OSDL Says SCO Suit Was Good for Linux

sebFlyte notes a zdnet story thats says "Speaking at Queen Mary, University of London, on Monday night, Open Source Developer Labs chief executive Stuart Cohen said the lawsuits [SCO suing everyone in sight over supposed issues with Linux] were "the best thing that ever happened to Linux"'

Comments

I can think of better things

[jasper-la]

Well I can think of better things happend to Linux! Big companies choosing Linux' side for example. Or the GPL with version 0.12!

Re:I can think of better things

[falconed]

Sure there could be better things. But there's no such thing as bad publicity, and the more publicity Linux gets, the better.

The SCO case put Linux on the front page. Maybe it wasn't under the best circumstances, but I'll bet it got a lot of people saying "Linux? What's that?" and actually getting an answer.

Re:I can think of better things

[GodLived]

... or IBM offering Linux on its high-end servers, or the SE Linux initiative.

It just proves the old adage

[winkydink]

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

Re:It just proves the old adage

[TheKubrix]

In that case, someone give Paris Hilton a copy of Linux, Quick!!

Re:It just proves the old adage

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes! What a great team! Linux is free and open to EVERYBODY... Just like Paris!!

Re:It just proves the old adage

[Michael O-P]

Wally disputes many old adages today:

http://www.comics.com/comics/dilbert/index.html

Re:It just proves the old adage

[thirteenVA]

but does it stand up to the slashdot adage that any sex is better than sitting alone in the basement?

I can relate...

[Andrewkov]

Yeah, it reminds me of the time someone beat me up and stole my bike when I was in grade 4. Best thing that ever happened to me!

Not terribly suprising.

[PopeAlien]

Sco news is good news.

theres no such thing as bad publicity.

"There was a lot of due diligence around the world with people looking at the code and looking at software stacks, and all this work validated that there was nothing there, no risk, no issue," said Cohen. "The SCO court case ended up on every Web site, in every newspaper and every magazine. Everybody had to do due diligence -- you could not be a CTO or CIO and not do due diligence in 2003/2004 when SCO was suing end users," he added.

this just goes to show the strength of community involvment.. A system where the teamining bearded hordes CAN check every line of code and confirm each others findings.

The best thing that happened?

[tod_miller]

I would say that would be a Mr Torvalds if-you-please.

I woudl certainly say it was the best thing Microsoft have done for linux so far, I mean, spending all that money to legitimise and place such great precedent for future generations of linux users.

Lets all not forget to thank bill and his minions next time we fire up tux racer!

adios.

Everybody likes a good underdog

[J Barnes]

I've got to say that as a dumb windoze user, I paid a lot more attention to the developments in the linux community once I learned of the SCO lawsuits. I'm still sitting in a windows environment, but after being enthralled with the underdog publicity generated by the legal manuverings, I'm taking alternate operating systems a lot more seriously.

I agree completely

[Weaselmancer]

The public flogging SCO received at the hands of their entire customer base serves as a stern warning to anyone who would try to lay any similar hijinks in the future.

"Hey Dan, this lawsuit sounds like a bad idea. Remember what happened to SCO?"

It's been wonderful good publicity, too. Nothing like showing the whole world who your allies are. The list of companies willing to back Linux (such as IBM) is impressive. Now, and thanks entirely to the lawsuit - people know that IBM backs Linux.

If Linux ever seemed fly-by-night, it sure as hell doesn't now.

Linux passed the test?

[tji]

I don't know if he is just making lemonade from the SCO lemons, or if he really has a point..

The negative way to look at the SCO thing is that it's just the beginning of a huge wave of patent infringement lawsuits that all the big boys and many little patent leaches are positioning themselves for.

The positive spin would be that Linux withstood a well funded / backed instance of that strategy, and people didn't stop moving to Linux while the lawsuit was active. So, this would imply that Linux can survive and even flourish in the face of the inevitable lawsuits.

I'm not sure which I actually believe. I think our porous patent system is transferring all the burden they should be taking unto the court system (which has been ill equipped to handle complex technical cases in the past).

Not according to CIO's

[MLopat]

While he may make optomistic comments about the lawsuit filed by SCO, from speaking with hundreds of technical decision makers, including CIO's, the lawsuits have actually been a stumbling block in using a fullblown linux back end for alot of companies. As a CIO, you're concerned about the longterm value of your solution. And if you're the one that's penned your signature to a $5million system that is using software that may not be supported (or worse) then you can pretty much kiss your ass goodbye. Long gone are the days where "nobody got fired for buying IBM"

You can argue that there is no "safe bet" right now on platform decisions, but with all the positive marketing Microsoft has put forward in recent years, and all the negative publicity that Linux is receiveing as a direct result of this lawsuit, its just one more incentive to check out other avenues, and may ultimately be the deciding factor when a company decides NOT to implement a Linux solution as has been the case with many now Microsoft clients.

So you guys will probably mod this down to a sub terrarian level.

Re:Not according to CIO's

[ajs]

"While he may make optomistic comments about the lawsuit filed by SCO, from speaking with hundreds of technical decision makers, including CIO's, the lawsuits have actually been a stumbling block in using a fullblown linux back end for alot of companies."

I think you're looking at this upside down. How many of those people who are using this as an excuse didn't need this event to make an execuse? Would the fact that Red Hat is a new company or IBM might go back to the Windows camp or something else have been the issue otherwise? I suspect so.

There are many people I deal with who look at the giant farms of Linux servers that I interact with and say, "hey, that's scary stuff!" Invariably, they are the dinosaurs who are busy being rendered obsolete. IBM mainframes were scary stuff at one point too, and no one could understand why you would want to stake your business on a MACHINE that could make MISTAKES... until a few dozen companies made it clear that NOT going that way was a ticket to extinction.

Windows desktops were the same way.

Unix servers: same story.

Web-based business transactions: same thing.

Every new technology requires a period of early-adoptors, and we're exiting (or just starting to exit) that phase with Linux. That's a scary time. These guys see the writing on the wall, and they're trying to make any rationalization they can to avoid the descision that they know they have to make. Tough nuts, industry doesn't care about their rationalization, only results.

As much as it pains me to admit it,

[idontgno]

the SCO fiasco has had positive effects.

• Gave the community a good scare, shaking off some of the complancency and reminding us that if software is a business, and you're competing in it, it's a nasty business and a bruising game.
• Made everyone re-examine the code itself, just to be sure we're clean. SCO's charges seem ridiculous, but it never hurts to audit just to be sure.
• Exposed one of the more virulent and extreme anti-OS points of view to objective examination. This examination finds that set of opinions greivously deficient.
• Firmed up the nebulous "open-versus-closed software" battlefield. Now it's harder to avoid taking a side, and those who do (Sun, for instance) have to engage in marketing and PR contortionism to do so, looking visibly quite silly in the process.
• And of course, comic relief.

it was even better for the bsd's

[Anonymous Coward]

freeBSD has picked up quite a fair bit of steam over the last two years. I know of a few companies that ditched linux for bsd specifically due to the sco case.

Re:it was even better for the bsd's

[advocate_one]

what we're seeing with BSD is merely post-mortem nervous activity causing the corpse to twitch...





runs for cover...

Linux license refund from SCO?

[3770]

Some companies bought the $699 linux license that SCO was selling.

If (or when) SCO loses this lawsuit I would argue that they didn't have the right to sell those licenses. They were selling something they didn't own.

Will the companies that bought those licenses be refunded (yeah, sure)? But could they sue SCO to get that money back? And can they win?

Did SCO protect themselves somehow in the license agreements they sold for this very scenario. They could have done that by not really selling them licenses to use Linux, but to use Caldera Linux and telling the customers that this will give them the rights to use whatever other version of Linux that they are using too.

I don't know how many that bought those licenses but I've heard some rather large numbers. We could easily be talking about _real_ money here.

Could SCO could risk a fast and swift death if they lose their lawsauit against IBM et al?

It was bad publicity

[bonch]

I disagree completely. It was bad publicity. It makes Linux seem like this chaotic thing with lawsuits that you might get embroiled in. Windows would be the "safer" choice.

With the issues the 2.6 kernel had this year and last, the SCO negativity was the last thing Linux needed. I think this article is one of those positive rallying cries to make people feel better, but SCO was a very bad thing for Linux. It's no longer seen as the invincible little free operating system. Its heritage was brought into question, the issue of code attribution is now on people's minds now and in the future on OSS projects, and it has the PR taint of corporations and intellectual properties in its history.

Re:It was bad publicity

[Weaselmancer]

Respectfully, I also disagree.

It's no longer seen as the invincible little free operating system.

According to the dictionary, one definition of invincible is "Incapable of being overcome or defeated; unconquerable." And up until now it's only been something that fans of Linux have claimed. Now it's something that has been shown to be true. Linux now has a legal track record. It's not hearsay anymore.

Its heritage was brought into question

Yes it was. And that solves another thing that Linux fans have always claimed - and has now been found to be true in a court of law. And also by example - SCO drained itself trying to prove the opposite, drained its investors and came up with absolutely, positively nothing. Again, now it's no longer a claim, it has a track record.

And it's a track record and only a track record that can make something seem stable. Now, thanks to SCO, Linux has one.

That $50mil that Microsoft funneled into Baystar was the best advertising that Linux could have ever hoped for. Even better than the IBM Linux commercials.

Re:It was bad publicity

[MrHanky]

Oh yes, it was bad publicity, but Linux managed fine. The lawsuit was, in the end, obviously frivolous, and proved only that there's actual money behind Linux. And money is the only thing that makes Windows a "safe" bet. Microsoft has lost many lawsuits, and will continue to do so as long as the US patent system is in its current state. Windows is also a security nightmare. Windows safe? No. But it's not going away soon.

(and re: your sig -- why not use a dictionary:
R'egime \R['e]`gime"\ (r?`zh?m"), n. [F. See {Regimen}.]
1. Mode or system of rule or management; character of government, or of the prevailing social system.)

He has a point. It did help.

[Animats]

Somebody challenged Linux. Spent lots of money, got expensive lawyers, issued public statements, and went to court. And they got rolled over. From a business perspective, that means Linux isn't going to fold up at the first challenge.

Look where SCOXE is today. Nobody is trading the stock. Volume is down 90% since the NASDAQ listed them as out of compliance with SEC regs. They may be kicked down to the Pink Sheets next week, but they're already trading like a Pink Sheet stock.

Everybody laughs at SCO now. Business Week, Fortune, and Forbes are all very negative on SCO.

Darl was interviewed by Business Week a few days ago. Some great momments:

• Q: Ralph Yarro was terminated in December as CEO of Canopy Group, SCO's longtime financial backer, for allegedly overpaying himself. Is Ralph Yarro still on SCO's board?

  A: Yes.

  Q: Do you want him to stay on the board?

  A: Ralph has been a great board member. He's been very supportive and valuable in terms of the input he has provided.

  Q: What has he helped you do?

  A: Ralph has a great entrepreneurial mind. He's been good on intellectual property and legal battles. I wouldn't call him the architect of our legal strategy, but he clearly has added value. How that's all going to play out, I don't know.

  Q: Are you concerned about his ability to serve?

  A: We had a board meeting last week. The company needs to get some clarity about the situation. It's important to figure out who represents the Canopy shares. As long as the cloud is there regarding the Canopy situation we want to remove the cloud.

  Q: Will he stay on the board?

  A: No one on the SCO board has asked him to step down. He will continue to serve.

Canopy owns part of SCO. Yarrow used to represent Canopy on the SCO board, but he doesn't, any more. Canopy fired Yarrow. Yarrow and Canopy are sueing each other. This is clearly a dysfunctional organization, not a serious threat. They've been referred to in the press as "the gang that couldn't sue straight".

Better analogy...

[gosand]

Yeah, it reminds me of the time someone beat me up and stole my bike when I was in grade 4. Best thing that ever happened to me!

Actually, it would be more accurate if: A bully with no friends accosted you and said you stole his bike, but all your friends, even some people you didn't know, gathered around and told the bully to get lost. He kept getting more and more belligerent, said he was going to get his big brother, but everyone started laughing at him. Even an ex-bully was on your side and gave the bully a bloody nose. He finally ran away crying, and went back to the creepy guy in the park, who had given him a bag of candy to stir up trouble because all the guy had was a homemade bike that wasn't very nice because he put it together from old parts of other bikes that he found or stole. The guy in the park didn't have any friends either because he had been a complete jerk to everyone his entire life. The creep really didn't want your bike, he just didn't want anyone else to have a nice bike. But the creep survived because he had lots of money from killing puppies and selling their souls to the devil. And he had a bad haircut. The end.

A different type of free?

[Gzip Christ]

Yes! What a great team! Linux is free and open to EVERYBODY... Just like Paris!!

I was going to say that Paris is free as in beer, not free as in speech, but that got me thinking. Linux is free as in speech because you can do what you want with it. Similarly, Paris will let you have your way with her, so maybe she is like Linux. The thing is, RMS hasn't told me to call her GNU/Paris, so I'm not really sure. Maybe we need a new saying just for people: free as in Paris Hilton or free as in Kevin Mitnick?

Re:What about your own obituary?

[Sloppy]

The problem with a well-attended funeral, is the obligation it creates. If a lot of people come to my funeral, that'll suck, because then I'll have to go to all of theirs. Let's just agree: we'll skip each other's funerals, ok?