Slashdot Mirror
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."
A lot of things SCO does reminds me of a child's behaviour, and this is one of them. Kids often dwell on things that please them, and act as if problems don't exist.
That's odd. Seems to describe the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, as well.
Trusted by cats.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
. . .
10 out of 10 Terrorists agree - Anybody but Bush in 2004
That makes all those who support anybody but Bush in league with the terrorists - Good fallacy.
Even if I get clever?
And write about the year US and the Vatican established full diplomatic relations? Or the year when Apple released a computer with the humorous name "Macintosh?" Or make an aside mention of the Los Angeles Olympics? Or talk about the publication of "Neuromancer?"
Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
www.fogbound.net
Maybe because:
- Nearly everything those veterans have said about Kerry is, according to both the U.S. Navy and the folks who were there at the time, a lie.
- Those veterans lied about themselves.
- Bush's friends financed it and his advisors both appeared in the commercials and provided legal advice to the group.
- The Swift Boat book is co-authored by Jerome Corsi who has said anti-Catholic, anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic things on a right-wing Website.
These are not just any vets, they are the same folks Nixon hired in the 1970s to disrupt his political enemies at any cost. Looks to me like Bush is borrowing from Nixon's old ethically-challenged playbook and even hiring the same old players.FreeSpeech.org
I wonder what happens if there's a 'freak accident" at SCO headquarters, and someone steals the 'critical evidence', or the buidling is possibly burned to the ground?
Seems suspicous to me. I'd not put it past them.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
From your post:
That makes all those who support anybody but Bush in league with the terrorists - Good fallacy [nizkor.org].
You claimed that I merged all who don't support Bush with terrorists into one group. But that's not the case.
Call B terrorists, call A non-Bush supporters.
I said terrorists don't like Bush
(All B are in A)
That does NOT imply anyone who doesn't support Bush is a terrorist.
(all A are NOT necessarily in B)
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
>10 out of 10 Terrorists agree - Anybody but Bush in 2004
Not even true. From The Economist, June 3 issue:
"A communiqué from a Saudi jihadi group expresses the hope that George Bush will be re-elected because his 'haste to use force, his lack of wisdom and religious fanaticism have roused the Islamic nation'."