Slashdot Mirror


Groklaw Turns One

JuliusRV writes "Today is Groklaw's one-year anniversary! As PJ writes, 'What a difference a year makes. When we started, all the headlines were saying that SCO was going to destroy Linux or at least make it cry. Now, looking around today, I see almost everyone predicting SCO's imminent doom instead. I think the truth, as usual, isn't in the headlines, and that it's somewhere in between those two extremes.' Thanks, PJ and all other Groklawyers, keep up the good work!"

11 of 181 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Good to see them in headlines again by TykeClone · · Score: 5, Funny
    Actually, the place where I work (I work for a large, high-traffic porn site) .... I'm glad that I can still use Linux, as it's the best operating system for serving up obscene volumes of multimedia content over the web.

    Or volumes of obscene multimedia content over the web.

    --
    A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
  2. If only... by peawee03 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... we had GrokLaw for Watergate, Rodney King, Clinton, and OJ, the world would be a much better place. WAIT- no way to get /. "discussions" on Watergate as-it-was-happening. Pity.

    --
    I wish I could write clever and witty sigs.
  3. SCO's Imminent Doom by cammoblammo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder what it would take to bring about the demise of SCO. I always assumed that SCO were a company who had turned to litigation because they couldn't sell products. Given that they've started to lay off staff around the world you'd think that their belts must need tightening. Does history have any examples of these things turn out?

    Regardless of what you think of the business direction SCO has taken, it must be worrying for the staff who still have families to feed. ATle ast they'll still be able to afford GNU/Linux...

    --

    Cogito, ergo sig.

  4. Re:It is normal for a story to turn this way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    This is human nature. As much as we like "bad girls" or "bad boys", we always pick the good.
    Try picking the "bad girl" once in a while, you might get some :)
  5. SCOX at $5.15 - Where's the bottom by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Groklaw has done a great job in dispelling Darl's FUD. Nobody takes SCO's threats seriously any more. Of course, Cravath and IBM are doing the heavy work, but nobody would notice without Groklaw. It's not at all common for pre-trial motions to be followed this closely.

    The remaining question for SCOX is "how low can it go"? Except for that bump in early April, when SCO tried, unsuccessfully, a stock buyback to prop up the price, the decline from 14 to 5 has been close to linear. If you just project the line out, SCOX goes to zero around late summer. It probably won't go to penny stock levels for a while, though; they have some cash left. But with no licensing revenue and a huge legal burn rate, they can't go on for all that long.

    The real question at this point, and it's one the players in the Open Source industry need to think about, is, who ends up with the rights to UNIX when SCO is gone? Sun? IBM? Red Hat? Boies?

    It's sad, in a way, to realize that the best thing the original UNIX can do is go away.

    1. Re:SCOX at $5.15 - Where's the bottom by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Insightful
      When you buy a company, you aquire its assets and its debts and liabilities. Buying them out before all the legal battles are over would be foolish, and afterwards I doubt that there will be much left.

      Wouldn't it make a nice picture with IBM and other claimants around the table carving the turkey on Thanksgiving? (Too bad it won't happen that soon unless SCO runs out of legal money.)

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  6. not accessible from China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It seems like groklaw is not accessible from China - or perhaps it is just from my location.

    Anyone else in China able to get to it?

    Why would it be inaccessible, I wonder?

    1. Re:not accessible from China? by MathFox · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think it is because we share our webserver with a few Tibetan websites (All Ibiblio websites are blocked). Off course, the censors in China won't tell anyone why a certain website is filtered, even when asked!

      --
      extern warranty;
      main()
      {
      (void)warranty;
      }
  7. Re:post-SCO by rifftide · · Score: 5, Interesting
    SCO doesn't have any patents. I think they're asserting rights to code that was added to derivative versions of System V by their licensees. But their story changes every few weeks or so. Re "post-SCO", I'd be interested to see what Groklaw morphs into if and when the SCO case settles down. Maybe they'll perform a similar service (analysis of legal documents and courtroom proceedings) for other IP property disputes with widespread repercussions in the tech industry.

    Some are already saying that SCO may be the tip of the iceberg as far as FOSS IP problems are concerned, even as SCO's case seems to be declining. (See the current issue of Fortune magazine, with Darl McBride on the cover, unfortunately not available online except to paid subscribers). Of course, one can argue that proprietary software should be held to same standards, but in practice FOSS is an easier target because the source code can be examined by hungry lawyers and they can always bring up the worldwide, quasi-anonymous nature of development of some projects.

  8. I've said it before, but ... by krumms · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I always assumed that SCO were a company who had turned to litigation because they couldn't sell products.

    Well, that was only the tip of the iceberg.

    The rest of it is that BayStar (and others?) delivered a truckload of cash to SCO with a prod in the ribs and a wink.

    SCO is evil.
    BayStar is more evil, because it funds companies to play the asshole/evil war against the big guns - encouraging companies to take up the rifles of Intellectual Property (and I don't just mean those companies being funded - I mean other companies seeing BayStar make a dollar and wanting to jump on the bandwagon).

    This ENCOURAGES shitty patents. The broader the better: the more you can sue.

    Linux must have looked like a fucking gold mine to BayStar.

    I find the whole idea disturbing. I'm crossing my fingers that before SCO dies, BayStar breathes its last too.

  9. Re:15 Minutes Over in 3...2...1 by 0x0d0a · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mmmm...I agree that PJ has become less objective than she was a year ago, when I considered her to be *very* scrupulously objective. She has become "part of the community", and it's hard to remain utterly cold when you're in such a position. She's also put up more "what if" conspiracy type thoughts herself. They may be perfectly valid, but I do think Groklaw is less valuable for it -- it was once somewhere that you could just aim PHB types -- even if the comments could be a bit out there, PJ's articles were strictly down-to-earth analysis. Even if ESR's Halloween memos and theories are perfectly well-founded (and some of them are almost certainly pretty accurate), they're tough to sell to someone who isn't part of the Linux world and has kind of vaguely always trusted Microsoft.

    I don't see the problem you do with the "FUD insurance" (though the conflict of interest is obvious) because PJ has done an admirable job of tamping down fear of legal violations. She is clearly in an abusable position; I have not seen anything that I would call abuse, though.

    I agree that Groklaw could use a bit less of the anti-SCO humor and Darl-namecalling from posters -- that's really better placed on Slashdot, with it's stronger moderation system.

    I also am interested as to whether PJ will begin to wind down Groklaw (as was my original impression) as SCO sputters down, or (as I'm starting to think) she will keep it alive as a forum to discuss Linux legal issues. It is clearly valuable to her employer, as she speaks with some authority on Linux legal issues.