Slashdot Mirror
SCO Says No Way To a GPL Solaris, Moves Trial Back
penguino writes "Looks like it didn't take long for SCO to formally respond to claims by Sun that it will open source Solaris. According to SCO 'they [Sun] still have licence restrictions that would prevent them from contributing our licensed works wholesale to the GPL'. The company has also released a statement dated June 8 that 'SCO is making a motion to move the scheduled trial date to September 2005 and split IBM's counterclaims into a separate case'. Also quoted is AUUG president and FreeBSD developer Greg Lehey who recommends 'that the best thing for IBM to do would be to print out every single version as requested and send the resultant 20 tonnes or so of paper to SCO. That would keep them quiet for a while'."
What version of Linux is IBM using now-a-days. Whichever it is, Sun should basically drop Solaris and focus developing Linux for sparks along the same lines as IBM is doing. I like Solaris machines, they're fast and reliable but I only see a future for Sun at IBM. Sun has Java technology that IBM could really use as a synergy for the core products. IBM with SUN would be a large player in the future of computing, but currently SUN standing alone will be like SGI and other once powerful computing companines.
Hmmm. I wonder if Sun expected this response from SCO, allowing them to say "Well, we offered" without actually opening anything.
You sleep with dogs, you wake up with fleas.
Can't say it could happen to a more deserving company.
How much code is still SVR5? I really can't imagine Sun would have been making all this noise about OpenSourcing Solaris recently if their lawyers hadn't looked over it.
We love Linux!
We don't know what Linux is!
Solaris is the first OS to work on these platforms (lets not mention Linux, even though it was really there first and we sell it)
What's the GPL?
The GPL is wonderful!
We will open source Java!
We won't open source Java!
We will open source Java! Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of our lives (maybe).
We will open source Solaris!
We won't open source Solaris!
How does Sun find time to do stuff between its constant reverses of its positions?
I seriously doubt that SCO will still exist when Sun gets round to opening the Solaris source. Then again I doubt that SCO will survive the rest of this year! Their rediculous claims will be proven to be rediculous in court soon.
This one may be partially true. Sun did licence SysV when they moved from SunOS. However, they have done a large amount of work on it since.
Are we going to see SCO try and claim the work that Sun have done on high quality SMP, multi-path support, hardware partitioning etc. as their "Intellectual Property" in the same way that they are attempting for the NUMA and JFS stuff.
...this is news?
SCO Says No Way To a GPL Solaris, Moves Trial Back
No one really expected Sun to GPL Solaris, or expected that SCO will allow them to without a threat of lawsuit. This only gives SCO something else to bitch about, and Sun and excuse to do nothing about opening their code base. Sorry to be so negative, but I haven't had much of a reason to think that Sun is on "our side" when it comes to open source software.
SCO and Sun do have one thing in common, however: They will both soon be dead because of Linux and the contributions of IBM and others.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
As the ancient saying goes: "If you play with a snake, you get bit."
I really like Sun, but this serves them right after paying SCO and acting holier-than-thou about IP rights re: Linux (even though they had the means to know and probably did know that the claims weren't true).
By the way, that same saying holds true for the Microsoft crowd. . . but they probably know that already.
IBM have been more than patient and reasonable with SCO. And SCO have produced zilch to support their claims.
...so why not SCO as well?
Ross Winn "not just another ugly face..."
That would keep them quiet for a while.
We don't WANT to keep them quiet for a while. We want IBM to go in for the kill and cut their tongue out to keep them quiet for GOOD. No more stall tactics, and definitely don't aid them in their stall tactics by giving them something to do. If they get even the faintest air of legitimacy again, rest assured some moron with more money than brains is going to pump funds into their hot air balloon to help reinflate it. I don't think I an take another year and a half of these stories every day like they were coming for awhile...
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
As much as we all hate SCO, unfortunately they are right this time. Solaris is built from the original Unix code. There is a direct descendence here, and SCO is absolutely within its rights to tell Sun that they can't sublicense it (which is essentially what open sourcing the code would do, assuming that it's a DFSG/OSD compliant license).
On the other hand, if Sun is in cahoots with SCO, as some here suggest, then perhaps they are shooting themselves in the collective foot today. Solaris is demonstrably descended from System V -- Sun programmers had all the original code to work from. It only strengthens the contrast between Solaris's development and Linux's development; i.e. the Linux developers did not have access to System V. Perhaps someone will subpoena Solaris code eventually, and show the court what a derivative work would really look like, contrasted with Linux, built from scratch and looking very different.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Remember who backs up SCO in this case. Microsoft. I think it's amazing that with all this legal mumbo-jumbo hitting the fan, people really trust MS not to cut off Mono. They have an incentive, they got the legal base for it, and soon they'll have plenty of cooperations dependant on a .NET platform.
No API breakage, they got all the reason in the world to maintain backwards compatibility.
P.S. On topic for being a legal issue involving some of the same characters... albeit it's not clear cut.
"So unmerciful is life, that everything afterwards is too late."
SCO haven't moved the trial back. They've requested that the trial be moved back. The judge has taken it under advisement.
"The Milliard Gargantubrain? A mere abacus - mention it not."
Now that the SCO-fud had finally weakened to an inaudiable level, SUN (although maybe not intentionally) decides to start the circus yet again.
In history, SCO will be given an entire chapter of the sad states of affairs in our time. Probably named something like "Lawyers, litigaters, outright dishonesty and profit"
SCO are demonspawns from hell to overrun the earth with lawyers and thus confusion. All to ensure chaos and armageddon.
/my theory
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
That's exactly what SCO did to IBM, and IBM successfully got the court to agree that the stuff must be given electronically.
You can't have the cake and eat it.
You would, after all, only do that if you thought that your case was so weak that you couldn't give your opponent fair access.
Exercise your right not to vote. thinkoutside.org
by spending more than $US100 million in Unix licence fees Sun has the broadest rights of any of SCO's Unix licensees
They have paid $100 million over the years to a company that has a market cap of $78 million (market close yesterday). $78 Million! IBM (Not sun) probably spent that on toilet seat covers last year. How is it that a company that could be wiped out (yes I get the irony of wiping andthe toilet seat cover) of existence for $30-40 million is bringing in $100 million in fees from sun and causing lawsuit problems for IBM. I realize that for IBM it is giving SCO just what they want as far as paying them off, but why not have Sun, IBM, Red Hat, SuSe and whoever else is pissed at SCO get together and spend 78 million and buy the bastards? Then open up the source to the world and laugh at what a dumbass Darl was.
I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
When you mentioned the smartest thing IBM could do would be shipping those 20 tonnes of paper to SCO, you should have added shipping it via COD ;)
IBM will own all of SCO's IP at the end of the trial anyway - if SCO even go that far.
what happens to the IP of a company that goes backrunpt (does it go to their investors maybe?)
"In the absence of the requested discovery items, SCO has had to rely upon some alternative sources for proof," the memorandum read. "IBM has so far only produced selected pieces of AIX and Dynix."
Apart from any monetary gains they hope to make, SCO is still fishing for AIX and Dynix source code. Even without verbatim copying, what they can learn from the IBM source code can be applied to SCO's own software products. Were this not the case, they would only need the revision histories for IBM to demonstrate ownership.
I would like to add that the 20 tonnes of paper be dropped without a parachute from a C130 Hercules onto SCO and Darl McBride.
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
Was there ever any mention of Sun making their license GPL?
Sco have the image of the bad guy that just keeps comming back.. again and again and again..
You think there out of the pictures and they just conjour up another evil plan. There just as annoying as most hollywood sequals they just get less less interesting over time and rather frustrating.. kind of like the halloweens or friday the 13ths.
All honesty is bad when IBM get involved and you know your in trouble if Novell has it in for you but Sun?
Personally for there own sake when will they just call it a day. All there doing is destroying their "reputation" and basically eliminating anysort of customer or industry trust.
1. SCO is essentially just claiming that Sun may or may not be able to release code to the GPL, depending on what parts Sun picks. There's not really a SCO related story there, until Sun does it, and SCO either objects to the specifics or doesn't.
2. SCO is claiming that it needs until SEP 2005 to go to court against IBM.
That's absolutely true. In fact, SCO needs all the delays it can possibly get.
3. SCO is claiming that the trial should be split into two parts, and their claims tried seperately from IBM's counterclaims. This is the part that is actually interesting.
Possible reasons:
I. it adds additional delays.
II. SCO expects to lose on its claims against IBM, and is hoping that splitting the trial will let them somehow get a venue for the IBM counter suit that won't be influenced too much by that loss. If the motion to split is approved, expect SCO to file motions to supress some of the results of the first trial.
III. SCO doesn't expect the motion to split to be allowed, but hopes that not getting it will give them grounds for an appeal.
IV. I can't think of other reasons offhand, but then I am not a lawyer. Someone else may.
Who is John Cabal?
and SCO is absolutely within its rights to tell Sun
Slow down there friend. There's actually quite a lot of doubt (seeGroklaw) about whether or not SCO even has any rights over the Unix code. I believe that's the basis of their current legal tussle with Novell.---
We spoke for about a half an hour. I don't recall a thing we said. - Colorblind James Experience
This story is a bit old already. See groklaw.
'...the best thing for IBM to do would be to print out every single version as requested and send the resultant 20 tonnes or so of paper to SCO. That would keep them quiet for a while'
-- Wouldn't that be a bad thing? I mean, SCO obviously has no qualms about suing major corporations for their use of Linux even though their copyright clames haven't been proven. If the trial gets delayed, it'll just give them more time to spread their FUD and scare companies, not to mention extending the "wait and see" attitude of companies that are thinking of embracing Linux.
Sun should realize that through their actions supporting SCO and taking out new licenses with them, they have given over all control of Solaris to SCO. How long until even Microsoft realizes that their worst nightmare is a SCO who has won some legal victories and comes back with new money and claims that Windows is a derivative work of DR-DOS?
The only long-term solution is the end of SCO, either by bankruptcy or takeover. SCO will disappear eventually because no public company can survive solely on licensing "old" software without developing any new offerings. (Yes, Microsoft exists because of licensing, but they continually sell new software. SCO doesn't.) The problem is this process will take a long time due to the influx of money they've gotten indirectly from Microsoft.
I think IBM or Sun (if they have the money) should purchase SCO, with a hostile takeover if necessary. It's a relatively quick solution, gets them out of litigation, and probably saves them millions of dollars in the long run. Otherwise this stuff will just drag on for years.
Developers: We can use your help.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200406090 20821429
Gotta love them Groklaw folks, especially PJ, who totally rocks.
Sunny Dubey
They should print the source code on rolls of paper about six inches wide and four in diameter. It'll make reusing the paper after the trial much easier...
Hmmm...squeeze-ably soft source code!
Bureaucracy loves company.
That SCO will be out of business by this time next year, so the problem will be moot. Or they plan to give SCO the bird and let them sue - They are already fighting on a dozen fronts anyway. Nothing like cranking up the burn rate another notch.
My rights don't need management.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I think nature is pretty swell. Forests are beautiful. Some of the best places on our planet.
'that the best thing for IBM to do would be to print out every single version as requested and send the resultant 20 tonnes or so of paper to SCO. That would keep them quiet for a while'.
Do we _really_ need to encourage wholesale destruction of every tree on our planet for something so incredibly stupid as the assholes at SCO? Seriously, can't you just electronically send all that code? DVDs or something? Just a small handful of them would be all that's needed, if you need more than one at all.
Also quoted is AUUG president and FreeBSD developer Greg Lehey who recommends 'that the best thing for IBM to do would be to print out every single version as requested and send the resultant 20 tonnes or so of paper to SCO. That would keep them quiet for a while'."
I guess I missed the reference to his law degree, oh wait he doesn't have one. In that case I'd trust that IBM folks have a much better idea of whats going on.
Here's a simplified theory :)
1 - MS "funds" SCO to sue IBM (but really to screw Linux)
2 - Sun adds to SCO fund via license agreement
3 - Time passes, SCOX drops like a rock, party nearly over
4 - MS settles with Sun over long standing issue ($$$ -> Sun)
5 - Sun offers (threatens?) to open source Solaris, allowing SCO to delay the inevitable, all while generating more new PR
.sigs are for post^Hers.
I really like Sun, but this serves them right after paying SCO and acting holier-than-thou about IP rights re: Linux (even though they had the means to know and probably did know that the claims weren't true).
Sigh... would poster and moderator both read the article? It's not about Linux, it's about the ancient rights to Unix, from which Solaris is based. And they never bought them from SCO, who only in the later years have bought the rights.
Remember that if you ever sign a contract - that contract may be taken over by someone that exploits it to the full extent of any ambiguity or deliberate misinterpretation. Scum like SCO is trying to make a living of things like that.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
IIRC - The original SunOS was a BSD Unix derivative. Solaris was built by combining Sys V and SunOS. Since then, Sun has hacked up (read improved) Solaris substantially. So at this point, I don't know how much of the original AT&T code still resides in Solaris, but I'd wager that there is not too much left. In the mean time, BSD derivatives have also improved over time.
It would take some investment in man-hours, but Sun might be able to comb through Solaris and rip out all the remaining AT&T Sys V stuff and replace it (as a place holder) with either *BSD code or some of their own re-writes. This would be a process similar to what BSDi/UC-Berkley had to do with 4.3/Net2 in order to reach the unencumbered 4.4BSD-Lite. Depending on how much of the old AT&T stuff still exists, this might be either a trivial or Herculean task.
Once that is done, Sun is left with an OS that contains BSD code along with its own Sun-originated Solaris code. At that point, they are free to license it as they see fit.
SCO? That thing is still aroung?
You asked what happens to the property of bankrupt companies, specifically what happens to IP/software when companies get dissolved. I recall an Ask Slashdot about that very topic, so you might search /. archives. Alas, Slashdot has never been very good about causing knowledge to 'persist' in that you can't browse by topic for past articles. . . and you have to know there was an article about it to begin with, or at least think to search.
/. crowd doesn't seem to be very good at - ask first, search for answers second.
Which,
Anyhow, the short answer is, it goes through probate. By which I mean, just like when a human being dies, when a company dies all there assets get assigned by the courts to 'heirs' according to an established pecking-order.
Something to the effect of Lawyers that are owed money by the company have first dibs (of course - law is made by lawyers), then I think it is creditors (people/institutions that loaned money to the company, or provided goods or services on credit who never got payed), then Preferred Shareholders, then whatever paltry worthless thing is left is split between the common shareholders, or something like that. I may have the order wrong.
Point is, there is always *someone* who can claim rights over whatever IP a company had when it went bankrupt. If it has any immediate monetary value (like a competitor is interested in the IP) it will usually be sold or licensed immediately, and the proceeds claimed by someone who had an interest in the company).
If it doesn't have any immediate, obvious monetary value, it usually gets forgotten about. Well, sort of - because if anyone else picks up that IP, spends time, money, and/or effort on adding value to that IP, and then tries to make money off of it, the people who neglected it for so long will immediately turn around and scream bloody-murder and demand huge royalties/settlements.
The best scenario I can think of would be for someone to do everything they humanly could to find who is the succesor-in-interest for the IP in question, if it is viewed as worthless, and offer the successor some small amount of cash up-front in order to buy the copyright and trademarks, or patents, or whatever, in whole for the product, and *then* do whatever they want with it.
You have to convince the original 'owner' of the IP that they aren't getting *anything* for it from anyone else, but you are willing to give them *something* for it. If they bite, you get the rights to it, and if it turns out to be worth something later, too bad for them - they no longer have a legal right to sue you after they have signed the instrument of conveyance that transfers ownership to you.
Agreed, but bankruptcy will take a very long time. They have some money, partly due to their inflated stock price since they started these lawsuits. A purchase will likely make the execs rich, but I'd rather they get some money and go away than linger around for years causing everyone problems.
Developers: We can use your help.
Speaking of which - this debacle kind of proves which license is really "viral". It's the proprietary ones, such as the one half-assedly half-granting Sun use of the Unix source.
"You can use it, but you can't give it away." So much for ownership.
Quote:
"I suppose the interesting question is if Sun releases those parts of Solaris which it has developed in-house, what does that do to the code it has licensed?"
Lehey said the GPL has the so-called "viral" effect, and that would theoretically cause the remainder (of code) to fall under the GPL as well, "but that's so preposterous that I can't think of any way it could happen"
The context is parts of Solaris Sun developed in-house. These are "derivative works", perhaps, of System V. Sure, fine.
One of the following might work:
(1) GPL-ing them does not, in any way, make the reverse true. System V is not a derivative of works derived from it, thus the GPL's viral effect will not encompass System V code.
(2) Because there would be a viral effect extending to code which Sun does not own, it will be impossible to use the GPL, as it could not release that code. Sun doesn't own the copyrights to change the license.
(3) Sun has all the rights to redistribute the code as it sees fit (including under the GPL). Maybe.
I wonder how Sun will respond.
Sun sponsors a site, Sunfreeware.com with lots of prepackaged free software for Solaris.
This is good timing. I think Sun should take a look at how SGI handled this.
SGI sat back one day, wondering about how they were spending something like $2billion a year on IRIX development. It finally dawned on them that they were a graphics software and support company, not an operating system company. So they switched to Linux, dropped IRIX like a rotten apple, and helped put a small portion of the $2billion they saved into helping get Linux to the point where they wanted it.
Sun could so the same--save billions, but still make a massive contribution to the Linux community, and help make sure Linux is 'where they want it.' It wouldn't take long, and they'd save a fortune.
Sun also provides pre-packaged freeware itself for Solaris. It comes on a CD in the Solaris 9 Media Kit and you can download it from that site as well.
Stick Men
There is no need to pay a licence fee to use Linux. Linux is copyright Linus Torvalds, who has agreed that anyone is allowed to use it, inspect it and modify it provided they eithershare their improvements with everybody or keep their trap shut about their improvements. SCO has no more claim to Linux than Sony to the VHS format. There are obvious similarities (macrokernel-based POSIX implementation in UNIX and Linux; PAL video signal and mono audio recorded on 12.7mm wide magnetic tape in Beta and VHS) but these are accepted to fall outside the scope of protectable intellectual property.
In most countries it is a criminal offence to sell stuff you do not own (unless you have lien over it and in most countries "intellectual property" is not subject to lien). The only person who has the right to charge money for Linux licences is Linus Torvalds, and he has already granted a free-of-charge {though not free-of-obligations} licence to use it. Anybody else attempting to sell Linux licences is guilty of fraud.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
You've got an axe to grind against microsoft. Thats great, this is slashdot(Get in line). But this is not the forum to debate mono and microsoft's future treatment of it. Can't you wait a few hours for another duplicate story about mono? This story has absolutely nothing to do with microsoft. None.
> Have you any clue as to how many years more
> advanced than Linux Solaris is at the high end
Nope. Could you please enlighten us? I have never been to the high end.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Most of the paper comes from trees planted precisely for that purpose. They get planted, they get cut down and turned into paper, and other trees are planted in their place.
I.e., the whole idiocy of "waaah, must save the trees from the evil paper-using people" is just as retarded, as trying to save the grain plants from the evil bakeries and whiskey distilleries. What's the point? That crop was planted there precisely for that purpose, and another crop will be planted next year.
I.e., while I can see some point in saving non-renewable resources (oil, coal, etc), I fail to see what's the point in fighting to save a _crop_ which was planted for the purpose of being harvested. That's all that those trees are. A crop. No more. No less.
Unlike with oil, noone's going to invade, say, Canada for its trees. They'll just _plant_ more trees. And if more paper is needed, more crop will be planted.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
1. Pay sun $2b to cooperate
2. Let them try and opensource their operating system.
3. Have your other puppet attack sun
4. Let sun take the fall, giving some credit.
5. Profit !
How legal is all of this ?
Once IBM's lawyers get through with the Prison Style [tm] gang rape of SCO, then Sun can open source Solaris.
Course I could be wrong...maybe the original AT&T contracts have some wording in there about things like this.
Thank you, I'm getting sick of people who don't see that for legitimizing the stall tactics SCO is already attempting (trial date of 9/2005? Even they know they won't be around then).
Does anyone know the status of IBM's motion from late May (it was either a motion to dismiss or something similar)? Any idea when that's expected for a ruling?
I don't think Darl's dream of prolonging the FID will come to any fruition. The court has replied to one of their attempts at delay, as reported on Groklaw today:
IBM had argued that SCO didn't need a delay because "two of the witnesses scheduled next week ... are former employees of AT&T, not IBM. .... Similarly, Mr. Rodgers was employed by Sequent, not IBM, and IBM does not have any of his documents. The final deponent, BayStar, is an investor in SCO, wholly unrelated to IBM, and that deposition apparently will not go forward." Today Judge Wells agreed and denied SCO's attempt to prolong the FUD. This guy really seems to understand the importance of getting these decisions out sooner rather than later, since the claims are enormous and the business impact could be huge. Their arguments to postpone the trial date are equally without merit, so expect more embarassing setbacks for SCO soon.
Read more Groklaw.
The article parent links to discusses a separate motion to delay depositions--which, yes, was denied-- not delay the overall trial schedule. The motion to bifurcate the trial, and the motion to extend the Discovery/Deposition period before trial, are reported as being taken under advisement.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
that Sun wan't you to agree to in order to get access to their source. Doesn't look particularly viral. Assuming Sun's Unix license wasn't as viral as SCO thinks it is, Sun could transfer the non-derived parts of Solaris to GPL, Open Source, or whatever. And assuming Sun knew what parts were derived. Some parts would obviously appear not derived to anybody, except to SCO perhaps
For me this brings up an interesting future scenario re the "Solaris is a derivative work of System V". If a company (SCO) licenses software to a second party (Sun), then the second company builds a huge code base around the licensed work, at what point does the second company's contribution become large enough that it's no longer considered "derivative"?
If enough new code is written to replace original code, is the resultant work still considered to be a derivative of the original? It may be inspired by it, but is it still legally hemmed in under the original copyright?
Maybe in this case Sun feels that enough of the licensed work has been re-written (and vastly improved) by their own staff that it no longer resembles the original System V.
- Jack
Either the writer of this article doesn't understand the issues involved, or the parties involved are all boobs. LEts look at some of the quotes from the article
The SCO Group's marketing manager Marc Modersitzki doesn't even use the lingo correctly - lets analyze some of his statements:
"However, they still have licence restrictions that would prevent them from contributing our licensed works wholesale to the GPL."
This statement makes it sound as if Sun is talking about transferring ownership to some GROUP - 'contributing wholesale to the GPL'... The proper statement would be something like "They still have license restrictions that would prevent them from releasing our intellectual property under the GPL license", and this may be true... Anything that Sun owns they can do whatever they want with - anything they license they have to comply with any terms of that license... nothing new here.
Lehey said the GPL has the so-called "viral" effect, and that would theoretically cause the remainder (of code) to fall under the GPL as well, "but that's so preposterous that I can't think of any way it could happen".
The viral clause of the GPL cannot affect things that you don't have the intellectual property rights to. I couldn't write a contract that required you to give me your neighbors car... it is not yours to give (Even if he let you drive it once or twice). Sun is free to release their code under the GPL... if it relies on things that are not GPLed that they don't have the intellectual property rights to, well, that sucks, but it is not within Sun's power to decide to GPL it. The viral clause only affects the rights of DOWNSTREAM users - it is a condition of the terms of granting the copyright. If Sun were to GPL solaris, minus the parts it doesn't have the rights to, I'm sure armies of developers will step up to provide a clean room implementation.
I am not a lawyer, but this stuff is not rocket science...
in objectieve terms. And that would explain why SCO wants all that info from IBM. And why that probably will not do SCO any good. It will take me a few minutes to write it up which is too long for Slashdot. I may post it later to GrokLaw which has a longer attention span than Slashdot.
[W]hy not have Sun, IBM, Red Hat, SuSe and whoever else is pissed at SCO get together and spend 78 million and buy the bastards?
It's a matter of principle: "If you will not set a good example, you shall serve as a terrible warning." Or, more specifically here, IBM's version of it: "If you sue IBM, we will destroy you." Doing so serves to discourage "sue Big Blue" as an exit strategy for other failing companies-- a corollary of the old principle about Danegeld. Besides, IBM has most of these lawyers on salary... it's good to keep them in practice, just like it's good to keep your knives sharpened. =)
Unsubstatiated rumor has it that members of IBM's legal team have been informed that they will be considered to have failed if SCO even exists after this lawsuit ends.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
I'd like to know exactly how Solaris is superior to Linux at the "high end". Care to elaborate? This seems a lot like an empty statement driven by the outdated notion that proporietary software is intrinsically superior to open source.
How many stories does this site link to that point to massively parallel clusters that run Linux? What's "higher end" than that?
Join Tor today!
While you're likely right about the chances, this quote from Sun's COO would qualfy as "mentioned by Sun", methinks.
In an interview with IDG News Service last month, Schwartz said "maybe we'll GPL it" and "We're still looking at that".
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
Just make sure the DVD is encrypted so that it only works on a Linux box.
...FreeBSD developer Greg Lehey who recommends 'that the best thing for IBM to do would be to print out every single version as requested and send the resultant 20 tonnes or so of paper to SCO. That would keep them quiet for a while'.
Or better yet, fax it to them via a bank of fax modems and let them pay for the paper...
--
As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.
Gotta love them Groklaw folks, especially PJ, who totally rocks.
And gotta love these slashdot editors, who can't seem to stop publishing misleading headlines.
The only problem I have with your post is this:
It caused me to check out the loser of a parent post that inspired you. Now I feel all dirty and stuff.
It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
all the cards can listen to the same IP address.
You can have all the network cards active at the same time. IP Multipathing isn't really an issue, because you don't need it. You can push any path preference issues down a layer into your router's configuration.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
The ownership of the System V copyright is in dispute. The owner of the System V copyright has certain rights and those rights probably apply to portions of Solaris. Both SCO and Novell claim that they own those rights, it is now up to a court to decide who actually owns them.
It's difficult to say why IBM thinks its cheaper now to fight it out in court rather than pony up the $80 million or so and be done with it. One thing is certain
If IBM buys SCO, there will be a next SCO. It will be a viable exit strategy for poorly managed companies hanging on to obsolete product lines. If IBM's legal team crushes SCO utterly, then nobody wants to be the next SCO.
'that the best thing for IBM to do would be to print out every single version as requested and send the resultant 20 tonnes or so of paper to SCO.
;-)
Print it in Landscape (as you might have long lines)
Of course you should not put page numbers on it, as that might confuse the issue of determining which is code or not
Dont put any order numbering information on the boxes
Finally ask the SCO lawyers for a delivery address, and ship it via several different couriers (in case one looses it all)
They then cant argue they did not get the code
>>Why bother, when it's already in Solaris?
>Because the stated goal was to Open Source Solaris... Without that, this whole exercise is meaningless.
So unless the purpose is to roll Solaris into Linux, there's no point in Open Sourcing Solaris? That implies that you think Linux should be the only Open Source OS??? What?
Just because a given OS is Open Sourced does not mean the purpose of Open Sourcing it is to improve Linux, Open Source and Linux are not synonymous.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
what more does sco need? didn't they have a group of programmers from mit go over everything and shouldn't have the code identified already?
sco is holding on with one hand and ready to fall of the cliff - can someone just step on their fingers and be gone with them.
and microsoft will only be around to help companies support the old applications that companies will still use while they migrate to open source.
I've been trying to figure out how fast SCO is going through cash. Their latest quarterly report is not much help, with their financial waters so muddied, and their reporting so obscure. The next quarterly report is due any day now. Maybe it will be more informative, but I doubt it.
When their financial backers backed out recently, it meant paper profit for SCO, but it also meant that SCO has less cash. And they will need it.
Perhaps they think they have a poor case, and a postponement will increase the chances of a settlement or buy out.
-
The
SCO® Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX) will host its second quarter 2004 financial results conference call on Thursday, June 10, 2004, at 9:00 a.m. (MDT), or 11:00 a.m. (EST).
Listen via webcast here. RealAudio or Windows Media Player, of course.If you would like to participate in the live call you may dial 800-795-1259 or 785-832-0326; confirmation code: 431766.
SGI seems to dissagree with the AC. From their 2003 SEC Filing:
We are concentrating our research and development efforts on products and technologies that we believe hold the highest growth potential, including global shared memory system architectures, visualization and storage. Our strategy is to derive maximum leverage from these efforts by using a foundation of industry-standard components such as the Intel Itanium family of microprocessors and the Linux operating systems. We also continue to invest, although at a lower rate than in the past, both on a percentage and absolute dollar basis, in our own MIPS microprocessors and IRIX operating system. There are no assurances that we will maintain or create sufficient differentiation to achieve and sustain a competitive advantage.
Sounds like a ringing endorsement of free software to me. SGI is good but they admit that it is difficult to keep up with free software so they are using it to their advantage.
Sun should take a lesson and quit screwing around with Microsoft, SCO and all of that trash. Free software is the future, commercial code is dead. Those who cling to the corpse are likewise dead.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Except that you could say the same thing about IBM before they jumped on the Linux bandwagon. Now, instead of dying along with their proprietary hardware, IBM is making billions off Linux. So are HP and others. SCO and Sun could do the same. The proprietary software game has cost everyone a fortune and it's time to end it.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
If I've got this right:
Quite a while back the Grasshopper Group (which was working on a NeWS for Macintosh at a garage-shop level) contracted with Sun to combine it with X as a Sun product. It didn't catch on. But the contract resulted in Sun having enough IP rights over the codebase that the developers couldn't open-source it. Since then they have tried several times to get Sun to allow them to release the code. But nothing ever came of it.
X is already open and NeWS is currently moribund. None of Sun's current or likely future market advantages are the restult of its windowing system, and an open version of NeWS wouldn't be any threat to Sun. (Even if it caught on big time Sun could just grab the open version and use it - and an open project would no doubt include a good Sun port anyhow.)
So if Sun is really interested in contributing to Open Source, here's something they can do on the cheap: Free the orphan.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Where does "allowing SCO to delay the inevitable" come in? Despite the fact that public statements on Sun+OSS and SCO's motion to reschedule trial are indeed both mentioned in this Slashdot headline, they don't appear to be related in any way other than that.
...Okay, yeah, giving SCO something to disagree with does indeed give them something to speak to the press about, but that would imply that every single open-source related news item that occurs would be equally likely to be a covert attempt to give SCO a platform to stay in the news, potentially implicating IBM, ESR, and Andy Tanenbaum. Also, it seems like SCO would have gotten in the news today anyway since they are moving to reschedule their trial with IBM.
And how does Sun publicly contradicting SCO help SCO, exactly?
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
In the absence of the requested discovery items, SCO has had to rely upon some alternative sources for proof.
With repeated statements like this, SCO has shown themselves to be not only in a different conception of reality from IBM, but in a different conception of reality from the case judge.
In this case, the "discovery items" they referred to were basically every single code change, no matter how minor, in the entire history of AIX/Dynix, when IBM has already provided straight-up source to both of these. SCO repeatedly said it "needed" this. The judge flat-out told SCO that this is not relevant to the case, that it's an undue imposition on IBM, and that there's no reason to need that material unless SCO is going on a fishing expedition.
SCO has continued to say, even in court, that IBM has "not provided" its needed discovery-- when they're referring to materials that the judge has specifically ruled IBM doesn't have to provide. In short, SCO is acting as if the judge doesn't exist, sometimes directly to the judge's face.
I keep wondering exactly what impact this sort of behavior-- and repeated failures by SCO to do what is ordered of them-- is having on the judge.
I then wonder if this is going to make the judge less likely to grant SCO things that they want if there's a grounds to reject them.. like the requested delay of trial until next year...
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
IBM should NOT give SCO twenty tons of paper - because SCO would use it as an excuse to drag out the suit.
IF IBM gives them anything at all it should be in electronic form, so there's no excuse for not processing it immediately.
But the info shouldn't go to SCO - from where it could be incorporated into SCO products or sold under-the-table to other IBM competitors. Instead IBM's code, along with SCOs, should be given to a third party, along with instructions to examine them for evidence supporting or refuting SCO's claims. (The subsets that are directly applicable to the case could then be given to SCO, leaving them in the dark about any other IBM IP.)
= = = =
The "twenty tons of paper" statement reminds me of a previous suit: Xerox vs. IBM, when Xerox thought IBM was beating the pants off its mainframe clone operation.
Xerox had shut it down and then sued IBM. IBM demanded the records. Xerox provided it - as tons of paper. IBM, taking advantage of its own data processing expertese, created an index and a searchable database for its legal team. B-)
Turns out that the killed-before-the-trial Xerox mainframe division (which, like IBM at the time, was a lease-based operation) had actually been making money hand-over-fist - but Xerox's accountants had screwed up so that it LOOKED like they were running at a loss. Big horselaugh on Xerox and a quick out-of-court settlement.
As part of the settlement IBM had to destroy the database.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
[the] assets get assigned by the courts to 'heirs' according to an established pecking-order.
Something to the effect of Lawyers that are owed money by the company have first dibs (of course - law is made by lawyers) [...]
It's actually more benign than that.
If the loser COULDN'T pay his lawyers, it would be hard for anyone with a reasonable case but in a potentially bankrupt-if-losing situation to hire competent lawyers. This would greatly increase the ability of deep-pockets plantifs and corrupt officials to use the legal system to harass their enemies.
So it's really there for the benefit of little guys in trouble, preserving their right to obtain legal council. Keeping the lawyers fed, though it IS an effect, is secondary.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Or [Sun might be] plan[ning] to give SCO the bird and let them sue - They are already fighting on a dozen fronts anyway. Nothing like cranking up the burn rate another notch.
That wouldn't work - because SCO doesn't have to sue them right away.
SCO could wait until the other suits are done. If they lose they're dead anyhow. If they win, they would then have the resources to go after Sun, and LOTS of damages to show due to the wide distribution of the code.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Print it one character per page also. This way they'll have to assemble it, since it will be shipped without page numbers, and also deal with the eviromentalists complaining about the amount of trees used to print this up. IBM can then tell them go after SCO since they made us do it.
IBM thought that way, until about 30 years ago.
At the time, IBM was the big bully of the computer industry. When victims sued, a standard IBM tactic was to flood the plaintiff with documents: a great indiscriminate memo dump from one of the world's biggest bureaucracies. Finding anything relevant would be like finding a particular needle in a needle factory.
When Control Data produced the CDC 6600, IBM responded by announcing a supercomputer of its own, hurting sales of the 6600 as potential customers waited for IBM. IBM didn't actually have any such machine in the works. Eventually CDC sued IBM, and, as usual, IBM sent documents by the trainload.
But IBM's lawyers forgot about progress and CDC's freakin' big computers. Cray hired an army of typists and began building a database of memos' dates, subjects, authors, and recipients. (Later, CDC spun off this group; it still exists.) When IBM found out, it didn't even pause to change its collective underwear before settling the suit, on condition that the database be destroyed (warning very long document; only click if you really care).
echo 33676832766569823265328479713269.8639857989Pq | dc
This isn't rocket science, people. Here's how it works:
1. Sun absolutely can GPL Solaris, however, they only have the power to do this to the portions of Solaris of which they own the IP. Sys V code they don't own would have to be ripped out.
2. Scores of developers get to work - on one side building the new "OpenSolaris," which is completely GPL'ed Solaris plugged back up with fresh, modern code to fill in the holes where IP rights prevent release. The other side is pulling Solaris' strengths, like scalability, and submitting patches and modules based on that code into Linux proper.
3. End result: an open Solaris fork is successful on both SPARC and x86 hardware, and Linux gains tremendously from it.
Since Sun still gains from future hardware sales (and can even sell OpenSolaris on it), I'd venture to say the only real loser here is Microsoft. And of course, SCO, who suddenly become irrelevant on the Sun front.
Schwartz will do that for you.
Help fight continental drift.
Note: for those of you who don't get it, this post is SARCASM.
Why is everyone calling SCO Litigious Bastards? They're not doing anything wrong, those Litigious Bastards! I mean really, could it be so bad that the Litigious Bastards are trying to make Linux cost money? I mean, the Litigious Bastards are right, it should, like Windows XP! Don't you agree with the Litigious Bastards?
Sun has been careful to maintain their licenses. If they say they will open source it, they will.
SCO will need lots more lawyers to sue the whole computer industry.
What if Sun were to merge Solaris with the FreeBDS project?
As I recall, Baystar(Microsoft) along with Sun and very few others were funding SCO about 6 months ago reinforcing these same kind of threats and lawsuits. Isn't it delicious irony that SCO holds them back with their own sword?
Sayeth SCO:
"No, I'm sorry but you have to whither and die right along with us. Now, Buckle-up Buttercup!"
I love this shit. It's like watching a dysfunctional family trying to teach their dog how to masterbate. Or better, watching a train wreck with 500 lawyers opposite 500 democrats in the tray isle. It's all just too sick not to watch.
does not eual GPL. there are other options.
fucking SCO.
I'd rather see linux x86 hardware compatibility added to the Solaris kernel and, in addition, the inclusion of gnu code.
Gnu/Solaris not Gnu/Linux with Solaris libs.
I think the reality will be something more like BSD vs. Linux. A lot of shared software in the user space but seperate OS's. I don't see either one, absorbing the other.
That much like my patent philosophy (obvious/trivial patents should require the applicant and the examiner who granted the patent to be forced to eat 1000 printed copies of the patent) the losers in this case should be forced to eat all legal briefings and printouts involved in the case. I'll even make a batch of my homemade habenero sauce for them, if they like it more spicy.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I thought they were dead or somthing.
Or at least not taken seriously.
This was demonstrated when an engineer caused a copy of MS-DOS to pop up a DR-DOS copyright.
I recently noticed this mentioned here.
Correction. That should be "a strait copy of CPM by DR.
...and learn to type!
I just said it should be Microsoft's nightmare, that the more they support SCO, the more likely that it could occur. So how, again, does Microsoft benefit? If SCO wins they lose. If SCO loses they lose. And the IPR and the attorneys can carry on with new finances following the disposition of the property to someone else. Arguably the only value of the properties (both DR-DOS and System V) is to continue lawsuits whoever bids on it in a bankruptcy fire-sale.
Yes, exactly. Why give SCO additional excuses to ask for delays? Why do something that is basically immature and retaliatory? Why sink to the level of your opponent, when your opponent has already tried such tactics, and didn't get away with it? Why make yourself look bad to the judge, when up to now you've been impeccably professional?
IBM really doesn't need to resort to this sort of thing. All indications are that they have a strong case while Caldera does not.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Adobe's Display Postscript is a separate implementation from considerably AFTER NeWS.
here is a previous posting on it by one of Slashdot's own, who was a principal in the early work.
By the way: NeWS itself was originally written by James Gosling and David Rosenthal, at Sun (according to this item by Don Hopkins, another of the early workers on it.)
Seems to me that Sun, and ONLY Sun, is in a position to let Henson, Gilmore, and Daniels open-source the code (as they would love to do).
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Street cred is a street cred way of saying market hype. It means that people on the street think you are credible. In the movie industry it's known as 'buzz' and marketers call it word of mouth advertising, but it amounts to the same thing: people are saying good things about you and folks are recommending your product or service to their friends.
Many of us 'leet' Linux users that you wrongly assume live in a basement are actually well respected professionals with a network of frinds and contacts who value our opinion on technical matters. If Sun were to open source Solaris, that would be another reason for me to recommend it.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I am wondering if there is anyone out there who keeps track of court statistics? If so, how often is it that a company files suit for patent/copyright infringement and then after 1 year asks for a postponement of the trial? And how often do they win as a result? Why bring it in the first place if you are not ready to do so?
Let's just see if your theory is true.
Guns are bad! Tax big business! More social spending! The US supports dictators around the world!
People here always use the one year chart. It looks much better for SCO when you look at the two year chart. Of course, when you look at the five year chart things look pretty dismal indeed.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
> Large, monolithic OLTP databases, such as the ones
> that banks and telcos use. When you have to track
> every single phone call made or received by every
> cellphone subscriber in the US in one huge billing database
Why not split the database into segments, like alphabetically into a,b,c,...,z customers, and then put each one on a separate PC with one master PC routing the calls? I bet it would be just as fast, if not faster than your monolithic system.
> Now you need a ridiculously complex method of searching twenty-six separate databases
Not at all; the point was check your search key and direct the search to the machine that owns the database containing the entries matching that range of the key. Each server is still searching its own database, but the database is 1/26th in size and the incoming requests are only 1/26th in volume. I think that would more than compensate for the extra link, which can be over a very high speed cable. You might not win much in latency, but you will definitely win in throughput and cost.
Will they ever let up with the legal threats?! Their work force is probably lawyer dominated now. Another professional lawsuit company.
And they're still reeling from the fact that Microsoft scorned them with its you-want-fries-with-that cert, MCSE...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAA...!
The $5 effect comes from the NASDAQ rule that you can't short stocks below $5. The bears drop out at this point.
I worked on a CDC 6600 back in 1979-1981 at NASA JSC in Houston. It was used to run the math models for space shuttle simulation - engineering simulation, that is, no thanx, 60 bit floating point isn't enough, we'll use double words (120 bits of floating point!). I was a computer operator then, a wee lad shoving punch cards thru the card reader.
The CDC beastie had 10 "peripheral processors" (Math processors), about 256K bytes, ran at about 4Hz (That last number may be wrong), and required chilled water and by golly lots of it to stay cool. It was about the size of a basketball half court. In the picture linked by the parent post, the desk the guy is sitting at has two display screens - perfectly circular, about 18" - 24" in diameter, basically ocilliscopes using vector cathode rays (none of them newfangled "pixels", no sir!). I used to wonder if I'd ever get cataracts from having my eyeballs xrayed every night.
Mac Dac (MacDonell Douglas) was designing the leading edge of the shuttle wing. Did you know that the leading edge of the wing is movable? That is, it's made of dozens of separate units that can be unscrewed (on the ground of course, not in space), reshaped, adjusted to a new leading edge line or curve as desired. I had to run hundreds of cards into that cyber for each run of the model. The runs took all night, and each run was for a slightly different shape of leading edge. It took several years of computer time to design a smooth curve that didn't have hot spots or where the max Q wouldn't cause the Carbon Carbon structure to buckle. 18000 mph plasma is hot and hits really hard.
15 years later, the Russians launch their shuttle (unmanned prototype) the leading edge of the wing was exactly matching the US shuttle...
Yeah, right, they developed their own. I'm ocnvinced they copied, and never intended to build one to actually put people in.
by the way, to keep the corporate bloodsuckers off my back: my posting is not the opinion or position of my employer, and I may not even agree with it if I stop and think about it too long...
Pavlov wouldn't be so famous if he'd used a can opener instead of a bell.
#include IANAL.H /* I am not a troll either */ /* Tho I certainly may be an idiot */
#include IANATE.H
#include TICMBAI.H
Look, you can't ever dictate to somebody else what to do with their property. Ever. You can't dictate to a customer what to do with a third party's property that you have licensed. Only that third party can.
And that's where a conventional license and GPL are exactly the same.
It hurts my fingers to type about "code that SCO owns", so I'll invent a company name, say, "Moon". Moon owns some code.
Think about it: If Sun wants to distribute Sun code plus Moon code, then Sun must distribute Moon's code under Moon's conditions. No matter how many hands Moon's code goes thru, or what other code it's mixed with, it's still Moon's code, so Moon's permissions still apply to the distribution of Moon's code.
This is true with either GPL or any copyright license that permits secondary distributions. Calling the GPL "viral" because of this and not calling other licenses viral is pure FUD.
If the license says "source code goes with it (GPL)", or if the license says "source must NOT go with it (non-GPL)", either way, Moon's permissions rule over Moon's code and Sun's permissions rule over Sun's code.
That's if the code is actually separate products (like IBM's code)
Derivative works are a little different. How "integrated" software is before it becomes "a derivative of" is for the courts to decide, and they do so with a lot of variation. But once decided - the law is clear:
The right to create derivative works is controlled by the owner of the original. That's why only Paramount can spawn endless spinoffs of Star Trek. Paramount's choice to prohibit others from creating derivatives is Paramount's right.
I believe the license that ATT and IBM agreed to allows IBM to create and own any derivative they want. That ownership would naturally include licensing and distribution rights. (else it wouldn't be "ownership")
GPL developers choose to not prohibit, but to conditionally allow distribution of exact copies and derivatives. As a copyright owner, it is their right. This is not viral. This is an exercise of the owner's exclusive right to control their own property.
Pavlov wouldn't be so famous if he'd used a can opener instead of a bell.
well, atleast SGI had/has a product to stand up for themselves.
If Solaris is open-sourced, what Sun would be left with is a (very few)bunch of Sun engineer's browing the web for the kernel updates and plugging them into sparc, which no one buys anyway.
Its like a warehouse of hardware company, waiting to pluggin their os and put their hardware on sale.
Sun is really in a dilemma. If they don't open it, the company will go down as it is now - if they open it, what would they really own then...
Also keep in mind that they're talking about open-sourcing java. But they never showed revenue out of java 'alone', besides they're light years away to compete with BEA and IBM on web-services, the 2 companies which're making more than in Java, than Sun( you go Sun ).
Very tricky... best option is to wait for SCO's suit to take shape and rollback, if SCO is successful, tell the whole world that they're upholding (SCO's) ip laws by accepting their restriction and not open solaris.
That's why there is a 'may' in that statement.
Sun is not only late to the party, but also dubious...
most wanted terrorists list? I think thats a good idea. As a member of our nations finest fighting force, it's my opinion that we should migrate this war to Utah against one of the biggest terrirosts of all.....SCO. Is it really that far fetched? I see striking similarties between Daryl McBride and Saddam Hussein, anyone else seeing them?
...but it's the people using open standards that are pushing it. The main reason proprietary formats like .doc and .wmv are so successful is that they come with windows, so "everyone" has them.
Whatever proprietary layer IBM or some other adds, they'll have a much harder time pushing it outside their own machines. People are in essence very simple. They'd like to save to the most compatible format available. If that's an open standard, that one is it.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings