SCO Says Email Is Inaccurate
daria42 writes "The SCO Group has slammed as 'inaccurate' suggestions that an e-mail from one of its own engineers showed Linux did not contain copyright Unix code, and even forwarded its own historical memo to journalists in an attempt to discredit the e-mail published on Groklaw." From the article: "This memo shows that Mr. Davidson's e-mail is referring to an investigation limited to literal copying, which is not the standard for copyright violations, and which can be avoided by deliberate obfuscation, as the memo itself points out..." We reported on the email yesterday.
Well of course they would say that. I mean, given their history, is there any other choice they would have for how to respond to this.
Corporate America feels like a childish game of "You go home.... no you go home..... No you go home.... No"
Well of course they're going to say that. Did anyone expect them to say "Ah, yea you got us. We were bullshitting this whole time."?
Does anyone know who Mr. Davidson is? Has anyone tried contacting him re: this email?
I think the point now is that no one really views the case as any more than a sick joke. It probably had a venemous effect early on, but the fact is that SCO has kept changing the case, and that no concrete evidence for the claim has ever been provided. Outside of certain circles, SCO's crap doesn't even make into the legal and business sections of major media players any more. SCO long ago lost the PR battle, nobody believes them, and even less care about it. Decisions on going to Linux aren't being based on whether SCO IP might be lurking in the source, but on factors of affordability, cost of ownership, ease of administration, etc.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Bernie Ebbers orchestrated an $11 billion fraud. While McBride has bumfucked some people over, that is for sure, it is nowhere near the scale of what Ebbers had done. What makes you think that McBride will receive a punishment that will make what Ebbers got "look like a slap on the wrist"?
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
It just stinks of 1984. Tell blatant lies enough and people just believe it even though they know its not true.
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
If you had been following (I know, you're bored), SCO has not, to date, provided *any* evidence of code infringment in court. None. Dec 22 is the deadline for any evidence of code infringment to be shown. SCOs public statements as to the nature of the case vary hugely from what actually happens in the court room - they spin it as copyright about Linux in the media, but as a contract dispute about AIX in court. The impression that "they must have a case because it's lasted this long" is exactly one of the things they rely one - TV court drama to the contrary, judges very rarely toss cases early on. Especially technical ones like this, where even though the lack of merit may be obvious, it takes signifigant technical analysis to prove it.
For what it's worth, the judge has been seeming rather fed up with it too - when he issued his ruling on deadlines for discovery, he specifically pointed out SCOs misrepresentation in the media as compared to the total lack of evidence they've presented in court.
Unfortunately the "sorry bunch of wankers" is having a negative effect on Linux's reputation. Founded or not, their claims just add to the FUD that Microsoft puts out to combat Linux's spread, and it's having a significant effect.
If people worried about every lying thieving politician and corporate officer, the world would stop dead in its tracks because nothing would ever get done.
Not to serve up a flip answer, but perhaps that's what needs to happen. For example, we need to have the selection "NONE OF THE ABOVE" for each ballot choice in any election, to have the option to force the political system to endure starvation instead of a mandatory minimum feeding.
The system of corruption generally takes steps to make the environment safe for corruption. This tends to expand corruption. And such expansion crashes the system eventually. Knowing this, we should understand and prefer to have the harsh measure of medicine over the comfortable safety of increasing numbness (until the gangrene sets in and the limb falls off).
Corrupt systems have to be fixed one way or another. Either they get fixed by eternal vigilance, or they are fixed by extinction. People have to understand that even by making no choice whatsoever, they've still made a choice, hence they've still selected or supported an outcome.
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
Unfortunately the "sorry bunch of wankers" is having a negative effect on Linux's reputation. Founded or not, their claims just add to the FUD that Microsoft puts out to combat Linux's spread, and it's having a significant effect.
It did for the first 6 months of the case. But recent studies have shown that pretty much nobody cares about it any more; if anything, it's accelerated adoption, because the continuing lack of evidence from SCO is making Linux look more stable, not less.