle in SCO's favor (or god forbid get a ruling in their favor) and they become ammo to help win the remaining cases. If the govt. just gives in and pays SCO some amount of money to go away, SCO can take this to the other cases and say, "Look, the US Govt. recognizes that our claim is legitimate!" Then it's all over.

      "That Hansel, he's so hot right now."

    3. Re:Reality check time by BigFire · · Score: 3, Funny

      Darl McBride is well on his to fullfill Londo Mollari's assessment of Emperor Cartagia: Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the kingdom of idiot would fight a war on twelve fronts.

  14. Re:ALL CAPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    >>WE BELIEVE WE CAN PROPOSE SOLUTIONS THAT WILL BE AGREEABLE AND ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE FOR YOU

    I originally read that as "AGREEABLE AND ECONOMICALLY PLEASIBLE FOR YOU" and I thought it was like many of the letters I receive from Nigeria.

  15. I think this is actually a shrewd move by SCO. by Hanzie · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Looks like they bit off more than they can chew, even before winning a single case

    No, they haven't bit off more than they can chew. Their business model isn't about winning court cases, it's about squeezing money. The fact they're willing to go after the feds means that they're not afraid of anybody, particularly YOU, Mr. CEO, so pay up now, before we drag you in too.

    Meanwhile, MS has been having some problems with governments defecting from the 1 Microsoft Way) so this helps them out.

    Microsoft has gone out of it's way to point investors at SCO because any crap SCOX throws at Linux only makes them look less awful. It's a classic case of MS saying "Lets you and him fight!"

    Of course, if they can get federal agencies (who aren't playing with their own money anyway) to pay them to shut up and go away, so much the better! I'm suprised that they haven't thought of this earlier.

    There's even a tiny chance that they'll be able to argue for a change of venue based on the courts using FOSS now, and therefore not being disinterested parties. It won't throw the case out, but it might be a good delaying tactic, and time really is money.

    --
    ********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
    1. Re:I think this is actually a shrewd move by SCO. by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Of course, if they can get federal agencies (who aren't playing with their own money anyway) to pay them to shut up and go away, so much the better! I'm suprised that they haven't thought of this earlier.


      That's a mischaracterization. Feds tend to be aware that they are playing with tax-payer money. But even more imporantly, they tend to view the tax-payer money alotted to their budgets as THEIR money. And limited money, at that. I've yet to see a Fed agency that didn't have more to do than their IT budget will allow (which isn't to say IT managers don't ever make bad decissions with the funds they have available).

      The only variation to this is within the budget structure itself. There are often pools of funds that get ear-marked for certain activities. One may be unable to fund a certain project even though there is a nice fat pool of money available for another kind of activity. Which leads in to my last point...

      Folks, the US Government is law. Fed agencies may not always be on the forefront of IT. But they do know law. They have access to legal devices unique to them and lawyers, paid from different pools of money than their IT budgets, who know how to make use of those legal devices to full effect.

      So while it may be possible that a Fed agency would throw money at a situation like this... I would suggest its very unlikely. In the civilian sector, throwing money at an issue is the easier tactic. In the Fed sector, pushing the problem off to legal resources (funded through a different budget) is the quick fix.
    2. Re:I think this is actually a shrewd move by SCO. by InsaneGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Shrewd, but not because of what you are saying.

      By going after the federal government, they have made it more difficult for the government to just remove their copyright. If the government were to nullify it, they'd have an excellent case for conflict of interest. In this scenario, if the casee against the government were to actually never make it to the courts it's served it purpose.

      As much as it is enjoyable to make fun of SCO and it's lawyers. You must not underestimate them, they are extremely intelligent in being able to manipulate for their benefit.

    3. Re:I think this is actually a shrewd move by SCO. by SeanAhern · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Fed agencies may not always be on the forefront of IT.

      This is probably a bit OT, but...

      I wouldn't think that federal agencies would be necessarily ahead or behind the forefront of IT. It depends on what area of IT you're talking about.

      The work that LLNL does, for instance, is very different from the business-oriented work that other companies do. However, there are similarities: extremely large networks with real-time demands by a large user base, the needs of integrating multi-platform environments together, etc.

      In other areas, LLNL is ahead. They have petabytes of storage that have to be shared, managed, and backed up. This is a much larger requirement than most IT shops. Not all, but most, I'd guess.

      (Disclaimer: I work for LLNL.)

  16. Uhhh... They're Picking on the UC Regents... by nweaver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not a wise move to go after the University of California (who manage livermore and los alamos).

    UC regents already won one lawsuit over this business... SCO may be violating BSD vs USL.

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
  17. Coverage at Groklaw.net by Aluminum+Tuesday · · Score: 3, Informative
  18. I knew SCO was run by a bunch of lunatics but... by u-235-sentinel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's awefully difficult to believe the rediculous actions of this company.

    ""If you fail to respond to our efforts to pursue a licensing arrangement, WE WILL TURN YOUR NAME OVER TO OUR OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR CONSIDERATION OF LEGAL ACTION," Pettit said."

    This was amusing. For consideration of legal action? It's sad how they managed to turn the legal system into a circus. It painfully shows how we need to fix our system or face future SCO's.

    ""Open-source software--available widely through the Internet--has the potential to provide our nation's enemies or potential enemies with computing capabilities that are restricted by U.S. law," McBride said. "A computer expert in North Korea who has a number of personal computers can download the latest version of Linux...and in short order build a virtual supercomputer.""

    This will happen regardless of what happens in the US. Linux is all over the world in multiple distros. I don't think a SMALL company like SCO will ever be able to do anything about it. SCO is in it's death throws. Let's bury them before they stink up the place.

    --
    Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
  19. SCO goal by lazy_arabica · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Open-source software--available widely through the Internet--has the potential to provide our nation's enemies or potential enemies with computing capabilities that are restricted by U.S. law


    Sounds like Mr. McBride is really looking for any way to show linux is a danger. But does he really believe to make us think his goal is to protect the world from US enemies ?
    And who is SCO to tell what the US should do with free software ?
  20. Re:OK, I am paranoid - BUT by ultrabot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First of all, the federal government would probably stomp a hole in MS's skull for anti-trust concerns

    Sorry, I may be misunderstanding something here...

    Aren't we talking of USA right now, with that George guy on the rudder?

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
  21. Re:OK, I am paranoid - BUT by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Informative

    The difference is that if you sue the Federal Government (as opposed to a State or private organization) they get to decide if you are allowed to sue them or not. That may seem unfair on the face of it, but considering the number of people that make a living from deep-pockets lawsuits it's not hard to understand (there aren't any deeper pockets than the U.S. Government.) A judge will say "Have a nice day, Mr. McBride" and that will be that. But in the meantime SCO gets to capitalize on yet another round of high-profile public FUD. I'm not sure what it's going to take: for some reason the American legal system seems unable to shut them up for more than a couple of days. We all keep hoping that IBM will go to the mat for us and take them down. Somebody needs to. They shoot rabid animals, don't they?

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  22. Old News by m.dillon · · Score: 4, Informative
    This is old news. The letters sent to the two agencies were simply SCO's standard threatening letter which they sent in December 2003. They're just pulling it out now to create more FUD. Nothing new has happened.

    -Matt

  23. Canopy LinuxNetworx and SCO by thinkliberty · · Score: 2, Informative

    linux networx is a canopy company like SCO/caldera is. see: http://www.linuxnetworx.com/news/pr042800_canopy.h tml Now in the news article it says: "SCO sent letters raising the prospect of legal action for using Linux to two Department of Energy facilities, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC)." But in this press release it says that linux networx is the one that installed the linux clusters at the LLNL. http://www.linuxnetworx.com/news/8.28.2001.49-Lawr ence_Liverm.html The new lesson of the day is if you do business with anyone funded by the canopy company you risk being sued by other members of the canopy group.

  24. This is the same letter they sent before... by rdean400 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Read the article. This letter was obtained by a FOIA request by an attorney defending the case against Daimler-Chrysler I believe. It's from the round of letters where SCO claimed various header files were in violation of copyrights related to the UNIX ABI.

  25. Re:Excellent! by baryon351 · · Score: 5, Informative

    hasn't SCO already had several unfavorable rulings in the IBM case? Haven't they been ordered to ~finally~ show the offending code? That should end that case quickly...

    Basically yes. And now it's changed from a "there's SysV code in Linux" case to a "there's derivative works of code you licensed from us in Linux" case. That's a big difference. They have not been able to identify ANY code, bar similarities in 5 ABI files, that has been ported directly from SysV to Linux. None. And they admitted it in court in the IBM case.

    What it's about now with IBM is that, while they admit IBM invented JFS, and IBM own the copyright over JFS, and while JFS may have originally been included in other IBM products (OS/2 perhaps?) that because it's attached to the AIX code, it's a "derivative work" of SysV, and therefore SCO have a say over how IBM can use that code.

    How about that. A completely independent IBM invention, used in SysV, and SCO are getting all shitty saying now that IBM cannot now move that code anywhere else after it's been used in IBM's own implementation as AIX.

    And they call the GPL viral. Darl's accusations there are that if anything touches SysV code licensed from SCO, then SCO have a right to say what can be done with it. That just doesn't make sense.

    In any case, it won't end the case quickly due to these changes, as SCO still want to see exactly what the JFS code looks like, so they can see if it was inserted into Linux, and then they can run around and issue more press releases saying "IBM has revealed 10,000 lines of our code is in Linux. see. they admitted it". I think the worst is yet to come in the press-release war that SCO has been waging.

    That is, unless they run out of money first. With their stock price nearly down to a third of what it was just a few months ago and an increasing number of legal fronts being fought, we can only hope that's sooner rather than later.

  26. Root for Canopy by thinkliberty · · Score: 5, Informative


    linux networx is a canopy company like SCO/caldera is. see: http://www.linuxnetworx.com/news/pr042800_canopy.h tml

    Now in the news article it says:
    "SCO sent letters raising the prospect of legal action for using Linux to two Department of Energy facilities, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC)."

    But in this press release it says that linux networx is the one that installed the linux clusters at the LLNL. http://www.linuxnetworx.com/news/8.28.2001.49-Lawr ence_Liverm.html

    The new lesson of the day is if you do business with anyone funded by the canopy company you risk being sued by other members of the canopy group.

    1. Re:Root for Canopy by flacco · · Score: 5, Interesting
      But in this press release it says that linux networx is the one that installed the linux clusters at the LLNL.

      ok, i admit i'm clinically paranoid - but i still think SCOX will eventually set up a patsy to lose a case to ensnare gnu/linux. i wonder if the US government would collude in such an operation. MS is a big money vacumm cleaner that sucks cash from other countries into the US - democratizing computing could appear to the technically ignorant realpolitikos as a net loss, nationally.

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    2. Re:Root for Canopy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      LLNL has some serious backbone and will fight SCO to the death; they have too much riding on Linux and they aren't going to let SCO get in their way of realtime simulation of nuclear explosions. SCO is screwed.

    3. Re:Root for Canopy by dnoyeb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Uhh, no. The Fed will be more than pleased to drive a stake through SCO. Most corporations like to flex their muscles. The Government is probably the worst about this.

      It seems suicidal.

      And stopping Microsoft's march is a net loss nationally. That does not mean its not the right thing to do.

  27. Re:Be careful ! by KlomDark · · Score: 2, Funny

    Or it could stand for Beavis and Butthead.

    Uh, huhuh huh, he said SCO.

    Yah yah, that sucks! Fire fire!

  28. More meaningless Darl soundbites by gilesjuk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He states a computer expert in North Korea can download Linux and create a super-computer. Yet I'm sure the same expert can download some ISOs of Windows from somewhere. Of course one method is legal and one is illegal, but I'm sure they wouldn't care about having unlicensed copies of Windows if they can't purchase legitimate copies.

    I'm sure Darl would sooner they be running SCO software.

    1. Re:More meaningless Darl soundbites by Realistic_Dragon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Having the terrorists running Windows sounds like a good thing to me.

      --
      Beep beep.
    2. Re:More meaningless Darl soundbites by cosmo7 · · Score: 2, Funny

      You seem to overlook that fact that windows does not cluster, has low processing thoughput, is riddled with security problems, and is unstable.

      You misspelled "works as intended".

    3. Re:More meaningless Darl soundbites by wondergibbon · · Score: 2, Funny

      He states a computer expert in North Korea can download Linux and create a super-computer. Yet I'm sure the same expert can download some ISOs of Windows from somewhere.

      There's a thought. North Korea running their nuclear research program using windows.
      I guess that's one way of stalling their research.

      "Microsoft Windows. Your new weapon of mass destruction."

  29. Re:This is just rehashed old news ,not a new event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
    If you ignore the title, the news.com.com article is well written and not confusing. The problem is that at most papers the editor writes the title, not the journalist. I've seen titles on abcnews.go.com mention things that never appear in the story. The editor read the first paragraph and just assumed the rest.

    As far as Slashdot, we all know even the submitters don't read the articles. "now targetting" my ass.

  30. easy ... root for the feds ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    NIH, The National Institues of Health, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services of the United States government, is using Beowulf clusters to help cure diseases such as cancer, Alzheimers, stroke, heart disease and kidney failure.

    I'm definitely rooting for the Feds on this one.

    1. Re:easy ... root for the feds ... by the+gnat · · Score: 4, Informative

      And the NERSC is not just used for weapons simulations - I know people who've used the facilities for biological research. It's also located at LBL, which if I recall correctly does entirely unclassified work (I know many biologists who work there too). Looks like they're doing a lot of applied physics, including fusion power research.

      The DOE national labs do a wide variety of fantastic research, relatively little of it focused on blowing shit up. In fact, I'd argue that their most important role is in biochemistry, due to their synchrotron facilities (used for protein structure determination). Even Livermore, which doesn't have a synchrotron (LBL is right nearby), is doing biology too now.

    2. Re:easy ... root for the feds ... by ameoba · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, a majority of the supercomputer weapons research being done these days involves stabilizing and safely storing the current stockpile of nukes. The rest of it is so that we can stop actually nuking Nevada and New Mexico while still having up to date technology.

      Take away their supercomputers and the government won't stop research, they'll just return to blowing up actual bombs.

      --
      my sig's at the bottom of the page.
    3. Re:easy ... root for the feds ... by ms1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Take away their supercomputers and the government won't stop research, they'll just return to blowing up actual bombs.

      Maybe they can test them at SCO after that?

  31. Another New Low by 4of12 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is disgusting.

    Probably the only thing worse would be if SCO were to send out dunning letters to worthy chartible organization that happen to make use of free and open source software in an effort to save money for helping people.

    The sooner that this company's fradulent claims are shot down in flames in the courts and its criminal executive officers charged by the SEC and led in handcuffs to join Ken Lay, the better.

    Were it me, I'd send back a letter indicating that my attorneys were in the process of closely examining your claim and will be contacting you shortly. To expedite our process, please submit supporting evidence of your claim to our counsel.

    I doubt you'd hear anything more from the litigious bastards.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
  32. This fits their plan by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 3, Interesting
    News.com reports that SCO is now targetting the Feds and their supercomputers (the Beowulf clusters, etc.). Looks like they bit off more than they can chew, even before winning a single case.

    They're not trying to win a single case, they're trying to get back in the press in a positive or semi-positive light and get the stock back above $10/share. Suing the federal government will give them exactly what they want: attention.

    Darl and company will likely end up enjoying the last of their days relaxing on a south pacific beach somewhere. Microsoft wants them to do as much damage to FLOSS before they have to flee the country. Winning the lawsuits isn't one of their goals. Understand those facts and the whole thing starts to make some amount of sense.

  33. Would be worried about Politicians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The bit that interested me is the description of the letter SCO sent to every member of the Senate and House of Representatives, which included quotes like:

    "Open-source software--available widely through the Internet--has the potential to provide our nation's enemies or potential enemies with computing capabilities that are restricted by U.S. law," [...] "A computer expert in North Korea who has a number of personal computers can download the latest version of Linux...and in short order build a virtual supercomputer."

    The people who read this letter include people who think like this.

    1. Re:Would be worried about Politicians by LordK3nn3th · · Score: 2, Funny

      Darl must be jealous that his Unix isn't that good.

      --

      ---
      Never criticize religion on Slashdot. You will be modded down for "Troll" no matter how factual it is.
  34. Old (but unknown publicly) event = News by Jayfar · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, it's news because the targets of the letters, save a few, hadn't been previously known publicly. An attorney for several of the targeted companies managed to snag these two letters from the gummint labs via a Freedom of Information Act request. FOIA requests are not fullfilled instantaneously.

    I could say, by the same token, this is just a bit of bad reporting by /. (surprise). I posted this same story to /. early last evening, but it was ignored and then rejected by the editors.

    "SCO threatened US DOE labs in December letters
    18:32 Friday 19 March 2004 Rejected"

  35. Serious by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 2, Funny

    To prove we mean business, we're typing this WITH OUR CAP LOCK ON! (evil, maniacal laugh)

    1. Re:Serious by betelgeuse-4 · · Score: 3, Funny

      What are the chances of Darl knowing that the caps lock key exists. I BET HE JUST HOLDS SHIFT DOWN.

  36. Darl's Dead Now by Ridgelift · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Open-source software--available widely through the Internet--has the potential to provide our nation's enemies or potential enemies with computing capabilities that are restricted by U.S. law," McBride said.

    Wow, I didn't know SCO was so concerned about saving the world from terrorists. Could someone give these people a humanitarian award please?

    All of this reminds me of something my dad said growing up: Companies can get away with just about anything, until they burn either the government or the military.

  37. Eminent Domain? by voss · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Federal government might have a pretty good case for Eminent Domain.

    Those labs are multibillion dollar projects.
    The value of the unix source code is not more than the fair market value of the company (ie $300 million dollars) , so the feds could easily begin eminent domain proceedings against SCO in which the US government would take the Unix source code in exchange for fair market value.

    Considering the massive use of Linux in federally funded schools, colleges and universities, settling the IP question once and for all would be worth it.
    Then the federal government could treat the unix source code as a public document.

    Im sure Microsoft would whine but its good public policy to preserve a competitive market.

    1. Re:Eminent Domain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      SCO would probably like to get bought out. I think the best thing to do is just to wipe them out in court, that way there is a possibility for criminal charges brought against mcbride and company, and gives an opportunity to test out the GPL in court.

  38. PJ at Groklaw by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 3, Interesting

    predicted that with their stock recently dropping in price (again) that they would stage another publicity stunt.

    Quote from yesterday before this happened "every time their stock goes down, they escalate the circus"

  39. Re:OK, I am paranoid - BUT by MoFoQ · · Score: 3, Funny

    maybe so...if it was on fair grounds.

    But remember, the IRS is only a quick phone call away. Or the president can declare that SCO is an enemy combatant and send SCO off to Cuba.

  40. PROTEST IDEA!!!! by Cyno01 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is it possible to rent penguins? I know their droppings are like any other birds, pretty nasty, kind of a pain to clean up and stink like hell in large quantities. Would it be possible to rent a flock of penguins and cage them in the sco parking lot for a work day? Everyone would have to walk through it and the penguins would probably hop up onto cars etc... Or just get a few pissed off male emporer penguins and leave them in Darl's office....

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  41. Bring it. by NatlLabGeek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My colleagues and I were wondering if they'd have the guts to consider a suit against the labs. We're a seriously major player in terms of installed nodes and code contributions, and suing one or more of us would get a great stock price bounce. It would also some of the brightest geeks on the planet and lawyers with a bottomless checkbook involved in SCO's world (not that it isn't happening already via the existing suits). They'd also be suing a weapons lab in a time of war and telling them you want to confiscate their classified gear - if you thought the Nazgul were cranky, try threatening somebody with enormous amounts of restricted data and see what kind of badness shows up at your door.

    On balance, I just can't see them doing this. The government can really spank somebody in a million different ways if you irritate them (SEC, FBI, air strikes...) and SCO's got enough to worry about right now. Then again we're talking about a company that thinks it's a good idea to sue IBM, so who knows?

    God, I hope they do it. :)

  42. Re:Does that include Trolltech? by thinkliberty · · Score: 4, Informative

    Maybe... Remember Darl Mcbride when he claimed that SCO owns C++ So in the future SCO may sue people using QT with C++ See: http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/mai n/0,14179,2877578,00.html "We have a lot of royalties coming to us from C++."

  43. Shock and horror by dbIII · · Score: 4, Funny
    First the terrorism card, that gets attention:
    Open-source software--available widely through the Internet--has the potential to provide our nation's enemies ...
    The next pointless claim will be that open source software may cause the exposure of breasts, and we all know that we have to protect our children against breasts, they're just so unamerican.

  44. Re:Does that include Trolltech? by Ralph+Yarro · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What with Canopy representatives on their board of directors and all.

    I can personally reassure you on behalf of Trolltech that Canopy has no influence in our day to day management.

    --

    The real Ralph Yarro posts as Anonymous Coward. Anyone else is an impostor.
  45. I just put my tinfoil hat on.... by NLG · · Score: 5, Insightful
    They need to make as much noise and annoy as many as possible, and they need to do it now. The bigger and more controversial the opponent, the better.

    You are mostly right, they need to make noise to pump the stock price again. However, there are some targets which we know they chose not to pursue. Bank of America, for one. Why go after Daimler/Chrysler instead? This is complex, and forgive the tin-foil hat sound of it.

    BoA is big. More importntly BoA is VERY influential in the Banking and Investment Banking industry. Think it through. BoA has ties to virtually every financial institution on the planet of somekind and could very easily use its influence to ruin SCO in a heartbeat. A few phone calls from some BoA execs and suddenly SCO's line of credit dries up and loans are called-in. Even better, the Mortgages and auto loans, whatever debts, of SCO execs are called and there are suddenly no other banks anywhere willing to lend them money.

    Not only that, but BayStar has all its credit affected also, as well as its execs. Sure all these SCO-scum and BayStar-bitches are probably rich enough to handle it, but it is going to hurt and hurt bad. Most Americans, even Donald Trump, are so heavily "leveraged" that if something like this were to occur it would destroy them. It would most certainly destroy SCO, et al.

    SCO's lawyers probably realized this at the last minute and convinced Darl that BoA and any other super-sized Bank was capable of playing hardball at a level SCO can't survive. Otherwise, why change targets instead of just tactics? SCO could have just amended that letter to BoA to sue them just like Daim\Chrysler instead of trying to get the court to seize, effectively, all their computers. Answer: SCO isn't suing BoA because they are scared of what BoA could do to them. If not, why announce the Fed-suit instead of going back after BoA? A company that everyone now knows(thanks to MS-Word fun) was an initial target. Answer: Not even the Feds scare them as bad, as this headline proves.

    --
    Flash is the Herpes of the Internet.
    your.opinion > /dev/null
    1. Re:I just put my tinfoil hat on.... by ultrabot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It would most certainly destroy SCO, et al.

      I tend to think that destruction of SCO is inevitable anyway, and SCO knows it. This charade is the exit strategy for the SCO management - they are going to emerge from this as rich men (rich w/ MSFT money), provided that they are not punished for misconduct (and this is something we all hope).

      That is, they can afford to anger pretty much everybody. Microsoft can't, however, and one would have expected SCO to tone down their attacks after the MSFT-SCO connection was proved beyond any doubt.

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    2. Re:I just put my tinfoil hat on.... by pla · · Score: 2, Interesting

      SCO isn't suing BoA because they are scared of what BoA could do to them. If not, why announce the Fed-suit instead of going back after BoA?

      I agree with your reasoning, right up to this line.

      Pissing off the world's banks may make life exceedingly difficult for most of us, but with some care (ie, knowing you'll lose any semblance of credit in the near future), people like Trump (and even Darl, though not even in the same ballpark) can prepare for such an event and weather the storm.

      Pissing off the Federal Government, however... Well, no amount of preparing (short of applying for and gaining political refugee status in a semi-hostile nation, and even that will fail if Uncle Sam wants someone badly enough) can save you from that ball-o'-wrath. I'd bet the FTC and the SEC may have a few choice words for Darl et al, if they found themselves dragged into this pump-n'-dump scam. And of course, with the leaked internal memos, particularly with Microsoft involved, I would not feel surprised to hear about some vague antitrust and RICO violations.

      Not to mention that the Federal Government needs to give its permission to sue it... So they can just say "no, go away", and Darl can't do a damned thing about it.

      So yes, annoying BoA would hurt Darl's cause (his real one, not the charade playing out in the court system). But going after the feds just begs for trouble that not even other whole countries can easily withstand (and I say that without a hint of nationalistic pride, just matter-of-factly).

  46. Must Prove Intent to defraud by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While they may lose ( or they may not.. that is still yet to be determined since there hasnt been a judgement on ANY of their claims, yet.. ) that wont instantly mean they goto jail.

    The SEC must prove there was intent to defraud .. If the people at SCO truely belive they are in the right.. then no *fraud* was commited.. just a lot of stupidity .. and last i heard that isnt a crime...

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Must Prove Intent to defraud by 4of12 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The SEC must prove there was intent to defraud...stupidity...isn't a crime.

      You're right.

      I'm sure that will be the defense, if it ever even comes to that.

      And in all likelihood there will only be a husk of a company left after all the legal fees and investor equity has been burned up. Not an attractive target for any private party.

      Government action would be predicated on teh government actually caring to go after them and having enough evidence, weighed against the politics of the action, lobbyists, etc.

      And, were I SCO, I would be careful not to let anything incriminating become part of a written record or email. Keep everything to just verbal exchanges, using innuendo and hints.

      What could fuel a legal backlash against SCO is if a tie is made to someone with deep pockets (eg, MSFT). In that case, opposition lawyers might smell enough money that they'd go after any connection between them, eg Baystar. Especially armed with previous federal findings that MS is a monopoly and has abused its power in another instance (Netscape).

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
  47. Freddy Vs SCO by Cynikal · · Score: 4, Funny

    Its ok he's dead now, we're safe...

    AAAHHH!!! there he is again!!!

    *stab* *stab* *stab*

    ok now he's dead for sure this time... we can go on with our lives

    AAAHHH!!! there he is again!!!

    *stab* *stab* *stab*

    and etc

  48. I stopped worrying and love SCO by Wm_K · · Score: 4, Funny
    1. Re:I stopped worrying and love SCO by boomka · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Excellent link. When I read this passage from the article:


      "Open-source software--available widely through the Internet--has the potential to provide our nation's enemies or potential enemies with computing capabilities that are restricted by U.S. law," McBride said. "A computer expert in North Korea who has a number of personal computers can download the latest version of Linux...and in short order build a virtual supercomputer."


      I though that when people write crap like this and are dead serious about it... then well, they are probably long past the point of arguing with. We just have to find a way to not let them do their crazy thing.

      --
      Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe.
      H.G. Wells, "The Outline of History"
  49. 1950s McCarthy Targets by Mr+Very+Angry · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    So now SCO attacks the US government?

    I find this reminiscent of the activities of McCarthy in the post WW2 period.

    The McCarthy investigation and activities were very successful in trying to root out left-wing people from jobs, on the basis that they were a threat to National Security. The world and its people were very weak after the second world war, so all sorts of nutty ideas could get talked about. As the USSR and the USA were involved in a turf war, it was alleged that anyone who supported the US communist party, was in fact undermining the security of the USA. I suppose the modern day equivalent would be any American who supported a pro-Iranian or Pro-Beijing party today, being accused of threatening US security.

    Some particularly famous examples were show trials involving Hollywood stars.

    Anyway, the whole investigation went on quite successfully until one day the "McCarthy-ites" decided to accuse the US armed forces of containing subversive activities. This was one step too far, and the investigations were halted, and became discredited in the eyes of many.

    ----
    "send a card today - make someone happy"

  50. No, it wasn't *that* letter, it was this one by Jayfar · · Score: 2, Informative

    "SCO sent the letter to every member of the Senate and House of Representatives, said Blake Stowell, a SCO spokesman." No, no, they did not send the extortion letter to congress. This refers to Darl's letter warning congress about the danger to our way of life posed by the and their GPL.

  51. Re:OK, I am paranoid - BUT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hah! If you REALLY had an imaginary girlfriend then you would have linked to her page to show her off instead of to the front page. I bet you only have an imaginary imaginary girlfriend.

  52. Same letter they sent Lehman Bros. by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative
    This isn't new. This is one of the letters from the December batch from SCO. It reads just like the one they sent Lehman Bros., which has been filed as an exhibit in Red Hat vs. SCO. Lehman Bros. referred SCO to Red Hat, which blew a hole in SCO's claim that Red Hat didn't have standing to sue SCO.

    None of SCO's desperate attempts to prop up the stock price have worked. Even the announcement of a stock buyback propped up the price for only one hour, between 0930 and 1030 last Tuesday. SCOX continues its long slide. SCOX closed at 8.71 on Friday. It started the week at 9.5, and the year around 20.

    SCO has reached the point where nothing they can say can help them. Only winning some of their lawsuits can help them, and that looks increasingly unlikely. They have to win three separate suits (against Novell, IBM, and Red Hat) to even start collecting from end users.

  53. Re:OK, I am paranoid - BUT by rco3 · · Score: 5, Informative

    "i wasnt aware that he had any opinions towards/against old billy boy"

    Then - no offense - your awareness is incomplete.
    Microsoft was found to be guilty of anti-competitive practices. The DOJ recommended breaking up Microsoft. This sound familiar?

    George W. handed down the proclamation from on high that the Justice department was no longer allowed to pursue a breakup of Microsoft.
    This took the wind right out of the sails of the DOJ's case, and Miscrosoft ended up with a slap on the wrist and a request not to do it again.

    I'm guessing that GWB's feelings about Microsoft may be *directly* related to the size of some campaign contributions he's received...

    --

    Ce n'est pas un vrai mouvement de robot!
  54. Good move, SCO by vectus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is a good move for two reasons:

    1) If the government decides to settle, SCO will be able to twist the truth and claim that the US Government backs their side of the case.

    2) If the government doesn't settle, SCO will be able the claim the government biased against them, which may help with PR.

    Hopefully SCO and their supporters pay for what's going on, now. I'm thinking of closing my account at Royal Bank to avoid indirectly funding SCO. That's a pretty big deal given the fact that when I grad I'm going to be a lawyer with an MBA. (And now I'm officially hated by slashdot ;) )

  55. Re:Does that include Trolltech? by jelle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "And C++ programming languages, we own those,"

    Geesh. parent poster was not kidding.

    Darl: "several dozen requests a month just to come in and see AIX or HP-UX code base."

    Didn't they ask IBM to show them the AIX source in their case against IBM? Then what is this about?

    Maybe this was the interview where he had to prove to the rest of the 'gang' that he was capable of lying through his teeth without blinking?

    Actually, googling around this article a little, extrapolating the trend: Will he sue the US Courts for migrating to Linux next? (btw wouldn't that be some sort of chicken-and-egg problem (ergo very likely for SCO to do)?)

    Darl: "NASDAQ, for example, runs all of the trading machines in their brokerages on OpenServer."

    Oh, and the trade 'floor' that lists their stock, NASDAQ too? Actually in that article NASDAQ "wants to eliminate the company's Unisys Corp. mainframes and migrate the trading-floor functions that run on those machines" and "Nasdaq currently uses about 300 Unix servers running a mix of HP's Tru64 and HP-UX operating systems as well as Sun's Solaris". I see mentions of Unisys, HP Tru64, HP-UX, and Solaris: Where is the SCO OpenServer that Darl was speaking about? Not mentioned, so not even close to OpenServer on 'all of the trading machines', likely even none at all, given the specific mention of Unisys for trading functions...

    --
    --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
  56. small quible by baomike · · Score: 2, Funny

    SCO's house of cards finally tumbles McBride and Co. will cash out, ..

    I think this should read";SCO's house of cards finally tumbles McBride and Co. will have cashed out,"

    This is what the stock buy back plan is for.
    Exercise employee stock option.
    sell stock, SCO buys like amount of stock.
    employee happy.
    stock price (on open market) not affected.
    repeat;

    What does BayStar do about this?
    1. If they are in on it ... nothing.
    2 If not in on it ... scream bloody murder.

  57. The country's in danger!! by niittyniemi · · Score: 5, Funny


    > He states a computer expert in North Korea can download Linux
    > and create a super-computer. Yet I'm sure the same expert
    > can download some ISOs of Windows from somewhere.

    Crikey, you're on to something! Imagine a Beowulf cluster running
    Windows ME......you can't put anything past those filthy Commies!

    With that sort of computing power they could develop any sort of
    weapon you can imagine....knives, axes, sticks....anything is possible

    Clippy: I see you're trying to develop a WMD, can I help?

    If the prospect of that doesn't constitute a clear & present danger
    then I don't know what does.

    I'm for GWB carrying forward the "War On Terrorism" and
    pre-emptively nuking Redmond. Who's with me?

    --
    The Machine stops.
  58. you can't sue the king by baomike · · Score: 2, Informative

    This came from English common law.
    You literaly could not sue the king without
    his permission.

  59. Re:-1 disinformation by hawkstone · · Score: 4, Informative

    I would not call that disinformation at all. I assume you are attempting to make a subtle distinction between management of the labs, and what one typically means by "belong to", not that you are attempting to troll or anything.

    Prime Contract W-7405-ENG-48 (Contract 48 or Prime Contract) is executed between the University of California (UC or University) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and it is under this contract that LANL and LLNL function.

    In other words, UC manages the labs under contract from DOE.

  60. The 'malfunction' is that they run fast.... by Kjella · · Score: 5, Funny

    I remember my mom used to tell me never to hit bee hives with my hockey stick. SCO never listens to this kind of advice, which comes up every time there's a story here about them; so what's their major malfunction? I just want it to end!

    They hit one, then run to the next, hit that, run some more, hit another one.... currently they have a shitload of bees after them, and their legs are getting tired...

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  61. Re:OK, I am paranoid - BUT by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Informative

    The difference is that if you sue the Federal Government (as opposed to a State or private organization) they get to decide if you are allowed to sue them or not. That may seem unfair on the face of it, but considering the number of people that make a living from deep-pockets lawsuits it's not hard to understand (there aren't any deeper pockets than the U.S. Government.)

    That's a useful effect. But it's not the reason for the rule.

    The reason that's in there is so that when the fed tries to exercise its constitutional authority on some OTHER big pockets (i.e. a state), it doesn't get tied up in a bunch of legal crud.

    The fed, however, DOES let such suits proceed much of the time.

    And after the CIA ripped off a company's database, installed spyware, and marketed it cheap to the world's banks (wrecking the market for the original authors), and the fed refused to be sued, resulting in the database's company folding, Congress got pissed and passed some laws to prevent it happening again. (That's why you see that bit about federal agencies in ELUAs - to set up a suit they can't wiggle out of if an agency tries to pull it again.)

    I don't know if this would keep the agencies from ducking the suits, but it might. (IANAL, and haven't even read the darn gobbledegook directly.) Let's see what shows up on groklaw.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  62. I wouldn't worry too much about that... by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Imagine SCO won some hilarious claim in the US - pretty much every other nation in the world would ignore them. Imagine all the American businesses that would have to pay licence fees to SCO - and all the non-American businesses that would not. That would hurt the US economy for real.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:I wouldn't worry too much about that... by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 3, Insightful
      SCO sent the letter to every member of the Senate and House of Representatives, said Blake Stowell, a SCO spokesman.

      And since most of those reps hopefully realize your point, I'd say, SCO just sent a wake-up call.

      In other news, this is just your semi-random FUD stuff that you should expect to continue until November.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    2. Re:I wouldn't worry too much about that... by EvilAlien · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lots of (relatively) cheap and talented labour up here in Canada, we'd love it if all the Linux businesses moved up here ;)

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
  63. Are they going to confiscate computers? by MongooseCN · · Score: 2, Funny

    SCO: I'm calling the FBI to confiscate all your computers and do an investigation!

    FBI: Sir. We are the FBI.

  64. Re:Huh? by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd say it's more liker firing a '22 at a grizzly... It *IS* possible to kill it, but chances are it's gonna be spitting up the spare bullets you have (had) in your back pocket.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  65. FCS by ebh · · Score: 2, Funny
    A lot of the Army's Future Combat Systems project runs on Linux. Thank you SCO, for providing a few choice test cases! I can just see it now:

    DEPLOYING UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE
    ACQUIRING TARGET
    LOCATION: LINDON, UTAH, USA
    TARGET DESTROYED
    SEND NOTIFICATION
    TO: LEGAL DEFENSE TEAM
    CONTENT: It's Miller time!

  66. No sco suits filed (yet) against fed labs by Jayfar · · Score: 3, Informative

    "If not, why announce the Fed-suit instead of going back after BoA?"

    Keep your tinfoil hat on; there's plenty of other oddities about this thing of SCO's, but you're a little off on this one point.

    1.) SCO hasn't sued the fed labs yet and announced nothing yesterday.

    2.) The letters were part of one of the threatening spam runs SCO did in December; the revelation now comes because an attorney representing several recipients of the sco scam spam just now has been able to obtain them, after filing a Freedom of Information Act request for the letters.

  67. Re:This is just rehashed old news ,not a new event by zurab · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If you ignore the title, the news.com.com article is well written and not confusing.

    Except that it's misleading and there's not enough clarification:

    It's not an idle threat, though many Linux fans dismiss the Lindon, Utah-based company's assertions. SCO's attorneys, Boies Schiller & Flexner, have indeed sued AutoZone for its use of Linux, claiming that the open-source operating system infringes on SCO's Unix copyrights.

    Unless author clarifies his point, it's misleading. SCO did not sue AutoZone simply because AutoZone uses Linux. They sued AutoZone because SCO had a licensing agreement with them which SCO felt was violated by AutoZone's use of Linux. Author's point seems to imply that if you are a large company and use Linux, you are at a risk of getting sued. This is not true. What legal principle can SCO use to sue Linux users that have no contract or licensing agreements with them? None, as far as I am aware.

    This is a problem with most mainstream press reporting on this issue. They follow SCO's FUD more than do their research and report facts.
  68. Re:OK, I am paranoid - BUT by ATMAvatar · · Score: 3, Informative

    2004 campaign contributions thus far

    Note the important:
    Microsoft Corp $160,850

    --
    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
  69. Missing the point by hwestiii · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think that people who see the U.S. government as some behemoth that can devour SCO are missing something. Four years ago, that might have been a reasonable analysis, but now you have people in charge of the govenrment who are actually much more hostile to the institutions that they nominally govern than they are to the industries they nominally regulate or serve.

    This is actually a perfect oppotunity for SCO to walk in, whine about lost IP value, and have a truly sympathetic ear on the other side of the table. The government shut down several nominally free services provided by the government because private industry concerns complained that they were too successful and taking away business from the private sector.

    The Bush administration loves anything that makes a buck, and probably hates things like Open Source software because it sounds too much like Communism.

  70. No news here, move on... by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 4, Informative
    Groklaw is reporting that they simply recieved the same December letter that eeverybody else did, and a lawyer representing other recipients got holdo of it via a Freedom of Information Act request.

    About the only interesting things here are that we now know they've been sending these letters to (pseudo) government organizations, and they've managed to threaten the Regents of the University of California ( thus re-igniting USL vs BSD).

    It's also increasingly unlikely that they did any sort of vetting in terms of who they sent the letters to. Dead Tree SPAM.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  71. Re:Does that include Trolltech? by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Will he sue the US Courts for migrating to Linux next? (btw wouldn't that be some sort of chicken-and-egg problem (ergo very likely for SCO to do)?)

    This raises a possibly interesting point. Any lawyer here who understands the US legal system? Could TSCOG then claim that the US court system is not qualified to consider the main case because of conflict of interest? This seems nuts, but less nuts than any other legal argument that we have heard from them. Any chance of an appeal based on it?

  72. Re:Does that include Trolltech? by BoneFlower · · Score: 2, Informative

    Umm... Its an ISO standard, royalty free... They might get some money licensing an *implementation* but not the language.

    Sadly, while I would chalk it up to a poorly transcribed/edited interview if it was anyone else saying it, McBride might actually believe they own C++...

  73. SCO has been mailing more BS to congressmen by -tji · · Score: 4, Interesting

    At the end of the article, they mention letters that SCO sent to every congressman saying:

    "Open-source software--available widely through the Internet--has the potential to provide our nation's enemies or potential enemies with computing capabilities that are restricted by U.S. law," McBride said. "A computer expert in North Korea who has a number of personal computers can download the latest version of Linux...and in short order build a virtual supercomputer."

    Like most of their previous assertions, they don't let logic get in their way on this either.. As if Linux is the threat here.. By this same logic, you would need to outlow Solaris-x86, Windows, *BSD, and anything else running on x86's.. They key to these systems is not the OS, it's the price/performance of these commodity CPU's.

  74. Please, oh please, sue the Mafia next by Racal+Vadic · · Score: 2, Funny

    Darl, do you have any idea how many Linux clusters those Mafia guys are running? And they're loaded! Go get 'em!

  75. And here's Mark Heise's response to Darl: by red+floyd · · Score: 2, Funny

    You sued WHO???? Don't you know that they have nukes?

    --
    The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
  76. David and Goliath and Goliath's big brother by utlemming · · Score: 3, Interesting

    SCO wanted the general public to think of this case as one of David v. Goliath. However, it is becoming clearer and clear that it is not a David v. Goliath case at all. In the historical David v. Goliath, Goliath picked the fight. In fact Goliath taunted the Isrealites. The would-be David in this case is SCO, and SCO picked the fight. But it seems that SCO did not just limit the fight to one Goliath. Oh no. Getting cocky, while swinging its sling, and a limited supply of ammo, SCO has gone on to pick a fight with a couple of other Goliath's; some of the Goliaths are bigger and some are smaller. But now SCO has decided that by threatening to sue the Feds, SCO has decided to pick on the biggest Goliath of them all. But that is not the best part -- this new Goliath (we'll called it the US Goliath Family) has a family, one that has deep pockets and several methods of persuasion. Between the members of the US Goliath Family you have the FTC, with power to investigate and criminalize the actions of SCO; the FBI, which has the power to investigate rackateering and extortion amoung other things; the SEC, which can investigate the claims of M$ involvement and bring criminal charges for securities fraud; the IRS, which can look into the finances of the company and conduct an expensive and lengthy audit; and several others in the family. SCO has just opened a can of worms, and they had better hope that they are right, becasue if they are wrong, they will have sealed their own coffins.

    The tables have now turned. Several government agencies have said this is a copyright issue. Now that there is a threat that government agencies will be dragged into the equation, there is now a huge financial incentive to look into possiable criminal conduct. The US government does not take well to extortion attempts. Perhaps SCO is doing this out the "spirit" of capitalism. Who knows. But one lesson that I learned quickly well growing up in the Wash, DC area is that when the government gets pissed off at a company things get rather unconfortable for the company. And forget the congressional support. When things start to hit the fan, you can bet that some General is going to have way more power in swaying a Congressman's opinion than SCO will.

    --
    The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
  77. Actually a smart move, from where they are now by ca1v1n · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Think about it, they're already neck-deep in shit if they don't win everything. Pissing off the feds isn't going to screw them over any more. The chance that they're taking is that the way government agencies deemed important enough to be allowed supercomputing clusters, adding on a charge for linux licenses won't bother anyone enough to raise a stink about it. They then get the credibility of a federal agency paying up to voice their threat with.

    That said, I think they *will* get hammered in court, but that doesn't make their behavior irrational from where they stand right now. Proving criminal fraud would basically require audio tape of them saying "No, we don't own the code, but we can still extort them for lots of money." which is unlikely, so all they really have to lose here are attorney's fees.

  78. AIX or the AIX kernel? by kardar · · Score: 2

    There was something I was wondering. Many people make the "mistake" of associating Linux with the GNU operating system. Linux is just the kernel. GNU can run on several kernels, Linux is the most popular one, the default one.

    When I started using FreeBSD I noticed that the kernel was really not that big of a deal compared to the Linux kernel, which was more of a bigger deal, or seemed to be, anyway. I remember I swapped an OpenBSD harddrive between minor architecture changes and had to compile a new kernel. It wasn't a big deal, it only took short period of time, and involved just editing the file directly, then compiling it and reboot.

    So here is what I was wondering. When they say AIX - the accusation there is AIX code in Linux - they mean the kernel, right? Or are they talking all of AIX. I am even wondering how these things match up; because, technically, calling what most people call Linux Linux is incorrect, it's actually GNU/Linux to begin with, and then perhaps some proprietary stuff thrown on top like YaST was up until yesterday or so.

    So I wonder how much people realize that we are just talking about a kernel here, or are we? Is it more than that? And how does the logic of these accusations draw the dividing line between kernel and OS? The accusations seem to be based on the fact that everyone is "using Linux" and "not using Unix" anymore, but identifying infringing code seems to be an afterthought, with no specific facts as of yet (probably ever). The accusations don't appear to be primarily about the technical details, they appear to be of a broader nature, about the fact that ex-Unix customers are now "using Linux". It's almost as if the individual(s) responsible for these legal actions don't know the difference between Linux and GNU - why would they be asking for "AIX" and not the "AIX kernel"?

    It's just kind of strange, if you asked me. It's basically tying software to hardware, because the kernel is all about hardware, all kinds of hardware. Since there is no evidence, and no infringement has taken place, these court cases are obviously going nowhere; but shouldn't tying hardware to software be at the discrection of the hardware manufacturer/chipmaker?

  79. The simplest answer to SCO alegations by ArcticCelt · · Score: 2, Funny

    The simplest answer to SCO alegations; They are going down !

    --

    Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
  80. Re:SCO vs The Feds?? ENEMY GIVEN MORE POWER by Klanglor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    now just imagine... SCO kill linux in USA, 699$+equipment per additional CPU. the Enemy: only equipment cost. now who will have the fastest computational power?

  81. Baloney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Bank of America can't simply call every financial institution in the world and get SCO shut down. That is retarded.

    Besides, don't you imagine BoA has competitors?

  82. The insanity grows by BCW2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now that this will involve the Feds as defendants, can we just let the Navy Seals have a training mission in Utah?

    SCO goes to their offices on Monday and finds nothing but an empty shell, not even a fingerprint.

    --
    Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
  83. Re:Does that include Trolltech? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Informative

    Its an ISO standard, royalty free... They might get some money licensing an *implementation* but not the language.

    Since when does being an ISO standard make a technology royalty free?

    It's not like MPEG is royalty free.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  84. The court would, indeed, hear it. by rjh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There's a legal doctrine which addresses this issue. I can't remember the precise term for it, but the Judiciary is allowed to be a litigant before itself. It's somewhat frowned upon, but the logic goes as follows: under the Constitution, the only branch of the government with standing to hear grievances against the government is the Judiciary. If the Judiciary has a grievance against another branch of the government, it is the Judiciary's Constitutional duty to hear its own case.

    For obvious reasons, this is really frowned upon. The Judiciary tends to judge itself much more harshly than it judges others.

    For instance, under the Constitution the Federal government is not allowed to reduce the pay of a judge during his/her term of good behavior. Sounds straightforward, right? Up until you consider that Federal judges haven't had a COLA (Cost Of Living Adjustment) in a decade. Due to inflation, Federal judges are getting paid about fourteen percent less today than they were in the '80s.

    During this time, Congress has made it a priority to give itself frequent and generous COLAs (when they haven't been giving themselves outright raises). It's outraged a large number of judges, who are--in terms of real buying power--getting their salaries cut by over an eighth despite the Constitution's guarantee that Congress is forbidden from doing that.

    So some particularly outraged judges filed a lawsuit against Congress, suing them to compel them to give the Judiciary a proper COLA. The Judiciary heard this lawsuit, because (a) nobody in their right mind could say the judges didn't have a legitimate grievance against the government, and (b) the Judiciary is the only agency authorized to hear these grievances.

    In the end, the suit was dismissed before trial. A trial is for the determination of facts, but there were no facts in disagreement. The disagreement was purely one about law, and those disagreements tend to be handled in pre-trial motions. The plaintiffs claimed that Congress' refusal to pass a COLA amounted to an unconstitutional cut in salary, and the respondent (the United States Solicitor-General, I think) claimed that Congress only says their salary shall not be cut, not that they're entitled to COLA increases in salary.

    The judge hearing the case decided the Solicitor-General had the correct view of the law. The question of law was resolved in the government's favor, and given that there was no violation of law, the plaintiff's lawsuit quietly vanished.

    All of this is if-I-recall-correctly. I may be in error on some details, but I think that I'm right on the major points.

    (Also, a sidebar: the next time you hear about how government jobs are cushy and high-ranking spots like judicial appointments are overpaid, consider this: on average, a Federal judge gets paid less than a quarter what they would make in private practice. The Judiciary is facing an exodus of judges into the private sector because the $120,000 salary of a Chief Judge of an Appellate Court simply doesn't compare to the $1-million-or-more they could make in a law firm. Are judges paid well? Yes. Are they paid market rates? Not even close.)

  85. SCO thinks it owns C++ by Angry+Pixie · · Score: 2, Informative

    SCO thinks it owns the C++ programming language according to one article:

    http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux03/ScoSource-02_S tory03.html#C++_Issues

    Excerpt:

    MozillaQuest Magazine: C++ appears to be one of the properties that SCO acquired through Novell's acquisition of AT&T's UNIX Systems Laboratories and subsequent purchase of Novell's UNIX interests by SCO. At this time most Linux and/or GNU/Linux distributions include C++ compilers and editors. Is this something for which SCO currently charges? If so, just what are the current arrangements? If not, will C++ licensing and enforcement be added to SCO's licensing and enforcement program?

    Blake Stowell: C++ is one of the properties that SCO owns today and we frequently are approached by customers who wish to license C++ from us and we do charge for that. Those arrangements are done on a case-by-case basis with each customer and are not disclosed publicly. C++ licensing is currently part of SCO's SCOsource licensing program.

    MozillaQuest Magazine: How about GNU C++? Does GNU C++ use SCO IP? If so, could SCO license and/or charge for use of its IP in GNU C++?

    Blake Stowell: I honestly don't know.


    According to the article, Blake Stowell works for SCO, but I don't know who he is. He goes on say that SCO would have to research any violations on the part of the GCC team.

    I know that the C++ language is developed by ANSI and ISO, but the language was developed by Bjorn Straussop (sp) as work property owned by AT&T. Am I correct?

    SCO claims it acquired C++ from AT&T or Novell. Despite being a programming language, C++ itself is still a technology no different from a hammer.I can't just create a language and call it C++. If I did, ISO couldn't sue me, but SCO would have us believe SCO could. So if I create my own language and call it Borland C++, I would be liable to both SCO and Borland (who is also liable to SCO).

    I know it's always in good form to bash Microsoft. Can we honestly believe that Microsoft is somehow behind this, or that Microsoft is still the evil empire? It looks like we have a new contender. I think it's about time we see more cartoons lampooning SCO like we saw for Microsoft. Where's the pic of McBride as a Borg?

  86. And after SCO is finished ... by Poligraf · · Score: 2, Funny

    Darl will have a hard time letting go of the popularity he enjoys among the /. crowd.

    In order to keep it, he'll start a new career in modelling. He will become the new, hmmmm, face of the reborn Goatse.cx

    $699 fee for linking to the site will be waived for the registered /. members ;-).

    --
    Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
  87. Re: lack of judges by benjamindees · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe the courts should consider non-lawyer judges. I know a few out-of-work slashdotters who might fit the bill :)

    --
    "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"