Slashdot Mirror
EV1Servers.Net's CEO Regrets SCO Deal
spafbnerf writes "Everyone Internet's CEO Robert Marsh, when asked his feelings about the SCO deal almost a month ago responds: 'Would I do it again? No. I'll go on the record as saying that,' Marsh said. 'I certainly know a lot more today than I knew a month ago, in a lot of respects.'"
Robert Marsh is an honorable businessman. He did his deal with SCO, and abided by it thinking that it was in the best interest of his business to pay off SCO to get them to go away.
And, it turns out SCO, in its usual behavior, spun the deal in a way that generated false rumors and is now trying to use EV1 as a model for future deals. The fact that Marsh is now telling the public that he is experiencing buyer's remorse should serve as a warning to all other hosting companies.
I wonder if he regrests it because he didn't anticipate the backlash, or because he just now understands that SCO is/was blowing smoke up his ass.
My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle...
He says he regrets his decision.. but the bigger question is WHY does he regret it? The public backlash, the lack of evidence from SCO? Is this a PR spin, or something that directly affects his company.... Just a thought...
ev1servers.net features as one of Microsoft's case studies. It's possible that there's some kind of Microsoft/SCO/EV1Servers connection... so... look at all of this, including the 'announced regret' with a jaded eye.
However, he still made the decision to purchase the licenses and now he is in a contract with SCO. Now that SCO has him in a contract, they can (and judging by their previous actions, will) sue him if they feel he is in violation of said contract. Keep in mind all of the people they have sued thus far have been people that are or were contract holders.
I hope he is not hosting any linux kernel source code or some such thing on any of his customers' websites, because I am sure that SCO will find a way to sue him for distributing their so-called intellectual property.
Moving forward, this just goes to show why you don't ask advice from any old lawyer on technical law matters. You need a lawyer who understands what is going on out there in the tech world so you can make an informed decision regarding your business and not waste countless amounts of money into a black hole of litigation.
I completely agree,
We got the hate mail, we got the group of people who interpreted our agreement as validating SCO or endorsing SCO or any number of things
But where is the fine line between a company's efforts to protect it's customers and business and move on as opposed to *endorsing* an evil company drawn?
Before we rush into judging someone's actions, we should sit down and think about it. I am sure until the CEO of Everyone's internet *admitted* to have made a mistake, a lot of us thought he did it *ON PURPOSE* against the Open Source, and that he's just as evil as SCO, at a time when Everyone's infrastructure runs on open source
Scaring people away just because they make a wrong move is not the way to go. Sending HATE mail and boycotting a business just because you don't agree with something they did is not the way to go. After all the guy's still using Linux as his main platform. Alienating him is just wrong.
Trying to get the word out about what to *pay SCO licencing fees* means and why NOT TO PAY them is a better idea. Some people are scared, and act in desperation. I think the key is to get the word out, as much as possible and try to emphasise the importance of *sticking together*, and not get divided by the threat. Obviously paying money to SCO not only are you endorsing a stupid agenda, evil and useless, but you are also throwing your money in a black hole. Yes indeed you'll most likely get it back when this is all over, but why give it to the bastards in the first place?
The phaomnneil pweor of the hmuan mnid. Fcuknig amzanig eh!
Lame. You are in the hosting business, immersed in the day-to-day use of systems, and you hadn't thought through your decision, and the possible repercussions, perceptions and reactions?
I don't believe it at all. He's playing both sides of the fence, now. I have even less respect for the guy. I think he underestimated the backlash and he's hoping to have it both ways. I took my hosting elsewhere. Won't have it. Nope.
Look, if he was that concerned he would have brought it up in some form of public forum, at least, prior to doing the deal. Wasn't his company already a Microsoft Server poster child?
Lame. Sorry. My opinion.
sig mind freed
On March 11, 2004, the NASA Records Officer notified Center Records Managers about a lawsuit filed by SCO Group, Inc, asserting the "enterprise" use of Linux (R) operating system violates SCO's intellectual property rights in Unix technology. If court rulings are favorable to the SCO, there may be subsequent claims against Government agencies.
Effective immediately, NASA is to preserve and prevent destruction of all records pertaining to the procurement and use of Linux (R) software per direction from the agency General Counsel and CIO. These records must be preserved until the NASA Headquarters, Office of General Counsel, lifts the destruction freeze.
We are asking each Directorate to review its technical and contract records and identify any that may be relevant to the subject litigation. A record is defined as papers, reports, photographs, or any documentation used to record the work of your office regardless of the physical form. Records can be created by your office and/or document an action, activity, or decision taken by your office. If records are discovered, you are requested to segregate them and immediately notify Ms. Patricia Southerland, the GSFC Records Manager, at extension 6-xxxx, or by email xxxxxx.
Silly!!
---------
No matter how thin you slice it, its still baloney.
Not quite. This is not like downloading a single song, and then trying to get your money back.
How many servers does the license cover? How many versions of Linux does it allegedly cover? How long does it last?
If Marsh really wants to demonstrate that he realizes that he made a mistake, and that he has switched sides, all he has to do is to publicly announce that he has deployed Linux in a manner not covered by the license.
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
Why do we keep assuming, all available evidence to the contrary, that SCO's strategies have anything to do with running a successful business?
Perhaps their strategy is to horribly fail at every they do for some unknown reason.
Maybe Darl has watched The Producers one too many times. Just replace the rich little old ladies with companies and making out with...um...corporate making out. Then when everything fails quickly, they make off with a bunch of cash. The only thing that could mess up their plan is for SCO to do something as ridiculous as Springtime for Hitler and be successful for their how-can-they-be-so-stupid entertainment value...
On second thought, maybe he should have watched The Producers one more time.