SUSE Requests Arbitration with SCO

rm69990 writes "In response to SCO's amended complaint against Novell alleging copyright infringement, Novell subsidiary SUSE has requested from the International Chamber of Commerce that SCO be barred from asserting copyright over SUSE Linux due to the UnitedLinux agreement between Caldera, SUSE, Connectiva and Turbolinux. This agreement requires that SCO arbitrate with SUSE instead of filing claims, removes the copyright from any work SCO produced while in UnitedLinux, gives SUSE sublicensing rights to SCO's copyrights, and constitutes an SCO commitment that any code released under an OSS license in UnitedLinux remain Open Source. Novell has filed a motion to stay SCO's claims against Novell until the outcome of this arbitration. So now it looks like Linux users are protected both through the APA between Novell and SCO, but the UnitedLinux agreement as well."

Comments

Who are the REAL pros here?

[TripMaster Monkey]

From TFA:

Man, do not mess with Novell. I never worked for lawyers as good as these guys, and it's a plumb pleasin' pleasure to watch them work.

Methinks this gives the Novell lawyers a bit too much credit...after all, all they're doing is patiently assertiing that the sky is in fact blue and that water is, and has always been, wet.

The real geniuses here are the SCO lawyers, for keeping this ridiculous dog & pony show going for as long as they have, although I admit that the admiration I experience witnessing their work is generously laced with nausea and trepidation. When SCO's house of cards finally falls, it will be with a deafening crash amid roars of appreciation from the OSS crowd, but in the meantime, hats off to the talented lawyers that have managed to keep it standing this long. They deserve respect, grudging though it my be.

Re:Who are the REAL pros here?

[morgan_greywolf]

You have brought up a bit of a quandry here. When all is said and done and SCO is officially dead, and the lawyers have to find other work, will this be a feather in their cap with SCO on their resume or will they be seen as the bottom feeding scum that they are. You may not like the job they are doing but they are certainly doing it rather well.

Look. If you were the one hiring the lawyer, who would you rather have? A nice guy who plays nice and fair all the time, or a lawyer who knows every little legal loophole and how to exploit it? Or, to put it in terms that most Slashdotters can understand, who would you rather have on your software security project? A nice programmer who might know a thing or two about breaking security, but has never done it, or a smart hacker who knows his way around every local and remote root exploit known to man and has done so? As the saying goes, when you have to dig through dirt, you get yourself a worm.

Re:Who are the REAL pros here?

[Alex P Keaton in da]

Like it or not, bottom feeding scum is subjective.
When they are in court making you money, they are geniuses...
When they are in court taking your money, they are scum...
Sort of like how defense attorneys are thought of scum sometimes, yet if you were charged with something, you would want the bottomest feeding scumiest one you could find...

Re:Who are the REAL pros here?

[schon]

If you were the one hiring the lawyer, who would you rather have? A nice guy who plays nice and fair all the time, or a lawyer who knows every little legal loophole and how to exploit it?

Mu.

In the context of this litigation, I would rather have the one that says "look, you have no case. Find another way to solve your financial problem." Rather than "hey, it doesn't matter if you have no case, just sue them anyway - they'll just settle."

In other words, I would rather have the nice guy who plays fair even though he knows every little legal loophole.

Contracts :o\

[TubeSteak]

Contracts aren't really what make businesses work, it's the relationships.

If you have to fall back to pointing at the contract and saying "but you agreed," it means the business relationship is fuxxored... and not only are you going to have to win a contract lawsuit, you're going to have to reasses the relationship between the companies.

Obviously, SCO is an anomaly, but the effect is the same. Relationships were broken and contracts aren't going to stop the damage, merely mitigate it.

Re:Contracts :o\

[Ohreally_factor]

Alternately, one could say that a sign of a good healthy economic relationship between companies is a clear, well written contract that doesn't leave room for confusion. A good relationship is when everyone is clear on their duties and benefits. A contract is the written manifestation of this.

Personally, I prefer to deal on a handshake basis with people I know, respect, and trust. I like to have a personal relationship with clients. For the times this is not possible, I know I need a contract or a deal memo. (I've also taken the time to learn to read a contract, and I don't hesitate to strike out provisions or add provisions in "boiler plate" contracts before signing when I don't agree to them. Does this lose me any business? Not business I'd really want to take.)

No Respect

[twitter]

The real geniuses here are the SCO lawyers, for keeping this ridiculous dog & pony show going for as long as they have ... They deserve respect, grudging though it my be.

Frauds deserve nothing more than jail.

Re:It gets much, much worse

[Anonymous Coward]

Not fond of firvolous lawsuits?

Man, do you live in the US, home of frivolous lawsuits where judges almost ALWAYS rules in favour of those that file them. People that spill hot coffee on themselves and win millions is just the tip of the ice berg. The US legal system is like a lottery. Just get a slimy enough lawyer and a big enough company to sue against and you're almost guaranteed some financial gain, even if its just to get the case out of the media quickly.

The only reason why SCO has lasted this long is that judges don't care if the lawsuit is frivolous. They are impartial. If one team of lawyers can make a convincing argument over another, the judge will rule in favour of it, regardless of how vapid and frivolous the suit is. If judges were not fond of frivolous lawsuits, SCO would have been tossed out on their ears long ago.

mod parent up

[Ohreally_factor]

You've seized the gist of the matter. It's not that Novell's lawyers are playing "nice"; I suspect that they're as hard-nosed as any other lawyer representing a client. The difference between the half-assed tactical antics of the "bottom feeding scumbags" and masterful strategy of the Novell legal team is night and day.

If PJ can ever rein in here over the top partisan P.O.V., I'd love for her to interview all the participants and then write the definitive history. As I don't think she'll ever lose that P.O.V., maybe Bob Mims would be a better candidate to write such a history.

What is paramount to being "professional"?

[abb3w]

[...] who would you rather have on your software security project? A nice programmer who might know a thing or two about breaking security, but has never done it, or a smart hacker who knows his way around every local and remote root exploit known to man and has done so?

Depends; did the "smart" hacker get caught flagrantly violating federal law? Perhaps doing something mindbogglingly stupid, like trying to social engineer his way into the FBI's systems? Then I'll take the nice one, because the "smart" one is nowhere near as smart as he thinks, and probably not as smart as he claims. Personally, when I need to dig through dirt, I find a shovel is more effective than a worm, and additionally lets you keep the crap at arms length.

"There is an unwritten rule among us, Richars; if you attempt any ploy on the far side of ethical, you'd damned well better be good enough at your game not to get caught. You're not good enough." — Count Falco Vorpatril in Lois McMaster Bujold's A Civil Campaign.

Wretched analogy aside, I'd prefer a lawyer who routinely wins without having to resort to slimy tactics, just like I'd prefer a security expert who doesn't rely on security by obscurity; the tactic is usually still available as a last resort, but relying on it too often makes for sloppy work habits.