About eight miles south of Yuma Arizona, there is a town in Mexico that is filled with dentists, A lot of US citizens travel there to save about 60% on their dental work.
Scox is being sued, or will be sued, by several companies. If you buy scox, you inherent those lawsuits. The liability of those lawsuits far exceeds scox's net worth.
"Judge Kimball's decision not only undermines SCO's claims against IBM but also suggests that the company was aware that it did not own the Unix copyrights on which it based its litigation even before it launched its SCOsource intellectual property licensing business"
BTW: Dan Lyons is also the guy who screamed and cried about anonymous boggers, and message board posters, then he turned out to be the fake Steve Jobs.
Didio: "SCO Group Gains Psychological Edge, Registers UNIX System V Copyrights"
"The fact that SCO registered its UNIX System V copyright lays to rest an earlier, erroneous contention by Novell president, Jack Messman, claiming that SCO did not own the copyrights."
Groklaw: "Maureen O'Gara reportage on a court hearing she didn't attend, yet magically was able to report on both the contents of a sealed SCO filing *and* what was shown by SCO's lawyers on a projection screen only Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells and the lawyers were supposed to see."
United States v. Enmons 410 U.S. 396: "wrongful has meaning in the Act only if it limits the statute's coverage to those instances where the obtaining of the property would itself be wrongful because the alleged extortionist has no lawful claim to that property."
I honestly don't know. Is DirectX all much better than OpenGL?
If OpenGL will do the job, why even consider DirectX?
Msft is fast & smart, US justice is slow &
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 1
That is the true bottom line, and msft knows it. Msft will continue to run circles around US justice, laughing up their sleeves the entire time.
And the pro-Linux cheerleaders don't even get it. "Yeah we win!! We win again!! We *always* win!! Yeah!!" While msft casually moves on to their next scam.
Re:Judge should be disgusted with himself
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 1
>>Don't blame the judge, blame the lawyers (BSF).
The lawyers are not in charge, the judge is.
Appeal? On what grounds? This is what happend: after several years of scox coming up empty handed, and the deadline for scox producing any evidence had passed: ibm said "since scox clearly can not produce evidence of any copywrite violation, we would like a summary judgement on those charges."
It would have been perfectly legal, and appropriate, for Kimball to have granted the summary judgement. But Kimball decided to allow the gaming. So I ask again: Appeal? On what grounds?
The only scox exec who dumped was Riamondi. He sold out when scox was in the high teens, just before he resigned.
Re:Novell to Open Source Unix?
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 1
Novell still has contractual obligations to HPQ, IBM, SUNW, and probably others.
Frankly, it may not matter. If sunw if going to open source solaris, that may mean that that all the sysV is gone from solaris. As I understand it, practically all the sysV is gone from AIX.
I doubt there is much is sysV that would be all that useful today.
Re:The cure is worse than the disease.
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 1
>>Novell themselves distributed Linux under the GPL.
So did scox - for years. In fact, unlike novell, scox (originally caldera) was formed to distribute Linux under the GPL. Scox also distributed Linux, under the GPL, for years after scox filed the lawsuit against IBM.
Judge should be disgusted with himself
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The reason this case took so long was that Kimball allowed scox to game the system. Kimball could have put a stop to it years ago, but decided not to. Instead Kimball decided to burden ibm with about $100 million worth of obviously bogus discovery, and delay the cases for years.
Direct quotes from Judge Kimball - February 2005:
"Viewed against the backdrop of SCO's plethora of public statements concerning IBM's and others' infringement of SCO's purported copyrights to the Unix software, it is astonishing that SCO has not offered any competent evidence to create a disputed fact regarding whether IBM has infringed SCO's alleged copyrights through IBM's Linux activities," Kimball wrote.
"Further, SCO, in its briefing, chose to cavalierly ignore IBM's claims that SCO could not create a disputed fact regarding whether it even owned the relevant copyrights," the judge wrote. This refers to the matter that Novell Inc. is claiming that it, and not SCO, actually owns Unix's intellectual property."
"Notwithstanding SCO's puzzling denial in its briefing that it has not alleged a claim against IBM for copyright"
Yet, Kimball decided to dismiss IBM's request for a partial summary judgement, and instead allow scox's laughable discovery requests.
Scox discovery requests were laughable because scox wanted 20 years of AIX revisions. This makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever because scox was claiming that IBM put system V UNIX code into Linux.
Kimball even acknowledged the absurdity of scox's claims asking scox something like: "you have Linux source code, you have system V source code, what else do you think you need?"
But Kimball allowed scox's gaming anyway.
But this case was *obviously* bogus
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 1
After 4.5 years, the case is finally nearing an end because scox never even owned the IP that the lawsuit was about. Think about that. It took that long for the courts to simply review the plain language of the contract.
Why didn't the courts ask for proof of ownership 4.5 years ago?
Instead the courts did everything backwards. First the courts allowed scox to game the system with years of obviously irrelevant discovery requests, then *after* all this time, and somewhere around $100 million spent by IBM to provide the insane discovery, the court finally gets around to finding out that scox never owned the IP to begin.
BTW: IBM pointed out to the courts, many years ago, that scox could not prove ownership.
The reason scox agreed to be msft's puppet is because scox had nothing to lose. Scox never had a profitable quarter. Scox was clearly heading for delisting and bankruptcy before the scam started.
The scam was planned in Dec 2002. Scox had a market cap around $10 million, at the time. Now, scox's market cap is over $25 million - thanks entirely to msft and sunw money, and msft arranged financing.
So this scam did not hurt scox at all. Just the opposite, if not for this scam, scox would probably have been out of business three years ago.
IMO: Entire thing was 1% of msft FUD campagin
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 1
Scox was a very small part of msft's ongoing mis-information campaign. The entire scam cost msft well under $50 million. Probably less than it costs to product one msft commercial. Not bad for nearly 5 years of FUD.
Msft's efforts are now directed at thoroughly defeating the ODF efforts, and establishing OOXML as the world's only standard. Msft is winning there also.
MySQL has also partnered with scox. Scox is a msft puppet. Scox has loudly claimed that the GPL is unconstitutional, and scox has written congress an open letter about it.
Scox seems a strange bedfellow for a company whose flagship product is built on the GPL.
New versions of Python, and PHP, are including SQLite as part of the standard distribution. And if SQLite isn't enough, there's alwasy PostgreSQL.
Considering the MySQL AB's unusual understanding of the GPL, their goofy dual license, their non-standard implementation of SQL, and their partnership with a company that claims the GPL is illegal (scox); I really have to wonder if MySQL is the way to go anymore.
Maybe you are not familiar with data centers. Things are done differently at data centers than on your desktop. Data centers servers run *huge* amounts of traffic, and they are managed by profession admins. And those admins are not challenged by a lack of a gui. Those admin may service hundreds of high-power servers at a time.
In fact, with high volume servers, a gui just gets in the way. The gui would just burn up cpu, and memory cycles. Most of the time, the blade server is not connected a monitor.
Slashdot Mirror
>>They avoid math and science because its HARD and not cool.
Also, because the same work can be done in India, or China, for $10/hour. Wouldn't you have to be stupid, to want to compete with that?
Wasn't there an article on /. a few weeks back that claimed that email was dead? So now email is alive and is killing the phone?
I am asking about marketshare, not quality.
Maybe dreamweaver has over-taken frontpage?
About eight miles south of Yuma Arizona, there is a town in Mexico that is filled with dentists, A lot of US citizens travel there to save about 60% on their dental work.
First: good point about the msft deal.
Second: Novell can not put sysV in the public domain because of the contractual obligations that novell inherited when novell aquired sysV from AT&T.
When IBM, HPQ, SUNW, and SGI, bought their UNIX licenses from AT&T, it was with a clear, contractual, understanding that the code would remain closed.
Novell inherited those contractual obligations. So novell can not legally, unilaterally, decide to open the old UNIX code.
That's how I understand it.
Scox is being sued, or will be sued, by several companies. If you buy scox, you inherent those lawsuits. The liability of those lawsuits far exceeds scox's net worth.
"Judge Kimball's decision not only undermines SCO's claims against IBM but also suggests that the company was aware that it did not own the Unix copyrights on which it based its litigation even before it launched its SCOsource intellectual property licensing business"
1 E3D15-5DC6-4D48-8BA4-8DA6D8AA9BC7
http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=98
There have been so many, but here a few of my favorites:
2 C00.a...s p
h tml
/ 0,14179,2914388,00.html
w ww.linuxworld.com/story/46800.htm
Enderle: "SCO Should Win"
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0%2C1895%2C1545173%
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1563242,00.a
Lyons: "What SCO Wants, SCO Gets"
http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/18/cz_dl_0618linux.
BTW: Dan Lyons is also the guy who screamed and cried about anonymous boggers, and message board posters, then he turned out to be the fake Steve Jobs.
Didio: "SCO Group Gains Psychological Edge, Registers UNIX System V Copyrights"
"The fact that SCO registered its UNIX System V copyright lays to rest an earlier, erroneous contention by Novell president, Jack Messman, claiming that SCO did not own the copyrights."
http://www.techupdate.com/techupdate/stories/main
Groklaw: "Maureen O'Gara reportage on a court hearing she didn't attend, yet magically was able to report on both the contents of a sealed SCO filing *and* what was shown by SCO's lawyers on a projection screen only Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells and the lawyers were supposed to see."
Here is the O'Gara article:
http://web.archive.org/web/20041025040145/http://
I think O'Gara was also the very first to report on the death of Val Noorda Kreidel. Maybe even before the coroner's report was out.
the Hobbs Act"
i ew?id=28
United States v. Enmons 410 U.S. 396: "wrongful has meaning in the Act only if it limits the statute's coverage to those instances where the obtaining of the property would itself be wrongful because the alleged extortionist has no lawful claim to that property."
http://law.gsu.edu/library/index/bibliographies/v
Remember scox sending out 1500 letters, which essentially said: "pay us for our UNIX code that's in Linux, or we'll sue you."
http://dot5hosting.com/
BTW: I absolutely do not recommend dot5 as a web-hosting service. But, if you just want a lot of online storage. . . .
I honestly don't know. Is DirectX all much better than OpenGL?
If OpenGL will do the job, why even consider DirectX?
That is the true bottom line, and msft knows it. Msft will continue to run circles around US justice, laughing up their sleeves the entire time.
And the pro-Linux cheerleaders don't even get it. "Yeah we win!! We win again!! We *always* win!! Yeah!!" While msft casually moves on to their next scam.
>>Don't blame the judge, blame the lawyers (BSF).
The lawyers are not in charge, the judge is.
Appeal? On what grounds? This is what happend: after several years of scox coming up empty handed, and the deadline for scox producing any evidence had passed: ibm said "since scox clearly can not produce evidence of any copywrite violation, we would like a summary judgement on those charges."
It would have been perfectly legal, and appropriate, for Kimball to have granted the summary judgement. But Kimball decided to allow the gaming. So I ask again: Appeal? On what grounds?
The only scox exec who dumped was Riamondi. He sold out when scox was in the high teens, just before he resigned.
Novell still has contractual obligations to HPQ, IBM, SUNW, and probably others.
Frankly, it may not matter. If sunw if going to open source solaris, that may mean that that all the sysV is gone from solaris. As I understand it, practically all the sysV is gone from AIX.
I doubt there is much is sysV that would be all that useful today.
>>Novell themselves distributed Linux under the GPL.
So did scox - for years. In fact, unlike novell, scox (originally caldera) was formed to distribute Linux under the GPL. Scox also distributed Linux, under the GPL, for years after scox filed the lawsuit against IBM.
The reason this case took so long was that Kimball allowed scox to game the system. Kimball could have put a stop to it years ago, but decided not to. Instead Kimball decided to burden ibm with about $100 million worth of obviously bogus discovery, and delay the cases for years.
Direct quotes from Judge Kimball - February 2005:
"Viewed against the backdrop of SCO's plethora of public statements concerning IBM's and others' infringement of SCO's purported copyrights to the Unix software, it is astonishing that SCO has not offered any competent evidence to create a disputed fact regarding whether IBM has infringed SCO's alleged copyrights through IBM's Linux activities," Kimball wrote.
"Further, SCO, in its briefing, chose to cavalierly ignore IBM's claims that SCO could not create a disputed fact regarding whether it even owned the relevant copyrights," the judge wrote. This refers to the matter that Novell Inc. is claiming that it, and not SCO, actually owns Unix's intellectual property."
"Notwithstanding SCO's puzzling denial in its briefing that it has not alleged a claim against IBM for copyright"
Yet, Kimball decided to dismiss IBM's request for a partial summary judgement, and instead allow scox's laughable discovery requests.
Scox discovery requests were laughable because scox wanted 20 years of AIX revisions. This makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever because scox was claiming that IBM put system V UNIX code into Linux.
Kimball even acknowledged the absurdity of scox's claims asking scox something like: "you have Linux source code, you have system V source code, what else do you think you need?"
But Kimball allowed scox's gaming anyway.
After 4.5 years, the case is finally nearing an end because scox never even owned the IP that the lawsuit was about. Think about that. It took that long for the courts to simply review the plain language of the contract.
Why didn't the courts ask for proof of ownership 4.5 years ago?
Instead the courts did everything backwards. First the courts allowed scox to game the system with years of obviously irrelevant discovery requests, then *after* all this time, and somewhere around $100 million spent by IBM to provide the insane discovery, the court finally gets around to finding out that scox never owned the IP to begin.
BTW: IBM pointed out to the courts, many years ago, that scox could not prove ownership.
The reason scox agreed to be msft's puppet is because scox had nothing to lose. Scox never had a profitable quarter. Scox was clearly heading for delisting and bankruptcy before the scam started.
The scam was planned in Dec 2002. Scox had a market cap around $10 million, at the time. Now, scox's market cap is over $25 million - thanks entirely to msft and sunw money, and msft arranged financing.
So this scam did not hurt scox at all. Just the opposite, if not for this scam, scox would probably have been out of business three years ago.
Scox was a very small part of msft's ongoing mis-information campaign. The entire scam cost msft well under $50 million. Probably less than it costs to product one msft commercial. Not bad for nearly 5 years of FUD.
Msft's efforts are now directed at thoroughly defeating the ODF efforts, and establishing OOXML as the world's only standard. Msft is winning there also.
The new versions of those languages, anyway.
MySQL has also partnered with scox. Scox is a msft puppet. Scox has loudly claimed that the GPL is unconstitutional, and scox has written congress an open letter about it.
Scox seems a strange bedfellow for a company whose flagship product is built on the GPL.
New versions of Python, and PHP, are including SQLite as part of the standard distribution. And if SQLite isn't enough, there's alwasy PostgreSQL.
Considering the MySQL AB's unusual understanding of the GPL, their goofy dual license, their non-standard implementation of SQL, and their partnership with a company that claims the GPL is illegal (scox); I really have to wonder if MySQL is the way to go anymore.
Maybe you are not familiar with data centers. Things are done differently at data centers than on your desktop. Data centers servers run *huge* amounts of traffic, and they are managed by profession admins. And those admins are not challenged by a lack of a gui. Those admin may service hundreds of high-power servers at a time.
In fact, with high volume servers, a gui just gets in the way. The gui would just burn up cpu, and memory cycles. Most of the time, the blade server is not connected a monitor.