Slashdot Mirror
SCO Targets UK Firms
indierockboy writes "It seems that SCO is bringing its dodgy 'Linux licenses' over here to the UK. Vnunet.com reports that SCO's expansion of their 'Linux licensing programme' makes legal action against UK users 'imminent'. Does anyone know if the ongoing cases in the USA can be used as a defense? Since SCO has yet to prove anything..."
Knowing a lawyer, the legal system in the UK doesn't put up with the shit the American system does. It is possible for legal events in other countries to influence our law. My friend cited a case regarding a patent dispute where the patent had been filed in the EU and prior art was being shown to exist in the EU. However, they'd already filed a patent in the US convering that technology and that pre-dated the european prior art. They won the case.
Returning to topic, SCO have to tread really carefully here. Firstly, if the British courts find their claim to be baseless that surely more ammunition for a motion to have the cases in the States dismissed.
Secondly, we have some pretty strict rules about business practices. They could find themselves in hot water with the regulators if they're shown to be effectively extorting people.
Thirdly, they have the EU to deal with. Lots of EU countries are rolling linux out. For this reason, they automatically have many powerful enemies who will be looking for ways to silence SCO. Microsoft learned the EU has teeth. So will SCO.
Simon
Aren't slander/libel cases a LOT easier to win in the U.K.?
Mr. McBride better be careful what he says about Linux over there...
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
that's the big question.. have SCO learned anything from all the fun and games in the States? Are they going to try for a bit of cheap court-cred by going for someone small, or are they going to take on a titan again?
The biggest users of GNU/Linux must be the banks here, and the likes of RBOS/HBOS/HSBC are an obstacle on the same scale as IBM & Daimler-Chrysler.. Way, way deep pockets, and more lawyers than even SCO could possibly envision..
In fact, given how things have worked out so far, and given who they would be up against in that sort of case, they would have trouble finding a competent solicitor to represent them. When it comes to crushing upstarts, the banks have been doing this longer than anyone...
As I recall, in the UK there is much less incentive to settle a legal argument (if you feel sure you are in the the right) because the loser of the court case pays the costs of both sides.
Even if you win you might end up out of pocket. I recall a case where a man sued for slander and actually won the action, but he was awarded two pence in damages and ordered to pay the costs of both sides. And lawyers in the UK are no cheaper than their US equivalents.
The UK courts (usually) have a good sense of fairness and even some measure of common sense, which seems remarkably uncommon in some courts. This cuts down immensely on frivolous law suits.
Presumably the agreement would be to licence SCO's claimed IP and not to settle ongoing litigation. If it turned out SCO's claims were unfounded then in English law whoever paid could have an action for misrepresentation or perhaps wrongful enrichment. Hardly worth suing for a few hundred quid, though.