Slashdot Mirror
Unsealed SCO Email Reveals Linux Code is Clean
rm69990 writes "In a recently unsealed email in the SCO vs. IBM case, it appears that an outside consultant, hired by SCO in 2002, failed to find copyright violations in the Linux Kernel. This was right around the time Darl McBride, who has before been hired by litigious companies as CEO, was hired. It appears that before SCO even began its investigation, they were hoping to find a smoking gun, not believing that Linux could possibly not contain Unix code. Apparently, they ignored the advice of this consultant."
It appears that before SCO even began its investigation, they were hoping to find a smoking gun, not believing that Linux could possibly not contain Unix code. Apparently, they ignored the advice of this consultant."
Gee, that sounds familiar. Seems to be a popular strategy in both business and *cough*cough*cough, government these days. Seriously though, this is a model that does appear to have some traction in a variety of fields in that if you press your case hard enough, and you convince enough of the right people, there is ground to be gained from simply sticking to your guns no matter what the reality happens to be. In my business, when you have a theory, you design an experiment to test it and collect data in an attempt to disprove that theory. When the data supports the theory, then you are golden. The way NOT to run business, science (or government) is to come up with a theory (or a desire) and then try to fit the evidence to support what you want. This of course is exactly what has happened with the SCO case, a couple of other business debacles in the news recently and interestingly, in the hunt for WMD in Iraq.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Probably not. This whole thing is still going to take another year or so to play out. Not the SCO has a snowball's chance; but they'll keep going at least until their "prepaid" lawyers run out on them. Hopefully that'll happen before they get to court. Actually, hopefully not, as if they were to quit halfway through the court procedings the judge would probably ask the bar association to investigate them. F*cking lawyers, er rather, THESE f*cking lawyers.
put the what in the where?
It isn't unrelated. Why do you think people like Darl McBride feel that they can get away with shit like this?
Because that's the example that's been set at the top.
...as much as I'd love for SCO to get their arses handed to them, I wouldn't get excited until their suit is actually thrown out of court.
Ron dies in chapter 9 of book 7.
Err, you mean Bernie Ebbers. But the real question is: will he actually spend 25 years in jail? That's doubtful. It wouldn't be surprising if he was actually out within 2 or 3 years, and back at the helm of some corporation within half a decade from now. CEOs are never held truly accountable for their actions. It won't happen with Ebbers, and it won't happen with McBridge. That is just a flaw with the system.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
'And why did Darl tell the world, and Congress, that because Linux was written by volunteers, there was no way to know if it was clean code, that it was a "free-for-all", that "there's not a policeman to check in the code at the Linux kernel level to ensure that there are not violations", when they already knew that it presented very clear evidence of purity?'
Because Darl is a lying cunt, that's why.
========================================
Death will come, and will have your eyes
-- Pavese
Virtually every news item posted here can start a flamewar. Amidst the Microsoft bashing, several voices will point out good things they have done. Praise or bash the iPod, and you will generate a response. It's nice to see that there is one thing that unites us all, liberal/conservative, Apple fan/hater, and that is the universal agreement that Darl is scum.
There are very few universally accepted truths in this world, and it is nice to be reminded of them once in a while.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Yeah, I got a friend named Guido who sells "insurance policies" too... his catch phrase is "Nice place you've got here... be a shame if anything should happen to it!"
Am I misreading the law, or does this actually qualify as extortion?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
doesn't mean you can't start a war of destruction against an innocent party.
Especially if you have lots of lawyers and elitists who care nothing for truth and honor.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Amen.
In this case, the 'simple' bit is a simple idea - only teams of programmers can make a kernel. It doesn't matter that it's incorrect, just that it's what the PHB believes. It is their dogma. All evidence presented to them is filtered through this belief, or just plain ignored.
Here endeth the lesson.
-EvilMagnus
There isn't any evidence refuting Intelligent Design, but that is the biggest problem with it. It is not a theory, no matter how much they claim it is, because it is untestable. A theory is a hypothesis that has been tested and not (yet) disproven. Since there is no way Intelligent Design can be tested, it is not a theory. That is why it does not belong in the science classroom (especially since it has religious origins).
SCO bought the controversy mongering press position on linux: skeptical that it was real, and challenging it's performance and legitimacy at every bend. The press hype things things because it generates sales (ad impressions, magazines, etc...). I think, that SCO and McBride got caught up in hype, much like many people got caught up in polls promising a Kerry win inthe last US election. As much as everyone wanted everything to be true, and the news was reporting it, making it seem more true, but at the end, just as the real experts said, the hype and the truth turned out to be two different things.
I think this happened to SCO on a grand scale - and they fed upon the media of the time and the desire for ANYTHING to stop Linux coming from MS and it's closest allies. They even got money from them. They got fame from the reporters like O'Gara. Their stock would go up when they reported more.
Fortunately, just because a newspaper prints it, it does not always mean it's true.
-- $G
Darl & his MSFT frineds DID get away with it.
My CEO's already convinced that Linux is dirty thanks to lots of Enderle reports that our microsoft rep among others seem to have refered him to.
My bet is that Darl's backers are already praising him and preparing a job for him in much the same way that Rick Belluzzo got rewarded for defeating SGI and HP.
I know you're just trolling, but...
Truth will have no matter when the sued companies cave or go bust.
Yeah, sure. IBM is gonna go bust. Right.
No, he really isn't.
Ebbers (not Edwards) is one of a very rare elite -- wealthy white-collar criminals who are getting the book thrown at them. There are very few prosecutions in this arena. It's expensive, you are facing hordes of lawyers, and people wonder why you aren't hauling off murderers.
Ebbers is getting screwed specifically because he was involved in one of a handlful of financial cases that were so egregious that they caught the attention of the popular media, and hence the mind of the public. If you are a politician, and you represent a public outraged over some criminal, you do what you can to have the book thrown at that criminal.
Darl did not piss off anyone other than the statistically insignificant (if vastly disproportionate in influence in the tech world) members of the open source community. My mother has no idea that Darl exists, and there isn't really any way to pack his crimes into a one-sentence damning sound byte that appeals to the public(Ebbers had to deal with pictures of blue collar workers and the sentence "they lost their retirement money"). Nothing scares the shit out of a voting baby boomer like the concept of someone losing their retirement money.
Darl, IIRC, came off of the whole thing rather well, with no liability and plenty of money. And SCO was in the shitter already, so his rep is more of just a CEO willing to try some long shots when not much remains than the guy who killed SCO. He *did* manage the media rather poorly, getting personally involved instead of having a more competent spokesman involved, but that's really the only black mark against him.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Also, their legal team should be forced to testify to reveal if they knew about this consultant, and if so why they continued these lawsuits with this information. If there's going to be a chilling effect on this madness, the lawyers should not get a free ride. They do not belong in the Bar association if they were doing McBride's bidding the whole time.
This country needs to be cleaned out. Its starting. We got Ebbers on the finacial front, along with Arther Anderson. Soon we'll have Rove or someone from the WH on the political front. Now McBride on the tech front and his lawyers on the legal front.
So much corruption, but at least some opportunities are opening and making an example out of these people goes a long way towards justice and keeping others from doing the same.
The problem was, you didn't listen to him. If you did, you would have heard him clearly say;
"I'm a PR agent. I've been paid to take a position and I am glad to suck up your time as that's what I am paid to do. I get bonus points by looking somewhat reasonable while you loose your composure in an attempt to convince me of something that I have no personal stake in beyond a paycheck."A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
I long for the days of a president who got a bit of nookie on the side. It's a far better situation than a president who fucks us over, fucks others over, and generates piles of dead bodies. On the other hand, my fossil fuel stocks have been kickin' ass -- even with today's hit on speculation China will not consume as much oil as it has been. Anyway
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Sorry to get off topic here, but I cannot let such a pathetic comparison stand.
Are you seriously saying that since Clinton lied about getting a blowjob, it is OK that the Bush administration lied about intelligence to justify going to war? Don't forget, Clinton got impeached for his lie by the House, but not convicted by the Senate. Given the fact that the repurcussions of Bush's lie is so much greater (we are at fucking war and there was no uranium purchased from Africa, no WMDs, no connection to 9/11), shouldn't the consequences be greater? Maybe Impeachment, Conviction and Jail time? I would say one day for each death that has occurred during the Iraq war - that should work out to between 30 to 300 years.
Sorry to not have much of a sense of humor about this, but the repurcussions of this lie are just too tragic and painful.
First Falcon-1 to orbit, then Falcon-9. Then I can die a happy man.
will probably never be found now. It is of course Bob Swartz' report.
How about:
- it appears that scox's showing of the code to select journalists, who signed an NDA, was a stunt specifically designed to decieve the public. No wonder there was an NDA.
- it appears that scox's showing the code in Las Vegas ScoForum, was not just a mistake, it appears to be another possible deception.
- apparently scox filed the law suit in bad faith, right from the begining.
- scox letters to 1500 businesses, demanding payment for the scox code in linux, appears to be an attempt at outright extortion.
- scox execs enriching themselves by selling scox in the high teens appears a blantant stock scam.
- mcbrides numerous public statements about millions of lines of code, appears to be somewhat less than truthful.
behind you.
Scox would not have been able to pull off the scam without lots of help from msft and sunw.
the jury found him guilty of, in essence, destroying the livelihoods not to mention the pensions of thousands of people. ebbers has caused more misery than most serial killers will ever manage to. i don't know what a suitable sentence really is, but it sure as hell isn't a couple of years.
Your comment reminds me of the Simpson's episode where the departing Mafia don says "Remember: In the End, Crime Doesn't Pay", and then gets into his fleet of limos.
Face facts, SCO was a company whose stock price was floundering. Then Darl came along, ginned up a lawsuit, and multiplied it manyfold. He also got real revenue for the company from "sales" of "licenses" to Microsoft. He's already a multi-millionaire as a result. And despite how slashdot members feel, it's extremely unlikely he'll ever see any jail time.
Big name spammers are much the same. We may all hate them, but they've done very well by themselves. What's the worst that most have them have seen from their billions of dollars of theft of service? A slap on the wrist.
Same thing for Bush and Rove. Had either been remotely honorable or honest, Bush wouldn't have won reelection. Tell me, how is is losing?
Face facts: evil tactics are often winning strategies. Especially because our collective tolerance for corruption is so high (and going higher).
Where's Osama? Who cares? The values that built your nation, and that drew all eyes in admiration, are going fast.
"A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
Part of it was matters of scale. I don't think anything in the legal industry right now -- SCO, Adelphia, Enron, or WorldCom -- scales to a war, and as such, I think such comparisons are inappropriate and designed mostly to garner karma from the anti-conservative Slashdot crowd.
:)
Aside from that, the same crowd that lambasts Bush for 'allowing' the various scandals that erupted after he took office (including the three I mentioned) all really built up during the Clinton administration, something they seem to ignore. For that matter, Ebbers was driving companies into the ground back when Reagan was in office, so there's something to say about the government's (in)ability to keep track of this no matter who is in office. If they're going to blame the Bush administration for allowing deception to become acceptable because it's "the example that's been set at the top," they need to keep in mind that the example is not new to the current occupants of the White House.
I will admit that I was unclear in things. While my intentions were not trolling as I see them, such posts are often seen as trolls by much of the mainstream Slashdot crowd. But sometimes one man's intentions to provoke thought are another man's begging food for the troll.
I also commend you greatly for keeping an open mind, and being mature enough to be able to bring up a rational conversation after your initial response. I took no offense at it, primarily because my political thoughts are all over the place as demonstrated above, and as such I am routinely chased by conservatives and liberals wielding devices intended to induce mass conflagrations upon my person. I simply clarify my views, and hope that others understand me better later on. I am pleased to find another one. People such as you are rare. In fact, I think I shall add you as a friend -- my first one ever.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Doesnt' anyone on the SCO legal team or board of directors, or executive staff care about the 10 commandments?
"Thou shallt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." It is one of the 10 commandments given by the Lord to the Isrealites in the desert. It means that the Lord told them not give false testimony, or render false accusations.
Now dear slashdot mod me down another 2. After 2 years and 100 posts, "Thou shallt not kill" costed me the only mod points i had.
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
- Bush had indicated previously that he wanted to attack Iraq.
- The Neo-cons had previously indicated that they wanted to attack Iraq.
- Bush had previously indicated that he wanted to be a war president
- There was a ton of information available that Saddam did not have WMDs, but this information, and the people who presented this information, was ignored and attacked by the administration.
Also, I didn't believe that Saddam had WMDs - I believed that he wanted them, but I thought it was extremely unlikely that he would be able to hide the WMDs and the infrastructure necessary to produce them from a dedicated multi-year search. Afterall, if the Bush administration had such clear intelligence that Saddam had the WMDs, why couldn't they share that information with the Weapon inspectors?First Falcon-1 to orbit, then Falcon-9. Then I can die a happy man.
Prior to 1998, there weren't any inspectors either. They were inteligence officers who were only interested in Saddams whereabouts for a surgical hit. That's WHY they got kicked out.
All your post has done is provide more evidence that when it comes down to it, partisan politics is more important than truth.
Not all of us hail from the USA, so your argument is pointless. Under clinton, I didn't care what you did. Under Bush, you have destabilized the entire middle east, and now MY home country is being attacked by terrorists (UK). Tony Blair (& Bush) told us all that we need to invade Iraq to improve our own safety. Nice going Tony, I feel safer already.
Either Bush & Blair were outright deliberately misleading people (I wouldn't say lie, politicians know how to do that without actually lying) due to the overwhelming voice of those that said 9-11 and WMD claims are bogus. OR they are terminally stupid. The outcome of the highly profitable Iraq conquest was ENTIRELY predicatble. The increased hatred, long-term "peace keeping" mission, Vietnam II. The Iraqi's still have the inevitable civil war to look forward to when we do pull out. It's a screw-up from day one and it was ALWAYS going to be a screw up. Even Bush himself said in 2000 that "nation building" was not easy and something the US should NOT be involved in. Of course, when your election campaign is financed by the Project for a New American Century, they you have to do what the puppeteer tells you.
So, look at it from my point of view. I don't give a fuck about Republicans and Democrats. But what I do see is one president getting the sack because he lied so his wife wouldn't find out about a BJ. The other has killed thousands with his "lies". What the hell do you want us to think? US politians use the whole "partisan" logic to dismiss suggestions based on where they are from, rather than arguing the point instead. That's been the downfall of your pretend "democracy" and it always will. Democracy is not a two party system!