Unbelieveable... SCO is now backtracking on the whole Linux user lawsuit thing... SCO's PR people in Australia are now claiming that there was never any serious plans to sue Linux companies or commercial Linux companies! This in spite of Darl's statement quite to the contrary just a week ago!
Are they really so stupid as to think that nobody will remember what they've actually said up to this point?
Blake Stowell, SCO's PR Director, told the Linux Journal that the 2002 licensing of 'Ancient Unix' code was for non-commercial use only. And only for 16-bit. The folks at Linux Journal were quick to point out that the 2002 announcement letter said no such thing:
"The text of the letter, sent January 23, 2002 by Bill Broderick, Director of Licensing Services for Caldera, in fact makes no mention of "non-commercial use" restrictions, does not include the words "non-commercial use" anywhere and specifically mentions "32-bit 32V Unix" as well as the 16-bit versions. "
When confronted with the facts, how dows Mr. Stowell respond? "That is what I was told by Chris Sontag." Impressive. Boy I would love to hear him say that in court!
Y'know, I'm wondering if we aren't doing SCO a favor by pointing out the glaring errors in SCO's wackier-by-the-minute assertions. People are very concerned about countering the lies being ground out by SCO. I know I am. But what if this is more than just PR fluff? What if they are really so detached from reality, and so incompetent in knowing their own history, that they really believe what they're saying? Then just let them spout off. Don't correct them. Let them hang themselves the moment they step into court. If they tried this argument in front of a judge I think the entire suit would be summarily dismissed (IANAL).
I'm not a history major, but I understand that the institution of slavey had a dig part to do in that culture's decline. Since slaves were much cheaper than paid employees and easier to 'manage', the Roman economy became dependent on slavery. Much of the working class (the plebians), in fact, did not find gainful employment (particularly in Rome). In order to maintain public order, Rome became a welfare state doling out 'bread and circuses' to keep the rabble compliant. They had to keep inventing bloodier and more lavish spectacles to keep the people happy. It was an inefficient system that corrupted core societal values and was financed by tribute from the provinces. It was only a matter of time before the society would collapse in on itself. Maybe it's just me, but I can see some similarities between Roman society and the current economic system. Any history, soc. or econ. majors want to pipe in on this?
Because SCO sure is. Evety ounce of FUD SCO can generate, every column inch they can get in the press without clear and credible rebuttal makes their clais more credible in the eyes of the PHB. The Laura Didios and Charles Coopers of this world are making SCO's job easier by lending an air of legitimacy to this farce. The press in general have NOT been doing a good job of presenting the true facts of this case, and often print SCO's assertions about UNIX ownership, among other lies and half-truths, as given. The mainstream press needs to be cahllenged to dig deeper into, for example, the likelihood that this is actually a 'pump-and-dump' scam: Thousands of shares issued at $0.001 in January now being sold en masse at $10. This is easily verified and I've seen it on Slashdot and some other sites, but the story has not broken out to the mainstream press. If the above were to break in, say, Forbes, CNN/Money, Motley Fool, etc., there would be an immediate effect - SCO stock valuation would implode - There would be an SEC investigation - The whole SCO drama would gring to a quick and ugly stop.
So I urge everyone to write letters to the editor, call the paper, do whatever it takes to get the truth out. No screeds, no overblown rhetoric or anti-SCO insults, just clearly, coherently, and as objectively lay out the facts in this case. SCO has been trying this case in the courts of public opinion. So can we.
Um, yes. NUMA came from the SEQUENT (now IBM) codebase. Same with RCU. But SCO's claim is that since Sequent (Dynix) was a derivative of SysV, then it's THEIR code. Which presumably, means that this is not merely a contract dispute with IBM but an intellectual property case. But, it is very unlikely that SCO can prove in court that Sequent's contract with AT&T/USL/Novell/SCO/Caldera/SCO grants SCO any rights whatsoever to ownership, let alone control, of Sequent NUMA code. So SCO is claiming piracy of IP they don't even own (or at least haven't proven as such in court).
The bullshit just keeps rising higher and higher...
"...The company also announced it will offer UnixWare(R) licenses tailored to support run-time, binary use of Linux for all commercial users of Linux based on kernel version 2.4.x and later. SCO will hold harmless commercial Linux customers that purchase a UnixWare license against any past copyright violations, and for any future use of Linux in a run-only, binary format."
So users no longer have access to Linux source? They can't recompile the kernel? Oh, that's right, Linux is an "unauthorized derivative of UNIX", so I assume they're laying claim to all of Linux now.
"Since the year 2001 commercial Linux customers have been purchasing and receiving software that includes misappropriated UNIX software owned by SCO... While using pirated software is copyright infringement, our first choice in helping Linux customers is to give them an option that will not disrupt their IT infrastructures..."
They have not provided any proof that Linux contains SCO IP... even if it did that does NOT mean that Linux users are committing software piracy.
Hundreds of files of misappropriated UNIX source code and derivative UNIX code have been contributed to Linux in a variety of areas, including multi-processing capabilities. The Linux 2.2.x kernel was able to scale to 2-4 processors. With Linux 2.4.x and the 2.5.x development kernel, Linux now scales to 32 and 64 processors through the addition of advanced Symmetrical Multi-Processing (SMP) capabilities taken from UNIX System V and derivative works, in violation of SCO's contract agreements and copyrights."
This is IBM (and formerly Sequent) code. It's NOT SCO's intellectual property. They CLAIM to have control over its distribution, but again, they haven't proven it in court. That certainly doesn't mean they own it.
I could go on but I'm sure many brighter ones will do a better job...
... and JFS is from OS/2. IBM has a strict firewall between AIX and Linux; AIX programmers can't work on Linux kernel projects (as far as I know) and any code contributions have to pass by the lawyers first... this is why SCO is doomed if it gets to court.
Preliminary spec: 1945 First flight: 1952 Entered service: 1955 Last produced: 1962 (B-52-H) End of Service Date: 2030
Not bad for an aircraft thought obsolete in 1961! Billions spent on finding a replacement: the B-58, the B-70 , the B-1B, the B-2. But nothing gets the job done like a BUFF.
I just lost my breakfast. Thanks ever so much. If you want to read about the fire, go here. Apparently UT was a major node for KazAA, and'a primo source for warez and pr0n.
His ex-boss's, that's who. Could be that Bubba-boy felt tht he was over a barrel on this one, if he refused his ex-boss might give give him a bad reference. Anybody have any ideas on how to avoid falling into this trap? I can think of two:
- Ask for a letter of reference on the day you leave the company (unless you're getting fired for cause, of course).
- Be sure to have more than one manager in the company who can be used as a reference.
The Globe and Mail article is here. Using probiotics they can increase yield two two three times. When they burn the plants to release the nickel, the ash is about 30% nickel! They can use the energy from burning to produce electricity. Inco is testing in a field contaminated with nickel-mining waste, so it also helps clean up the environment. Any biologists out there know if there would be a net reduction in CO2 over the production cycle? That would be a real bonus.
Beyond /. effect... it's gone!
on
When Users Attack
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Two years ago she was doing country gospel and new country in small-town eastern Ontario. She won a contest and got to sing a duet onstage with Shania Twain. Then she was "discovered", got an agent, and suddenly she was one 'bad-ass chick'. See this article for details.
Slashdot Mirror
Unbelieveable... SCO is now backtracking on the whole Linux user lawsuit thing... SCO's PR people in Australia are now claiming that there was never any serious plans to sue Linux companies or commercial Linux companies! This in spite of Darl's statement quite to the contrary just a week ago!
Are they really so stupid as to think that nobody will remember what they've actually said up to this point?
Blake Stowell, SCO's PR Director, told the Linux Journal that the 2002 licensing of 'Ancient Unix' code was for non-commercial use only. And only for 16-bit. The folks at Linux Journal were quick to point out that the 2002 announcement letter said no such thing:
"The text of the letter, sent January 23, 2002 by Bill Broderick, Director of Licensing Services for Caldera, in fact makes no mention of "non-commercial use" restrictions, does not include the words "non-commercial use" anywhere and specifically mentions "32-bit 32V Unix" as well as the 16-bit versions. "
When confronted with the facts, how dows Mr. Stowell respond? "That is what I was told by Chris Sontag." Impressive. Boy I would love to hear him say that in court!
Y'know, I'm wondering if we aren't doing SCO a favor by pointing out the glaring errors in SCO's wackier-by-the-minute assertions. People are very concerned about countering the lies being ground out by SCO. I know I am. But what if this is more than just PR fluff? What if they are really so detached from reality, and so incompetent in knowing their own history, that they really believe what they're saying? Then just let them spout off. Don't correct them. Let them hang themselves the moment they step into court. If they tried this argument in front of a judge I think the entire suit would be summarily dismissed (IANAL).
Is SCO Smoking Crack?
96.68% Yes and counting...
I'm not a history major, but I understand that the institution of slavey had a dig part to do in that culture's decline. Since slaves were much cheaper than paid employees and easier to 'manage', the Roman economy became dependent on slavery. Much of the working class (the plebians), in fact, did not find gainful employment (particularly in Rome). In order to maintain public order, Rome became a welfare state doling out 'bread and circuses' to keep the rabble compliant. They had to keep inventing bloodier and more lavish spectacles to keep the people happy. It was an inefficient system that corrupted core societal values and was financed by tribute from the provinces. It was only a matter of time before the society would collapse in on itself.
Maybe it's just me, but I can see some similarities between Roman society and the current economic system. Any history, soc. or econ. majors want to pipe in on this?
Because SCO sure is. Evety ounce of FUD SCO can generate, every column inch they can get in the press without clear and credible rebuttal makes their clais more credible in the eyes of the PHB. The Laura Didios and Charles Coopers of this world are making SCO's job easier by lending an air of legitimacy to this farce. The press in general have NOT been doing a good job of presenting the true facts of this case, and often print SCO's assertions about UNIX ownership, among other lies and half-truths, as given. The mainstream press needs to be cahllenged to dig deeper into, for example, the likelihood that this is actually a 'pump-and-dump' scam: Thousands of shares issued at $0.001 in January now being sold en masse at $10. This is easily verified and I've seen it on Slashdot and some other sites, but the story has not broken out to the mainstream press. If the above were to break in, say, Forbes, CNN/Money, Motley Fool, etc., there would be an immediate effect
- SCO stock valuation would implode
- There would be an SEC investigation
- The whole SCO drama would gring to a quick and ugly stop.
So I urge everyone to write letters to the editor, call the paper, do whatever it takes to get the truth out. No screeds, no overblown rhetoric or anti-SCO insults, just clearly, coherently, and as objectively lay out the facts in this case. SCO has been trying this case in the courts of public opinion. So can we.
Um, yes. NUMA came from the SEQUENT (now IBM) codebase. Same with RCU. But SCO's claim is that since Sequent (Dynix) was a derivative of SysV, then it's THEIR code. Which presumably, means that this is not merely a contract dispute with IBM but an intellectual property case. But, it is very unlikely that SCO can prove in court that Sequent's contract with AT&T/USL/Novell/SCO/Caldera/SCO grants SCO any rights whatsoever to ownership, let alone control, of Sequent NUMA code. So SCO is claiming piracy of IP they don't even own (or at least haven't proven as such in court).
The bullshit just keeps rising higher and higher...
"...The company also announced it will offer
UnixWare(R) licenses tailored to support run-time, binary use of Linux for all
commercial users of Linux based on kernel version 2.4.x and later. SCO will
hold harmless commercial Linux customers that purchase a UnixWare license
against any past copyright violations, and for any future use of Linux in a
run-only, binary format."
So users no longer have access to Linux source? They can't recompile the kernel? Oh, that's right, Linux is an "unauthorized derivative of UNIX", so I assume they're laying claim to all of Linux now.
"Since the year 2001 commercial Linux customers have been purchasing and receiving software that includes misappropriated UNIX software owned by SCO... While using pirated software is copyright infringement, our first choice in helping Linux customers is to give them an option that will not disrupt their IT infrastructures..."
They have not provided any proof that Linux contains SCO IP... even if it did that does NOT mean that Linux users are committing software piracy.
Hundreds of files of misappropriated UNIX source code and derivative UNIX
code have been contributed to Linux in a variety of areas, including
multi-processing capabilities. The Linux 2.2.x kernel was able to scale to 2-4 processors. With Linux 2.4.x and the 2.5.x development kernel, Linux now scales to 32 and 64 processors through the addition of advanced Symmetrical Multi-Processing (SMP) capabilities taken from UNIX System V and derivative works, in violation of SCO's contract agreements and copyrights."
This is IBM (and formerly Sequent) code. It's NOT SCO's intellectual property. They CLAIM to have control over its distribution, but again, they haven't proven it in court. That certainly doesn't mean they own it.
I could go on but I'm sure many brighter ones will do a better job...
Why isn't the press getting wind of this? Darl's mass purchase of $.001 stock just before the lawsuit was annnounced should be front-page news!
Time: 9:15 Monday.
SCO stated on Monday that they would make an announcement before the start of business on the NYSE today.
So where is it? Nowhere to be found!
"You talk like you're a real ass-kicker. But I ain't convinced." - Charles Bronson, Mr. Majestyk
What I find when I go to http://www.EmarketersAmerica.org:
"THIS PAGE HAS BEEN RE-DIRECTED FOR ABUSE / SPAM VIOLATIONS"
hmmm... e-Vigilantes at work?
... and JFS is from OS/2. IBM has a strict firewall between AIX and Linux; AIX programmers can't work on Linux kernel projects (as far as I know) and any code contributions have to pass by the lawyers first... this is why SCO is doomed if it gets to court.
Preliminary spec: 1945
First flight: 1952
Entered service: 1955
Last produced: 1962 (B-52-H)
End of Service Date: 2030
Not bad for an aircraft thought obsolete in 1961! Billions spent on finding a replacement: the B-58, the B-70 , the B-1B, the B-2. But nothing gets the job done like a BUFF.
?Huh? 200?
(5280 feet/mile * 12 in./foot) / 27 in. = 2346.7
Looks like the folks at the Royal Canadian Air Farce just got an upgrade!
I wish. See post below.
>(Score:0, Flamebait) ...
> Apparently UT was a major node for KazAA, and'a primo source for warez and pr0n.
Flamebait?! I didn't say it, The Register did!
Bah... moderators on crack again.
I just lost my breakfast. Thanks ever so much.
If you want to read about the fire, go here. Apparently UT was a major node for KazAA, and'a primo source for warez and pr0n.
His ex-boss's, that's who. Could be that Bubba-boy felt tht he was over a barrel on this one, if he refused his ex-boss might give give him a bad reference. Anybody have any ideas on how to avoid falling into this trap? I can think of two:
- Ask for a letter of reference on the day you leave the company (unless you're getting fired for cause, of course).
- Be sure to have more than one manager in the company who can be used as a reference.
CS4745? Hey that's a new course! Wish they'd had that when I was there...
Whatever you think of what he (?) said, that Sascha Hanke has a lot of balls!
It's called spin. And the article reeks of it. It reads like it was written by a covert RIAA operative.
The Globe and Mail article is here. Using probiotics they can increase yield two two three times. When they burn the plants to release the nickel, the ash is about 30% nickel! They can use the energy from burning to produce electricity. Inco is testing in a field contaminated with nickel-mining waste, so it also helps clean up the environment.
Any biologists out there know if there would be a net reduction in CO2 over the production cycle? That would be a real bonus.
www.thetechboard.com/mishaps/index.html: HTTP 404 - File not found
www.thetechboard.com: The website for thetechboard.com is Coming Soon!
For more information, please click here to contact us.
Two years ago she was doing country gospel and new country in small-town eastern Ontario. She won a contest and got to sing a duet onstage with Shania Twain. Then she was "discovered", got an agent, and suddenly she was one 'bad-ass chick'. See this article for details.