SCO Says 'Linux Doesn't Exist'

4A6F656C writes "In an article on LinuxWorld.com.au, Kieren O'Shaughnessy, director of SCO Australia and New Zealand, details SCO's plans for Australia, stating that they have 'prepared a hit list' and "would approach Australian Linux users to ensure they had an IP licence." In closing, he adds 'Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix'." UnknowingFool writes "IBM's lawyers have been busy the last few days. Groklaw has reported a number of different filings. On the heels of last week's motions (1) and (2) for summary judgement, they have filed more documents. First, IBM wants large portions of SCO's testimonies striken (removed) on multiple grounds. Deep in the motion, they call out SCO to produce the 'experts' that did the code comparison analysis. If IBM wins on most of these points, SCO will have very little left in the way of legal evidence. SCO answers on IBMs 10th counterclaim. IANAL but from I understand SCO says this copyright infringment that SCO has allegedly committed on one of IBM's patents is irrelevant to the case and the court doesn't need to decide on it. So SCO is saying that they can sue IBM for infringing on their Unix copyrights and patents but IBM can't counter sue on a specific patent. IBM also filed another memo to support summary judgement. As a matter of law, SCO has to produce evidence to backup its claims. This mountain of evidence SCO has claimed all this time: If they don't produce it, the court has to rule in IBM's favor."

Comments

Backpedalling we a'go...

[Godeke]

OK, this part is off topic, but what the heck does "we broke our duck" mean? I'm sure it is some clever down under slang, but darned if I can decode it.

These lines are the kicker (and send exactly the opposite message from the summary here on /.):

Early this year, O'Shaughnessy warned that SCO had prepared a hit list and would approach Australian Linux users to ensure they had an IP license.
But this urgency has dissipated with O'Shaughnessy pointing out that he had enough on his plate and would simply sell licenses as the opportunity arose.

Can anyone seriously say that they are really committed to victory in the courts if they have backpedaled that far on enforcing "their violated rights" down under?

Re:Backpedalling we a'go...

[swillden]

to who? SCO Australia Ltd?

Keep in mind that SCO is now bundling Linux licenses with it's Unix products, so every time they sell a Unix license they can crow about another customer finally recognizing the need to purchase a Linux license.

OTOH, this whole lawsuit thing has really hammered their sales figures into the ground, so that's *still* not very many Linux licenses to crow about.

Does IBM's actions buy loyalty?

[SnapShot]

Here's a question. IBM seems to be willing to go to the mat to defend open source and/or free software. Does this buy loyalty from you linux developers? Do you think they are getting more "good will" than they are spending in lawyers fees?

Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty?

[Cecil]

Microsoft may be the 400lb gorilla, but only in the software side of things.

IBM, on the other hand, is the 4 ton gorilla (ie, King Kong) in the semiconductor and hardware industries. They make somewhere around 90% of the ICs in the world, if I recall correctly.

Intel and AMD are toy companies in comparison. They may be cutting edge, but they're tiny. If you need an analogy, they are like id software. Top-quality stuff, highly respected, but generally not a major industry force. A major consumer force, yes, but not an industry force. They're a very specialized company, and don't seem particularly eager to try and diversify. EA and the other mega-developers view them as outsourced game engine R&D. IBM views AMD and Intel and, on the software side of things, the Open Source community, in the same sort of way. Cheap R&D.

Still, not a bad deal.

This is brilliant

[thewalled]

Starts to talk nonsense..
"The only reason we are [pursuing a lawsuit against IBM] is to defend our Unix business; we are not a litigation company, we are about Unix on Intel," he said.

Accelerates..
"IBM has transformed Linux from a bicycle to a Rolls-Royce, making it almost an enterprise-class operating system.

Goes into overdrive..
"It took us 25 years to build our business and it took [IBM] four years simply by stealing code and then giving it away free."

and ofcourse finally..
"Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix,"

I wish more people like this existed to make my day.

Does Unix exist anymore?

[wandazulu]

When SCO talks about Unix, what, exactly, are they talking about? Is there a "Unix" anymore? I know of AIX, Solaris, and the BSDs as the last remaining operating systems that are, I believe, Unix-derived (some of the AT&T code, some of the BSD stuff). I don't think even SCO's own products (Unixware, SCO) are so close to SysV that they can truly say to be the true "Unix" operating system.

So when they say Linux is an unauthorized Unix, what Unix are they talking about? Besides, doesn't the original email from Linux talk about how Linux is a "Minix" clone, which in turn is a much scaled down version of Unix? Why doesn't SCO go after Minix too while they're at it. Or Plan9...that's very Unix-like.

Or Windows...oops, no, not that one. Besides, that's more VMS than Unix. :)

Australian slander laws?

[LWATCDR]

Anyone know what the laws in Australia are on slander?
"IBM has transformed Linux from a bicycle to a Rolls-Royce, making it almost an enterprise-class operating system.

It took us 25 years to build our business and it took [IBM] four years simply by stealing code and then giving it away free."

This seems like a statement that could put one in jail. Claiming that someone stole from you without proof seems a risky move at best.

Yes SCO everyone does hate you. No one will ever want to business with you ever again. Suing customers is not the way to make people want to do business with you. By your actions you have made IBM look like a warm, friendly, and even cool company and the hero of the IT world. Yes the former evil empire now looks like Santa Claus while SCO's image is that of the Iraq information minister. I would say that SCO hasn't reached the level of the Anti-Christ. Frankly most people would expect the Anti-Christ to not be as incompetent as SCO. No not even level of Hitler. SCOs level of evil is about at the level of a pimple faced Neo-Nazi skinhead publishing newsletter out of his bedroom. Full of lies, stupid ranting, and a false sense of injustice.

Yes SCO you have sunk so low that you are not even really hated anymore. SCO you have sunk to the level of disgust. SCO has sunk to level of a guest on Jerry Springer.

Linux does not exist?

[mi]

Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix

Somehow, this reminded of Saddam Hussein's recent courtroom statement, that "Everyone knows, Kuwait is part of Iraq"

I love IBM's lawyers...

[Proteus]

I've been reading one of IBM's recent filings, and I found this gem on p. 19:

Even as SCO describes the case -- by directly quoting (without attribution) a Westlaw headnote...

So first, SCO accuses IBM of copyright infringement. Then, SCO demonstrably commits (admittedly minor) copyright infringment in its court filing for that same suit! And all IBM's lawyers do is mention it in a parenthetical. Well done, IBM!

The calm, cool, confident, and respectful manner in which IBM is handling itself in court is admirable; IMHO, this puts them head-and-shoulders above SCO's legal team.