This is what I've been saying all along. The GPL is not a weapon of mass destruction. It is purely defensive. Free software is free - even to those we despise.
For instance, it appears that China is using GPL'd software but not giving back the source on their custom binaries. What are you going to do about it? Right, nothing. There's nothing you can do about it.
But that's not the point of Free software. Free is free as in freedom, like freedom of speech. It means we must tolerate those who will abuse it. That doesn't mean we can't be pissed about it. And it doesn't mean we can't boycott, protest, or otherwise demonstrate (vote with out wallets) our displeasure with people like SCO.
That's what SAMBA is saying, and they're right. There's simply nothing else they can do but bitch. AFter a while, this will be a pretty big embarrassment to SCO I should think.
Anyone else here remember this clown? You know, the big shot lawyer who, on the first day made this big impression with everyone and was supposed to show up at various times (including during SCO's big show), and yet never has?
What a 'great' lawyer he's turned out to be. He's allowed his client to shoot off his mouth, display false or at the least misleading information and thereby created limitless liability for SCO. WHERE IS HE? I think he was rented for the publicity folks. Really.
I wonder about that don't you? Where IS he?
And SCO? To quote James T. Kirk:
"I... Have had... Enough.... Of... YOUUuuuuu...." - Just imagine that while getting a boot to the head.
At least for a little while I suppose. Darl(ing) can keep shooting his mouth off all he wants, it'll just make the court case that much more interesting.
All this flap about how SCO hates the GPL is pure BS since they don't seem to have an problem using GCC and SAMBA. But when this all comes to court, they'll really have to decide which way it is - is the GPL legal or not? Because it's going to affect the future (if there is one) of their 'product'.
Of course, I'm still cynical enough to believe that this whole thing is an exercise in legality. SCO isn't looking to the future, well unless you're an exec dreaming about tropical climates.
I suppose by 'press' I was referring more to the news.com.com / infoworld.com variety of tech news. But you have a point. Some things do need to be put into perspective.:/
Ok, the press has had a field day with headlines like, "SCO Shows Code To Millions Of Awed Onlookers". Well, now it's time to step up and have some truth in reporting.
Let's try and get some of the mainstream press to look into this and put SCO's feet to the fire. I'm so tired of this bullshit.
Oh that'll be fun, why not just reinvent every driver for every sound/video/motherboard/RAID/north and south bridge, etc. ever made. Sure.
It's hard enough getting the mainstream graphics people to do Linux drivers; how convinced do you think they'll be to do one for some off-brand version of Dumb-OS(tm)?
They don't have to apparently. They seen to have the press in their back pocket.
The stupid mainstream press have headlines like, "SCO Shows Offending Code To Crowds Of Awed Onlookers". But the simple truth is, they still haven't really shown shit.
Yes, but... So what? It's like SCO 'revoking' IBM's license to AIX. Well? Has it stopped IBM from selling it? Of course not! The GPL's strengths are in it's defensability not in the offensive. It's about giving rights, not taking someone else's away. Think of it as a really big tank with great armor but no gun.
Just because SCO blows more out their ass by declaring something invalid doesn't mean anything. They've said a LOT in the last two weeks. Everyone calm down out there. It hasn't yet stopped you from compiling a kernel. Their 'position' - whatever it is today - is hardly defensible considering that they're willing to pick and choose between what parts (and products) they like of the GPL. For instance, they seem to like GCC and SAMBA. Well, that's terrific. It's great evidence for the courts, and another example of how they (and their developers) support the GPL after all.
No court of law is going to believe that SCO agreed to the GPL in all of these contexts without adequate knowledge. To quote Airplane, "They bought their tickets, they KNEW what they were getting into!"
I still think it would be unwise to proclaim special exemptions for any reason here regardless of violation because:
a) Enforceability of the GPL is suspect to begin with. i.e., You and what army (of lawyers)?
b) It could come back to bite you in the ass later.
So SCO's out of compliance with the GPL. So apparently is China. ENFORCEABILITY. This is exactly what I mean. What ya gonna do?
Don't let your hate of this organization get ahead of the true goal here. I'm telling you, these scumbags will get theirs if we do not compromise.
I know I'm going to sound like RMS here but the fact is, Free software really is free for EVERYONE - even those we happen to hate today.
You know, there was a time, not too long ago many of us disliked IBM and their tactics. In fact, that may one day happen again. If we set a precident now where you can revoke a GPL'd license just because you don't like someone, where does it stop?
Free software is FREE. SCO is hanging themselves by it and here's why:
Let them use GCC. Let them use Samba. LET THEM! ANY market acceptance of these free products is good PR for these projects on ANY platform - free or otherwise. This is because any platform in competition can then say, "Our version of Linux running Samba 3.x offers the same benefits as SCO's Openserver, except ours costs half the price."
I know we're all in agreement here about how we feel about Darl(ing) McBride and his band of merry lawyers. But they will get what is coming to them if we stick to the GPL. It's worked so far and this long because there's no fighting it when the playfield is even. SCO can't say they didn't agree to the terms of the GPL when they, to this day, continue to release code under it. Sometimes the best offense is a good defense.
And RMS, if you're listening out there, you can tell all your detractors for me to STFU. At least there's still someone alive that sticks to their principles and I respect that.
Good ol' Darl(ing) just wants to be sure everyone (and everything's) 'clean'...
"We have a solution that gets you clean, gets you square with the use of Linux without having to go to the courtroom," Chief Executive Darl McBride said in a conference call Monday. - ZDNET
Are you clean?
Shit, just having this guy ask that question makes me want to go take a long hot shower.
In the year leading to C='s end, the CEO of C= was earning 3 million more than IBM's CEO at that time. The big difference was that IBM was actually profitable. The execs played games like having their annual meetings on some remote island so as to avoid the wrath of their shareholders.
Yes, they did stupid things (like trying to sell their own branded PC); but ultimately, C='s management shortchanged their employees, vendors, and the users. Having been a C= dealer in PA and met many engineers in West Chester, I can tell you there's a lot that people don't know.
Let's just say that the execs of that company aren't exactly starving to death.
This whole SCO business has nothing to do with the survival of SCO, the GPL, the 3 billion from IBM, or the $1400 license fees from you. That's all cover for what's REALLY going on.
I have one question: WHERE IS BOIES? You remember him right? Mr. Bigshot lawyer guy? Showed up on the first day of the filing and disappeared. Why is it that he hasn't told his client Darl(ing) to STFU and handled the responses himself? That's what a responsible, caring lawyer would do. That's what a lawyer not rented for a single DAY would do. I'll tell you what - this has all been a show.
All of this has been to pump up the stock so Darl and his cronies can dump it and enjoy life in some warm climate somewhere. All these claims of IP and GPL violations are cover for the real criminal activity. These guys are destroying SCO and they know it - have known it for some time.
I feel for the employees, the duped stockholders, and even those stupid enough to purchase a single useless license from these guys. One can only hope for a class action, but history shows (check out the corporate histories of Commodore, Ameritrain, Enron, Worldcom), the big guys of these types of companies rarely do time.
Never has been folks. Darl(ing) has known for some time that he's on a sinking ship. What to do, what to do?
Well? What do you do with a bunch of stock options and no where else to go? PUMP IT UP and DUMP IT! This whole thing has been an exercise in stock manipulation, plain and simple. Don't be duped into thinking that SCO cares about their company, IP rights, the 3 billion from IBM (yeah, right), or even the $1400 from you dear reader. They have to say that's what it's about to avoid future personal lawsuits from their stockholders. That's the REAL FUD here friends.
Let's be realistic here. You don't go and sue the biggest computer corporation in the world with a claim against the GPL when:
- You have Boies as a lawyer who should know better. He's more noise. What exactly has he DONE? Anyone hear from this guy lately? No? Know why? His name was there for initial polish, to put some shine on the IBM claim. I'll bet they haven't paid him to do anything more than that - they probably couldn't afford it. Who does the talking now (actually, who can't shut up?) DARL. If they had a real claim, Boies would be telling his client what EVERY lawyer tells their client - STFU and let ME do the talking.
- You are yourselves distributing and continuing to distribute Linux.
- You are vulnerable to possibly hundreds of software patent lawsuits. C'mon this is IBM - you know, the INVENTORS of the thing! IBM handpicked four - my guess is closer to four hundred.
- You intentionally piss off every single one of your partners (IBM, SuSE), customers, and even end users thereby eliminating any hope for future revenue.
No folks, this is about the golden parachute. These corporate scum have made the biggest noise they could and got the biggest pump possible. Who knows how much money they've made in the past month or so.
I feel bad for all the employees that will be in the wreckage that is SCO. Chances are, Darl and his cronies will get their millions and be sipping pina coladas off the gold coast at the end of all this.
It's sad, but I've personally seen it before at both Commodore and Ameritrain. The best we can hope for is a class action against these extorting leeches.
The man's just doing his job. It's not like he's stuffing people into a gas chamber or anything.
OTOH, I can certainly understand the reaction of the RH guy, all things considered.
Kean's response about things being 'open' is ironic. If his company would be more open and simply disclose what part of Linux they feel has been compromised, this could all be academic. Instead, lawyers and crooks run SCO now.
How would it be to work for them? To know that your job will only last as long as the lawsuit continues. After SCO loses (and they will), these poor programmers will be out of a job and Unixware is already a dying concern whose end will certainly be hastened by this action.
The execs will bail out with their millions and the coders will be getting in line at the unemployment office. Where's the f*cking justice here?
And all that work. All that programming effort. For nothing.
I'm wondering if there shouldn't be an amendment made to the GPL - something about 'hold no harm'. Maybe a line about full disclosure of disputed code.
As I see it, the main probelm we have with SCO is their reluctance to tell us what they have a problem with. We know why they won't, and they are currently under no obligation to cough it up outside of court.
But were the GPL to be ammended for this instance, this could not happen in the future. I'm not saying the GPL should determine whether donated code is legal, mind you. I'm saying that at least the OPTION to determine it's status should be granted to it's users when under legal intimidation.
How can SCO pull IBM's AIX license which is perpetual without a court order doing so? NOTHING they have done has any legal basis whatsoever. Nothing has actually come to a court of law. No proof of anything has been offered. All heresay and FUD.
Slashdot Mirror
This is what I've been saying all along. The GPL is not a weapon of mass destruction. It is purely defensive. Free software is free - even to those we despise.
For instance, it appears that China is using GPL'd software but not giving back the source on their custom binaries. What are you going to do about it? Right, nothing. There's nothing you can do about it.
But that's not the point of Free software. Free is free as in freedom, like freedom of speech. It means we must tolerate those who will abuse it. That doesn't mean we can't be pissed about it. And it doesn't mean we can't boycott, protest, or otherwise demonstrate (vote with out wallets) our displeasure with people like SCO.
That's what SAMBA is saying, and they're right. There's simply nothing else they can do but bitch. AFter a while, this will be a pretty big embarrassment to SCO I should think.
WHERE THE HELL IS BOIES?!!
Anyone else here remember this clown? You know, the big shot lawyer who, on the first day made this big impression with everyone and was supposed to show up at various times (including during SCO's big show), and yet never has?
What a 'great' lawyer he's turned out to be. He's allowed his client to shoot off his mouth, display false or at the least misleading information and thereby created limitless liability for SCO. WHERE IS HE? I think he was rented for the publicity folks. Really.
I wonder about that don't you? Where IS he?
And SCO? To quote James T. Kirk:
"I... Have had... Enough.... Of... YOUUuuuuu...." - Just imagine that while getting a boot to the head.
...or can they?
At least for a little while I suppose. Darl(ing) can keep shooting his mouth off all he wants, it'll just make the court case that much more interesting.
All this flap about how SCO hates the GPL is pure BS since they don't seem to have an problem using GCC and SAMBA. But when this all comes to court, they'll really have to decide which way it is - is the GPL legal or not? Because it's going to affect the future (if there is one) of their 'product'.
Of course, I'm still cynical enough to believe that this whole thing is an exercise in legality. SCO isn't looking to the future, well unless you're an exec dreaming about tropical climates.
I suppose by 'press' I was referring more to the news.com.com / infoworld.com variety of tech news. But you have a point. Some things do need to be put into perspective. :/
in 'Contact', except the end result wasn't as breathtaking.
Maybe if SCO had invented some sort of transport device...
Ok, the press has had a field day with headlines like, "SCO Shows Code To Millions Of Awed Onlookers". Well, now it's time to step up and have some truth in reporting.
Let's try and get some of the mainstream press to look into this and put SCO's feet to the fire. I'm so tired of this bullshit.
Oh that'll be fun, why not just reinvent every driver for every sound/video/motherboard/RAID/north and south bridge, etc. ever made. Sure.
It's hard enough getting the mainstream graphics people to do Linux drivers; how convinced do you think they'll be to do one for some off-brand version of Dumb-OS(tm)?
They don't have to apparently. They seen to have the press in their back pocket.
The stupid mainstream press have headlines like, "SCO Shows Offending Code To Crowds Of Awed Onlookers". But the simple truth is, they still haven't really shown shit.
Attendees applauded when SCO announced support for *new* hardware like: USB, AGP, PCI, and PS/2 Mouse/Keyboard ports.
;)
And coming soon! Full compliance with ELS...
Extended
Lawyer
Support
Yes, but... So what? It's like SCO 'revoking' IBM's license to AIX. Well? Has it stopped IBM from selling it? Of course not! The GPL's strengths are in it's defensability not in the offensive. It's about giving rights, not taking someone else's away. Think of it as a really big tank with great armor but no gun.
Just because SCO blows more out their ass by declaring something invalid doesn't mean anything. They've said a LOT in the last two weeks. Everyone calm down out there. It hasn't yet stopped you from compiling a kernel. Their 'position' - whatever it is today - is hardly defensible considering that they're willing to pick and choose between what parts (and products) they like of the GPL. For instance, they seem to like GCC and SAMBA. Well, that's terrific. It's great evidence for the courts, and another example of how they (and their developers) support the GPL after all.
No court of law is going to believe that SCO agreed to the GPL in all of these contexts without adequate knowledge. To quote Airplane, "They bought their tickets, they KNEW what they were getting into!"
I still think it would be unwise to proclaim special exemptions for any reason here regardless of violation because:
a) Enforceability of the GPL is suspect to begin with. i.e., You and what army (of lawyers)?
b) It could come back to bite you in the ass later.
So SCO's out of compliance with the GPL. So apparently is China. ENFORCEABILITY. This is exactly what I mean. What ya gonna do?
Don't let your hate of this organization get ahead of the true goal here. I'm telling you, these scumbags will get theirs if we do not compromise.
You mean the 'WP' project?
:)
http://wp.openoffice.org/
I know I'm going to sound like RMS here but the fact is, Free software really is free for EVERYONE - even those we happen to hate today.
You know, there was a time, not too long ago many of us disliked IBM and their tactics. In fact, that may one day happen again. If we set a precident now where you can revoke a GPL'd license just because you don't like someone, where does it stop?
Free software is FREE. SCO is hanging themselves by it and here's why:
Let them use GCC. Let them use Samba. LET THEM! ANY market acceptance of these free products is good PR for these projects on ANY platform - free or otherwise. This is because any platform in competition can then say, "Our version of Linux running Samba 3.x offers the same benefits as SCO's Openserver, except ours costs half the price."
I know we're all in agreement here about how we feel about Darl(ing) McBride and his band of merry lawyers. But they will get what is coming to them if we stick to the GPL. It's worked so far and this long because there's no fighting it when the playfield is even. SCO can't say they didn't agree to the terms of the GPL when they, to this day, continue to release code under it. Sometimes the best offense is a good defense.
And RMS, if you're listening out there, you can tell all your detractors for me to STFU. At least there's still someone alive that sticks to their principles and I respect that.
Good ol' Darl(ing) just wants to be sure everyone (and everything's) 'clean'...
"We have a solution that gets you clean, gets you square with the use of Linux without having to go to the courtroom," Chief Executive Darl McBride said in a conference call Monday. - ZDNET
Are you clean?
Shit, just having this guy ask that question makes me want to go take a long hot shower.
... 'Glow' will have a chance to succeed now.
Oh, what is it?
Glad you asked!
http://groupware.openoffice.org/glow/
Glow is a groupware software for openoffice.org.
Not entirely true.
In the year leading to C='s end, the CEO of C= was earning 3 million more than IBM's CEO at that time. The big difference was that IBM was actually profitable. The execs played games like having their annual meetings on some remote island so as to avoid the wrath of their shareholders.
Yes, they did stupid things (like trying to sell their own branded PC); but ultimately, C='s management shortchanged their employees, vendors, and the users. Having been a C= dealer in PA and met many engineers in West Chester, I can tell you there's a lot that people don't know.
Let's just say that the execs of that company aren't exactly starving to death.
This whole SCO business has nothing to do with the survival of SCO, the GPL, the 3 billion from IBM, or the $1400 license fees from you. That's all cover for what's REALLY going on.
I have one question: WHERE IS BOIES? You remember him right? Mr. Bigshot lawyer guy? Showed up on the first day of the filing and disappeared. Why is it that he hasn't told his client Darl(ing) to STFU and handled the responses himself? That's what a responsible, caring lawyer would do. That's what a lawyer not rented for a single DAY would do. I'll tell you what - this has all been a show.
All of this has been to pump up the stock so Darl and his cronies can dump it and enjoy life in some warm climate somewhere. All these claims of IP and GPL violations are cover for the real criminal activity. These guys are destroying SCO and they know it - have known it for some time.
I feel for the employees, the duped stockholders, and even those stupid enough to purchase a single useless license from these guys. One can only hope for a class action, but history shows (check out the corporate histories of Commodore, Ameritrain, Enron, Worldcom), the big guys of these types of companies rarely do time.
Never has been folks. Darl(ing) has known for some time that he's on a sinking ship. What to do, what to do?
:(
Well? What do you do with a bunch of stock options and no where else to go? PUMP IT UP and DUMP IT! This whole thing has been an exercise in stock manipulation, plain and simple. Don't be duped into thinking that SCO cares about their company, IP rights, the 3 billion from IBM (yeah, right), or even the $1400 from you dear reader. They have to say that's what it's about to avoid future personal lawsuits from their stockholders. That's the REAL FUD here friends.
Let's be realistic here. You don't go and sue the biggest computer corporation in the world with a claim against the GPL when:
- You have Boies as a lawyer who should know better. He's more noise. What exactly has he DONE? Anyone hear from this guy lately? No? Know why? His name was there for initial polish, to put some shine on the IBM claim. I'll bet they haven't paid him to do anything more than that - they probably couldn't afford it. Who does the talking now (actually, who can't shut up?) DARL. If they had a real claim, Boies would be telling his client what EVERY lawyer tells their client - STFU and let ME do the talking.
- You are yourselves distributing and continuing to distribute Linux.
- You are vulnerable to possibly hundreds of software patent lawsuits. C'mon this is IBM - you know, the INVENTORS of the thing! IBM handpicked four - my guess is closer to four hundred.
- You intentionally piss off every single one of your partners (IBM, SuSE), customers, and even end users thereby eliminating any hope for future revenue.
No folks, this is about the golden parachute. These corporate scum have made the biggest noise they could and got the biggest pump possible. Who knows how much money they've made in the past month or so.
I feel bad for all the employees that will be in the wreckage that is SCO. Chances are, Darl and his cronies will get their millions and be sipping pina coladas off the gold coast at the end of all this.
It's sad, but I've personally seen it before at both Commodore and Ameritrain. The best we can hope for is a class action against these extorting leeches.
But...
I wouldn't count on it.
Yep. The smack is layeth down. The jig is up. Whatever cliche' you want to use. It's over. No more pumping the stock for you Darl(ing).
Well... I hope it is. IBM MUST pursue this to the death or else these stupid greedy bastards will go bother someone else and get an injunction.
Did you see those patent infringements though? Wow.
Or check into the Verone Cables yourself. How this shit escapes the media is amazing. McCarthy had a real reason to be paranoid.
Er.... You go to the house of pain?
;)
(Obscure Oingo Boingo reference)
Yet another stock pump and dump. They're not hoping for a buy out anymore - this is suicide.
The man's just doing his job. It's not like he's stuffing people into a gas chamber or anything.
OTOH, I can certainly understand the reaction of the RH guy, all things considered.
Kean's response about things being 'open' is ironic. If his company would be more open and simply disclose what part of Linux they feel has been compromised, this could all be academic. Instead, lawyers and crooks run SCO now.
How would it be to work for them? To know that your job will only last as long as the lawsuit continues. After SCO loses (and they will), these poor programmers will be out of a job and Unixware is already a dying concern whose end will certainly be hastened by this action.
The execs will bail out with their millions and the coders will be getting in line at the unemployment office. Where's the f*cking justice here?
And all that work. All that programming effort. For nothing.
I'm wondering if there shouldn't be an amendment made to the GPL - something about 'hold no harm'. Maybe a line about full disclosure of disputed code.
As I see it, the main probelm we have with SCO is their reluctance to tell us what they have a problem with. We know why they won't, and they are currently under no obligation to cough it up outside of court.
But were the GPL to be ammended for this instance, this could not happen in the future. I'm not saying the GPL should determine whether donated code is legal, mind you. I'm saying that at least the OPTION to determine it's status should be granted to it's users when under legal intimidation.
How can SCO pull IBM's AIX license which is perpetual without a court order doing so? NOTHING they have done has any legal basis whatsoever. Nothing has actually come to a court of law. No proof of anything has been offered. All heresay and FUD.
How about instead of trying to prove why MS is so much better than Linux, why not improve the interoperability tools between the two?
You know why, don't you?