Whoever holds the patents may require other sites to pay them licensing royalties.
Going out on a limb with that one, huh? Yeah, I can't think of many reasons for a company to buy the patent portfolio of a company whose patents on a key Internet technology were just upheld in court. Besides pulling a SCO, that is.
Can we just refer to this kind of manuover as "pulling a SCO" from now on?
Re:Guinness for IT strength!
on
PeltierBeer
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
When Ricochet was alive in areas that mattered (Denver and San Diego don't matter, sorry) there was very strong reception in Seal Beach, CA on Main St and well onto the sand. I used to head over to the Hennessee's there, plug in at my favorite bar stool and manage dedicated servers in Wisconsin while enjoying a Guinness. At least once I switched critical operations from one server to another while requesting another round. Miss that Ricochet. Really do.
I saw the movie in the Theatre. That scene went by so fast -- and I already knew it was coming -- I couldn't believe anyone had noticed the details. Then I remembered Bittorrent and realized that the *only* people who could have noticed the detail would be those who could freeze-frame the movie.
Re:this is killing Linux, OSD in general
on
Today's SCO News
·
· Score: 1
Your CIO is a weenie - tell him I said so. As CTO of a mid-sized pharmaceutical I can say without reservation that this lawsuit means nothing to my business, which is heavily dependent on Linux (RedHat in particular). Of course, if things get really bad, I'll move our servers to Lindows, since they're protected by a licensing arrangement with SCO.
The only activeX program I NEED is ScriptX for automated printing for web applications. But the same author has a cross-platform solution called Neptune. I could conceivably go completely cross-platform
Still, there are many subtle differences between IE and Mozilla in regards to UI controls, positioning, etc. Until I have a business reason to support Mozilla and IE, I'll just stick with IE support for a closed-community business application I'm overseeing.
Business desks HAVE Internet Explorer on them. I don't want to PUT anything on those desks myself--because then it's MY fault if something goes wrong. If I specify a standard computer configuration without "extras" then my support issues are basically eliminated as far as an ASP-style application provider is concerned.
Of course, for my own browsing I use IE sometimes -- especially when working on our web software -- but usually stick with the latest Mozilla offering. I *love* MozillaFirebird. I love the tabbed browsing, the speed, the way common forms are pre-filled out (better than IE's autocomplete, IMHO). I love the fact that I don't need to worry about pop ups when I visit public sites.
And I've already run across one business reason to cross-platform my application: the Zaurus 5500 & 5600 PDAs with the Opera browser. I modified my web app to target specific functions for handheld use using Opera and the results are very pleasant. It took about 2 weeks of effort in all to redesign the pages and change a few of the backend pieces to match the adjusted functionality; not bad. Like I said -- if I have a business reason to adjust to a cross-platform solution, I will. So far, I haven't had the need beyond targeting the PDA. Looks like with this settlement I won't be seeing a bunch of pre-installed Mozilla browsers anytime soon, either. So, I doubt I ever will change my standard desktop web application from being specific to Internet Explorer 5.5/6.0.
But rather, send mall bits of code to SCO, 5, 10, 15, 20 lines at a time, perhaps a block if nessicary. Ask, nicely, if any of these lines violate what they consider to be their IP.
It sends a nasty email to SCO with foul language. Before you think "cool!" realize that you may be charged with harrassment via telecommunication lines, which I seem to recall is a federal offense (in the US). But, more crucially, such emails will be touted by SCO as indicative of the "Linux/Open Source" community and will be used to turn the hearts and minds of the average people away from "our side". They're praying for more idiocy as embodied in this link.
Be respectful in the face of their disrespect. Be honorable in the face of their dishonorable acts. Take the high ground and watch them collapse on themselves.
Maybe but how quickly will this become out of date?
Security six months down the line might be totally different if some other group start a cooler IDS on SF.NET.
Yeah, we better just bury our heads in the sand rather than try to be proactive on security, 'cause, like Barbie(R) would say, "Security is hard".
I think you wrote your post solely to be a contrarian and to appear to the ignorant as being wise. Your comment offers absolutely nothing of substance to the issue.
Since no one is out there auditing Linux code looking for stuff like this - how hard do you think it is for one person out of thousands of developers to have done this?
Don't use this argument, you look like a SCOunderel or SCOhort. The fact is it is not on the shoulders of Linux's developers or users to PROVE its code is unemcombered. Rather it is up to the offended party to show that it has been offended (otherwise it has no case to bear).
On a slightly different topic, SCO's argument on the call today was that no one is validating the Linux code base and therefore distributors and users are in danger of being sued by SCO. Let's assume that SCO is right, for argument's sake, and there is a violation within Linux. Would the users had been better off if they acquired their software from a vendor who issues a license and states that the software bought is clear of encumberance? Well, lets say you buy everything from one vendor, say, Microsoft. Say that all your products are Microsoft-licensed and backed by Microsoft. Say you bought SQL Server. Say Microsoft got in a licensing tussle with a vendor of its own and the vendor claimed Microsoft was misappropriating its intellectual property. As a user with a valid MSFT license, you're immune, right? I mean, Microsoft may be in trouble but you are in the clear. Right? Wrong. The courts have upheld that said vendor can bring legal action against Microsoft's SQL Server clients for misappropriation of IP.
SCO's argument that users need a single source (SCOSource) to validate their software licensing against IP violations is specious and they know it. But it is good, effective FUD.
Darl McBride said on the call that the transfer document between Novell and SCO was "inconsistent" but indicated that the sale MAY include IP rights in one section but clearly stated Novell retained those rights in another. He states he called his buddies at Novell and asked what the deal was because it "didn't make sense" and his buddies in Novell agreed, but higher ups (those not part of the original deal -- much like the current owners of the SCO moniker, I rekon) decided to hold on to those rights when SCO expressed interest in them.
Sounds like he's admitting that the legal documents side with Novell in this matter. Otherwise he would have said, "No, the documents are clear -- we bought the rights." He's not saying that. Not at all.
An amazing admission that their claims do NOT involve intellectual property but rather contractual agreements to other parties. In such a case the strangers (RedHat, but, oops, not SuSE and UnitedLinux..., Linux users worldwide) have nothing to fear.
Ok, folks, move along. Nothing to see here. Break it up...
Good thing we have the chance to pay for a professional OS and for professional regression testing. Thanks, Microsoft, for saving us from shoddy, untested software.
In fact, one of the more common questions asked at Slashdot.org, the open source "News for Nerds" page, is "How do I get developers to join my project?"
And the most common answers are:
BSD is dying
Stephen King, American icon, dead at 53
CmdrTaco is Michael's mutilated sex slave
Micro$oft suxors
Hot grits
Natalie Portman petrified
Mod parent up/down
Frost pist
Another question: why is there a picture of Mr Lee's crotch proudly displayed in the article referenced? Very disturbing. Perhaps that's IBM's answer to SCO?
Speaking of WindRiver...an article at EE Times quotes Dave Fraser of WindRiver spouting FUD against Linux and reports that the Alameda, CA company executives decided against their own Linux distribution because of "fear of legal action":
Wind River executives said last week that fear of legal action caused them to abandon their own Linux program, which was quietly moving into high gear three years ago. After investing more than a year in Wind River Linux, they said they decided against releasing it because Linux is subject to the laws of the general public license, which allows users to demand access to an OEM's source code. "We decided we didn't want to expose our customers to those kinds of issues," said Fraser of Wind River. "This like going after the tobacco companies. If it's successful, it will tear down the precepts that support Linux, and it could affect the concept of all software."
Linux is like the Tobacco companies?! Smokin'! Why not ask BMW to critique Jaguar...
When any manufacturer offers incredibly deep discounts like this, it's only so they can get their hooks into you. "Give them the razors, sell them the blades."
So grow a beard and join the Free Sftware Movement.
Slashdot Mirror
Well... we should add "(3) To purchase the intellectual property of another with the sole intention to extort money from others"
- Whoever holds the patents may require other sites to pay them licensing royalties.
Going out on a limb with that one, huh? Yeah, I can't think of many reasons for a company to buy the patent portfolio of a company whose patents on a key Internet technology were just upheld in court. Besides pulling a SCO, that is.Can we just refer to this kind of manuover as "pulling a SCO" from now on?
When Ricochet was alive in areas that mattered (Denver and San Diego don't matter, sorry) there was very strong reception in Seal Beach, CA on Main St and well onto the sand. I used to head over to the Hennessee's there, plug in at my favorite bar stool and manage dedicated servers in Wisconsin while enjoying a Guinness. At least once I switched critical operations from one server to another while requesting another round. Miss that Ricochet. Really do.
I saw the movie in the Theatre. That scene went by so fast -- and I already knew it was coming -- I couldn't believe anyone had noticed the details. Then I remembered Bittorrent and realized that the *only* people who could have noticed the detail would be those who could freeze-frame the movie.
Kidding on that last part.
Still, there are many subtle differences between IE and Mozilla in regards to UI controls, positioning, etc. Until I have a business reason to support Mozilla and IE, I'll just stick with IE support for a closed-community business application I'm overseeing.
Business desks HAVE Internet Explorer on them. I don't want to PUT anything on those desks myself--because then it's MY fault if something goes wrong. If I specify a standard computer configuration without "extras" then my support issues are basically eliminated as far as an ASP-style application provider is concerned.
Of course, for my own browsing I use IE sometimes -- especially when working on our web software -- but usually stick with the latest Mozilla offering. I *love* MozillaFirebird. I love the tabbed browsing, the speed, the way common forms are pre-filled out (better than IE's autocomplete, IMHO). I love the fact that I don't need to worry about pop ups when I visit public sites.
And I've already run across one business reason to cross-platform my application: the Zaurus 5500 & 5600 PDAs with the Opera browser. I modified my web app to target specific functions for handheld use using Opera and the results are very pleasant. It took about 2 weeks of effort in all to redesign the pages and change a few of the backend pieces to match the adjusted functionality; not bad. Like I said -- if I have a business reason to adjust to a cross-platform solution, I will. So far, I haven't had the need beyond targeting the PDA. Looks like with this settlement I won't be seeing a bunch of pre-installed Mozilla browsers anytime soon, either. So, I doubt I ever will change my standard desktop web application from being specific to Internet Explorer 5.5/6.0.
This line is for wasting time since I type too damn fast for CowboyNeal to handle.
- But rather, send mall bits of code to SCO, 5, 10, 15, 20 lines at a time, perhaps a block if nessicary. Ask, nicely, if any of these lines violate what they consider to be their IP.
that suggestion, I like.Be respectful in the face of their disrespect. Be honorable in the face of their dishonorable acts. Take the high ground and watch them collapse on themselves.
- Maybe but how quickly will this become out of date?
Yeah, we better just bury our heads in the sand rather than try to be proactive on security, 'cause, like Barbie(R) would say, "Security is hard".Security six months down the line might be totally different if some other group start a cooler IDS on SF.NET.
I think you wrote your post solely to be a contrarian and to appear to the ignorant as being wise. Your comment offers absolutely nothing of substance to the issue.
troll? I was responding to MY OWN COMMENT, YOU MORON! Hahahahahaha
- Since no one is out there auditing Linux code looking for stuff like this - how hard do you think it is for one person out of thousands of developers to have done this?
Don't use this argument, you look like a SCOunderel or SCOhort. The fact is it is not on the shoulders of Linux's developers or users to PROVE its code is unemcombered. Rather it is up to the offended party to show that it has been offended (otherwise it has no case to bear).On a slightly different topic, SCO's argument on the call today was that no one is validating the Linux code base and therefore distributors and users are in danger of being sued by SCO. Let's assume that SCO is right, for argument's sake, and there is a violation within Linux. Would the users had been better off if they acquired their software from a vendor who issues a license and states that the software bought is clear of encumberance? Well, lets say you buy everything from one vendor, say, Microsoft. Say that all your products are Microsoft-licensed and backed by Microsoft. Say you bought SQL Server. Say Microsoft got in a licensing tussle with a vendor of its own and the vendor claimed Microsoft was misappropriating its intellectual property. As a user with a valid MSFT license, you're immune, right? I mean, Microsoft may be in trouble but you are in the clear. Right? Wrong. The courts have upheld that said vendor can bring legal action against Microsoft's SQL Server clients for misappropriation of IP.
SCO's argument that users need a single source (SCOSource) to validate their software licensing against IP violations is specious and they know it. But it is good, effective FUD.
Oh. Not me, but James Taylor is my dad. He also my granddad and my great-granddad.
Sounds like he's admitting that the legal documents side with Novell in this matter. Otherwise he would have said, "No, the documents are clear -- we bought the rights." He's not saying that. Not at all.
I'm in on the call - Robert Taylor of R James Taylor Consulting...just listening, though...
Ok, folks, move along. Nothing to see here. Break it up...
Good thing we have the chance to pay for a professional OS and for professional regression testing. Thanks, Microsoft, for saving us from shoddy, untested software.
- In fact, one of the more common questions asked at Slashdot.org, the open source "News for Nerds" page, is "How do I get developers to join my project?"
And the most common answers are:BSD is dying
Stephen King, American icon, dead at 53
CmdrTaco is Michael's mutilated sex slave
Micro$oft suxors
Hot grits
Natalie Portman petrified
Mod parent up/down
Frost pist
Another question: why is there a picture of Mr Lee's crotch proudly displayed in the article referenced? Very disturbing. Perhaps that's IBM's answer to SCO?
- Wind River executives said last week that fear of legal action caused them to abandon their own Linux program, which was quietly moving into high gear three years ago. After investing more than a year in Wind River Linux, they said they decided against releasing it because Linux is subject to the laws of the general public license, which allows users to demand access to an OEM's source code. "We decided we didn't want to expose our customers to those kinds of issues," said Fraser of Wind River. "This like going after the tobacco companies. If it's successful, it will tear down the precepts that support Linux, and it could affect the concept of all software."
Linux is like the Tobacco companies?! Smokin'! Why not ask BMW to critique Jaguar...- Despite this piracy, the flick has made over $365M already. Including my tickets. Twice.
Once to film it and another to watch it, hmmm??Yep. I'm sure the timing was PURELY COINCIDENTAL.
- When any manufacturer offers incredibly deep discounts like this, it's only so they can get their hooks into you. "Give them the razors, sell them the blades."
So grow a beard and join the Free Sftware Movement.see the link: _ in my original (and NOT redundant!) post