Slashdot Mirror
SCO Uses 3rd Parties To Spread Claims In Germany
kryonD writes "According to this Computer Weekly article, SCO is no longer allowed to spread their FUD in Germany. This wasn't even a court or government order, but an out of court settlement with a small company. They even get 'fined' EU10,000 by the company for every breach of the settlement. Although, it appears from the article that SCO is side-stepping the agreement by commissioning 3rd party firms to spread their FUD for them. The settlement happened last month, but this is the first I have heard of it. I wonder what made them back down so quickly."
We mentioned the settlement earlier this month (including prohibitions on making certain claims); the news is the attempt to circumvent it.
If SCO can be sued and they settle by agreeing to not spread their propaganda, then it's equally possible that SCO's sidekick could be sued for exactly the same thing. Since there is a court precedent, wouldn't any company willing to do this think twice - because they would be sued too?
Keep your eyes to the sky.
Since when is Gregory Blepp able to create legal conditions. At best, he can lobby congress to push the UN to make a resoltuion that Germany should make a law forcing Germans to purchase "SCO's intellectual property"....hmmm I wonder at what point they would realize the futility in that one. Or they could lobby the German govn't directly....yeah, that will go over well.
I know there are trade agreements in place to respect IP laws, but I am curious as to how SCO can create "legal conditions" in other countries. Considering the troubles Microsoft is having in these same other countries, I would think SCO might have a slightly harder time of it.
If you are one in a million, then there are six thousand people who are just like you.
Aren't people already suspecting SCO is doing Microsoft's dirty work in its fight against OSS?
SCO got a German PR agency to write their claims in a news release. Since it's pretty obvious that no PR agency would by itself do so, couldn't SCO still be fined for making these claims, even if not directly? Even so, the agreement should've stopped "the claims being made" rather than "SCO making the claims," since SCO markedly benefits by the claims and can almost always be shown responsible for some random third-party's claim.
Interesting that this gains its strength through an out-of-court settlement with a private company that extends a temporary injunction against SCO's claims. Some US group (EFF? Red Hat? OSDN? Netscape? Isn't there a group of Linux vendors? FSF?) should try to do the same - get something small done in court, to say "We're not afraid of fighting this in court," then extend that considerably out of court with a promise to return to court.
Heh, the ad on this article is GlobalServers' "Stop worrying about SCO" ad.
-
Fine SCO every time someone writes another article about them. They're being so damn frivolous that it pains me to hear anything else about them short of their ultimate demise.
They can't the way SCO's doing it, in the article it tells the terms, and they only apply to SCO's German subsidary and employees of that subsidary. IANAL, and not familiar with Germany's legal system, but it looks like SCO managed to sneak this by the company without them realizing the potential it allows for SCO to continue to cause trouble -- just as long as the German subsidary and its employees stay out of it.The company sounds pretty determined to make SCO stop (I am supposing SCO's claims are hurting their business), and had won a preliminary restraining order last year, and SCO entered into this out-of-court settlement this year instead of continuing to fight against them in court. I doubt the company's going to just take this current stuff lightly, and even though SCO hasn't violated the letter of the settlement, that won't stop the company from suing SCO's US, or whichever branch they use for the FUD of the day. I also doubt the courts will look on SCO Germany entering into an agreement to stop these exact same actions lightly. SCO will have an uphill battle to win that case.
Of course it doesn't seem that SCO really cares if they have a chance in hell of winning a lawsuit, as long as they can spread their FUD about. (Feel free to apply whichever conspiracy theory is current as to why.)
Also, it appears that SCO insiders now own less than 50% of the stock, while institutions own a like 40% and over 10% is in private hands.
So, unlike the last time that SCO was trading as a penny stock, it might be possible for some enterprising company to just buy a controlling share for 60 million and be done with it.
This is unless the instituational holders have some vested interest in seeing debacle continue. I would think that it there are several two and three letter companies that might be willing to pay a significant premium to make SCO go away.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
This could be the big one folks. It'll probably take another month for any kind of ruling, but if they win it settles everything in one shot. IP, the GPL (the real big one) and should carry over to Red Hat and Novell.
Read Groklaws short post, it might put a smile on your face.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
Don't get me wrong, I think TSG's claims are laughable. If anything, I think my comments were intended to show just how silly TSG is. Also, get the facts right. Not to defend them, but TSG has never claimed that Linux "is so tainted with [their] patents" if only for the fact that they don't have any significant patents (if any). I think it most likely that TSG has chose not to show what they claim to be infringing code as a business strategy to delay the inevitable for as long as possible in order to benefit their executives and benefactors as much as possible before the whole house of cards comes crashing down. That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
There was Cowboy Neal at the wheel of a bus to never-ever land.
I don't pretend to be a stock market genius but this is interesting too.. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/it?s=SCOX Doesn't that page basically say that all insider trading since June of 2003 has been selling. Shouldn't shareholders be concerned with almost 10 months of insider selling?
as strange as this seems in most area when a person talks a group of other into doing something ilegal they are acomplices and it they cause a crowd to riot they are charged too.
I don't know about germany's laws but wouldn't the association with the persons doing the action that SCO tryed and was bared from basicaly the same as inciting a riot. Couldn't they still be held acountable anyways loop holes or not. i think it would be the same as if a mob boss ordered the execution of someone, even though somone else did the killing the mob bos can get the rap for it.
well at least thats what i think it should be like. anyone know if it would be that way in germany?
Actually, the settlment disallows SCO-Germany from making claims against Linux. It is the US branch that is hiring German PR firms to spread FUD.
In ancient times there used to be a similar fine (read: death penalty) for mentioning the names of psychopaths who destroyed important pieces of art (who were doing that so that their names remained in history).
The Raven
Go not unto/. for advice, for you will be told both yea and nay (but have nothing to do with the question)
It is a pity that the PR company isn't named. Linux is getting well established as a server platform in many of Germany's largest banks and IBM are quite powerful there too.
In fact, it is not unusual for management to exercise options and sell the stock. Most want to diversify their portfolios. Also, they sell to buy a new house, pay kid's tuition, etc.
I don't know. Two solid years of selling by William H Gates III doesn't seem to have daunted Microsoft investors much.
... unlike the US. While precendents can be set, there is the Bundesgesetzbuch (BGB) that pretty much lays out the law. However, the real kicker WRT to German court law is that the loser has to pay the court costs for both sides.
This has several interesting effects: Frivolous lawsuits are rarer, lawyers are paid much lower hourly billing rates, and health insurance is much more affordable. IMHO, this is a much more equitable way to run a legal system than the parasitic mess we have in the US.
Frankly, the folks at SCO should be forced to post bond to assure their countersuers will have something to collect on if SCO goes out of business. Furthermore, I hope that the current management will be held personally liable for their actions while at SCO. Once pointy-headed managers see that there are reprecussions that reach beyond the destruction of a company, perhaps they'll lay off the roullette-wheel approach to attain profits.
Depends on which side that company is on ... What if Microsoft decides that SCO can't survive like this and buys it to put a bit more muscle behind SCO's case?
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
But not the current crop of CEOs, oh no. They'll fuck anyone and everyone over so that they can make a buck. Or several million of them.
What we need is a mandatory Samauari-style honor code for corporate upper management. With mandatory seppku for the most grevious infractions. Even if the upper management at MCI, Tyco and Enron were completely spotless, they should have all ritually disemboweled themselves for the shameful actions that took place at their companies on their watches. We should expect no less from the people who are the custodians of our fortunes.
"Oh Sure, Mr Fox," you might say, "like that will ever happen!" But it can. All we really need to do is each and every one of us teach our children to live with honor. We can start with a code as simple as "Never lie, never do anything you know is wrong and never do anything you would be ashamed of," and we can go from there.
Of course, the current crop of CEOs would have to have right from wrong spelled out for them, since apparently even the letter and spirit of the law wasn't enough of a hint, but I don't think it'd be an insurmountable goal.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
He destroyed temple of Artemis in Efeze (one of the seven wonders of the ancient world) just to get his name in the history books.
Oddly enough, 23 centeries later a small fast food joint in Rotterdam was named after him.
And now a /. comment to boot!
What's SCO's stance on FreeBSD?
-
I'd take it to be insult of the court if they went around looking for loopholes as such.
I suspect the court will take it that way too. From what I've read over the years Germany's courts aren't keen to put up with games like this.-
besides, if they already have one court decision then getting another can't be that hard(and if they can reasonably prove that sco is behind it, just getting them smacked with another fine).
To be fair it was apparently only a preliminary injunction to SCO to stop, but I agree, with that behind them + the settlement terms should make it quite simple to get the full injunction. Since SCO's played fairly dirty here, I wouldn't be surprised to see this company get a nice chunk of damages awarded too.