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."
Then you draw a needle on the dial that points to BULLSHIT.
Then whenever you hear anybody on the TV who has the word 'CHIEF' or 'EXECUTIVE' or 'OFFICER' in their title, you point the box at the TV and there's your answer.
(also works with radio, newspapers and the Internet. Patent Pending of course.)
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.
Yet more proof that the Googlebomb calling SCO "litigious bastards" is correct.
Maybe now the case will be dismissed...
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
As SCO continues to desintigrate, it is import to keep an eye those responsible who worked there as they try to find their way back into the respectable computing world.
No one should be able to participate in a sickeningly slezy shakedown like SCO tried to pull off and just wash their hands and pretend it never happended.
Of course not everyone associated with SCO is guilty of sleaze but keeping an eye out for key SCO people and either making sure they don't get hired or at least making it known to companies that would think of hiring the scumbags it isn't worth the bad press/karma.
...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.
Tune in the news and pay attention to the video images of Bernie Edwards going to jail for 25 years. Now, go down to your local "adult" store and buy some lube in preparation for your own date with justice.
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
...and in other news, kitten naps.....
I talked at length with that guy from the Toqueville institute. I tried and tried to explain that Linux is just a kernel, only a small part of an OS, and that anyone with a decent CS education is taught everything they need to know to develop a kernel as simple as the first Linux kernel that Linus wrote. I explained that Linux is a social phenomenon more than a technical achievement, because, conceptually, kernels just aren't such a big deal (although debugging them is a hassle, well handled by the 'many eyes' of the community).
No matter what I said, he was not able to grasp it. He just could not believe that one guy could write an OS kernel. But he really didn't understand what a kernel is either, so that was a bit of a barrier also. The fact that various CS professors had come out and said the same thing didn't faze him.
Darl McBride is just another non-technical businessman who thinks that operating systems are black magic that only huge teams of people can write. His reasoning leads him to believe that if "one guy" did it, but one guy really couldn't have done it, then he must have copied it. Pure, simple, logical, but unsound in that it completely doesn't account for just how simple or complex a kernel is.
Just like how some people can't possibly understand how a piston engine works, some people aren't cut out to grok OS kernels. Darl just doesn't have the brains for it. (Plus, his primary motivation is to make money, not actually UNDERSTAND anything.)
Christ Almighty! You mean we're letting them breed???? Have we learned nothing from the Black Death?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
this was ORIGINALLY a lawsuit about the derivative works from a company working with a Unix license that IBM bought.
1 70212250
0 22922296
what are you talking about? In their first filing,
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040704
their first cause of action was "Linux is full of UNIX, which belongs to us"
First cause of action - (Misappropriation of Trade Secrets--Utah Code Ann. 13-24-1 et seq.)
this is in reference to their placing UNIX code in linux... read the previous 103 statements to see what they are alleging.
in their second (and current) complaint, they keep it up!
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040207
3. A variant or clone of UNIX currently exists in the computer marketplace called "Linux." Linux is, in material part, based upon UNIX source code and methods.
4. The UNIX software distribution vendors, such as IBM, are contractually and legally prohibited from giving away or disclosing proprietary UNIX source code and methods for external business purposes, such as contributions to Linux, or from otherwise using UNIX for the benefit of others. This prohibition extends to derivative work products that are modifications of, or derivative works based on, UNIX System V source code or technology. IBM is violating this prohibition, en masse, as though no prohibition or proprietary restrictions exist at all with respect to the UNIX technology. As a result of IBM's wholesale disregard of its contractual and legal obligations to SCO, Linux 2.4.x and 2.6.x and the development Linux kernel, 2.5.x, are replete with protected technology. As such, the Linux 2.4.x and Linux 2.5.x and 2.6.x kernels are unauthorized derivatives of UNIX System V.
the are, have, and continue to claim that Linux is full of Unix, and that its a derivative because IBM put UNIX code in Linux.
That's the basics of their case, in a few words... they are hiding that contention behind their contracts with IBM. But how did they breach contract with SCO? - SCO alleges that they put UNIX in Linux.
If there is no illegal UNIX in Linux, then they've not breached any contracts, have they? To have breached contract, they would have had to have infringed on SCO's "UNIX copyrights"
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
Should I be happy because someone ignored a consultant or sad that they caused so much trouble by doing so? Decisions, decisions...
That is all.
Dude, you're too focused on ends. Enjoy the process.
Each day brings a new humilation to Darl McBride. Treasure this moment, because all too soon the case will be thrown out of court and then you won't have Darl to kick around any more.
So just relax and enoy, and don't be so focused on the final result. (No, your girlfriend didn't pay me to say that.)
Groklaw is intermittantly slow for me (database problems or whatever) and so I want to make sure this can be read by all.
I'd have to say this looks pretty damning, all said--it shows they found nothing and persisted anyway... Lovely.
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.
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.
#include
and...
{
and...
}
as for all the other lines that *don't* match - aha! That's the obfuscated part!
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).