Slashdot Mirror
DaimlerChrysler/SCO Case Winds Down
kuwan writes "It was previously reported that SCO moved for and was denied a stay in their case agains DaimlerChrysler. (Remember that all of SCO's claims against DaimlerChrysler were thrown out except for the issue of whether or not DaimlerChrysler made its certification in a timely manner.) The opposition and reply memos for that motion are now available and apparently SCO's motion was so weak that DaimlerChrysler is asking SCO to pay the cost of preparing their opposition memo. A nice summary of the latest maneuvers is available at scofacts.org."
Any idea when SCO will finally die?
The owls are not what they seem
Methinks that the Sybase "one-eyed monster whacking a luser" advert was a perfect fit for this article.
:-)
Dunno if it is luck or the usual Slashdot editor impartial and unbiased reporting
Hopefully a few more whacks and it will be gone for good.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
Way to go! Make SCO pay for everything. Suck up all their blood money and drive them out of business.
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
...if Slashdot fixed the links to their own stories.
A man's reach must exceed his grasp, or what's an erection for?
Does that mean they actually bought some sort of UNIX license off SCO or does that mean something altogether unrelated?
I can think of one reason SCO deserves some money from us; they are providing us with a lot of entertainment and they are illustrating how not to conduct legal affairs. I believe that we should all contribute to a pool to improve the lives of (former) SCO (related) employees who are (or will be) housed in our wonderful incarceration facilities. This may need to be a large fund since I suspect that some Canapy Group employees might need some free government lodging. I think we should put PJ in charge of distributing the money; imagine Darl asking PJ for just a little money for a snickers bar.
Every point I made back then has since played out in court as predicted. Even the SCO Group is now relying on the same interpretation of the GPL license in its defence against IBM.
As I stated on March 10, 2004:
"Daimler/Chrysler wins SCO Case Hands Down"
:-)
Maybe we'll be so lucky.
Cheers,
Richard
In a weird sort of way, I kind of feel sorry for SCO.
I mean geez, they're just another legit company trying to make it in this high tech industry. Won't anyone give them a break?
It is actually profitable to be sued by you.
When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
Dear Anonymous moron
/. is site with mostly American readers and moderators. Every time someone writes something "ontopic" that isn't pleasant for Americans and doesn't agree with their American point of view, he gets modded down as "offtopic", "redundant" or even "troll" or "flamebait".
You forget that
Why argue your point of view, when you can make the opposite point disappear?
Robert
Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
Just out of curiosity - what language is your website in, btw?
I'm guessing it's some Scandinavian language?
Just out of curiosity - what language is your website in, btw? I'm guessing it's some Scandinavian language?
Not really, it's Slavic language: Polish.
Robert
Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
"You would all be speaking Farsi and Arabic if not for our brave GIs!"
"You would all be speaking Afghani if not for our brave... I mean, if not for the Pakistan Army!"
"You would all be speaking South American and wearing funny hats like Che Guevara if not for the covert operations of our brave CIA agents!"
And many, many more! Call this number now and have your debt account number ready!
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
Ah, my bad. In hindsight, I was debating whether to say Scandinavian or East-European (although am not certain if Slavic is primarily East-European or not).
:)
Thanks!
He admits on the front page that he has several thousand
shares and that he hopes to mitigate the low value perception of
SCOs business. Although PJ's pages are biased to some degree,
it is in regards to one major fact: the whole suit has no base.
He attempts to post the facts but it entirely based on his research
and blogging. I have no problem with that but the eyes of many
catches a lot which I happen to enjoy at Groklaw.
I think DC could have probably played this out to the end just as easily as IBM seems to be able to. DC was smart in that they just didn't have any of SCO's products running in production, as I understand it. It was almost the equivilent of the BSA auditing you for unlicensed M$ products and finding out you're a Linux shop. Oh, and all M$ products sitting on a shelf are in their original boxes and amount to old copies of WFW and MS-DOS 3.2.
Dude, 99.99999994% percent of the whole population is considered a troll on groklaw. If this defines credibility, all we are left with is PJ and a couple of paranoid, pussy whipped, virgin geeks.
As I watched groklaw grow, I thought "man, this woman has no clue about open source", but now that it has devolved into mindless sycophantic cult worship, infighting, backstabbing and replacing emotion for rational discourse, I thought "she finally gets it."
Good luck with all that.
although am not certain if Slavic is primarily East-European or not
;)
;)).
It depends. Some people from Poland, Czech, or post-yugoslavian countries might disagree and punch you in the face
Thing is, the term "Slavic" crosses the boundary of what was always considered Central Europe and Eastern Europe. Traditionally, before 20th century, East Europe was synonymous with Orthodox Church (Pravoswavny as some Slavs would say), Greek/Byzantium culture, and cyryllic writing. Catholic/Protestant Slavic countries with latin writing were considered Central Europe, identifying rather with Western Europe. Balkan Slavic nations considered themselves primarily Central/Southern Europe.
After WW2 every Russian vasal country in Europe was considered Eastern Europe, even Russian ocupied part of Germany.
Most of Slavic people today would like to regain their pre-soviet culture, including their place on geopolitical map of Europe. Hence most of Western Slavs consider themselves Central/Western Europe, Southern Slavs -- Central/Southern Europe and Eastern Slavs -- Eastern Europe (even those living in North-Eastern Asia
Robert
PS Western/Southern/Eastern Slavs are quite strict, scientific terms; just look at the map.
Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
The USians are coming. To "liberate" you.
Does your country have Oil? If not, it probably has Bin Laden? No? That's alright, I'm sure they'd find some reason or the other to invade you.
You think they respect your sovereign rights? You think they care? Nope.
While dictators are ruling countries like North Korea and Pakistan, they are more concerned about Iraq - the people need to be liberated, you know? The oil, most importantly.
So that the USians can sit in their homes with their gas guzzling SUVs and eat fries and watch their reality shows. And ofcourse, complain about outsourcing and how their rights are being "trampled" while they vote in the same guy who took those rights away in the first place.
A bunch of fucking hypocrites. That is what they are.
Look at the US. They do not respect other nations sovereign rights. Their allies are Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Israel and the like. They subsidize China and overlook Chinese human right abuses. They do not even care enough about the environment to ratify the Kyoto. It is a sad, sad state of affairs.
And *YET* the moment you bring this up, some USian will come up and pretend that they care.
Do not bother. They are too high up in their "religious" and "moral" highground to care about the world. They like policing the world and are too used to the comforts of their MacDonalds and their SUVs.
In a nation that prides itself of liberty and values, they have not even elected a non-white non-Christian non-Catholic non-male President. Ever. So much for their "values".
Get over it, USians do not care. Vietnam happened once and you think their people would learn. But Iraq is happening again. Look at the atrocities in Abu Gharib and what not. Look at the way they treat their prisoners in Guatanomo Bay. They trained the Taliban to fight the Soviets. They pul Ayotallah in Iran. They put put people like Pinochet into power who killed tens of thousands. Their Prince^W President is the "friend" of the Saudi Royal family. They preach values? Get over this - America and Americans have no values.
They pretend and they pretend well. They're all just a bunch of hypocrites. Notice how much the people whine all over the place, but yet none of their policies change.
Take the topic under discussion - India is a peaceful democracy with a flourishing economy and Pakistan is an Islamic military dictatorship, and yet the USA does not want India to be elected to the UN - why? So that Pakistan is appeased.
Do not bother, America and Americans do not care. They are too used to their comforts and their hypocrisy runs so deep that the rest of the world is quite disgusted. Their civil liberties are being trampled, they're fucking over the rest of the world and pissing off a lot of people.
Remembe - even Rome fell.
Does anyone else see the irony that this was modded "offtopic"?
./ mods moderating an on-topic post as off-topic* ./, remember?),
No. "Irony" implies that something different than the expected result happened. I can see nothing unexpected in either
- a meta-discussion being considered off-topic,
- an off-topic post mentioning the word off-topic itself,
- such a post being modded off-topic,
-
- even if such a post complains about exactly this (this is
- a post (indirectly) forseeing its moderation getting modded real high or real low,
- and so on.
Regardless how you spin it, there isn't much irony in how it got modded, especially considering this is Slashdot.
*I don't consider this thread to be on-topic (as its meta-discussion started with a troll), but let's be open-minded for a moment.
Keep an eye on which arguments are silently dropped in replies. Not always, but often times it's very telling.
Ho hum! If you look at the IP-Wars.net article (linked to in the main /. article), you will see that Al Petrofsky mentions his site at scofacts.org.
/. article), you will see (on the first line) it links to a PDF at ... scofacts.org!
... because, in reality, we are all on the same side!
If you look at the Groklaw.net article (linked to in the main
Al Petrofsky might be considered a troll on Groklaw, but this doesn't stop Groklaw from using his material.
And this doesn't matter. Why
Hope this helps
Sesostris III
You never know what is enough unless you know what is more than enough. - Blake
When DirecTV did a similar (but more aggressive) blanket (and mostly claim-less) lawsuit against supposed "pirates", asking (demanding?)for a "settlement" to avoid legal action, it only took one "win" for the little guys to basically cease DirecTV's actions.
I am not a lawyer (but I know a few good jokes about them), but would a "win" against SCO basically kill off their entire case? If DC "wins" (or the case is dismissed), does that mean SCO's claims of licensing fees are over? And if that happens, can the few who actually paid SCO "licensing" fees get a refund?
Repant. Thy end is sheer.
It's not a question of the political comment or the nationality of the /.ers. The current topic is Daimler Chrysler, SCO and the lawsuit.
/.
American poitics, the general intelligence of Americans, idiotic foriegn policies and the tribulations of having to live with Bush are off the topic.
Want to discuss those topics? Submit an article to
...carrier dead.....
You don't know half of it, I think it already has +4/-4 moderation. Perhaps I'm gonna post detailed stats when I'll get them tomorrow ;)
Robert
Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
We should register SCO.COM and put a website with Nelson from the Simpsons just pointing and going "Ha HA!"
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Requesting attorneys fees and costs from your opponent on a motion is pretty much standard practice. What will be interesting to see is if the defendants (Daimler/Chrysler) later move for sanctions under the local "frivolous claim" rule in their jurisdiction. These kinds of rules exist in the Federal courts (Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) and most states. It looks like Michigan has a similar rule in effect (MCR 2.625(A)(2), MCL 600.2591(2)). Nice thing about these kinds of provisions is that their sanctions can be directed against the attorneys as well as the parties. Sorry for not including links to the citations, but for obvious reasons I don't want to be responsible for the "slashdotting" of a particular Federal or state court website. Just Google it.
eldapo
Nice link to IP-Wars in the article. Maybe Groklaw will link to anti-slash in retatliation.
To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
>>>
Oh, and all M$ products sitting on a shelf are in their original boxes and amount to old copies of WFW and MS-DOS 3.2.
>>>
Did you mean MS-DOS 3.3 or perhaps MS-DOS 6.2?
3.2 wasn't the disaster that was DOS 4 but it was a pain. Most companies quickly upgraded when 3.3 came out.
1000 SlashDot sigs
... and Al Petrovsky is considered a troll on Groklaw.
How does this have anything to do with the facts that were presented? Regardless of what Al's status is on Groklaw, he is the one that actually did the work to get the copies of the Opposition and Reply memos so that we could be discussing them here. He should get credit for that and the other work that he's done. Groklaw even links to his site, scofacts.org, for copies of some of the documents.
Now if you don't like Al's analysis then that's fine, ignore it. I personally respect Al and the work that he's done and I enjoyed his analysis. Who cares whether or not Al and PJ had a falling out at Groklaw? Al has done a mountain of work to bring us audio and video recordings of hearings, copies of legal documents, and first-hand reports from court hearings. And all at his own expense. If all this work makes you a troll at Groklaw, then I hope that I become one too.
Lawywers always ask for fees, if they think they are going to win or not. It has little to do with the strength of their case.
IANAL and I know that Lawyers usually ask for legal fees when they win (or think they're going to win) a case, but do they normally ask for the fees involved in preparing an opposition memo? That's what I found entertaining. Specifically this piece right here:
The context of SCO's motion, the lack of legal authority to support it, and the absence of any plausible reason for tying the adjudication of this case to the outcome of the IBM litigation reveal SCO's motion for what it is -- a naked effort to manipulate the Court system, and DCC, for SCO's own benefit. DCC therefore respectfully requests that the Court deny SCO's Motion For Stay and award DCC its fees and costs incurred in preparing this Opposition.
infested with jello like fishes no melotron wishes
"I have no problem with that but the eyes of many
catches a lot which I happen to enjoy at Groklaw."
It is not the eyes of the posters on Groklaw that I have a problem with. I am a long time lurker*, but since Pam started deleting the accounts of people she could no longer put up with, it seems that she has only 'yes' men left. There is very little useful input from named posters. Most of the enlightened stuff comes from "Anonymous". Talk about throwing out the baby with the bath water!
* I lurk there as I have nothing useful to add to the discussions. Yes, I know that does not stop most posters there, but it does stop me.
IANAL
My faith is expressed through Nihilism. Do you understand?
There is also an attempt to smear Al's name going on on various web sites. The root source of this smear campaign is an open and interesting question.
sPh
It's pretty sad. I think it was more fun when the Iraqi(SCO) Information Minister was screaming at people. Oh well, now we get to watch them get their asses get kicked in by everyone on earth.
sPh
Here's a (hopefully) working link:
SCO's claims Against Daimler-Chrysler Thrown Out
I'm not sure why the one in the article I submitted didn't work as it's the same one I'm posting here.
infested with jello like fishes no melotron wishes
It's not a matter of whether PJ has the legal right to delete the posts she doesn't like. It's matter of groklaw being unfair and biased to the point of being worthless.
PJ doesn't just delete trolls, obscene posts, and posts that are intended to insult. PJ will delete anything that doesn't suck-up to the groklaw party line.
On groklaw, there is no real discussion. It's a big circle-jerk. And it's too bad, because groklaw used to be a really great site.
You said:
'Petrovsky's "analysis" is weak and off-base, as usual.'
Okay, please be specific about where and how the arguement is "off base" and "weak." I don't care who considers Pertrovsky a troll. I want specific facts.
Thank you for your reply.
john gabrielh ing
harlan
al_petrofsky
talk_to_birds
rus
br3n
Long time readers of Groklaw will probably recognize these names.
The revolution may not be televised but it will be chronicled at ip-wars.net.
1000 SlashDot sigs
I have been reading groklaw for about 18 months.
I 100% agree that PJ will accept nothing but yes-men. Anything that does not follow the groklaw party line 100% is deleted. PJ is even known to delete accounts for what people posts on other boards.
You will not find meaningful discussion on groklaw anymore, I can assure you of that.
sPh
"Anything that does not follow the groklaw party line 100% is deleted"
That's a curious conclusion you've come to, since for the last two months or so PJ has set up dedicated threads in SCO-related articles (titled Official "The SCO Group" Positions) which is reserved for official SCO representatives to freely post.
To date I haven't seen SCO officials comment.
Furthermore the intro to the thread states, " Sub-posts from persons not connected with "The SCO Group" must be very polite, address other posters and the main poster with the honorific "Mr." or "Mrs." or "Ms.", as appropriate, use correct surnames, not call names or suggest or imply unethical or illegal conduct by "The SCO Group" or its employees or attorneys. "
Seems to me like Groklaw is bending over backwards to accomodate. The catch being that since it's an open forum, SCO will have to endure facts, logic and actual case law being applied to their comments as feedback.
Michael Moore posts to /.?
-Dizzle
"I most likely AM so interested in myself."
mmm stereotypes
Groklaw continues to thrive now that most of the bleating whiners have been cropped from the message boards. Court documents continue to arrive and be converted to text in a timely manner and Pam's comments continue to chisel away at the SCO legal position while reflecting on the morality of such groups.
Well then, where are the court documents and transcripts from the Daimler case? Groklaw doesn't have them. Al Petrofsky has gone out of his way to get these documents, report or court hearings, get audio and video recordings of the hearings, etc. Groklaw will sometimes link to Al's site, scofacts.org, but never give him credit. It says something to me when PJ can't get along with people that so productive and active in the same cause.
Groklaw's loss is our gain.
infested with jello like fishes no melotron wishes
As an American that did NOT vote for GW Bush and as an American that does NOT like the direction our country is headed, particularly with respect to what we're doing around the world, I have to say that I don't like your comment. I think it would have been fine if you hadn't included that part about "And *YET* the moment you bring this up, some USian will come up and pretend that they care." Guess what? Some of us do. Just slightly under 1/2 of us do care, according to the results of a national poll we had a few weeks ago. Unfortunately, the so-called "moral majority" got out the vote.
It's too bad that people can get up on their soapbox like the parent post, but can't do so under their own names.
"non-white non-Christian non-Catholic non-male President"
/. before.
You act as if there are no subgroups within t his so-called "white" race. I'll also point out that a lot of our presidents have NOT been Catholic. Christians yes, but when the majority of voters are Christians, what would you expect? As far as non-male, the point is taken, but we do have women in Congress. Congress could stop a lot of what the President does if they wanted to. Refusing to fund Vietnam or Iraq would've made those campaigns not worth doing since the President would have a) not enough time due to a cap on the amount of time he may send troops in and b) no additional funds.
"Look at the US. They do not respect other nations sovereign rights. Their allies are Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Israel and the like. They subsidize China and overlook Chinese human right abuses. They do not even care enough about the environment to ratify the Kyoto. It is a sad, sad state of affairs."
What does any of that have to do with sovereign rights? I see you lumped Israel in with Pakistan and the Saudis. Interesting that we also have Australia, Great Britain, Spain and others. I guess they are EVIL too.
Show that the "atrocities" of Abu Ghraib was the will of the American people. Until then it has nothing to do with our values. Again, what does Guatanomo Bay have to do with values? We don't like people that were caught aiding terrorists? I can't believe it! We trained the Taliban to resist a Soviet occupation of a sovereign nation. We do have values. Those values got George Bush elected over John Kerry. You might not agree with the values, but we certainly do have some pretty strong ones (strong enough that we'd vote on abortion or gay marriage and to hell with anything else apparently...).
We're not the only ones with SUVs or McDonalds btw. Pretty weak arguments based on stereotypes.
"They are too high up in their "religious" and "moral" highground to care about the world."
I thought you said later we had no values? Oh yes, you just don't agree with them and thus they don't exist.
"While dictators are ruling countries like North Korea and Pakistan, they are more concerned about Iraq - the people need to be liberated, you know? The oil, most importantly."
Your argument about sovereignty would indicate that interfering with North Korea or Pakistan would be wrong anyway. Your whining about China is also quite hypocritical for the same reason. But this is more of the same stuff that's been all over
So, you posted more of same faulty arguments, contradicted yourself, and shown a disregard for anyone's opinions but your own. I'm sure that since my values are incompatible with your own, you probably think this post does not exist.
Next up they'll be overturning the right to vote or own property.
You are an idiot. Owning property is at the core of the beliefs of the middle-aged white men crowd.
It is the liberals who make claims that not all property should be owned, and if you have more property then you should pay more for each piece you own.
If anyone it is the hippies (note this is not a jab at the liberals, I actually mean the hippies) who want to abolish all property.
badness 10000
You were doing a reasonable job of slapping down an idiot (non christian, non catholic!?) until the above line. If the inhabitants of Guantanamo Bay were 'caught' aiding terrorists why haven't they been put on trial? Could it be anything to do with the lack of any real evidence against some of them? Why is the US government ignoring its obligations under the Geneva Conventions? For your information they require anyone whose status under them is unclear to be treated as a prisoner of war until that status has been clarified. Your government has failed on both counts, they are not being treated as POWs and their status has not been clarified.
Note, inventing a brand new category of 'enemy combatant' to suit your own desires does not count as clarification.
As to some specific points above:
- Nearly half of the US voters who voted voted against the incombent president. It was a closely fought election, and not all US citizens can be blaimed for who gets elected.
- There are many in the US who object to SUVs. Even in the UK, I get to realise that SUVs are controversial over there in the US. Indeed, the anti-SUV movement is probably more developed over there than over here!
- Vietnam. Some of the strongest anti-Vietnam war protests were
... in the US!
- Americans have no values? What about; Freedom of Speech? Stallman and the GPL? The ACLU? Linux? (Linus Torvalds now lives and workds in the US). Democracy? (If Bush had lost the vote, he would have been out!).
- Abu Gharib/Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay have, and do, anger a lot of US citizens. At least one US soldier has been court marshalled and imprisoned for Abu Ghraib, and the US supreme Court has ruled against the US Administration on some os the Administration's tactics as Guantanamo Bay. (Legal representation, I believe, although not sure).
I could go on. All I will say is don't judge a whole nation on the actions of a few. And that goes for all nations, not just the US. I would no more hold the US people as a whole to account for what their current president does, that I would blame all of Russia for what Stalin did!Have a nice day!
Sesostris III
You never know what is enough unless you know what is more than enough. - Blake
How come some one hasent modded the above right wing nut job down?
* Carthago Delenda Est *
div_2n: "This is a tired old argument drummed up by people that don't like it when their comments get deleted on a website belonging to someone else and their comments violate the rules by the operator and is being perpetuated potentially by SCO shills."
Hmm, well, no one likes that, do they?
On the other hand, you are also mischaracterizing the issue. Pam Jones deletes accounts *AND* the authorial attributions of the members posts.
In other words, Pam continues to use the work of people she's deleted, but she takes away the credit for their contributions.
Removal of authorial attributions, as copyright management information, is also potential grounds for a DMCA take-down order. And a probable copyright infringement. While none of the current Groklaw disappeared intend to follow-up on those grounds, Pam Jones is placing her site at risk from some litigious bastard looking for a reason to take out her site.
Whether you agree with those assessments or not is irrelevant, as the action is clearly unethical in any event.
-- John Gabriel
AC: "I trust PJ's understanding of the law (it's her job), more than the anti-Groklaw crowd."
Seems like most of the so-called "Pro-Groklaw" crowd is contributing to this conversation as "Anonymous Coward". What are you afraid of?
I am the registered owner of one hundred shares of The SCO Group's common stock (SCOX), and enjoy all the rights and privileges thereto pertaining (here's the certificate). I am not the direct or beneficial owner of any other shares of SCOX.
I also owe 14,400 shares of SCOX to various broker/dealers. My total interest in SCOX is a net shortage of 14,300 shares: when the share price increases by $1/share, the net value of my portfolio (assets minus liabilities) decreases by $14,300. Vice-versa for a decrease in the share price.
Thus, I benefit from any exarcerbation, not mitigation, of any "low value perception" of SCO.
As it says right at the top of scofacts.org:
Actually, br3n's not gone yet, though Pam has threatened br3n, in a post on Groklaw, with "thinking deep thoughts" about doing deleting her.
Yes, this is Pam's way of getting agreement on GL -- not by arguing the points, but by threatening with deletion anyone who disagrees with her, whether at Groklaw, or *anywhere on the internet*.
Brilliant strategy, Pam. I mean, hey, it worked for Stalin.
It is official.
Netcraft confirms: SCO is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered SCO community when IDC confirmed that SCO market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all Linux distribution versions. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that SCO has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. SCO is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by falling dead last in a recent Linux distribution study.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict SCO's future. The hand writing is on the wall: SCO faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for SCO because SCO is dying. Things are looking very bad for SCO. As many of us are already aware, SCO continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
SCO UNIX is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time developers Simon Baldwin and Andrew Sharpe only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: SCO is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
SCO UNIX project leader Darl states that there are 7000 users of SCO UNIX. How many users of OpenServer are there? Let's see. The number of SCO UNIX versus OpenServer posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 OpenServer users. SCO UNIX posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of OpenServer posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of SCO UNIX. A recent article put SCO UNIX distribution at about 80 percent of the market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 SCO UNIX users. This is consistent with the number of SCO Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of half-baked SCO lawsuits, abysmal sales and so on, many development companies is going out of business and will probably be taken over by another company who will sell another troubled product. Now SCO is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that SCO has steadily declined in market share. SCO is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If SCO is to survive at all it will be among dilettante dabblers. SCO continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, SCO is dead.
Fact: SCO is dying
http://saveie6.com/
A Brief History of GrokWar gives the short form.
-- TWZ
Actually, as far as I know, John F. Kennedy was the first and the last catholic President. John Kerry was the second catholic that ran for presidency (from the major parties). Grandparent apparently doesn't understand WASP.
Be warned, even Rome fell.
Correct, however it took thousands of years. Using your analogy, the world should be under the foot of the US for another 1800 years or so.
Might as well get comfortable...its going to be a long show.
There is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
In fact, all the information to answer your question can be determined from my single - means '1' - journal article.
If you're too lazy or stupid to take it from there, I'm afraid I decline to help you. Especially as your motives are obviously less than charitable.
Fuckwit.
You forget, it's not a few, it's the majority that is accepting this, and the rest of the world is well in its rights to judge a nation by the actions of its majority. Iraq has happened, Guantanamo bay has happened, Abu Ghraib has happened, Falluja has happened, Molub and other towns are happening, and the ones ultimately responsible have been given a carte blanche to screw up some more. Face it, the excuse that the fuckup government was an accident does not work anymore. The US has chosen to go the Bush route and the nation (note, not every single individual) is judged by this. Right now, the US is well underway of becoming intensely evil, regardless of the large amount of decency that still exists.
Darl and friends will have drawn those huge salaries as long as possible before SCO gets smacked down. I'm sure some of them will also end up with cushy jobs that don't actually involve work at Microsoft or Sun when this is all over, too.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
>
That's a curious conclusion you've come to, since for the last two months or so PJ has set up dedicated threads in SCO-related articles (titled Official "The SCO Group" Positions) which is reserved for official SCO representatives to freely post.
Pffft. Yeah, okay, PJ made an *exception* for official SCO representatives. Ever hear of the exception that proves the rule? Official SCO representatives *and only* official SCO representatives, are allowed to post anything other typical groklaw sucking up.
What if somebody who isn't an official SCO representatives has a different point of view? Oh, we won't have that on groklaw. What a kick in the teeth to those who have contributed so much.
The Groklaw link in the story submission itself has the same document that appears at ip-wars.net. It is noteworthy, however, that the motion is not included in the case documents in Groklaw's section dedicated to collating all the documents for the various legal proceedings. It's possibly an oversight that needs to be brought to the attention of the page maintainer (not PJ in this instance).
Logic is a wonderful thing but doesn't always beat actual thought. -Terry Pratchett
. . Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it. Robert Heinlein
>>Most of the enlightened stuff comes from "Anonymous".
>Precisely the opposite of reality.
Actually, Anonymous logins can be very enlightened on GL. Most notably is Qutrmass (sp) who always posts anonymously. Makes it harder to find his posts, but it's worth it. Also, there are other examples of Anonymous postings at GL that are well worth reading. It's what keeps me from using the option to remove anonymous posts from view.
I am, and always will be, an idiot. Karma: Coma (mostly effected by
Correct, however it took thousands of years. Using your analogy, the world should be under the foot of the US for another 1800 years or so.
Ok, I know this is nitpicking but although one could claim it was about 1800 years (until 1453 defeat of Byzantine, eastern Rome), in practice the full roman hegemony "only" lasted for couple of centuries (maybe from ~100BC until ~300 AD). The fall of western Rome (476?) split the empire in half, and although Byzantine did recover some land areas for a while, it never regained the same glory as pre-split, and started steady decline before crusades (triggered by the islamic expansion on 7th century AD).
Not that this really weakens your main point but... :-)
I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
> Did you know that PJ has no financial interests in
> ANY of the litigants involved in SCO v World?
Not the litigants, no. However, there was a little problem of her involvement with an operation called OSRM, that was seeking to make a dollar by shilling for Linux insurance.
You'll have heard of OSRM, because that's the organization that Steve Ballmer and SCOX have been citing as recently supporting the case that Linux is full of potential intellectual property liabilities. 228 potential patent violations at last count -- but pay us and we'll protect you.
(Now where have I heard *that* line before?)
Granted, she's just resigned from OSRM, but any attempt to discuss the fact that she was working for a FUD factory on Groklaw would get you banned.
> That is what is called 'Clean Hands'!
Mmmmm. I've got another term for it myself. It doesn't resemble yours in the slightest.
This is the *first* time I've ever said 'I wish I had mod points so that I could mod that post up.'
If I had them, you'd have gotten all five -- a/c or not.
Thanks for the first laugh I've ever had over this story.
> PJ is very religious, Al is gay. PJ banishes Al.
Hang on a second, let me get this straight:
PJ says to Big Gay Al, "You will respec' my authoru-tah!" and hits him with her nightstick.
So Cartman, I mean, PJ, banishes Big Gay Al to Big Gay Al's Animal Sanctuary over on:
http://www.ip-wars.net/
"Oh my God! They've killed John Gabriel's Grokposts!"
If you find that history to be laughably wrong, tell us where it errs. You can post your corrections on the ip-wars site, anonymously or otherwise, and they won't be deleted. If you're unwilling or unable to back up your accusation, there's no reason why anyone should pay any attention to you.
Please identify one statement in the story which is factually incorrect. Thanks. -- TWZ
Yes. She's given every indication that if she did she'd use them.
Bar: "Funny thing though, you never referred to DM as a 'Fuckwit'."
Actually, Bar, should you prefer read the first draft of that article, you will find that I did characterize Mr. McBride in response to Paragraph 13, as follows:
"Mr. McBride, the only way to defend this in court is to tell the judge that you are a complete fucking idiot, and that all previous mangement was equally incompetent. Even if a court buys that explanation, I hardly think they'll reward SCO's utter stupidity to the tune of 3 billion dollars. It's far more likely that they will require SCO to pay IBM's court costs instead."
-- http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=77770&cid
Any other false assumptions you'd like to share in promoting your fitness to belong in the same complete fucking idiot class as Darl 'Fuckwit' McBride?
" Well, there's been no confirmation from Netcraft yet..."
It is official.
Netcraft confirms: SCO is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered SCO community when IDC confirmed that SCO market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all Linux distribution versions. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that SCO has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. SCO is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by falling dead last in a recent Linux distribution study.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict SCO's future. The hand writing is on the wall: SCO faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for SCO because SCO is dying. Things are looking very bad for SCO. As many of us are already aware, SCO continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
SCO UNIX is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time developers Simon Baldwin and Andrew Sharpe only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: SCO is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
SCO UNIX project leader Darl states that there are 7000 users of SCO UNIX. How many users of OpenServer are there? Let's see. The number of SCO UNIX versus OpenServer posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 OpenServer users. SCO UNIX posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of OpenServer posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of SCO UNIX. A recent article put SCO UNIX distribution at about 80 percent of the market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 SCO UNIX users. This is consistent with the number of SCO Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of half-baked SCO lawsuits, abysmal sales and so on, many development companies is going out of business and will probably be taken over by another company who will sell another troubled product. Now SCO is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that SCO has steadily declined in market share. SCO is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If SCO is to survive at all it will be among dilettante dabblers. SCO continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, SCO is dead.
Fact: SCO is dying
http://saveie6.com/
"Petrovsky's "analysis" is weak and off-base, as usual." That really is pretty funny, considering that in the AZ case, it was Al that got it right and Pam that got it wrong. But Al's account got deleted for even suggesting that she didn't quite have it right. Personally, what really bothered me was that ever since that time, she would use his work, but she would never give him credit. Granted, Al has never complained about this, but it bothers me none the less.
Yup, the link in the ip-wars article is to Al's site, so the grandparent is correct. Al got the documents, and they are on his site. ipwars is not his site.
Exorcist may have a different answer, but the geek would say:
"When the parent process (Microsoft) calls wait*() on him, or dies".
What would be quite close to the truth.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. PJ is not in favor of open information. I care fare more about the openness of FOSS than I do about SCO. If PJ is going to be given the podium to speak, I want the world to know that she does not speak for me. As for whiney little diatribes, have you seen what Pam dishes out? Have you ever read what she writes about slashdot? She certainly is not a fan of this site and its open communications. Hell, she doesn't even understand the value and openness of the internet. How much more effective could groklaw have been if it could be found by the wall street types when they would search for information on SCOX. And she even has the gall to suggest that she has some sort of right to stop deep linking. She should spend some time reading the court decisions on that.
Uh, PJ is just a paralegal, not an attorney. The requirements to understand the law are actually quite minimal.
They are trained to do research.
It seems to me that when I read it, it was fairly accurate as far as it went. If anything it was far from complete.
It actually missed out on a lot of complaints that some of us had, and how long ago people were starting to have misgivings.
But I just don't think that is what you were suggesting.
Inaccuracy: Only once has the US ever elected a Catholic President (JFK).
Moll.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
No problem.
Where PJ makes any such statement is all over Groklaw.
We can start with blocking anyone from even indexing the content of GL, even though it is plainly legal in the united states.
Go to the article on the Mission statement being updated, and search on the word "nasty". She actively discourages people from releasing their comments under the CCL.
She believes in free code, she does not believe in free information.
"Yes I have. PJ is discrete and courteous,"
Now that is funny. Everyone on Y!SCOX is a troll, astroturfer etc.
"Again, your unsubstantiated opinion. "
that one I did substantiate. Go back an reread.
"Care to cite or is this yet another unsubstaniated whinge?"
What is a whinge?
Of course I'll cite them for you . . . there are none! Every time it comes up, it is settled in favor of the linker!
And lying to or through Congress should be made a capital offence, even for Presidents.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
# host 149.156.96.35
35.96.156.149.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer hell.pl.
French, is it?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
She doesn't support either abuse, or the posting of text which might get GrokLaw closed down (and usually they're synonymous).
/dev/null, I'd be very surprised, 'coz I'm pretty sure I would have by now (call me prejudiced, or call me experienced, makes no difference in how it works). If you'd been on FidoNet, you'd have been downed for TEA and XA long ago there as well.
If you post an alternate PoV that is not abusive, she will leave it there - unless you've been so consistently abusive in the past that she's already toileted your account.
If she hasn't fed your account to
So... learn to express yourself in a socially constructive manner and the gates to acceptance will open before you. Refuse, and you're condemned to a frustrating on-line life forever. That's not a decree from me, that's just how life works.
Get it? Got it? Oh, never mind. This is SlashDot.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
...is a separate question.
Evil thought: I very rarely get negative mods. Does that mean I'm a moron? (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
If Al was, so to speak, waving his mud-encrusted dipstick in PJ's face then I can understand why she'd banish him. I'd expect her to also banish Scientologists, Mormons or Atheists who were using her site to promote their views instead of for discussing the legal issues there posted. But if you're going to claim that she kicked him off just for choosing to be bent, link to some verifiable testimony. SCOfacts appears to be down right now, so I can't search for myself.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Thanks for the great reply. I did notice that the Wikipedia entry also talked a lot of what you'd said, except for the cultural nuances ofcourse ;)
If the BSA pulled that shit on me running a GNU/Linux shop they'd find themselves on the wrong end of a lawsuit.
My other OS is also FreeBSD
I've never seen a link to scofacts from Groklaw.
Also, Al has a vested interest in SCO's stock price downfall, because he's shorted it.
He loses credibility for that but not as much because he states it himself.
DirecTV's more interesting tactics were technical.
[Me, I still live in the legal gray world where I believe I have a right to time, space and device shift content I lawfully receive from DirecTV and believe all technical means to achieve those ends ought to be legal. Simulatneously, I don't believe I have a right to grab their signal for free with a hacked card, nor should I download movies or music content for which I haven't already paid the copyright owner. So, to the extent that hacker technology helps me, I support it, even if it puts me askew the DMCA.]
"Provided by the management for your protection."
This isn't the knitting group?
... not 'qualities'.
-------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.
If you look at the stats on this dog of a stock, two-thirds of the shares are held by institutions. The common opinion is that there's some "gaming" of the stock price: small blocks traded at a few cents up repeatedly to make the thing look more appealing. This may entice some naive folks to take the shares off the funds' hands before it tanks and the funds have to deal with the loss.
The recent pattern seems to be a hard drop in the early morning when shares are dumped, then 'painting up' in the late afternoon so the closing price stays near the previous day's value. Repeat until divested...
The suit, as I recall, claimed that even though DC said they hadn't used Unix in seven years, that their response didn't include a list of servers as specified in the License, or what they did with the defunct boxes to ensure protection of the code, or if they'd taken the code and given it to That Evil Penguinista OS.
They didn't refuse to certify, they just refused to answer items outside the terms of the original License ex. Linux-related matters.