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."

16 of 317 comments (clear)

  1. 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. 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...

  3. 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 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.
  4. 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.

  5. 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!
  6. 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
  7. 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!!!

  8. 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.

  9. 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.
  10. 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.

  11. 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

  12. 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.
  13. 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.