Slashdot Mirror


Groklaw Debunks SCO's ELF Heist

Xenographic writes "Following SCO's earlier claims that ELF really belonged to them, in this Groklaw article, we find enough proof to show that SCO does not and never could have owned ELF or any part of it. Moreover, it shows that their real motive in this is to desperately raise new issues to stave off IBM's motion for summary judgement on IBM's 10th counterclaim. For those who don't remember, that's the one where IBM asked for certification that their Linux activities did not violate any of SCO's copyrights, and SCO replied (with forked tongue) that the case against IBM wasn't about copyrights... Let the "Santa Claus Organization" jokes commence."

317 comments

  1. SCO Yard Sale by mfh · · Score: 2, Funny

    3....2....1.... BANKRUPT!

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    1. Re:SCO Yard Sale by Orgazmus · · Score: 2, Funny

      The remains goes to that greasy guy in the back (IBM)

      --
      The system had the verbosity of HTML combined with all the readability of compiled assembly viewed as bitmap images
    2. Re:SCO Yard Sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3....2....1....CONTACT!

    3. Re:SCO Yard Sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how nostalgic

      T

    4. Re:SCO Yard Sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking more of a Homer Simpson:

      3...2...1... Bing! We have meatloaf!

  2. This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Earl+The+Squirrel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...what stupid people can do with a lot of money.

    1. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Lonath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...what stupid people can do with a lot of money

      Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. They want you to misunderestimate them.

    2. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by swillden · · Score: 3, Funny

      Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. They want you to misunderestimate them.

      So, when you use nonexistent words like "misunderestimate", I should assume it's because you're greedy?

      That's a dot-bomb business plan if I've ever seen one:

      1. Say "misunderestimate"
      2. ???
      3. Profit!
      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by YellowElf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Doesn't seem stupid or insane, merely desperate; it's lawyers doing everything possible to win an apparently losing case. They seem to be in territory nowhere near where they expected to be from the beginning, as their original plan was to be bought out to shut them up.

      What would you do as a lawyering firm expected to do everything possible to win the case for your client?

      I'll still be rubbing my hands with glee anyway.

      --
      Insert witty saying or aphorism here.
    4. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That quote is backwards...I hate it when people take a quote and try to be profound by changing it. Leave Mr. Clarke alone!

    5. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Youssef+Adnan · · Score: 0

      I would like to say that this is one of the best slashdot comments that I read...

    6. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "..So, when you use nonexistent words like "misunderestimate",..."

      I think he was simply quoting GW, it's like caling someone a "Moran".

    7. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 3, Funny

      They want you to misunderestimate them.
      Dubya, is that you?

    8. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by miniver · · Score: 2, Informative
      So, when you use nonexistent words like "misunderestimate"
      "The statistics of English are astonishing. Of all the world's languages (which now number some 2,700), it is arguably the richest in vocabulary. The compendious Oxford English Dictionary lists about 500,000 words; and a further half-million technical and scientific terms remain uncatalogued. According to traditional estimates, neighboring German has a vocabulary of about 185,000 and French fewer than 100,000, including such Franglais as le snacque-barre and le hit-parade."
      -- Robert McCrum, William Cran, & Robert MacNeil. The Story of English. New York: Penguin, 1992: 1

      There is no such thing as a non-existant word -- once you use it, it exists, and nothing can take it away. 'Misunderestimate' is a word (4,370 hits on Google) in much the same manner as 'supercalifragilisticexpialidocious'; it may be rare, but it has a definite meaning to a significant number of people.

      --
      We call it art because we have names for the things we understand.
    9. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by c00k13m0n5t3r · · Score: 2, Informative

      In fact, there is a wired mag report on the evil twins behind the whole SCO story.
      They cite it as "the new business modell for the new millenium", which is apparently to sue everyone for violating copyrights which doesn't belong to you, and then to wait for the scared little hacks to pay you nice sums, trying to avoid court proceedings.
      But it seems that this nice new business modell is going to sink, crashing on the big blue iceberg...

    10. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by labratuk · · Score: 4, Funny

      I increasingly get the feeling that SCO are just slowly going through make menuconfig item by item and trying to claim ownership to each bit. You just wait until they reach 'Device Drivers'.

      --
      Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
    11. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by John+Harrison · · Score: 3, Funny

      Your logic is craptastic.

    12. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I expect the use of misunderestimate was on purpose -- the poster must be anti-Bush :-)

      http://www.cnn.com/2003/EDUCATION/01/15/offbeat.bu shisms.reut/

    13. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by dacarr · · Score: 1

      Irregardless, that's perfectly cromulent.

      --
      This sig no verb.
    14. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by miniver · · Score: 1
      Your logic is craptastic.

      I was discussing word creation in English; logic has nothing to do with it. On the other hand, you seem to have understood my point. :-)

      --
      We call it art because we have names for the things we understand.
    15. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

      Is word creation in English substantially different than in other languages?

    16. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by MrNemesis · · Score: 5, Funny

      make menuconfig?!

      Holy shit! We've been using make config up until now, and it was taking us ages to figure out what all those scrappy little options were! This is gonna make my lawsuits SO much easier! Thank you!

      Yours, Darl

      --
      Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
    17. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by timlee · · Score: 1

      Your logic is craptastic.

      How ironical.

    18. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Alsee · · Score: 3, Funny

      How ironical

      How morissette.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    19. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by miniver · · Score: 3, Informative
      Is word creation in English substantially different than in other languages?

      The primary reason for the size of the English vocabulary (and why English is one of the most popular international languages) is that English is like the Borg: all new words are assimilated into the collective. When someone creates a new word, all it takes to be part of English is for people to use it. For that matter, English sucks in words from other languages continuously -- 'rendezvous' was originally from the French phrase 'rendez vous', for present yourself.

      Compare and contrast that with French, where the Académie française dictates whether or not a word is allowed to be part of 'French', and it can take decades to approve of a new word. (BTW, Have the French decided what to call a computer yet?)

      "A language is a dialect with an Army and a Navy."
      -- attributed to Professor Max Weinreich

      --
      We call it art because we have names for the things we understand.
    20. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (BTW, Have the French decided what to call a computer yet?)

      Yeah, it's ordinateur. E-mail on the other hand, that was a little tricky. It took them years to come up with courriel.

    21. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I'm not absolutely sure, but I think that was the whole point of the "misunderestimate" post. Duhbya intentional poses as a not too bright "regular guy" with whom ordinary people can identify and trust. How could a dumb guy be capable of such deviousness? No, the war in Iraq, the handling of the economy, the response to terrorism, etc. were just honest mistakes.

      In this way, we misunderestimate the president and his administration.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    22. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by hobo2k · · Score: 1

      "Yeah, it's ordinateur" The Ordinater? Yeah, I think I saw that movie. It was a ass kicking robot from the future on a mission to convert the entire human society into helpless ordinal numbers. right?

    23. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 1
      How typically biased. Yes, it can take a long time for the stuffed shirts of the AF to acknowledge a word, but if you listen to what French people actually say, you'll find they don't follow the rules and just use the words anyway. Kind of like here, come to think of it. Imagine that!

      P.S. -- Watch what you say about the Borg, buddy. Oh, and, nice use of the colon.

      --
      Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
    24. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Drishmung · · Score: 1

      As Booker T. Washington said We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary

      --
      Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
    25. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by iantri · · Score: 1
      (BTW, Have the French decided what to call a computer yet?)
      An 'ordinateur'.

      At least, that's what they tought me in our French classes, which are part of the elementary (and one year of secondary) school curriculum here in Ontario, but we go by Québecois French which I am told is a bit different.

      Still, as far as I know, people in France call it an 'ordinateur'.

      More controversial are terms like "télécharger" and "courriel", which is supposed to mean "download" and "e-mail", but many French-speaking people (in Québec and France) simply use "download" and "e-mail"...

    26. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by yuri+benjamin · · Score: 1

      the Académie française dictates whether or not a word is allowed to be part of 'French'

      Meanwhile Jacques Sixpac continues to use "non-words" in everyday conversation, and Jean Septpac has no trouble understanding him, in spite of the Académie française's lack of official approval.

      That's because proscibed-french and french-in-actual-use are two totally different things.
      Same applies to any other language.

      --
      You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
    27. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Alsee · · Score: 1

      The problem with the French is they have no word for entrepreneur.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    28. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by The_Dougster · · Score: 1

      I'm simply disgustapated by how far this thread has strayed from the topic.

      --
      Clickety Click ...
    29. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by AmbyVoc · · Score: 1

      When I was studying french it (the computer) was called `data ordinateur', that was in 1990 -- 1995.

      But I think the word `data' could have been thought as a borrowed english word and been taken away. I heard they once issued a law about using borrowed english words in public places where the police could fine you if noticed.

      But, I'm from Finland and thus can not prove 100% anything I say about the french so...

      It's just like it is, grapewine speak.

      --
      - Voice of Ambience -
    30. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by tb()ne · · Score: 1

      Ah. So, contrary to your earlier post, there are such things as non-existent words in particular languages (e.g., 'French'). Perhaps swillden was implicitly referring to the 'English' language.

    31. Re:This whole SCO thing goes to show.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They seem to have progressed and now call them "logiciel" ( ie, something that deal with logical commands )

  3. Sigh... by GFLPraxis · · Score: 0

    SCO can't seem to make up their mind on what they're suing about, can they...

    1. Re:Sigh... by fatgeekuk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Any unfounded claims to yet again churn the media and fuel another cycle of funding (either misguided or selfserving).

      Anything to prolong the story.

      This is all they have, there is no sustainable business plan, no ongoing investment, no hope of a true future.

      All there is is short-term stock inflation and lawyers fees.

      And for some, that is enough.

  4. Chewbacka plantiff? by afidel · · Score: 5, Funny

    I mean we have the Chewbacka defense, is SCO modeling a new plantiff strategy, the Chewbacka complaint?

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    1. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by miskatonic+alumnus · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's Chewbacca. I know being a "grammar nazi" is frowned upon around here, but Star Wars is one of the holy grails of Slashdot! Go spank thyself!!!

    2. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nah, I'd rather spank your mom then spank my monkey =)

    3. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 1

      ...or you can just use "Chewie" to make it even easier :D

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

    4. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by chefbb · · Score: 4, Funny
      Go spank thyself!!!

      Another Holy Grail of Slashdot. :)

    5. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by Tassach · · Score: 1

      Thank you *SO* much for making diet coke shoot out of my nose.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    6. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by Exatron · · Score: 1

      That would explain the grail-shaped beacon.

      --
      "I think so, Brain, but 'instant karma' always gets so lumpy." - Pinky
      "Decepticons FOREVER!!!" - Ravage
    7. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There IS a valid reason for Chewbacca wanting to live with the ewoks though.
      It came up with at work with a team meeting where I said someone did something as part of the Chewbacca defense.
      Then a co worker popped up and explained that Chewbacca wanted to live with the ewoks because they were both furry, and Chewbacca's shlong would look really really big to ewoks and bolster his self image.
      The scarey thing is, I cant use the Chewbacca defense anymore because it makes sense..

    8. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it's all based on a fallacy. Chewbacca does not live on Endor (or even the moon of Endor. Does that mean that the moon is called Endor, or is it a moon of a planet called Endor that we know nothing about?).

    9. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by greenegg77 · · Score: 1

      And I always thought the Chewbacca defense was something like "Your honor, if my client loses this case, he has promised to rip your arms off as well."

      "Not Guilty!"

      --
      --- This .sig for sale - $500 OBO.
    10. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by crucini · · Score: 0

      But how can anyone tell, based only on the movie? I guess we're basing it on the novel, but if that changed his name to Chucuba or something we'd assume it was wrong.

      I think there is no authoritative source for the spelling of Chewbacca.

    11. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could try the official site for starters. Or how about the ending credits? You have seen the film, right?

    12. Re:Chewbacka plantiff? by crucini · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I can communicate this to you, but I don't regard any website as official. I don't think owning the Star Wars IP gives one the right to make authoritative pronouncements, especially since it's clear that George Lucas has lost touch with the original Star Wars vision.

  5. Elves by Grond_the_Hammer · · Score: 3, Funny

    I always thought Elves were imaginary anyway...

    1. Re:Elves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I heard that if you're naughty, Santa will have his badass war elf, Legolas, fck you up with arrows.

    2. Re:Elves by pklong · · Score: 1

      Well the Scantily Clued Organisation probably believes Santa delivered Elves to them down their chimney stack.

      --

      Philip

      Signatures are broken

  6. Well damnit.. by agent+dero · · Score: 2, Funny

    I could have done that, I mean it's not rocke..er quantu...er..computer science.

    Common sense.

    --
    Error 407 - No creative sig found
  7. The Media by Bob+McCown · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is any of this getting press in the media, besides these odd articles at non-mainstream news sites? Or investiment news sites? I can't imagine all this SCO news exists in a vacumn.

    1. Re:The Media by Sepper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Main Press?

      Hahaha! This stuff is WAY too geeky for any average person to even care about.

      Think about it for a second, it's all computer stuff AND lawyer details... As geeks, we all know it's mostly garbage-claims, but we still NEED Groklaw to clear things up.

      Unless Linux get more mainstream press (something other than hype) you won't see this. Main press is more interested in hype stuff (like the lastest Ipod model or how's going to be the next American Idol,etc..) than actual more boring facts...

      still, you can try news.google.com for SCO news in the main press...

      --
      I live in Soviet Canuckistan you insensitive clod!
    2. Re:The Media by julesh · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, the Financial Times has had two articles on this over the last couple of days. With a fairly pro-linux attitude, by the looks of it -- one of them starts like this:

      A US judge yesterday dealt the controversial SCO Group a significant setback in its campaign to profit from Linux by throwing out much of the software company's lawsuit against DaimlerChrysler.

    3. Re:The Media by Xenographic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you read this earlier article on Groklaw, you'll see plenty of quotes to show that much of the mainstream media is quite clueless. There aren't many who have caught on yet, although investors don't seem to value the stock any more. Then again, there are still those mysterious end of the day rallies, which some say are indications that someone is "painting the tape" (e.g. manipulating the stock price--not hard to do with a stock like SCOX, apparently).

    4. Re:The Media by Chicane-UK · · Score: 1

      No - typically the only coverage was the stuff that set out to make SCO seem like they had a serious case, and were going to take the "thieving Linux developers" to the cleaners.

      Now that the tables are turned and SCO are being exposed for the scumbags that they are, the media seems to have gone quiet.

      Grrr.... :|

      --
      "Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
    5. Re:The Media by arvindn · · Score: 1
      Is any of this getting press in the media, besides these odd articles at non-mainstream news sites?

      No. Something like 95% of SCO news hits are from tech sites.

    6. Re:The Media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
      So you think that rebound on July 21st was manipulation? It could be just dumb luck that the stock regained all it's loses from the ruling right before the closing bell, only to drop right back down the next morning. Right. Only the buyer and the SEC know for sure.

      This chart looks so much like someone painting the tape, they should put it in textbooks.

    7. Re:The Media by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1

      It would probably go something like this:
      Headline: "Linux lifted ELF, states SCO."
      Joe Reader: "More elves? Geez don't they ever get tired of these Lord of the Rings stories?"

      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    8. Re:The Media by Daniel · · Score: 1

      Is any of this getting press in the media,

      Sure -- just the other day cnn.com ran a front-page article explaining how people are scared of buying open-source software because users can be sued over copyright infringement.

      Or, um, is that not what you meant?

      Daniel

      --
      Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
    9. Re:The Media by FewClues · · Score: 1

      Oh sure it is! I put an article in my retirement park newletter. Of course most of the folks here think Linux is a wrinkle remover.

    10. Re:The Media by Zocalo · · Score: 1, Informative
      Not only that, but the tale of "SCO" is actually fairly confusing since the Santa Cruz *Operation* that was on the committee is a) still around, and b) isn't responsible for any of these lawsuits! One of the projects I did for a previous employer was to rip out thirty or so SCO UNIX boxes scattered across the UK and replace them with solidstate terminal servers hooked up via leased lines to our two Sequent boxes at HQ. Our SCO rep was less than happy with this, understandably enough since we were overdue for an upgrade and coming up on maintainance renewals - but that's when everyone junks an old system, right? Anyway, this was all at the time that the SCO/Caldera/Tarantella shenanigans were going on so we got the whole sordid tale...

      The Santa Cruz Operation that was on the committee that specified ELF 1.2 with IBM, Novell, et al is still around and trading under the name Tarantella, and was indeed incorporated in Santa Cruz. The current SCO Group that has initiated all the lawsuits was also around trading under the name "Caldera Systems" at the same time. When SCO became Tarantella, Caldera acquired their rights to the "SCO" trademarks - the tree logo, the term "SCO", and their UNIX business/partnership with Novell.

      I think it's going to be a no-brainer for IBM to blow the ELF claims out of the water. All they need is four bits of paper: SCO's incorporation, Caldera's incorporation, Caldera's acquiring of the "SCO" trademark and Caldera's official name change to The SCO Group. Line up the dates and it's all over; even if the current SCO had acquired the old SCO outright, they still can't arbitrarily revoke decisions made by their acquisition's directors. Aside from that being dangerously close to being a bait and switch, there is also the issue of the amount of time that passed from Caldera acquiring SCO. One of the reasons that the RIAA goes after copyright infringers with so much gusto is because they have to; if you fail to adequately defend your copyright then you are risking losing that copyright altogether. If SCO thinks it owns ELF, then why has it taken them so long to bring the matter up?

      The answer of course is simple; SCO doesn't want the copyrights to ELF, although it probably wouldn't say no to them. What SCO wants is another delay in the case in order acquire more time to spread FUD and perform yet more legal shenannigans. Unfortunately no matter how good IBM's lawyers are they are going to get some of it at least.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    11. Re:The Media by MosesJones · · Score: 1

      It gets into the press that matters, I've seen articles in the FT, WSJ and Economist about it. All siding with the idea that the case is a joke.

      These are the papers read by the people who make decisions. USA Today covering it wouldn't help anyone.

      Fox News would cover it but they can't decide which one is the Republican.

      --
      An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    12. Re:The Media by HenchmenResources · · Score: 1
      fortunately/Unfortunately yes it is getting a little press in mainstream media. I work for a daily newspaper and about a month a go a story on SCO's adventures came across the AP wire and my paper ran it. the only problem was that the story was about 10 months late and out of date. the truly sad part about running the article from the wire is that the paper I work for is located in UTAH and we couldn't spare a writer for a day to send them down to court or to interview McBride or make a call to Linus or any of the other players in this whole ordeal. So unfortunately most of the people getting any info on this eather get poor outdated information or they are a geek and have been following this from day one on sites like /.

      --
      "Napalm is nature's toothpaste" - Chef Brian
    13. Re:The Media by gwalla · · Score: 1
      Is any of this getting press in the media


      Some. The San Francisco Chronicle ran a small story on it in the business section recently. It may have been from a wire service.
      --
      Oper on the Nightstar
    14. Re:The Media by gsasha · · Score: 1

      I tried news.google.com and what do I find in the headline:
      SCO satisfied with DaimlerChrysler case outcome
      The SCO Group says it is satisfied with the outcome of its litigation against DaimlerChrysler, as the latter had now certified its compliance with its UNIX software agreement.
      A court in Michigan dismissed most of SCO's suit on Wednesday. SCO had accused the German car company in March this year of breaking the terms of its UNIX licensing contract.
      SCO said in a statement that the purpose of the litigation was "was to force them (DaimlerChrysler) to certify their compliance to their UNIX software agreement that they entered into."
      SCO said it had sent DaimlerChrysler and more than 1000 other UNIX licensees a letter in December 2003 asking all of them to certify their compliance with their UNIX software agreement.
      ... continued

    15. Re:The Media by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Good review of the history, for those who haven't been playing at home.

      One minor point you got wrong: It's trademarks not copyrights that must be vigorously enforced so as not to lose them. The RIAA is not concerned about the artists or the music companies losing copyright (at least not since the Bono Copyright Extension Act), they're worried about loss of sales due to unauthorized copying.

      And your analysis is right. All SCO is attempting is more delay. They're hanging on by their fingernails, and a delay for an hour, a day, or a week is survivial for an hour, a day, or a week, which is more time for insiders to cash out.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    16. Re:The Media by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Canopy holds around a 35% stake in SCO. Ralph Yarro*, CEO and president of Canopy, has another 36%. There are only 15 million shares outstanding, so this is a very thinly traded stock, making it much easier to manipulate.

      Something stinks in Lindon, Utah.

      *If you're not sure who Ralph J Yarro III is, he played Dan Akroyd's boss in Trading Places.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    17. Re:The Media by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that Fortune has been vehemently anti-linux.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  8. Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    it's "tongue". Jesus, people, it's really not that hard to spell.

    1. Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by biendamon · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If you're going to be a "spelling nazi," permit me to be a "grammar nazi." Please note the positioning of periods, commas, and other similar punctiation inside the quotes.

      There are a lot of problematic elements in basic grammar that the technologically literate crowd at Slashdot, and even the legal eagles at Groklaw, have let fall by the wayside. I'm sure I've committed some egregious error in this very post, aside from responding to an off-topic comment with an even more off-topic one...

    2. Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by pjt33 · · Score: 1
      I'm sure I've committed some egregious error in this very post
      Yep. Your version of "punctuation" is somewhat unusual, to say the least.
    3. Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try to spell correctly yourself first, eh? Look at your "punctiation." Now go shut up and sit in a corner and play with your dolls.

    4. Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by biendamon · · Score: 1

      I caught that right as I was clicking Submit. I'd love to be able to claim it was an intentional piece of irony, but the reality is that I simply hit the 'i' instead of the 'u' by mistake.

      Perhaps this could be a lesson to all those who feel an insatiable need to correct spelling and grammar online without first proof-reading their own material.

      And in conclusion...

      Tounge.
      Punctiation.
      "Periods outside quotes".

    5. Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American English puts punctuation inside quotation marks. UK English does not. The justification for Americans has something to do with printing with moveable type and cosmetic sensibilities.

      As a geek, cosmetic sensibilities are irrelevant and distracting. It seems more correct (on slashdot at least) to use the grouping nature of paired punctuation marks to dictate where the single marks should fall.

    6. Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually ... that seems to be the 'usage pattern' for US. Most of the rest of the world goes by a rule that, apart for some special cases, looks like put inside quotes the punctuation elements that belong to the quote (a.k.a treat quotation marks and parentheses similarly). Thus his use is not necessarily wrong.

      (also, if I got that part correctly, use of comma and period inside quotes would be a historical printing artefact from the need of protecting an otherwise isolate comma/period by placing it adjacent to the previous character to prevent damage)

    7. Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by Peaceful_Patriot · · Score: 1

      Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but...

      Why do these posts always begin this way, and then go on to bore us with their crap.

      Does the spelling of 'tongue' really interfere with a reasonable persons ability to understand the posters point? Why disrupt the conversation with Offtopic "I'm so smart and you're so dumb" comments like these? Save your spelling/grammar corrections for those who will be impressed. Like your sixth grade teacher. The rest of us are discussing SCO.

      --
      There is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
    8. Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe you mean ...

      "Now go shut up,sit in a corner, and play with your dolls."

    9. Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American English puts punctuation inside quotation marks. UK English does not.

      In English usage, punctuation is used inside quotation marks where it makes sense and not where it doesn't e.g. a question mark goes inside the quotation marks if a question is being quoted, not if the quotatiun is being questioned.

      In American usage, common sense is not applied in this way because American grammarians do not have any common sense to apply.

    10. Re:Sorry to be a spelling nazi, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Strangely, that's exactly how it's spelled in the article above?

  9. Hmmmm... by arch17c7 · · Score: 2, Funny

    So does this mean that Will Ferrell might be next on the list of "to-be-sued"? Of course, in hindsight, maybe that one should progress, given the movie that was the result.

    1. Re:Hmmmm... by gmletzkojr · · Score: 1

      In other news, the SCO is creating a class action suit against everyone, claiming that they had copyrighted breathing, and there, the average citizen is not allowed to breathe any longer.

      --
      I for one welcome our new [insert main topic] overlords.
  10. eyewitness account #1 without the commentary by spoonyfork · · Score: 2, Funny
    Ha ha, fooled you. :P

    (I know this is off-topic but I'll take the potential karma hit for the joke only a couple people might get.)

    --
    Speak truth to power.
    1. Re:eyewitness account #1 without the commentary by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 3, Funny

      "(I know this is off-topic but I'll take the potential karma hit for the joke only a couple people might get.)"

      I don't get it. Can I hit you?

    2. Re:eyewitness account #1 without the commentary by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      Dark Helmet to Lone Star in "Spaceballs", but I don't get the relevance.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    3. Re:eyewitness account #1 without the commentary by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1

      Hmm, Karma War Hammer of +3 Clue-inflicting damage. No saving throw baby! C'mon!

      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    4. Re:eyewitness account #1 without the commentary by snake_dad · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't call it off-topic. For the clueless that already moderated it as such, this refers to a post in the previous SCO/Groklaw story. You know, the good one, with the judge throwing them and their little dog out of court and all. I'll take the potential karma hit and spoonyfork's wrath for pointing this out :)

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
    5. Re:eyewitness account #1 without the commentary by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      =)

      You forgot the creative commons license again!

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  11. Slashdot mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ah, SCO, SCO, SCO. This latest prank... Where to begin to unravel the latest brainstorm, the claim that ELF belongs to them, that Linux is using it illegally, and that it's the mortar holding the entire kernel together? I am smiling just typing this.

    Here is what the ELF story is about, according to a Linuxworld article by Maureen O'Gara:

    "In 1995, the year Novell sold Unix to the Santa Cruz Operation, an industry group calling itself the Tool Interface Standard Committee (TISC) came up with a ELF 1.2 standard and to popularize it and streamline PC software development granted users a 'non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license' to the stuff, effectively putting it in the public domain, SCO says.

    "SCOsource chief Chris Sontag, the SCO VP in charge of the company's hate-inducing IP push, claims TISC, which folded immediately after the spec was published, exceeded its rights even though both Novell and the old SCO - as well as Microsoft, IBM and Intel - were on the committee."

    OK. ELF. Here we go. After all the research we have done, here are the conclusions I reach. First, ELF isn't mortar. It's not even in the kernel. It's interface stuff. It's not the only interface one might use, and in fact it replaced a prior interface, so it isn't essential for Linux to keep breathing and life to go on. It'd be annoying but not at all impossible to replace it.

    Second, if TISC overstepped its authority, that is between SCO and SCO, because oldSCO was involved, oldSCO being a member of TISC.

    Third, I don't believe they own it.

    Fourth, Linux is not unique in using ELF.

    Fifth, this is getting silly.

    Let me explain, please, how I reached those conclusions.

    Here's what the TISC document [PDF], regarding ELF version 1.2, told the world they were intending and what the world could do with ELF:

    "This Executable and Linking Format Specification, Version 1.2, is the result of the work of the Tool Interface Standards (TIS) Committee--an association of members of the microcomputer industry formed to work toward standardization of the software interfaces visible to development tools for 32-bit Intel Architecture operating environments.

    "Such interfaces include object module formats, executable file formats, and debug record information and formats. The goal of the committee is to help streamline the software development process throughout the microcomputer industry, currently concentrating on 32-bit operating environments. To that end, the committee has developed specifications--some for file formats that are portable across leading industry operating systems, and others describing formats for 32-bit Windows * operating systems. Originally distributed collectively as the TIS Portable Formats Specifications Version 1.1, these specifications are now separated and distributed individually.

    "TIS Committee members include representatives from Absoft, Autodesk, Borland International Corporation, IBM Corporation, Intel Corporation, Lahey, Lotus Corporation, MetaWare Corporation, Microtec Research, Microsoft Corporation, Novell Corporation, The Santa Cruz Operation, and WATCOM International Corporation. PharLap Software Incorporated and Symantec Corporation also participated in the specification definition efforts. This specification like the others in the TIS collection of specifications is based on existing, proven formats in keeping with the TIS Committee's goal to adopt, and when necessary, extend existing standards rather than invent new ones.

    "About ELF: Executable and Linking Format The Executable and Linking Format was originally developed and published by UNIX System Laboratories (USL) as part of the Application Binary Interface (ABI). The Tool Interface Standards committee (TIS) has selected the evolving ELF standard as a portable ob

    1. Re:Slashdot mirror by erykjj · · Score: 1

      Favorite line: "That horse was already out of the barn." Case closed.

    2. Re:Slashdot mirror by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      I read it as:

      SCOsource thief Chris Sontag

      Funny what one letter can do to meaning...

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
  12. DAMMIT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only 17 comments, and Slashdotted already. :(

    1. Re:DAMMIT! by claar · · Score: 1

      There's a copy here if you're having trouble getting to the article.

      --
      I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous...
  13. Selling SCO short? by MixmastaKooz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    With SCO's last defeat agaisnt Daimler-Chrysler and now this, who here has been short selling SCO's stock? Anybody willing to put their money where their mouth is?! ;) Do you think making money off of SCO's demise would be the ultimate revenge? (then give the profits to an open source fund, well, after you bought a new box and big screen). I wish I had some cash to do this (work for a non-profit), but it would be cool if people had some stories about selling SCO's stock short!

    1. Re:Selling SCO short? by dknj · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      At $1.40 a share, is it really worth it?

      -dk

    2. Re:Selling SCO short? by muon1183 · · Score: 2, Informative

      In case you haven't been paying attention to the replies to the posts suggesting this in other SCO threads, there isn't any stock available to be shorted, so nobody can short SCO (or at least of those people who wanted to short after SCO filed suit, nobody can).

      --

      There's no sig like SIGSEG
    3. Re:Selling SCO short? by cosmo7 · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're looking at a French re-insurance company. The SCO we all love and cherish trades as SCOX.

    4. Re:Selling SCO short? by LMCBoy · · Score: 1

      SCO's ticker symbol is "SCOX", not "SCO"...

      --
      Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
    5. Re:Selling SCO short? by Dan+Ost · · Score: 1

      SCO's symbol is SCOX. Look them up and you'll see that they're
      trading in the $4 range.

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
    6. Re:Selling SCO short? by swillden · · Score: 2, Interesting

      it would be cool if people had some stories about selling SCO's stock short!

      I sold 400 SCOX shares short about the time it hit $10 per share, on the way up. I rode it all the way to the peak of over $20, and still hold my position now that it's below $5. I tried to short some more when it was high, but couldn't get any. It's taken over a year so far, but I'm ahead, and if I cashed out now it would even be a long-term gain.

      I intend to ride it into the ground, though.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re:Selling SCO short? by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ..and even then what does it matter if it's 1 or 2 or 4 or 20 dollars a share, when the percentual changes are what any smalltime investor would be looking for anyways. 30% drop would still be 30% drop regardless or what the individual share price was..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    8. Re:Selling SCO short? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Short sales are never considered long-term gains, even if you cover after 20 years. The technical explanation is that for long-term gains, you need to be holding stock (not just have an open position) for 365 days, and in this case, you only hold the stock for a short time between buying it on the market and returning it to whoever you borrowed it from.

    9. Re:Selling SCO short? by Zocalo · · Score: 1
      There isn't any stock available to be shorted

      Nor will there be, and quite possibly never will be again with the price in the region of $4.25 and the long term outlook of SCO being none to bright. It's against NASDAQ regulations to short stocks valued at less than $5 you see.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    10. Re:Selling SCO short? by Animats · · Score: 1
      Short-selling reached half the float back in June. That's huge.

      Right now, there seems to be an attempt to support the price at $4.25. Look at the daily chart. This follows attempts to support the price around $15 (failed), $10 (failed), then $5 (worked for a while, then failed.)

      At some point, somebody is going to buy what's left of SCO for a very low price.

  14. Overrated? Site was being slow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mods on crack.. more likely, an editor I suppose..

  15. Why SCO is a blessing by diagnosis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Obviously this SCO stuff is a riot. And possibly a pain in the butt. But it does a couple of things:

    1. Gets Linux more press; this is good
    2. Proves that Linux has *serious* game, and can play with the big boys
    3. Shows legitimacy (see 2): publicly whooping SCO time and time again demonstrates the legimitacy of Linux and its IP.
    4. Entertains everyone: remember this? Everyone loves watching things crash and burn...

    So, after all, what's not to love?
    ---------------------
    Dr. Movie Movie, PhD: DrMovieMovie.com
    Witty movie reviews, eating contests, and a guy who once drank a gallon of milk in an hour.

    1. Re:Why SCO is a blessing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Don't forget:

      5. Creates opportunity for Bruce Perens and Pamela Jones to sell "Linux insurance".

    2. Re:Why SCO is a blessing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bruce has always wanted to make a living from being a 'linux expert'. On the other hand, he hasnt got the positive, superlative malice required to be a success in the insurance industry... he might do better at something a bit more benign, like used car sales.

    3. Re:Why SCO is a blessing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heh, with today's clueless CEOs/CIOs they might have a nice business here. Remember, the dumb one is the buyer.

    4. Re:Why SCO is a blessing by pinkocommie · · Score: 1

      Sorry but until recently and to a large extent even now, its still portrayed as linux hippies vs the nice normal company and how the poor angelic SCO is suffering etc etc. Truth be damned (not enough of a 'human' angle?)

    5. Re:Why SCO is a blessing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > 2. Proves that Linux has *serious* game, and can play with the big boys

      I dunno about that one. It certainly proves that IBM and other big corps. that use linux can play with the "big boys". But we've yet to see SCO make motions against OSS community itself.

  16. Santa Claus? by oneiros27 · · Score: 1

    Just do what the Easter Bunny did -- hire Lobo deal with him.

    (For those who don't read comic books, see The Lobo Paramilitary Christmas Special. The AFI even did a short film version

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
    1. Re:Santa Claus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haven't seen or read but no fear... eDonkey to the rescue. Trim spaces as necessary.

      ed2k://|file|(Comic).-.Lobo.Paramilitary.Christm as .Special.pdf|10051994|24B4CE8A383144D2B8EE3EEB11FF 695F|/
      ed2k://|file|The.Lobo.Paramilitary.Christm as.Speci al.mpg|140773976|974F761D9B6D6C5FB59D28D9067B1938| /
      ed2k://|file|The_Lobo_Paramilitary_Christmas_Sp eci al_[VHS.rip].avi|75522048|98FD2B8B062052C23D0055DD DBCEC92A|/

    2. Re:Santa Claus? by benj_e · · Score: 1

      That is my favorite Lobo - although the one where he is sent to hell is pretty good too.

      --
      The Tao that can be spoken is not the one eternal Tao
  17. Anagrams for SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Satans Computer Org.

    1. Re:Anagrams for SCO by grappo666 · · Score: 1

      Too obvious, Santa is better >;)

    2. Re:Anagrams for SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naah... Satan is MORE serious than this bunch of greedy idiots. He'd never deal with'em...in the end he'll get the profit anyway (souls souls!).

    3. Re:Anagrams for SCO by Hatta · · Score: 1

      That's a backronym. The reverse of an acronym. Anagrams for sco would be COS SOC OSC, and so forth.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:Anagrams for SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you mean Santa's Computer Org, you insensitive dyslexic clod?

    5. Re:Anagrams for SCO by Captain+DaFt · · Score: 1

      Fer crien outloud! Obviously it stands for [Drumroll]:

      Sue Carelessly, Often

      (Ok, I'l see myself out now...) };->

      --
      The U.S. really needs an English to Wisdom dictionary.
  18. Talk about a short squeeze.. by SirFozzie · · Score: 1, Interesting

    There was a story a couple days ago that the only thing propping up SCO at this point was the insane percentage of short positions held in the stock.

    Something like 54.5% of the positions held in SCO were shorts..

    --
    People Talking in Movie shows.. people smoking in bed.. people voting republican.. GIVE THEM A BOOT TO THE HEAD!
  19. Re:Overrated? Site was being slow... by empaler · · Score: 1

    It was both AC and formatted, I don't know what got into someone. Then again, I didn't have any problems getting onto the site.

  20. Re:Overrated? Site was being slow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well apparently I wasn't the only one who had trouble..

  21. Stocking stuffers by raistphrk · · Score: 1

    I think all those naughty SCO investors will get coal in their stockings this year instead of dividends.

    In other news, Santa's elves will send Darl a summons for giving Santa cookies that contain portions made from recipes pilfered from the Keebler elves.

    1. Re:Stocking stuffers by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 1

      You don't mean the Keebler ELF's?

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

  22. Summary by MojoRilla · · Score: 5, Informative

    SCO says the ELF format was improperly released by the TISC.

    But SCO was on the TISC. And so was Novell. And the TISC released ELF before assets were sold.

    Plus, any format endorsed by the TISC is property of that committee. And anyone who joins the committee and donates standards must grant the TISC rights.

    Finally, the ELF format is an interchange format, and not copywritable.

    1. Re:Summary by julesh · · Score: 2, Informative

      SCO says the ELF format was improperly released by the TISC.

      But SCO was on the TISC.


      That's SCO(Caldera) says the ELF format [...] But SCO(SCO) was on the TISC. Just for clarity's sake.

    2. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      any format endorsed by the TISC is property of that committee

      Any format endorsed by TISC is their property??? Really???

    3. Re:Summary by YU+Nicks+NE+Way · · Score: 1
      SCO(Caldera) says the ELF format [...] But SCO(SCO) was on the TISC
      Actually, that's the key point. SCO(SCO) didn't have the Unix rights. SCO(Caldera) claims to have done so. SCO(Caldera) argues that SCO(SCO) didn't have the rights to release ELF. If SCO(Caldera) is right about holding the Unix SysV copyrights, then TISC's license wasn't valid, and the subsequent purchase didn't make it so.

      As to the argument about header files, the author's simply wrong. The one case cited doesn't handle the question of organized name-value pairs, merely an operational interface.

      In short, the Groklaw article is more bunko than debunk.
    4. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since TISC endorsed exactly one standard (ELF 1.2, which they created) and then disbanded, yes, the statement is true.

    5. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Any format endorsed by TISC is their property??? Really???

      Yes. Really.

      The comittee (by its bylaws) couldn't endorse anything it didn't own. If someone else owned something, and wanted the comittee to endorse it, they had to join the comittee, and sign a release saying that anything they proposed became property of the comittee.

    6. Re:Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      copywritable

      baka... copyrightable.

    7. Re:Summary by yuri+benjamin · · Score: 1

      At the time TISC released ELF to the public, UNIX belonged either to Novel or old-SCO, both of whom were part of TISC.
      By the time new-SCO acquired old-SCO's UNIX interests, ELF had already been released to the public by the rightful owners at the time of release.

      --
      You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
    8. Re:Summary by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I'm not quite understanding your logic. Care to elaborate?

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  23. "Santa Claus Organization" by WormholeFiend · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, for one thing, even if SCO stood for "Santa Claus Organization", they could not claim Santa Claus, or even the North Pole, very easily, as this matter is already in dispute between several parties:

    1) The Danes, who claim to own the North Pole because the Lomonsov Ridge, which passes under the ice cap, is an extension of Greenland, which is part of the Danemark Kingdom. (Controversially, however, Santa (Jule manden) is already a Dane because he lives "in the capital of Greenland, Nuuk. So giving the North Pole to Greenland does not change his status, even if he has an extra factory there. He stays a Danish citizen.)

    2) The Russians, who claim to own the North Pole because the Lomonsov Ridge is an extension of Russia.

    3) The Turks, because St Nicholas, on whom Santa Claus is modelled, is buried on Gemiler, a tiny island off Turkey.

    Another issue is that the USA wants to divide the Arctic sea by sectors, as is the case with Antarctica, because the north coast of Alaska is the southernmost border of the Arctic ocean, so by sharing the Arctic in this way, the USA gets a larger share.

    Finally, on behalf of all my fellow Canadians, I claim Santa Claus, because he proudly wears the colors of our National Flag, and we own land up there too.

    1. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by Freon115 · · Score: 1

      Come on, we all know Santa Claus' village is in Finland, in Laponia precisely ;)

    2. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by Otter · · Score: 3, Funny
      Finally, on behalf of all my fellow Canadians, I claim Santa Claus, because he proudly wears the colors of our National Flag, and we own land up there too.

      If I were you guys, I'd argue that he lives at the magnetic North Pole....

    3. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by WormholeFiend · · Score: 2, Informative

      shenanigans!

      proof: if you want to write a letter to Santa Claus, here's the address:

      Santa Claus
      North Pole
      Canada
      H0H 0H0

      From:
      www.the-north-pole.com/santamail.shtml

    4. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by vidarh · · Score: 1

      You forgot both Norway and Finland... Of course you do realise that the only reason Santa wears the colors of your national flag is because of Coca Cola corporation and their marketing, don't you? So I guess that would give Coca Cola a claim too :)

    5. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by Trespass · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, the vatican de-canonized St. Nicholas, and then the Discordians adopted him.

    6. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      i'm pretty sure there's some santa claus center in at least sweden too, in addition to santa park which is in finland.

      I'm not sure where the swedes explain santa claus to live at but the finnish tradition is that santa claus lives at 'korvatunturi'(in northern finland).

      so.. linus sneaked up to korvatunturi and stole not only linux but elf as well from santa.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    7. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by netglen · · Score: 1

      Screw the North Pole. The South Pole is where the fun is. Tons of blind albino penguins to play with.

    8. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Santa Claus
      North Pole
      Canada


      CANADA? Now *that* explains why he wears red!

    9. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.

    10. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by Sique · · Score: 1

      That's simply wrong. Here is a picture of a red St. Nicholas from 1847, long before Coca Cola was even founded. You may also check out Snopes.com.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    11. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by Sique · · Score: 1

      Yeah, he has a post box there, for all those americans that can't remember his norwegian home town Mo i Rana or his finnish place Laponia near Rovaniemi.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    12. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by julesh · · Score: 1

      CANADA? Now *that* explains why he wears red!

      Nah, Coca Cola sponsor him to do that. You must have seen him in their adverts...

    13. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by Yaztromo · · Score: 1
      If I were you guys, I'd argue that he lives at the magnetic North Pole....

      That wouldn't do much good, as magnetic north has been slowly wandering its way outside of Canadian territory these past few years.

      Besides which, it's currently in the middle of the Artic Ocean. Not nearly enough tundra there for the reindeer to graze.

      Yaz.

    14. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by schon · · Score: 1

      Not nearly enough tundra there for the reindeer to graze.

      Uhh, *HELLO* - they're magic reindeer. They can travel around the world in one day (making a few million stops along the way) but you think they can't leave the north pole for the other 364 days of the year?

      And even if they couldn't, you think Santa can afford the raw resources for a toy for 50 million children, but can't spring for food for his reindeer?

      Your lack of faith is disturbing. Next you're gonna tell me that the Easter Bunny doesn't really lay the eggs himself!

    15. Re:"Santa Claus Organization" by mhotchin · · Score: 1

      *Of course* Santa Clause lives in Canada! You can even tell from his address:
      Santa Claus
      North Pole, Canada

      H0H 0H0

  24. Maybe at $4.30 by bstadil · · Score: 1

    No not at $1.40 but then again this is not SCOX:-)

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  25. Where's the Progress? by l4m3z0r · · Score: 4, Funny

    We probably don't need to be reading what Groklaw says about it anymore now that we got the Daimler-Chrysler crap thrown out. Slashdot readers will be seeing more of that like soon enough, what with them most likely being thrown out of court rooms for the rest of summer and on into fall. Let's get on to the real reports like "SCO claims against IBM thrown out of court", "Judge rejects SCO vs Redhat arguments", and my favorite "Darl McBride beaten with gavel". Enough opinions, let's get on with watching them be summarily humiliated by old dudes in black robes.

    1. Re:Where's the Progress? by MooseByte · · Score: 1

      "Let's get on to the real reports like "SCO claims against IBM thrown out of court", "Judge rejects SCO vs Redhat arguments", and my favorite "Darl McBride beaten with gavel".

      Frankly the favorite I'm holding out for is, "Darl McBride sodomized with gavel - the large side."

    2. Re:Where's the Progress? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Multiple times, over and over, because any elected/appointed government official just loves yelling out 'BOHICA!!'

  26. stupid? I don't think so...; by deadmongrel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    oh please! what they are doing is insane but not stupid. They are manipulating eveything from market to laws. If they are anything but stupid. I would say greedy, cunning but not stupid. They are actually making money off this. Pump and dump? The only people who are going to be affected are the programmers at sco but i am sure they would find alternate employment once this fiasco is over.

    1. Re:stupid? I don't think so...; by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting
      The only people who are going to be affected are the programmers at sco...

      Programmers at SCO? Nevermind...

    2. Re:stupid? I don't think so...; by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1


      They are actually making money off this. Pump and dump? The only people who are going to be affected are the programmers at sco but i am sure they would find alternate employment once this fiasco is over.


      OK - maybe I'm missing something very important here. If so, please educate me. Having said that...

      During the duration of this ploy, SCO's stock has climbed and then dropped. I would assume this implies that a fairly high number of people have been buying the stock during its more lofty heights. And if so, they are losing money made as an investment on faulty claims. Sounds like being affected to me.

      Furthermore, even though the damage isn't nearly as wide-spread as it could be, there are some IT managers who do / did listen to SCO. If (and that's a rather large "if") they had plans to purchase / deploy Linux architecture and then either held off or scrapped those plans, that's damage to the vendor being considered. More people being affected.
    3. Re:stupid? I don't think so...; by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      The only people who are going to be affected are the programmers at sco but i am sure they would find alternate employment once this fiasco is over.

      Since when does SCO have programmers?

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  27. Re:Selling SCO short? Good Luck! by GlacierPilot · · Score: 2, Informative

    I managed to short SCOX in the upper teens and got out around ten. Not bad. The problem has been for months being able to borrow the stock in the first place. Just try getting a couple thousand shares - no way unless you've got better contacts than I (this is my profession BTW). The short interest that already exists in SCOX has dried up the stock available for borrowing and even when it goes to zero you haven't made all that much.

  28. Wrong chart by mark-t · · Score: 1
    You linked the wrong chart.

    Try here

    Not that it's much better.

  29. "Let the Santa Claus jokes commence" by nusratt · · Score: 3, Funny

    "and SCO replied (with forked tounge)" [sic]

    actually, i'm more interested in hearing the "tounge" jokes

  30. The ELF claim also shows that DARL lied by DaveInAustin · · Score: 1

    I know that Darl has already lied about so many things, but here are a couple - When we found out about the infringements in Linux, we stopped distributing it. - We are concerned about the changes from 2.2 to 2.4. ELF has been Part of linux for at least 9 years, way before linux 2.2. It is to obvious that ELF is part of linux. Also, one of their defenses to the IBM patent counterclaim that we have been using it for years and they have never complained about it before

    --
    --- http://davidnehme.blogspot.com
    1. Re:The ELF claim also shows that DARL lied by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Indeed... SCO bringing ELF into the equation is particularly damaging for their claims because many of the other technologies they were trying to claim ownership over were moderately hidden aspects of the kernel and Linux, but I reacall the migration to ELF from a.out as being a very big thing when it happened, and it's simply infeasable that SCO could claim it did not know the ELF was there at the time of the original claim. It's patently obvious that they are making stuff up as they go. I can't wait to see what the judge says on Aug 4th.

  31. Selling SCO short by Dr_Marvin_Monroe · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you look at the charts, it looks like MANY people have been covering their short positions. That's the only reason I can figure that the stock price INCREASES after the bad/good news on the DC suit.

    Looks to me like many of the shorts are now buying shares back to cover their short positions, and those swindlers at SCO are not really giving in to sell.

    I simply recommend staying away from SCOX, it's really tough to outmanuver the stock swindlers on a company such as this. The company insiders and all the people on the SCOX insider phone-tree have been pumping up the share prices, selling back and then re-purchasing to manipulate the price. Simply stay away from these guys.... There's better money to be made somewhere else, and it doesn't tarnish your karma or expose you to the risks found here.

  32. Santa Claus Corp... by crawdaddy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Let the "Santa Claus Organization" jokes commence."

    Darl McBride is a HO HO HO!
    *ducks*

    1. Re:Santa Claus Corp... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      naah that's Shill and his Boys ...

    2. Re:Santa Claus Corp... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought Darl McBride was with SCO, not SCC..

  33. Crazy Standards Ambiguity by NaugaHunter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "We have extended this traditional copyright doctrine to exclude from protection against infringement those elements of a work that necessarily result from external factors inherent in the subject matter of the work. For computer-related applications, these external factors include hardware standards and mechanical specifications, software standards and compatibility requirements, computer manufacturer design standards, industry programming practices, and practices and demands of the industry being serviced.See Gates Rubber, 9F.3d at 838; Computer Assocs. Int'l, Inc. v. Altai, Inc., 982 F.2d 693, 709-10 (2d Cir. 1992); Plains Cotton Coop. Assoc. v. Goodpasture Serv., Inc., 807 F.2d 1256, 1262 1635](5th Cir. 1987)

    If Word documents (or Office documents in general) an be argued to be 'standard', could this clause be used to protect code used to open them, regardless of how Microsoft changes them? This part appears a double edged sword, as the next question becomes who deigns something a 'standard'. Does common use qualify, or does it have to be recognized by some board or group?

    As I think about it, it may mean that the method of using published standards can't be copyrighted; but the 'published' part is implied. Perhaps the whole document defines 'standards' and 'specifications' more specifically (Groklaw only quoted part itself), but it seems like a possible angle to use in a non-intended manner.

    --
    R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
    1. Re:Crazy Standards Ambiguity by julesh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If Word documents (or Office documents in general) an be argued to be 'standard', could this clause be used to protect code used to open them, regardless of how Microsoft changes them?

      I think so. It's not just talking about published and accredited standards -- it's talking about any kind of standard, even down to stuff that is simply "the practices [...] of the industry being served", which is exactly the kind of standard that MS Office documents are -- the industry involved being just about all of them.

      OTOH, it only relates to copyright, not patents. And wouldn't get you out of trouble from the "circumvention devices" aspect of the DMCA, which might apply to the DRM features in the latest Office versions, because in that case it isn't Microsoft's copyrights that are being infringed, but (they argue) their consumers.

    2. Re:Crazy Standards Ambiguity by Alsee · · Score: 1

      DMCA, which might apply to the DRM features in the latest Office versions, because in that case it isn't Microsoft's copyrights that are being infringed, but (they argue) their consumers

      I beleive there is an interesting loophole in the DMCA here. It specificly reffers to decrypting without authority of the copyright holder. If your text is locked in Microsoft's DRM then you have every right to autorize yourself to circumvent that encryptions.

      The problem is that I think it is still criminal to assist anyone else in decrypting their own files, you would be "trafficing in a cricumvention tools".

      By the way, does anyone have any information on the progress of the DMCRA? Is it moving forward or stalled? It would resolve this stupid DMCA mess.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  34. Not "Santa Claus" but... by dkh2 · · Score: 1

    You got that abbrev. wrong.

    It should have been "Sanity Clause Operation".

    It's clear that Darl McBride and his subordinates are all seeking what Corporal Klinger always wanted... a Section 8 discharge.

    --
    My office has been taken over by iPod people.
    1. Re:Not "Santa Claus" but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, there aint a no sanity clause!

  35. M$ Theater Group Presents SCO by static0verdrive · · Score: 1

    Let's keep in mind that SCO is simply M$'s sock puppet (to quote Captain Eric S. Raymond) and thus they'll stop at nothing to undermine linux, except maybe bankruptcy and a court order to SHUT THE HELL UP!

    --
    ========
    77 77 77 2e 6d 65 6c 76 69 6e 73 2e 63 6f 6d
  36. FYI, Story title: A Tall Tale About ELF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A Tall Tale About ELF - by Frank Sorenson, Dr Stupid and PJ
    Thursday, July 22 2004 @ 08:51 PM EDT

  37. Next thing we'll know by marika · · Score: 1

    Darl will claim he owns /. and that he is happy with the overcome. He annoyes me.

    --
    This is totally insecure, but very convenient.
  38. SCO has no legal claim by bstadil · · Score: 1
    Below is from an earlier comment of mine.

    You are right in everything you say but it has no bearing since we are talking about a different company.

    It's like you you remove the graphics card of an Dell computer and sell it to SCO. Then SCO turns around and sues Dell for the missing card. At best they should sue you and would probably loose as they bougt "as is" The state of ELF was know or should have been known at the time Caldera sold to NewSCO.

    Quote:

    Current SCO is the third link in the chain. Whenever something is sold the successor in interest get's "less or equal" what the seller held. Since the seller sold the copyright with the explicit understanding that ELF was in the public domain, NewSCO can not claim anything. If someone "exceeded" their authority it's a matter for the parties involved at the time.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:SCO has no legal claim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At best they should sue you and would probably loose as they bougt "as is"

      baka... it's lose and bought.

  39. coming down the pipe from IBM by dAzED1 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    IBM doesn't seem content to beat SCO, they seem to want to *destroy* their linux case against anyone.

    That makes me think that there are things waiting in the wings with IBM. Looking Glass is cool, but I bet there are things much cooler from IBM that they're not disclosing until all this clears up. I bet IBM has some really good linux, and even OSS, products that will be coming out as soon as this goes away.

    I still wish IBM would just buy Sun. Sun has a lot of very valuable IP, but they're not mass-producing enough processors to be competitive. If IBM bought Sun they could get a lot of Sun's chip-to-chip stuff, their new smart threading cores, etc - and just put it on their own power chips. Then those could be used in Sun servers and IBM servers alike.

    1. Re:coming down the pipe from IBM by FORTRANshadow · · Score: 1

      Without commenting on the first part, I suspect there would be anti-trust implications of IBM acquiring Sun. That would also upset a really big company that just gave Sun a whole bundle of money - I'm sure there would be much wailing and grinding of teeth from Redmond. And the reverse would also be true - Armonk would probably oppose a MS-Sun union.

      --
      "Plugh!"
    2. Re:coming down the pipe from IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seriously doubt IBM would hold off on releasing stuff until something as minor as the SCO case completes.

      Besides this the SCO case could potentially drag on years.

    3. Re:coming down the pipe from IBM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I'm betting that there is nothing at IBM as cool as LookingGlass and that IBM are starting a project to create a Linux UI ASAP.. I don't know maybe utilising the SWT framework. Maybe even looking at using Multimedia extensions as a core part of the interface..

      Shot in the dark of course and not a result of anything I do for a living.

      Honest....

      Just posting anonymously because...

  40. Need more linux stores by zogger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We need more whitebox shops in towns all over to start selling linux or installing it. Put up a big sign "windows viruses eliminated forever!" that would be enough to get a lot of people inside the store at least. Then if they saw a few machines setup running some good different distros with all the apps that come with them, a lot of folks would think about it. Let people play with it a little, then they can see there's enough similarities to be comfortable with it, and enough installed apps that they probably wouldn't need much more. For what people pay for their semi monthly windows debugging at the shop, they could get a shiny new distro installed and have a bit of handholding in the store to show them how to use it.

    Personally, I just am not going to worry about ANYTHING that might come from the SCO issues. Initially I thought they might have something, but now it's obvious they have less than squat.

    If I could figure out a way to be two people I would do the linux whitebox shop myself, but I got a job now.....

    1. Re:Need more linux stores by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1
      If I could figure out a way to be two people I would do the linux whitebox shop myself, but I got a job now.....

      Well, I've just started a small business, but mostly doing service, as I didn't have a lot of money to put into stock, and couldn't justify spending several thousand dollars for computer systems as floor demos, considering I'll make maybe a hundred bucks on each.

      I could put one cheap-assed PC-Chips or similar system together, though, running SuSE or Mandrake, for customers to play with. I also really like the idea of the sign "Windows viruses eliminated forever!" Mind if I use that in some advertising?
      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    2. Re:Need more linux stores by berzerke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...spending several thousand dollars for computer systems as floor demos, considering I'll make maybe a hundred bucks on each...

      Most whitebox makers I know make far less than a hundred bucks on a single box. They actually make more selling parts and service than computers.

    3. Re:Need more linux stores by Kevin_Peters · · Score: 1

      I'm in the process of doing just this in Memphis, TN (actually, it will be just outside Memphis in Southaven, Mississippi).

      --
      The music is all around us. I can hear it. Can you?
    4. Re:Need more linux stores by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here is the thing. you CAN be sucessful at it but you will need to set up a support center. call in line and tech support. people dont give a rat's ass about what OS they run. they care about if they can use it.

      will you be available to help them when the Comcast High speed internet moron shows up at heir house and says" Where's the windows CD?", "My drivers wont load, your computer is broke.", " your internet will not work without our special software"...

      How about at 9:00pm at night when they want to install a software app? (note sell CD-r's with tested RPM's of games and aps for your customers! hell profit making possibilities are endless with this!) are you going to set up a website that will filter them to the software they ca neasily install??

      if I buy a computer from dell and I'm the typical drooling moron, I can call them to help me. (yes even at a cost) same for Compusa purchases... I can buy a "tech support" card and talk to a guy/gal that will help me figure out that complex and hidden "search" feature.

      you want to make it a success? build a support center around it... like APPLE did. selling a computer preinstalled and configured and then afte r taking their check you scream RTFM!!!! LOL LOL LOL in their faces will not make you money.

      and that is where linux retailers fail miserably.

      if you want to sell it and make money at it... SUPPORT IT!

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    5. Re:Need more linux stores by MindStalker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do not, I repeat do not invest thousands of dollars for floor demos, have one computer for demo, and make that the same computer you do inventory and crap on (of course secure the hell outta that part of it, perferably keep the confidential info on a removable harddrive, or on the network, and keep it disconnected for demo use) put the top items you want to sell on it. Thats it, don't even think about carraying an inventory of more that what you are going to sell in the next week, shelf life for computer parts are horrifically bad.

    6. Re:Need more linux stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh come on.

      i can make a super fast linux box running mandrake10 with openGL acceleration running on it for less than $250.00 $99.00 for a all in one motherboardwith a soldered on duron processor. $19.00 case and PS, $19.00 CD drive, $29.00 128 meg ram stick and a 40gig hard drive. + $19.00 15 inch monitor. $5.00 keyboard and mouse. Sell it for $350.00 very easy.

      you can easily have 4 demos on the floor for $1000.00 + time to assemble and install mandrake. splurge and put a DVD drive in one of them and install xine+decss to demonstrate dvd playback (smooth as hell on a duron!)

      the place to make money is sell CD's with ready to go RPM's of games and apps that you know will work on these machines with the distro you chose.

      $10.00 a CD for software apps. Hell sell Update CD's for $10.00 each! people like buying CD's compared to downloading.

      also sell "support cards" prepaid 20 minute support cards... every new computer conmes with a single 60 minute card. then you hire 3 monkeys to man the suport lines, I'm betting you can outsource it to india for $3.00 a day.

    7. Re:Need more linux stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called JIT supply.

      cstomer orders a pc from you, have it drop shipped to the store overnight (Add's $29.00 to the cost) restore the drive image from CD and the computer is ready. by 5:00pm the next business day.

      easy to do.

    8. Re:Need more linux stores by kuom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Linux is the OS that works against itself the most.

      I love the choices I have with Linux, at least a few dozens flavors of kernel, hundreds of distros, and countless tarballs, RPMs, and DEBs for me to choose from. But when you want to support these countless and fast growing numbers, it becomes a nightmare.

      My company just converted over to Linux recently (every desktop, servers were all already on Linux/BSD). One of the biggest challenge we had was how we are going to handle support. The best solution was to have a contractor company to support us so we don't waste our valuable resources. The idea is to have one of our own employees pick up the phone, and have someone walk him/her through the problems (or even have the support person control the desktop via VNC or krfb).

      But do you know how hard it is to find good support for Linux? We had a rough time finding a company that would do what we want, and to add on top of that, the ones we find only support some generic dsitros. We are not running any special kernels or distros here, we are using a major distro, the only difference is we modified the GNOME desktop a little to fit the needs of each department. But this becomes insanely difficult to for someone else (a contractor) to support remotely.

      In the end, we went ahead and did the support ourselves. People bitch and whine about how the desktop is different than their Windows XP desktop now, but we always through this question back at them: "Can you still do your job?" And that silenced most of the complaints. Users were complaining about not being able to play certain games online (especially from MSN), or not being able to run certain programs that they downloaded.

      But with home users, you are not so lucky. Regular home users expect to have total freedom over their machine. To some, this means having root access. And we all know root access in the hands of the not-so-smart people is a dangerous thing. And it only takes a couple of these morons to suck up all of your time and resources.

      I am not saying that Linux on the desktop doesn't work. It does, everyone from my company is using it. The problem is supporting the various flavors of Linux distributions. It's easier for Dell to train their support techs to know all flavors of Windows, but it would be impossible to train a staff of support techs to know lots of Linux distros + different windows managers. An user running GNOME and an user running Enlightenment think they are on very different machines, while they could both be running the same version fo the same distro.

    9. Re:Need more linux stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To some, this means having root access. And we all know root access in the hands of the not-so-smart people is a dangerous thing. And it only takes a couple of these morons to suck up all of your time and resources.

      not needed. autologin as user and tell them the root password. every time you NEED to be root mandrake asks you for the password.

      people actually like it that way. there is absolutely no reason to run as root, and if you configure it that way it will not change usually.

      as for customizing, do not do it. leave it as a stock mandrake,suse,whatever distro.

      also, remember you can do the same things that dell and the others do...

      "oh you need to restore from your computer CD. call us when it is finished."

      if the windows weenies can fall back on that catch all then so can we.

    10. Re:Need more linux stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately I think you overestimate the average (ie non-technical) computer user's willingness to try new things. People stick with Windows because it's what they know, it's what their friends know and it's what they use at work. You won't convince them to change in most cases, and when you do you will end up having to provide so much support you'll wish you hadn't bothered.

      I'm not saying it won't happen - and I'm sure there is a niche market for it now in some places - but if you want to market to the masses you grit your teeth and pay the Windows tax.

      The time will come, as businesses adopt it on the desktop, but it's not quite yet IMO.

    11. Re:Need more linux stores by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

      yes and no.

      at my local LUG we support Mandrake 10.0 only we have 1 guy specalized in KDE but most are used to and support Gnome. we will try to answer questions to newboes about other distros but we only officially support Mandrake 10.0 in it's standard config.

      It's easy to do that also. tell your customer, we support you as the computer sit's right now, or with software disks you buy from us. anything else we will try to help but can not support it.

      simple as that. if I run windows XP and install a windows desktop replacement like are floating around or nistall "windowshades" extensions to the computer that causes problems withthe standard computer Dell adn the likes will not support it.

      why does linux have to play by different rules than the windows world? support the computer ONLY in it's current configureation or supported upgrades. anything else is $9.95 a minute with no guarentee of a solution.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    12. Re:Need more linux stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      side note, apologiesfor the nasty typos above... answering slashdot posts from my zaurus in the lunchroom makes for nasty typing...

      sorry all.

    13. Re:Need more linux stores by kuom · · Score: 1

      people actually like it that way. there is absolutely no reason to run as root, and if you configure it that way it will not change usually.

      I'd agree with you in general, but I am talking about the extreme case of a couple of morons who want to "play" with their desktop and really screw things up. It only takes one evil user to waste all the time for your entire IT department. I could only imagine it being worse if these morons has the root password.

      I dealt with a couple of these people after we switched everyone to Linux. One of them customized the desktop to his liking to such extreme, that GNOME hanged (something with gtk). And when I went out to fix his computer, he refuses to tell me what he did to break it. I restored it to the default, only to go back the next day with the exact same issue. I told him to stop using the custom theme he downloaded, because I suspect it has something to do with it, and he absolutely refuses to.

      Well, I guess that isn't so different from support stupid Windows users. A lot of the problems I am running into now are savvy Windows users feeling uncomfortable in the new environment, and they are making a big stink about it.

      "When I had Windows, I could do this and this and that, but now that they gave me this piece of junk Linux, I can't do any of that! Free software my ass! Now I have less freedom!"(seriously, I oever heard this a few times from some of the users, they actually think they get more freedom from running Windows)

      Also, the UI for various distros changes rapidly, on top of the fast growing KDE/GNOME projects, companies such as Mandrake and Red Hat throw in their own customization on top of each version. This is another issue that is easier to solve in a corporate enviroment, because if we decide to upgrad,e we will upgrade everyone to Mandrake 10.0 and leaves no one behind, but it's difficult to keep track of the users you have sold PCs to what versions they are running.

    14. Re:Need more linux stores by pinkocommie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're also underestimating how sick and tired the average person is of Viruses, Pop-Up's, Malware, Spyware etc etc. I was @ Circuit City a coupla days ago and some lady was begging the guy to help her with popups and the sales guy was thats the sites 'revenue stream', you're not supposed to be able to stop them. I told them all about this nifty lil thing that they could get for free called Mozilla FireFox thats just like IE but doesnt crap out with pop ups and malware. Had around 8 people around the counter write down the name of this technological 'wonder' and thank me ;)

    15. Re:Need more linux stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our solution with those kind of people is to tell their manager... it;'s not your responsibility to deal with whiney people.

      management here is very quick to tell them," if you don't like it then we will be sad to see you go. please keep in touch won't you?"

      it shut's them up fast when they hear management tell them in a nice way to STFU or we'll simply replace you with someone that is not an ass.

      if the user keep's breaking things, make it so he can't by locking it down further... something really easy to do in linux. that is a management problem not a IT problem.

    16. Re:Need more linux stores by kerskine · · Score: 1

      That's what I do when someone has problems with their Windows machine. I give them my Linuxcare Rescue CD, tell them to put it in their CD drive, and answer "Yes" to all the questions.

      --
      ****

      "I'd never want to join a club that would have me as a member" - G. Marx
    17. Re:Need more linux stores by AndroSyn · · Score: 1

      We need more whitebox shops in towns all over to start selling linux or installing it. Put up a big sign "windows viruses eliminated forever!"


      Or you could get a very pretty looking box with the same features by buying a Mac *ducks*
    18. Re:Need more linux stores by zogger · · Score: 1

      you surely could. I'm an old machead,loved them for years and years, I wasn't a windows or unix guy. Jobs just priced me out of macs finally, just cannot justify the expense for what I do with the computer, and I have adopted the FOSS philsophy as well. Linux is good enough, cheap enough and usefull enough to fit the bill for 90% of the people out there to do at least 905 of what they want to do, at one third the price of a mac machine and OSX nowadays. You can get a brand new basic x86 machine for around 300$ now and stick linux on it and it's swell. Not sure what the cheapest mac with OSX installed is from apple, but I bet it ain't 300$. and if it's both GUI and CLI, I don't see the difference any more. I certainly enjoyed my years of worry free easy surfing with macs, but time to move on now. sdome people make enough, I just don't, my days of dropping tons of cash on conmputers are over, forced upgrades every other year indicate to me that cheaper is good enough now. We hit a plateau a few years ago where computers in general all got powerful enough and good enough, what we are doing now is just horsepower wars to do almost the same tasks we've been doing, surf, email, listen to some tunes, look at some pics, write a document, etc. There's no way a whitebox shop can easily compete at the high end, but at the mom and pop low end you can, and apple just will not let you be a dealer unless you can plunk down serious folding cash, and even then you can't compete with apple, they will undercut you, that part sucks and is why you never saw many mac shops. what is it now, you need at least 50 grand to even think about being a new mac dealer? Something like that last I heard--too rich for my blood.

      Naw, I switched to linux, is plenty good enough and the rate of change and improvement is awesome, and will only get better.

    19. Re:Need more linux stores by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      will you be available to help them when the Comcast High speed internet moron shows up at heir house and says" Where's the windows CD?", "My drivers wont load, your computer is broke.", " your internet will not work without our special software"...

      Why should I be? If Comcast sends out morons let Comcast provide the support.

      I take it they are a clueless as the RoadRunner morons.

    20. Re:Need more linux stores by crucini · · Score: 1

      I appreciate hearing your experiences. I think IT departments need to draw a bright line between supported, standard workstations (user does not have root) and self-supported workstations. I, and many other programmers, self-admin our workstations, but we don't expect IT to take responsibility.

      The desktop problem you described seems like it could have a similar solution. If the home directories are NFS mounted, maybe set up a web page where users can authenticate and change some settings. One button would "restore my desktop to default configuration". That gives the user the freedom to play around, knowing he can reset without calling IT.

      Remember, if the users feel freedom, power and stability, they'll be happy with the IT department and with Linux.

    21. Re:Need more linux stores by zogger · · Score: 1

      Good luck on your new business, and by all means, be my guest to use the marketing gimmick! I thought it was cute, because it's true, and it probably will work to get people to walk in the door.

    22. Re:Need more linux stores by zogger · · Score: 1

      Good for you! Do an update article and submit it to slashdot after you have been in business for awhile.

    23. Re:Need more linux stores by zogger · · Score: 1

      that's all good advice. Offer better service then most whitebbox shops, although to be fair, most of those do service as well, just during business hours. If they are 24/7, most likely they are bigger than a mom and pop store size, which was more what I had in mind, something about any nerd could do with a meagre budget and some drive.

    24. Re:Need more linux stores by zogger · · Score: 1

      I am ther LAST guy to get alarmed over typos and misspellings, so no probs there.And I agree, pick a standard distro and leave it clean, don't try to support every distro out there, you would go nuts.

  41. MS strategy.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) create investment company to fund dying unix company
    2) use dying unix company to create FUD about competition
    3) pump tons of cash into it and sue everyone
    4) .. win...
    5) ... ... .. umm.. profit??? ... ..

    wait you mean this makes linux STRONGER?

    what they're losing???

    umm...

    DAMN SLASHDOT STRATEGY!

  42. Wow.. The BayStar/SCO Fight just got uglier.. by SirFozzie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    (Just saw this yahoo press release from SCO)

    LINDON, Utah, July 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX - News) announced today that the SEC has declared effective, as of July 21, 2004, SCO's registration statement relating to the resale of shares of common stock issuable to BayStar Capital II, L.P. This fulfills the only condition to closing the repurchase transaction under the stock repurchase agreement between SCO and BayStar dated May 31, 2004, which was previously announced on June 1, 2004. Accordingly, SCO has informed BayStar that it considers the repurchase transaction to be closed as of July 21, 2004.

    BayStar has notified SCO that it is BayStar's position that the repurchase transaction has not closed, pending resolution of claims by BayStar that SCO's recent public statements regarding SCOsource licensing opportunities are inconsistent with statements previously made by SCO to representatives of BayStar. SCO takes such questions very seriously and reaffirms the accuracy of its public disclosures concerning its SCOsource business and confirms its belief that such disclosures are not inconsistent with any confidential statements previously made to BayStar. As SCO previously has cautioned in its public disclosures, it has limited experience with its SCOsource licensing initiative, and projecting SCOsource revenue is difficult and subject to numerous risks and uncertainties.

    BayStar has also claimed that it will not consider the repurchase transaction closed until SCO provides BayStar with confidential information supporting the accuracy of SCO's recent public disclosures regarding its SCOsource business. SCO has declined to provide the SCOsource information requested by BayStar in order to protect the confidential and proprietary nature of the information and the names of the companies engaged in SCOsource licensing discussions and to avoid fostering speculation regarding its SCOsource business.

    SCO believes that the stock repurchase agreement with BayStar is effective and binding, and observes that the issues raised by BayStar are neither conditions to closing nor the subject of any representations, warranties or other terms of that agreement. In connection with the closing, SCO has sent to BayStar a stock certificate representing 2,105,263 shares of SCO common stock and notified BayStar that is ready to deliver $13,000,000 in cash, constituting the balance of the repurchase consideration, upon receipt from BayStar of its wire transfer instructions.

    SCO has requested BayStar to fulfill its obligations under the stock repurchase agreement to deliver to SCO the certificates for the 40,000 shares of SCO Series A-1 Convertible Preferred Stock upon closing, and has informed BayStar that SCO will, in any case, consider all such Series A-1 stock cancelled and no longer issued and outstanding, effective as of the closing on July 21, 2004.

    --
    People Talking in Movie shows.. people smoking in bed.. people voting republican.. GIVE THEM A BOOT TO THE HEAD!
    1. Re:Wow.. The BayStar/SCO Fight just got uglier.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Translation to English, plz.

    2. Re:Wow.. The BayStar/SCO Fight just got uglier.. by canfirman · · Score: 1

      You know, at first I was surprised at this, but now I wonder why. SCO can't even keep their legal stories straight, how can we expect them to keep their public statements straight? I wonder how much impact this will have on the Baystar funding. If Baystar feels they're being taken for a ride, I'm willing to bet they'll pull their funding. If that happens, bye bye SCO.

      --
      It is not our abilities that show what we truly are... it is our choices.
    3. Re:Wow.. The BayStar/SCO Fight just got uglier.. by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1


      Can anybody translate this SCO/Baystar stock market mumbojumbo into plain English? What's SCO trying to pull here?

    4. Re:Wow.. The BayStar/SCO Fight just got uglier.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Baystar's money, apparently. At least, at the rate the common stock is going. BS paid money for the preferred stock and is getting back part of it and some 2M of soon-to-be toilet paper in the form of common stock.

    5. Re:Wow.. The BayStar/SCO Fight just got uglier.. by SirFozzie · · Score: 4, Informative

      Basically, SCO want to hurry up and retire the A-1 stock (which gives BayStar a lot of say about how SCO runs the lawsuit and their business).

      The SEC signed off on the deal, and SCO says "Ok. Here's your money and shares. You're now a commoner just like the rest of our stockholders."

      Baystar: "I still have some questions about the SCOSource Licensing program... you're telling us one thing and doing another."

      SCO: "Not Listening! TAKE THE STOCK AND MONEY! LA! LA! LA! (fingers in ears)"

      Baystar: "Wait a second.. I have valid concerns, I haven't signed off on this yet.."

      SCO: "Yes you have! You just own a ton of our stock now. Go away! We don't like you anymore"

      --
      People Talking in Movie shows.. people smoking in bed.. people voting republican.. GIVE THEM A BOOT TO THE HEAD!
    6. Re:Wow.. The BayStar/SCO Fight just got uglier.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SCO, you send your hostage first,

      BayStar, No you send our money, first

    7. Re:Wow.. The BayStar/SCO Fight just got uglier.. by SirFozzie · · Score: 1
      Yup. It just got uglier.



      Baystar Capital Announces Repurchase Transaction With the SCO Group, Inc. Has Not Closed
      Friday July 23, 1:56 pm ET

      SAN FRANCISCO, July 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- BayStar Capital today announced that, despite a prior announcement by The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX - News) to the contrary, the transactions contemplated by the Stock Repurchase Agreement by and between BayStar and SCO, dated as of May 31, 2004, have not closed due to an unresolved dispute between the parties. BayStar intends to file an action requesting a declaratory judgment with respect to its rights under the Stock Repurchase Agreement. Until a final determination is made by the court, BayStar maintains its position as a Series A-1 Preferred stockholder of SCO.

      Source: BayStar Capital

      --
      People Talking in Movie shows.. people smoking in bed.. people voting republican.. GIVE THEM A BOOT TO THE HEAD!
    8. Re:Wow.. The BayStar/SCO Fight just got uglier.. by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      Here's my interpretation:

      SCO went to Baystar promising that, if Baystar financed them, SCO's IP properties were worth huge sums of money, and Baystar would profit handsomely. Baystar takes the bait.

      Time passes.

      Baystar realizes that SCO's IP claims are not all they were represented to be, and says so. They want out. SCO offers to buy back the preferred shares with cash and common shares. Baystar accepts.

      Now we must realize that Baystar wasn't in this to break even, or to make a tidy profit - they were out to make a killing. So simply getting their money back won't do. So now that the deal is closing, Baystar is holding up SCO because, technically, they STILL own the preferred stock, and have questions they want answered - possibly for a later lawsuit for fraud, possibly just as a tactic to squeeze more out of SCO.

      It's kind of like going to a closing on a house where all but the final paperwork is signed, and then the (current) owner says "Waitaminit - I still am not satisfied with your financial statement. Until you prove to me (to my satisfaction) that you can afford the house, I'm not signing.

      While we can surmise that SCO is populated by con men and crooks, it does not follow that everyone SCO deals with is a victim. From Baystar's actions, they seem nearly as slimy. It's like 2 crooks arguing over booty that they agreed to share but turns out to be less than what was expected; just because 1 of them bonks the other one on the head doesn't make the unconcious one innocent.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    9. Re:Wow.. The BayStar/SCO Fight just got uglier.. by gsfprez · · Score: 1

      http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040723/sff025_1.html

      Baystar Capital Announces Repurchase Transaction With the SCO Group, Inc. Has Not Closed
      Friday July 23, 1:56 pm ET (note, 2 hours after previous SCO announcement)

      SAN FRANCISCO, July 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- BayStar Capital today announced that, despite a prior announcement by The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX - News) to the contrary, the transactions contemplated by the Stock Repurchase Agreement by and between BayStar and SCO, dated as of May 31, 2004, have not closed due to an unresolved dispute between the parties. BayStar intends to file an action requesting a declaratory judgment with respect to its rights under the Stock Repurchase Agreement. Until a final determination is made by the court, BayStar maintains its position as a Series A-1 Preferred stockholder of SCO.
      ____

      Wow.

      --
      guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
  43. everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by capsteve · · Score: 3, Insightful

    everytime SCO comes up with another hair-brained scheme to prove their position, it seems everyone in the community pitches in to prove them wrong. i'm not proposing this is a bad thing, but there may be some side effects of this process...

    imagine this scenario: SCO doesn't have the staff to research every possible technical angle. they probably have limited their ability to hire (competant)contractors to do the technical research either(would you work freelance for them?). so... they whip their existing tech staff to find other possible threads of "truth/proof" to prove their prior ownership claims.

    "don't worry if it isn't water-tight. we'll let IBM, groklaw, and the linux zealots figure it out for us. in the meantime, keep searching for possible angles no matter how slim. by the time they disprove one claim, we'll have another one waitng in the wings..."

    i don't want to give them too much credit for thinking this way, but as a community, those who would like to prove SCO wrong seem to be doing all the hard work, and at an exceptional pace. it's also something of a military tactic to keep your enemy busy with inconsequential skrimishs, tiring out the enemy troops prior to the big surprise attack.

    just my $.02

    --
    three can keep a secret, if two are dead - benjamin franklin
    1. Re:everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Trust me, I've thought of that. However, in this case, they filed the claim under seal, so your putative motive for SCO seems not to apply in this instance.

      PS Nobody at Groklaw is tired.

      PJ

    2. Re:everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by DugzDC · · Score: 1
      the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and all that.

      but the flip side of the coin you mention is that each time they do this, they come away with less respect. they make themselves look dumb. we should be happy to help with that

    3. Re:everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by ModMeFlamebait · · Score: 0

      So they effectively have open source lawyers? Oh, the irony.

      --
      Pavlov. Does this name ring a bell?
    4. Re:everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by MosesJones · · Score: 1



      Err its not really a military tactic when your opponents have

      1) All the heavy artillery

      2) All the airbourne troops

      3) Nuclear Weapons

      4) Top Secret Weapons that no-one even knows about

      5) So many more troops that they can lose all of your numbers in a freak jello accident.

      And that is just IBM in comparison. Add in the guerilla warfare from the likes of Groklaw and the OSS community, season lightly with some of the largest industrial manufacturers in the world and you don't have a war.

      You have a butt-kicking contest with a queue.

      --
      An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    5. Re:everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      it's also something of a military tactic to keep your enemy busy with inconsequential skrimishs, tiring out the enemy troops prior to the big surprise attack.

      Thats physically and mentally. Which is why you want to have a fresh body of troops to rotate in and out.

      When you are speaking about a war of the mind, when you have more people on your side. Each battle is won by you. You simply have more people. It's like going to a dodgeball fight with 100 people and the other team having 10. They won't win.

      Big surprises are usually used to take out something of major importance. If SCO had a major surpise, they would of used it by now. Not only to keep their funding but to end this whole thing. As it were, SCO is sort of like the confused company not knowing that the war is over. Everytime they try to attack, they are summarily put down.
      i don't want to give them too much credit for thinking this way, but as a community, those who would like to prove SCO wrong seem to be doing all the hard work, and at an exceptional pace

      We do it to make sure that there will be no other wars in this arena. It's also highly effective. SCO is losing.

    6. Re:everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by Xenographic · · Score: 1

      Well, for starters, they're desperately throwing out everything they can think of sans research.

      Now then, either we have to disprove this, or IBM will. We might as well do it early.

      For our shooting their arguements down to be of any help, they'd have to find one we couldn't shoot down.

      That hasn't happened yet, because the Linux developers simply aren't theives, and calling them such when one cannot prove those allegations might well be considered defamation by a court of law...

    7. Re:everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by capsteve · · Score: 1

      all of you have very good perspective on this, thanks for all the excellent constructive responses! i usually am of the mind to give people the benefit of the doubt; i like to think that everyone(and this includes multi-people organizations) will do the right thing when given the chance... people usually only do bad things when they think they can get away without getting caught.

      i remember when i first heard that caldera was purchasing SCO: i thought this is a good thing! a linux company now has control of the Unix rights and can really help the genreal cause by open sourcing some of the original unix code! oh well, guess i was too optimistic :-(

      since darl and co. have been looking to make a buck on the legal stance of holding the Unix paperwork, i've always felt i was watching a benevolent group of adults (OSS, IBM, Novell and crew playing the role of parents, uncles, aunts) dealing with the misbehavior of an out-of-control kid (SCO) trying to bully the adopted, well behaved children(Linux/Torvards and company).

      that SCO-kid is in for a spanking... by all the adults!

      --
      three can keep a secret, if two are dead - benjamin franklin
    8. Re:everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by DarkVein · · Score: 1

      Something I learned a while ago is that sometimes when companies merge, they don't merge the way they do on paper. Sometimes, for tax or legal reasons, (and when it's not a hostile take over, kay?) it's better if the superior company is purchased by the inferior company. So, KBR purchases Halliburton, and Caldera purchases SCO. In reality, Halliburton is maintaining its internal structure and KBR is being absorbed; SCO is maintaining its internal structure, and Caldera is absorbed.

      Mergers are funny that way.

      --

      I'm as mimsy as the next borogove but your mome raths are completely outgrabe.

    9. Re:everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, if they are really MS sock puppets this could prove to be an incredibly stupid tactic. To pursue your military analogy: skirmishing and testing the defense also gives the defender a chance to identify and remedy potential vulnerabilities.

      Also: This isn't the field of battle. This is the judical systems governed by both the letter of the law and legal precedent. Losing a weak case may establish a precedent which can be very hard to overturn at a later date. If the judge rules that the GPL is valid, it will be that much harder for MS's next avatar to claim otherwise.

    10. Re:everyone is doing SCO's research for them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If SCO had a major surpise, they would of used it by now

      "would have" or "would've" - never ever "would of".

  44. we're with you on that won ted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if we see any more ?pr firm? scriptdead headLIEns about some fauxking hideous glowbull warmongering corepirate nazi felon execrable, being good for US, we're just going to log it DOWn again.

    as for you robbIE & your whoreabully infactdead PostBlock censorship devise, it's still broken also. phewww

    consult with/trust in yOUR creators... debunking unprecedented evile since/until forever. see you there?

    1. Re:we're with you on that won ted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HUH???

  45. Grammar Nazi by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 2

    >Please note the positioning of periods, commas, and other similar punctiation inside the quotes.

    You are espousing the American standard of punctuation, while the poster about whom you are complaining has used the English standard. You should make certain that said poster is not actually conforming to the grammar rules of English as taught in his home country before flaming. We have enough trouble with the US Congress acting as if the internet exists solely withing the US borders. The "technologically literate crowd" here at /. should certainly know better.

    As to spelling, identify the correctly spelled word in each of the following pairs: [tire, tyre] [flavour, flavor] [colour, color].
    --
    Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    1. Re:Grammar Nazi by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1
      As to spelling, identify the correctly spelled word in each of the following pairs: [tire, tyre] [flavour, flavor] [colour, color].
      And some of my favourites from watching CFL football: [offence, offense] [defence, defense].
      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    2. Re:Grammar Nazi by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      You are espousing the American standard of punctuation, while the poster about whom you are complaining has used the English standard. You should make certain that said poster is not actually conforming to the grammar rules of English as taught in his home country before flaming.

      Not just that, but I, as an American, frequently use the English standard because it makes more sense.

      For example:
      Why did Joe come into my room and yell, "Holy shit!", Steve?

      For me, the LOGICAL way to do things is to have punctuation inside quotes relate ONLY to the text inside the quotes. I think quoting should be treated the same way nested loops are treated in programming languages. If you have a sentance quoted inside a sentence, it makes sense to have punctuation inside the quotes and punctuation outside that quotes. It's nice to have the quote function as a clear delineation between them, as it would in computer language. It also functions more gracefully if you were to have a quote of a quoted quote.

      American quoting standard:Reverse Polish Notation::English quoting standard:infix

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
  46. Legal Malpractice? by serutan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The TIS Committee grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license to use the information disclosed in this Specification to make your software TIS-compliant..."

    Pretty straightforward, isn't it?
    Should it be obvious to SCO's lawyers that the ELF infringement claim has no value? YES!
    Knowing this, should their rudimentary sense of ethics tell them NOT to help bring this suit? YES!!
    Should lawyers be held PERSONALLY responsible for participating in worthless suits like this that waste everybody else's time and money? HELL YES!!!

    1. Re:Legal Malpractice? by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      Uhh, dude: lawyers and ethics don't mix. I thought we all knew that.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    2. Re:Legal Malpractice? by yodaj007 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Long ago my planet solved its lawyer problem for good. At first we wanted to just fire all the lawyers, but that wasn't enough. So we changed our plans, and instead fired all the lawyers into the sun. After that, any new lawyer could represent a client, but if he did so and lost his case, he was consequently fired into the sun.
      After doing these things, the world economies boomed, birth rates shot up 150%, the average intelligence of my fellow Orks increased by 25%, and global warming became a non-issue.
      Some days I wonder why the hell I came to this planet.

      --
      These aren't the sigs you're looking for.
    3. Re:Legal Malpractice? by julesh · · Score: 1

      Um... no. Lawyers are supposed to be your direct representative. They're not _allowed_ to make judgements on whether they believe your actions are ethical or not. Once you've hired them, they're supposed to do whatever you want (as long as doing so is legal) without making any such judgments.

      That's one of the most fundamental points of a modern legal system. It just doesn't work if lawyers start making decisions like that... because sooner or later you'll get to the point where the lawyers won't touch a case that _does_ have merit because they think it would be too risky.

    4. Re:Legal Malpractice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell I can't figure out why any lawyer would want to represent SCO. You just know that after they lose they're going to sue their lawyers for malpractice whether it's legitimate or not. Then their malpractice lawyers for malpractice and so on for ever and ever.

    5. Re:Legal Malpractice? by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      Should lawyers be held PERSONALLY responsible for participating in worthless suits like this that waste everybody else's time and money? HELL YES!!!

      You're looking for the term barratry, or maybe vexatious litigation, or even abuse of process.

      Unfortunately, court-imposed sanctions for any of the above tend to be very seldom imposed. Courts have generally been very lenient with respect to the conduct of lawyers in this regard, and the tiniest hint of a smidgen of an inkling of merit often is enough to get a lawyer off the hook.

      Meanwhile, if the lawyers do refuse to carry out SCO's wishes with respect to new vexatious suits and abuses of process, then they might face trouble from their client in the form of accusations of legal malpractice. (Defending against such accusations takes time and money, even if the claims are groundless.) Not that I have much sympathy, but sometimes the lawyers are between a bit of a rock and a hard place.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    6. Re:Legal Malpractice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Parent is flamebait. Lawyers already get in trouble for wasting a court's time and money. Ever heard of a "frivolous lawsuit"? That's actually a term of art, and judges get really pissed when lawyers waste their time.

      Second, if they didn't participate in the legal process, then they should be fired. Have you ever told your boss you didn't want to write a software package because you disagreed with the business ethics? I bet 90% of you haven't or wouldn't, because you don't want to get tossed out on your ass. Consider this rewording:

      Should software engineers be held PERSONALLY responsible for participating in worthless projects that waste everybody else's time and money? HELL YES!!!

      Suddenly doesn't sound so good, does it? How ad hominem attacks get modded Insightful, I'll never know.

    7. Re:Legal Malpractice? by serutan · · Score: 1

      sooner or later you'll get to the point where the lawyers won't touch a case that _does_ have merit because they think it would be too risky.

      As opposed to now, where it's hard to find a lawyer to take a case that's not lucrative enough. We've been at that point for many years and the system is still working somehow. I don't see the downside of adding another arbitrary criterion, based on ethics instead of money, that might relieve us of some of these nonsensical suits.

  47. Re:Why SCO is a blessing (3a) by gosand · · Score: 1
    3. Shows legitimacy (see 2): publicly whooping SCO time and time again demonstrates the legimitacy of Linux and its IP.

    3a. It shows the power of the internet, and how farces like this can be exposed to the public.

    Groklaw does an awesome job of putting all this (dis)information together so we can all understand it. Without them, it would be hard to figure out what is going on. Without the internet, all you would hear about this stuff, if anything, would be what hits mainstream publications. I am amazed at the speed with which their arguments are dismantled.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  48. Copyright infringement by ceswiedler · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Of course there is nothing illegal about implementing a standard from scratch. But copying another person's implementation is indeed infringement. It's possible that a kernel developer was careless and thought "why should I go to the effort of writing an ELF implementation from scratch, when the UNIX implementation is pretty much in the public domain?"

    If they did that, it would be copyright infringement.

    1. Re:Copyright infringement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, it wouldn't. you can't copyright standards in software programming.

    2. Re:Copyright infringement by julesh · · Score: 1

      Yes, although there's nothing to suggest that that did happen. And if that is what SCO were alleging, their comment that the committee had 'exceeded their authority' in putting the ELF specs in the public domain would be irrelevant.

    3. Re:Copyright infringement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the code itself is copyrighted, not the standard.

  49. Offtopic job turnover at SCO by boobert · · Score: 1

    Has anyone been tracking the turnover rate at SCO?? I once worked at a company that had an average turnover of about a year. Pretty much the only people that made it over a year were hired from outside the US and were locked in due to immigration reasons.

    Seems like SCO has had that software engineer position in india open for sometime now.

    --
    Your ad here ask me how!
    1. Re:Offtopic job turnover at SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, I worked at a startup that had churn rate of more than one new hire/fire per week and there were less than 100 people who worked there.

    2. Re:Offtopic job turnover at SCO by amber_of_luxor · · Score: 1

      I worked at a startup that had churn rate of more than one new hire/fire per week and there were less than 100 people who worked there.

      There are industries where a staff turnover of 500% per year is considered to have an outstanding staff retention rate.

      Not to forget the one that has a 100% per month turnover rate.

      Amber

      --
      Wind Beneath Thy Wings
  50. I stand quite thoroughly corrected. by biendamon · · Score: 1

    I had simply meant to point out to the original "spelling nazi" that correcting spelling/grammar mistakes when one commits them oneself is amusingly ironic. It appears I also engaged in some unintentional jingoism, having made the assumption that the original poster was American. I apologize.

  51. The word "misunderestimate" is ... by burgburgburg · · Score: 3, Funny

    perfectly cromulent.

  52. Re:Selling SCO short? Good Luck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this is your profession maybe you could explain how they can jack the price everyday just before the close?

  53. They know what this case is about: by burgburgburg · · Score: 1
    This case is about taking a company with very little value, creating a media firestorm, stoking it periodically, using the media attention to insider sell the inflated stock and use the rest of the stock in various manipulations to leech off value to the parent corporation, and desperately abuse the legal system to stave off any final legal judgement that would destroy the scheme.

    Why, wasn't that obvious?

  54. "Forked tounge?" by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, I suppose that's some sort of a medival French siege weapon. I'd definitely classify this one as an aggressive legal maneuver. Let's see how well the IBM trebuchet counterattack works.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  55. YOU FAIL IT, YOU ARE TEH SUXX0R! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    L00000zr. Not at all 133t.

  56. ELF isn't polite. by michael+path · · Score: 2, Funny

    The ELF name isn't politically correct any longer.

    Please use "Allocation Challenged File System" (ACFS).

    This was in the 2.6.4 changelog. Geez.

  57. Re:Selling SCO short? Good Luck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this is your profession maybe you could explain how they can jack the price everyday just before the close?

    If I understand correctly, the closing price is nothing more than the last trade made at the end of the day. So all you need to do is put in a high enough order at 4:25 in the afternoon. Since no outstanding sell orders would dare turn down such a great price, SCO could keep their closing price nice and high.

    That being said, I believe this is highly illegal. SCO could get into deep trouble if it could be proven that they're manipulating their stocks.

    P.S. This is *not* my profession, but this is how I understand it works.

  58. What's the motive? by bannerman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm still convinced that not everyone over at SCOG is mentally retarded. They've got some intelligent folks over there. All the same, it took a volunteer paralegal 24 hours to come up with overwhelming evidence against their latest claims. Certainly they could have at least come up with something more substantial, or in lieu of that, more vague.. to base their claims on.

    So what are they trying to pull? There's more involved here, and I think that it might be really important to understand what it is before they show their hand.

    --
    I keep forgetting my place. Jesus is for losers. Why do I still play to the crowd?
    1. Re:What's the motive? by bhima · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, you've hit on point that should have a lot of lawyer's attention: merit-less law suits which used take months of hard work in court rooms and lawyer's office's to uncover now takes an amazingly short time thanks to many volunteers. This means it is getting a little more dangerous to bring such things to the courts as your true motives are more likely to be exposed. And that's nothing but a good thing.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    2. Re:What's the motive? by ToLu+the+Happy+Furby · · Score: 1

      All the same, it took a volunteer paralegal 24 hours to come up with overwhelming evidence against their latest claims. Certainly they could have at least come up with something more substantial, or in lieu of that, more vague.. to base their claims on.

      So what are they trying to pull? There's more involved here, and I think that it might be really important to understand what it is before they show their hand.


      There's a hearing scheduled for Aug. 4 on IBM's request for summary judgement on its 10th counterclaim, which states that Linux does not violate any of SCO's copyrights. The summary judgement phase comes at the end of the discovery phase, and before the trial phase of a court case. Now the trial phase is when controversial issues of fact are decided. So a claim can only be ruled on in summary judgement if, based only on issues of law (interpreted neutrally), with the evidence presented in discovery interpreted in as favorable a light as possible towards the losing side, the judge still concludes that the losing side has no chance of succeeding at trial on the merits.

      In other words, the way you avoid losing on summary judgement is to make it seem like there is a controversy of facts that it will take a trial to resolve. And that's what SCO's trying to do by throwing in as many crap theories of why Linux might be infringing their copyrights as possible. So long as the judge thinks there's the tiniest chance they could prove any of those claims, she has to deny IBM's summary judgement motion.

      Now, SCO knows full well that, even if they make it to trial, they're not going to win any copyright claims against IBM regarding Linux. Indeed, one of their tactics in arguing against IBM's counterclaim is to say that they haven't based their case against IBM on a copyright argument but rather on an argument that IBM somehow violated their UNIX contract with AT&T, which SCO is now successor in interest to.

      The problem for SCO is that their SCOSource "business" (such as it is) relies entirely on the fear that Linux does infringe on SCO's copyrights. Even if SCO somehow did win against IBM on the contract violation issue, that wouldn't make anyone other than IBM liable for using or distributing Linux. (Nor would a copyright-based win make them liable for merely using Linux, but it sounds plausible.)

      If IBM were to win summary judgement on Aug. 4, it would be very widely publicized that SCO's copyright claims on Linux had been completely thrown out, and the entire premise for SCOSource would be wiped out. So, even though they don't intend to argue any copyright claims against Linux in this or any other case--for the simple fact that they don't have any and they know it--SCO really doesn't want to lose this counterclaim, and moreover even if they have to eventually lose it after the trial's over a couple years from now, they really really don't want to lose it on summary judgement in a few weeks.

      Hence the scramble to muddy the waters and create whatever potentially controversial facts they can. Of course the sort of analysis on Groklaw should--assuming it holds up and IBM presents it well--carry the day and allow for summary judgement. But the main tactic of civil law is to throw around as much shit as possible and hope that some of it sticks; worst case scenario you waste your opponents' time having to defend against it.

    3. Re:What's the motive? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1
      So what are they trying to pull?

      I believe it was when Universal sued Nintendo over Donkey Kong, the head honcho from Universal said 'We view litigation as a profit center.'

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    4. Re:What's the motive? by bannerman · · Score: 1

      We all know that litigation is SCOG's primary profit center right now. Considering that, and considering the fact that they DO have significant resources and some good minds at their disposal, why did they come up with something so pathetically easy to take down?

      I'm convinced that they did it intentionally.

      --
      I keep forgetting my place. Jesus is for losers. Why do I still play to the crowd?
    5. Re:What's the motive? by bannerman · · Score: 1

      I agree, that's a great thing. But why play such a weak hand so publicly? I think it was intentional.

      --
      I keep forgetting my place. Jesus is for losers. Why do I still play to the crowd?
    6. Re:What's the motive? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Probably. If they convice everybody that they're idiots, then they can do something fiendishly clever, and nobody'll notice.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    7. Re:What's the motive? by bhima · · Score: 1
      Hanlon's Razor "Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"? .... Though in this case I think both causes are available.

      Truthfully though the reason that SCO legal missteps look so stupid to us (technical oriented people) is because we are looking for a technical explanation when technology has NOTHING to do with Darl's, or Baystar's motives and expectations. Their plans are simple: Mar-2003 - Begin with a stock worth just over $1 dollar. Create a variety of reasons for that stock to look more valuable (Multi-billion dollar lawsuits against corporation with the assets to pay up), create enough industry news to keep the stock up during the declared insider share sell off plans to avoid SEC scrutiny. Here their goals end and from their perspective it has been a resounding success with shares selling from $4 (just under 4 times the beginning price) to $19 (just under 15 times the beginning price).

      Now if they can prevent the general public (and SEC) from concluding that they never intended to win this lawsuit, expected to make a profit from stock manipulation, and intended the SCO business to causality from the beginning they will avoid a SEC investigation (and potential jail type and punitive penalties) and a very expensive stock holder lawsuit.

      Mean while Microsoft, who financed this whole thing, sits on the sidelines with clean hands!

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  59. Compasses and Canadian Taxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    f I were you guys, I'd argue that he lives at the magnetic North Pole

    Now you've done it. Now them damn Canucks is gonna start taxing everyone's magnetic compasses

    1. Re:Compasses and Canadian Taxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's alright. Even that's wandering away from them towards Russia ...

  60. one word by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 1
  61. Bull, News is SCO's Raison d'Etre. by twitter · · Score: 1
    SCO exists solely to make press releases and get them into mainstream press. At his last keynote meeting, McBride proudly thumped on top of two phonebook sized binders of press clippings. They do little more because it's what they are paid by M$ to do.

    Where the media is failing is in getting a diverse opinion of the facts presented above. Almost all of the mainstream news outlets covered McBride's presentation of events, "IBM orchestrating an attack on SCO", while McBride proudly thumped on the results of his own media manipulation. How pathetic is that? Turner is right, the wintel press and most media are little more than a big choir all singing the same song.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  62. Lucky for us. by LordPixie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Main press is more interested in hype stuff (like the lastest Ipod model...

    Thank god we don't peruse places that hype the latest iPod model. No siree. We subscribe to Slashdot: Bastion of Stuff that Matters.

    Please. Slashdot is just as interested in hype, fluff, and FUD as any other big news source. We just want ours geek flavored. Compare any article with the headline/summary, and it's pretty obvious. This is an entertainment website. While it certainly serves lots of news, let's not jump on the high horses. Slashdot is just as vulnerable as the other news sources.


    --LordPixie

  63. Not the first time a company hasn't understood by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    This is precisely what happened with Rambus. They were a JEDEC member along with, well, everyone else involved in the memory bussiness. They all got together because they realised that competing standards would kill them. At the time, it would basically be whoever Intel picked would live, teh rest would die. No one wanted to be on the losing end of that.

    So they decided to form an open standard, that they could all use. One of the major parts of that process was that you had to disclose any and all patents that related to things being considered, and you couldn't patent anything JEDEC decided on.

    Well Rambus did just the opposite. they sat quietly and didn't reveal their patents, and they modified some of them to reflect the agreements reached at JEDEC for SDRAM.

    Then later, when SDRAM was popular and they introduced their own competing prodcut they said "Oh look what we found in our back pocket: patents! We own all the RAM and you all have to pay us royalties". Ya, well that went over like not at all, and Rambus lost their claims related to that.

    Some companies think that because you sat on the comittee, you own everything it produced.

    1. Re:Not the first time a company hasn't understood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny how people stop paying attention to news that does not fit their conceptual scheme. RAMBUS actually won the case on appeal.

  64. Beos used ELF too by brian0x00FF · · Score: 1

    When Beos switched from a Metroworks based toolkit to a gcc based one, they also moved to the ELF format.

  65. Yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just like the rest of SCO's case

  66. And pray you tell us..... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    .... how it helps them to document all their lies?

    Since they don't have anything, every time they claim something they must be debunked.

    This should be a lesson for any other companies that in the future try to pull an SCO in the OSS community.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  67. "I'll bite your legs off!" by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

    Could someone please introduce the Black SCO Knight to Mr. Boomstick and finish this off, now, please?

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  68. Holy Grail? Spank? by jpetts · · Score: 1

    Try here. (Search for "spank")

    --
    Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
  69. SCOX by dacarr · · Score: 1
    They are currently at $4.25, no net gain over the day.

    Methinks that ebay should buy a few extra boxes to set up the assets auctions.

    --
    This sig no verb.
  70. Scenes A Faire - For Patents Too!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Under the scenes a faire doctrine, we deny protection to those expressions that are standard, stock, or common to a particular topic or that necessarily follow from a common theme or setting. Autoskill, 994 F.2d at 1494 (citing 3 Nimmer Section 13.03 [B] [4], at 13-70); Atari, 672 F.2d at 616 . Granting copyright protection to the necessary incidents of an idea would effectively afford a monopoly to the first programmer to express those ideas."

    This shit so needs to be written into patent law as well...

  71. too much pessimism by zogger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    People literally do not know to even consider changing. They have never seen it, used it or in a lot of cases even heard of it. to most people, they think windows equals the computer equals the internet. Heck, most people have never even seen a mac for that matter. You have to physically show them, stick it right in their face, that's why you need a stock windows install running next to a major distro install on identical (or close enough) machines. I've done it, people freak out just looking at the menu, they are amazed all the stuff you get. Show them the browser, the office app, how to play a cd, how to look at pics, etc, that's all most folks do. I say line em up next to each other, there's hardly any difference except the vast difference in quantity of apps you get with linux, and modern linux desktops are certainly pretty enough. Compare what you get with both of them, and at the time you tell the customer "no more windows viruses, no more popups, no more winodws broken-ness". And you have to do that deal where you insist that you only support it as it sits, that any third party apps they get from you, and you could put tripwire on it or something to help you maintain that if they complain. Frankly, I think most users would be overjoyed to just not have to dick with it. They really don't want ot, they want it to be secure online, and there's no queestion the stock linux apps work perfectly fine now. Show them how to get online (pre set it up for them in the store with their ISP info), show them the browser, do the email thing (I would recommend mozilla suite to people, keep it simple and effective), and that's it. Only let them run as root for day to day updates that are automated, like RHN or whatever else the other distros have.

    I think it's doable,either preloaded sales or load it up for them and give them an hour to play with it in the store or at their house, like I said, I would like to do it, everytime I go in a whhitebox store around here there's a stack of borked windows machines waiting to be picked up, usually from something they got being online, and-insert sam kinnison voice- it never ends. You can be there ten minutes and yet another windows victim walks in the store. I have been seing this for years now, it's crazy. no reason for it.

    With any major distro, there are literally so many apps that can go with it right from an install, I think most folks would be quite comfortable with the selection. Tell them once or twice a year they can bring it in for a discounted upgrade, and reload the next version of the distro, charge something reasonable like only 20$. Tell them to compare that to windows, they'll get the message, they know what a windows upgrade costs. I mean, if their machine will take it, it will take it. You can get lists of easily supported hardware, and most hardware out there now is supported. Not all, but most, it's close enough now to deal with it. Keep note of your customers machines specs in a file, and recommend they always upgrade their RAM if it needs it, and do it for them at cost, it will make their machines run better and score you a lot of customer loyalty brownie points at the same time, worth a few minutes work, toss 'em a bone, people love that stuff, they love not getting gouged. Word of mouth will get you more business as these new customers friends get nailed by the exploit du jour, and they don't-they'll brag about it. People are tired of windows BS a lot more than they are "used" to windows BS, they just literally have no other place to go, they don't see it! They have no credible idea other than maybe they heard of it and think it's some strange app, they really don't know.

    I keep thinking on this, maybe I might do it at night with some flyers and driving. It's obvious that the large companies are going to drag their feet with linux on the desktop, I say snag the billions a year cash they are ignoring. You are hard pressed to find anyone who has had a computer more than a year who doesn't have a windows horror story, it's the best advertising there is.

  72. New lawsuit: BayStar vs SCO (?) by eddy · · Score: 2, Informative

    SCO says:

    Accordingly, SCO has informed BayStar that it considers the repurchase transaction to be closed as of July 21, 2004.

    BayStar answers:

    BayStar intends to file an action requesting a declaratory judgment with respect to its rights under the Stock Repurchase Agreement. Until a final determination is made by the court, BayStar maintains its position as a Series A-1 Preferred stockholder of SCO.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
  73. Dear Darl by dan+of+the+north · · Score: 1
    Dear Darl. Just saw your press release : "...SCO...notified BayStar that is ready to deliver $13,000,000 in cash, constituting the balance of the repurchase consideration, upon receipt from BayStar of its wire transfer instructions."

    Please wire transfer the funds to our PayPal account - SCOsux@BayStar.com - Thanx!

  74. More by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're wondering what this is about, it's about control over SCO. BayStar wants to maintain their control (powerful A-1 shares), SCO feels that BayStar is out (they're to recieve ~2M normal (weak) shares and a bunch of cash for giving up their A-1s).

    If you want to follow the speculation, analysis and fallout of this you should go to the yahoo board, where most of the economical topics are discussed and analyzed before the trickle down to groklaw and slashdot. Here's a place to start.

  75. Everyone is getting rid of ten years of lawsuits! by aug24 · · Score: 1
    Think about it... we are indeed saving SCO the effort, but by having this information repository available now, we are getting ready for everything else Redmod et al will throw at us for ten years.

    If you believe, as I do, that the GPL and open source principle is (a) legal and (b) for the common good, then sorting out these issues in one fell swoop is good for us in the long term - oops! that may well give billg an idea. Pretend I never said it ;-)

    J.

    --
    You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
  76. i have a copyright on dirt! by decoder · · Score: 1

    I bought some property recently. That property came with a ground made of dirt. I therefore have the copyright for dirt. Even though God gave dirt as a standard for use as a ground before I was born, He was overstepping his bounds. If you pay me now for the right to use your dirt, it will be $699 per square foot of dirt. Otherwise a lawsuit will be filed.

  77. Groklaw debunks its own straw man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Groklaw quotes SCO's filing where the complanint is about ELF "codes" being copied to Linux. That's codes, not format. Sadly, the rest of the article is a quite logical argument about why SCO doesn't own rights to the ELF format.

  78. no, not lawyers... by schon · · Score: 1

    Open source paralegals.

    This is the beauty of open-source (whether software or law)... everybody benefits from it.

    Which (IMHO) isn't necessarily a bad thing.

  79. Sure looks like it, but I'm no stock expert. by Xenographic · · Score: 1

    Well, I don't claim to know a lot about stocks, so I have no idea if this could also be "dead cat bounce" or some late rally due to all the short sellers. I'm told the short interest in that stock is positively insane.

    But yeah, right now, I'm simply far more inclined to believe that SCO is doing something underhanded. I mean, they've yet to tell any kind of consistant story. They only ones who believe them are either uninformed (media spouting press releases) or Enderle & Didio. Enderle, of course hates 'GPL zealots' and probably just wants the publicity. Ironically, he apparently has (does?) work for IBM at times, too. Were I them, I'd certainly axe him from the payroll after all the crap he's pulled of late.

    And don't bother sending Enderle nasty email. He'll just choose the angriest and least coherent of them to make fun of in some insipid article.

  80. Re:Selling SCO short? Good Luck! by cosmo7 · · Score: 1

    even when it goes to zero you haven't made all that much

    But $0.00 is my trigger to go long!

    (On the uptick of course).

  81. Odd example by siskbc · · Score: 1
    Then later, when SDRAM was popular and they introduced their own competing prodcut they said "Oh look what we found in our back pocket: patents! We own all the RAM and you all have to pay us royalties". Ya, well that went over like not at all, and Rambus lost their claims related to that.

    First, as already mentioned, Rambus won. So that kind of nixes your point. Fortunately, that was about patents - not copyrights - and additionally, the committee that SCO and Novell was a part of actually granted a license.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  82. Don't become discouraged . . . by Eric+Damron · · Score: 1

    Don't become discouraged if IBM doesn't get its summary judgment. All SCO need do is bring up ANYTHING that can be disputed and the Judge will be forced to allow the case to proceed. It doesn't mean that SCO has won just that they get to lose more slowly. Which, I believe, is all SCO really wants. More time for FUD.

    I think that they may be hoping that if they can draw this out long enough and make it painful enough that IBM will just buy them out.

    Remember that it has been pretty well documented that this whole thing began with funding from Microsoft. And I'm sure that Microsoft wants Linux and Open Source dragged through the mud for as long as possible. They offered to give SCO LOTS more money though Baystar-like deals. But that may not be so easy now that the whole scam has gone sour and it looks like Baystar may sue SCO. SCO's dilemma is in no small way do to the internet community which hangs out around groklaw.

    What scares me a little is that if the internet can be used for such good there must be someone out there determined to ruin it for that purpose. I mean we can't have the little people taking power can we?

    --
    The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
  83. Let the "Santa Claus Organization" jokes commence. by weeboo0104 · · Score: 1

    Q> What's the difference between SCO and Santa Claus?

    A> Some people actually believe in Santa Claus

    --
    It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
  84. Case going as "they" predict? by Knaldgas · · Score: 1
    Are we missing something here?

    Could the real agenda of SCO (or the money behind them), be to actually loose this case, and then run around and yell about GPL/Linux killing commercial business?

    It would require a *good* spin-doctor to pull that of, but...

  85. Stupid is as stupid does by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SCO has been buying back their own stock; that's what has been holding the price up.

    Nothing illegal, (they disclosed this in one of those SEC forms) but very, very stupid. It also presents an interesting view of the stock price (especially the daily closings) when you know this.

    For a real look at the stock price, check out a 5 yr graph.

  86. PATENT, not COPYRIGHT by Theovon · · Score: 1

    If I understand things correctly, something like ELF itself isn't copyrightable. Under present patent law that allows software patents it is patentable, but you can't copyright an idea. However, if there were a reference implementation of ELF, then THAT would be copyrightable.

    1. Re:PATENT, not COPYRIGHT by borgheron · · Score: 1

      In the case of copyright:

      Yes, but only that implementation. If you or someone else created an implementation of the API independently, it's okay.

      In the case of patent:

      The company or entity which controls the patent can sue you for infringement no matter if you did it on your own or not. Patents are a much greyer area as far as the law is concerned.

      It seems as though SCO is trying to bring back the days of copyrighted APIs as well (based on a few landmark cases such as Apple v. Franklin, you can't), which have long since gone the way of the Do-do.

      GJC

      --
      Gregory Casamento
      ## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
  87. Pump and Dump? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tried to talk to my gay roommate about this, but he couldn't stop laughing. Why is that?

  88. Can't wait for the bankruptcy by zombie-m · · Score: 1

    I can't wait for SCO to go bankrupt. This of course would be in all of our best interest, but i'm hoping i'll be able to get some cheap computers or furniture or something on their very last attempt for some cash: when they auction off all their crap as they go out of business. Maybe i'll even be able to get a Linux license...

  89. A linux box retailer should standardise by yuri+benjamin · · Score: 1

    If you're going to set up a linux box retailer, standardise on one distro, and train your tech support guys on that distro.

    Set up an easy to use knowledge-base website for customers (and your own call centre staff) to get their own info on that one standard distro.

    Supply a CD with Internet set-up wizards for all the major dial-up, cable and dsl ISPs in your area, that you have developed for your standard distro that comes with all the whiteboxes you sell.

    You may need to partner with Mandrake, SuSE or some other major distro, but that would be a worthwhile partnership if you want your computer retailer to succeed.

    If I ever get the starting capital together, this is one option for me in my area. I don't mind giving away my business plan because if someone else beats me to it - all the better for the cause.

    --
    You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
  90. Bad SCO, Bad! by cashcraft · · Score: 1

    Its good to see them get rejected.

    But you know, I always thought that Caldrea Linux (server-style) was a great product. I was sad to see it go. But now I am a devoted Cobalt Neworks fan.

  91. Firefox as a way into open source and Linux by Cato · · Score: 1

    Somebody mod the parent up! There's a lot of mileage in simply switching Windows users to Firefox and Thunderbird as a way of getting into open source, and the reaction mentioned shows there's real demand for this.

    This is a smaller step than going wholesale into Linux, and will lead to a certain proportion of Windows Mozilla users going for Linux as a result. More Mozilla usage will also reduce the number of worm-ridden PCs which is a benefit to everyone, whatever their OS.