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."
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.
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.
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:
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:
...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.
Best. Comment. Ever. Enjoy!
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.
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.
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.
You're looking at a French re-insurance company. The SCO we all love and cherish trades as SCOX.
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.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.....
(Just saw this yahoo press release from SCO)
/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.
LINDON, Utah, July 23
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!
"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!!!
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?
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.
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