Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

SCO's Real Motive... A Buyout?

CmdrTaco posted more than 11 years ago | from the holding-the-industry-hostage dept.

Caldera 451

psykocrime writes "Acccording to this article in ComputerWorld, CEO Darl McBride of SCO has finally discussed the possibility of a buyout by IBM in public. Among other things, McBride says: "I'm not trying to screw up the Linux business," he said. "I'm trying to take care of the shareholders, employees and people who have been having their rights trampled on." and "If there's a way of resolving this that is positive, then we can get back out to business and everybody is good to go, then I'm fine with that," McBride said today in an interview with Computerworld. "If that's one of the outcomes of this, then so be it." Also, yet another computerworld article indicates that most of the press and analysts who have been invited to take part in SCO's "public review of the infringing code" have declined... apparently due primarily to concerns over the terms of the non-disclosure agreement SCO is asking them to agree to. Linus in particular has said "no way" to signing their NDA to look at the code."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

SCO, please (-1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089457)

Please, let me look at your source code, I want to write a new operating system, and I want it to be stable.

Re:SCO, please (-1)

Troll McClure (571760) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089544)

remember,

SCO's Not Unix!

hmm, theres something wrong there......

You have a fantastic username. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089554)

Hang one a second... (3, Interesting)

Realistic_Dragon (655151) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089458)

If SCO has to give 95% of UNIX royalties to Novel, and SCO wins a suit (right after a bunch of pigs fly overhead) based on that IP, doesn't that mean that SCO would have to give 95% of the winnings to Novel?

Re:Hang one a second... (1)

Baumi (148744) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089488)

I don't think so. Not sure, but IMHO you don't have to pay royalties on damages awarded to you.

Re:Hang one a second... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089509)

But maybee Novell could sue SCO for not acting sooner - therefore defrauding them of their royalty payments. :)

Re:Hang one a second... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089556)

It's being called really desparate

Re:Hang one a second... (3, Informative)

d^2b (34992) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089578)

The clarification I read from Novell is that the 95% figure is only for an existing set of contracts at the time of the deal with SCO. So the gist of the article was that this was not as much of a smoking gun as Slashdot (or Bruce Perens) thought.

Note that this is not making any claim about who owns the copyrights to the Unix code, just what the SCO 10k statement means.

Re:Hang one a second... (2, Informative)

d^2b (34992) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089601)

Here is the link [eweek.com] to the article I mentioned, for the google-challenged.

Re:Hang one a second... while i tell you a story (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089637)

Once upon a time whilst walking in a park I asked a geek "Do you have a girlfriend?". He responded with a very puzzled look. "A girlfriend?," he mused, "Who is the developer?". I chuckled and told him this was not an open source project. He then became slightly angry and inquired, "Are you trying to insult me? Only the best geeks use open source only! What planet are you living on?!". I reassured him I was well aware of his integrity as a geek (white skin, clumsy, pants that are too short, lack of daily shower, pocket protector etc), and explained, "A girlfriend is a female who to a male (most oftenly a male) has an intimate friendship." He gave me a very confused look. "I have never heard of such a thing.. this.. g-g-irlfriend?" He asked me, sounding very baffled. "I have heard of friends before, those pets other people have. But what is this thing you say.. Grill?". "Girl," I corrected. Then I asked him to sit down on a bench nearby so I could explain it too him, the poor, helpless thing. I told him that for human beings to reproduce, sexual intercourse must occur between a male and a female. "Perhaps you hear the trolls mention a thing called "pussy" on slashdot?". The geek burst into laughter, "Haha, you have been browsing at -1 lately, haven't you? You know that is just troll talk. Those silly trolls never have anything intelligent to say."

My face turned serious. "My dear geek, are you not aware of the female population amongst you? Do you not stare in the street and want to hump a post when you pass by a hot, slim, gorgeous looking chick with a firm bust and well sculpted ass?". The geek immediately began to appear as if he was having a nervous breakdown. His glasses began to fog up and he took them off to wipe them with this linux embroidered shirt, "I think I know what you are talking about. Those things are icky. They have cooties. Get away from me!" I felt offended. "Nonsense, I pleaded! Pussy is a beautiful thing. A sacred thing that you should strive to give pleasure to." The geek would not listen and he began to cry. "STOP IT!! You are EVIL!!" He then, quite geekishly, skipped off down the path.

I walked back to my house feeling rather disheartened. 'Why don't they listen to me' I asked myself? When I got home my girlfriend opened the door. She was wearing short-shorts and a sports bra. She had been doing the thigh master for the past 30 minutes and was sweating. I could see her dark nipples underneath her slightly damp bra. Oh god I could fuck her to the moon and back. I could smell her horniness the second I took my shoes off. I chased her, both of us laughing, to our bedroom [THE FOLLOWING has been censored for the well-being of geeks].... Six hours later, finally satisfied a little, I sat up and noticed that same geek hiding in the trees. He had been watching us the entire time. I swear his penis had to have been the size of a fucking horse cock (not bad for a geek, i might add), and he appeared as if he had gone into a state of shock. I could see cum stains forming near the bulge of his pant zipper. I thought to myself. There is one geek, finally brought into the real world.

OT, but a bit irritating (0, Offtopic)

sphealey (2855) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089651)

...royalties to Novel, and SCO wins...
Novell has been in the networking business under the same name since 1975. Why do so many people in the computer industry have trouble spelling that name correctly? I see this in at least 1/3 of postings that mention Novell.

sPh

teh ir0ny (5, Funny)

lvdrproject (626577) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089464)

Haha, wait. Linus has to sign a non-disclosure agreement to look at the code for the operating system he created? You are richer than rich, SCO.

Re:teh ir0ny (0, Troll)

Thelonious Monk (667418) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089474)

Who's Linus again.... oh wait isn't he that linux guy??

Re:teh ir0ny (3, Interesting)

SkArcher (676201) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089505)

Linus is right;

Torvalds in an e-mail interview compared the fight between SCO, IBM and Novell Inc. to bad TV. "Quite frankly, I found it mostly interesting in a Jerry Springer kind of way. White trash battling it out in public, throwing chairs at each other. SCO crying about IBM's other women. ... Fairly entertaining," said Torvalds.

Pass me the popcorn.

On a more serious note is the statement that;

[Micheal] Overly said a review of the code by anyone other than a judge "means absolutely, positively nothing" in determining the merit of SCO's claims.

So basically, the word from a legal expert is 'lets get this to court, shall we?'

Bring it on Darl!

Re:teh ir0ny (0, Offtopic)

Badanov (518690) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089557)

You know if any of the rest of us mortals used an equivelent disparaging term for blacks in a quote, we would be modded down to a negative number.

Re:teh ir0ny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089673)

Black trash?

Perfect Catch 22 (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089640)

"But Giga Information Group Inc. analyst Stacey Quandt said she has discussed SCO's offer with her legal counsel, and if she signs an NDA, it may hinder her ability to write about it. She could get subpoenaed as well. Quandt called the offer a PR stunt."

"I could tell you, but then I would have to kill you!" -Colonel Flagg from "Mash"

ir0ny indeed (-1, Offtopic)

The Tyro (247333) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089645)

I have to echo the above poster's comment about the racially-tinged reference.

It's ironic indeed that the same comment could not be made about african americans or other racial groups without setting off the Al Sharptons of the world.

I'm not claiming some kind of conspiracy or anything of the sort, but it's interesting what we as americans find acceptable targets of our derision. Whether this is due to socialization, collective guilt, peer pressure... who knows. IANAS (I am not a sociologist).

Re:ir0ny indeed (0, Offtopic)

be-fan (61476) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089693)

socialization, collective guilt, peer pressure...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;
Yeah, that about covers it. Be thankful that you're only having to deal with some jokes about white trash, rather than still dealing with the after-effects of hundreds of years of social injustice. Same thing goes for those "women have it easy, those poor men!" morons as well.

Re:teh ir0ny (5, Interesting)

Baumi (148744) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089513)

It's the source for SCO's brand of UNIX, not for Linux.

While SCO alleges that part of the Linux sources are copied from their OS, it's not like SCO's UNIX is Linux.

(It'll still be interesting to see SCO trying to prove that somehow someone copied the source of closed-source software to use it an a GPLd piece of SW. After all, they'd also have to disprove the far more likely alternative that one of their developers illegally copied Linux freely available GPLd code to use in their closed-source kernel.)

Re:teh ir0ny (4, Insightful)

Garion911 (10618) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089521)

Almost like John Fogerty (from CCR) being sued for plagerizing himself [columbia.edu]

Linux is the ultimate of UNIX bastardization (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089532)

He just started it, and let anybody's code in without checking its origin. That's what Linux is, and that's where Linus is standing.

Re:Linux is the ultimate of UNIX bastardization (4, Interesting)

JJahn (657100) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089549)

Sounds good. To prove that, why don't you go steal some MS source code, submit it as blabla.c, and see if it gets into the kernel. You might find that Linus absolutely does not just "let anybody's code in" the kernel.

Annual license Fee (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089467)

In the future don't forget to send money to SCO lest they yank your license to run linux.

Re:Annual license Fee (1)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089584)

That's one of the reasons I believe this is all about, falling revenues.

If they win and the code is removed from the kernel that's fine, but the current userbase which is running the code will be in violation. SCO will probably propose that such people pay them a license fee.

Re:Good job. (2, Informative)

solidhen (642119) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089658)

Uh no, being required to pay a licensing fee violates section 7 [fsf.org] of the GPL. It would then be illegal for anyone to distribute the program at all.

Take away their publicity (4, Insightful)

caluml (551744) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089469)

It's almost that we're giving them a platform to stand on and spew forth their venomous vitriol by persistantly putting stories about them on Slashdot.

Without publicity, they'll wither and die more quickly, so why don't we choke off their oxygen feed by ignoring them?

Re:Take away their publicity (2, Insightful)

Martin Kallisti (652377) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089502)

Because whichever way you put it, it's still important news that might affect the whole community.

Not publishing newsworthy items just because it is related to someone which one for one reason or another does not like, is a form of active censorship (as opposed to the passive censorship that all selection of news is, naturally) which - IMHO - does not belong on Slashdot.

Re:Take away their publicity (4, Insightful)

ctid (449118) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089518)

I don't think that [taking away their publicity by ignoring them on Slashdot] works here. The problem is that the effect they are aiming for is to stop businesses from adopting Linux. In this way they hope to encourage IBM and other organizations to buy them out to avoid more damage to the Linux market. We could ignore them here, but their version of this story would stil be all over the mainstream (Internet-based) tech press.

I think publicity here helps, because I'm sure that many readers here will be in a position to influence opinion regarding SCO and their so-called claims on Linux IP.

Re:Take away their publicity (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089519)

You're giving way too much weight to slashdot as a forum. Yes, Slashdot is a forum that allows a platform for discussion, but it's not the only one.

If a story is reported in Computerworld, or MSNBC, or Info Week, or Washington Post, it's already news. Cutting off the discussion on Slashdot doesn't stop that fact.

Re:Take away their publicity (1)

TVmisGuided (151197) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089545)

If the stories were hitting WSJ or Forbes with the same frequency as they do on Slashdot, you might have a valid point. As far as they're concerned, though, Slashdot is just a well-known soapbox for a mix of clueful people and "my OS is better than your OS" ranters.

The only thing that's going to choke off their oxygen supply is for the people who control the purse strings to take their business elsewhere. With Microsoft dumping a transfusion of ready cash into their coffers "to buy a license", [slashdot.org] that just might be enough to keep their lawyers on the job a little while longer.

The best possible option IMO is for IBM to buy SCO out, in as hostile a takeover bid as possible, thereby tying up the funding that SCO would otherwise put to use pursuing this IP idiocy.

Just my two cents' worth...save up the change for a root beer or something.

Re:Take away their publicity (1)

thrillseeker (518224) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089589)

The best possible option IMO is for IBM to buy SCO out, in as hostile a takeover bid as possible

No, one doesn't stay the chief gorilla by coddling those that challenge you. IBM should sue SCO out of existence and pick over their carcass for any morsels of IP they might want. The other young gorillas out there are watching.

Re:Take away their publicity (5, Insightful)

sphealey (2855) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089692)

The best possible option IMO is for IBM to buy SCO out, in as hostile a takeover bid as possible, thereby tying up the funding that SCO would otherwise put to use pursuing this IP idiocy.
Organizations like IBM never give in to threats, or to actions that could be construed as extortion. And if you think about it, they cannot: if one small company holding a few patents were able to force Bigco to pay 1 billion dollars, then Bigco would shortly have no money left. This aggressive defensive behaviour sometimes leads big orgs to make bad decisions (particularly in situations involving people rather than things), but that is another story.

The weird thing to me is that if SCO had approached IBM quietly and said: "hey, it looks like we have some IP problems here - why don't you buy us out and resolve those problems" then there is a good chance IBM might have considered it. Shareholders happy, golden parachutes for everyone, IBM looks like a hero to the Linux world: the proverbial win-win compromise. But instead SCO took a confrontational approach knowing that IBM would counterattack. Wonder why.

sPh

Re:Take away their publicity (5, Funny)

Cpt_Kirks (37296) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089553)

Without publicity, they'll wither and die more quickly, so why don't we choke off their oxygen feed by ignoring them?

You are forgetting that this mess is being driven by lawyers. Since lawyers are a form of anaerobic bacteria, cutting off their oxygen won't help...

suppose they gave a war and nobody came? (2, Interesting)

Fishstick (150821) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089593)

most of the press and analysts who have been invited to take part in SCO's "public review of the infringing code" have declined

reminded me of the title of that movie with Tony Curtis and Brian Keith suppose they gave a war and nobody came? [imdb.com]

I just think that is funny. They invited everyone to come look at the "evidence", but they made the conditions such that nobody will play.

"Well, we provided an opportunity for the community to come and see -- they chose to stand us up."

Wasn't there some "11 o'clock" meeting that they held up where they invited Novell to come and talk this over and nobody showed up? Seems pretty transparent to me.

Is anybody buying this? Apparently not, given the drop in their stock, eh?

Re:Take away their publicity (1)

vistic (556838) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089594)

I think more publicity in this case would be a good thing.

It might stop other companies from acting as foolish.

Re:Take away their publicity (1)

Arker (91948) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089600)

That's like asking folks not to look at train wrecks anymore.

This is just too damn stupid, too damn ugly, and for some reason our species seems programmed to be fascinated with such things.

Re:Take away their publicity (1)

pudge (3605) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089641)

Exactly. This is the Raelians all over again, right down to the "we will allow experts under NDA to verify our claims." The media eventualyl stopped paying attention to them, and they should learn from their mistakes -- giving them as much attention as they did -- by telling SCO they can put up or shut up.

Obligatory Simpsons Reference (0, Offtopic)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089644)

With changes to support current SCO news

Lisa: Hey, Slashdot! Are you suffering from the heartbreak of... SCO-itis? Then take a tip from Mr. Paul Anka!

[Paul waves, begins playing a small synthesizer and singing]

To stop SCO's Lawsuit, one-two-three, Here's a fresh new way that's trouble-free. It's got Paul Anka's guarantee...[winks]

Lisa: [singing] Guarantee void in Tennessee.

Together: [singing] Just don't look. Just don't look.

[people turn away; the monsters turn to look]

Just don't look. Just don't look.

[more people turn away]

Just don't look. Just don't look.

Fun! (4, Interesting)

hatless (8275) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089472)

Any chance IBM's legal team could string together SCO's actions of the last couple of weeks and make a case that SCO was trying to blackmail IBM? Maybe there's a RICO case here. Ha.

Re:Fun! (5, Insightful)

sql*kitten (1359) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089643)

Any chance IBM's legal team could string together SCO's actions of the last couple of weeks and make a case that SCO was trying to blackmail IBM? Maybe there's a RICO case here.

Any chance? IBM's lawyers are among the most dangerous people on the planet. They have a huge stockpile of Patents of Mass Infringement, and a budget that would make the Special Forces weep. Companies like IBM and Xerox (and others) quietly do huge amounts of research, and patent it all. Most infringements they don't care about, because they simply cross-license IP from their allies. Most of the them exist for one reason: so that if anyone sues IBM for anything, they can respond with total disaster, a big smoking crater where your NASDAQ listing used to be. "Yeah, we infringed one of your patents, sorry about that, oh but you infringed about a hundred of ours, you have 20 seconds to come out with your hands up and your pants down."

The one threat that IBM faces here is setting a precedent by buying SCO outright. They won't want to do that unless backed into a corner because it might encourage others. It's more likely that they'd buy Novell.

Rewite (3, Insightful)

Mattygfunk1 (596840) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089473)

When the offending code is removed from linux, what do SCO expect will happen? It will simply be rewritten by the community and improved as a result.

cheap web hosting [cheap-web-...ing.com.au] dragon action figures [mibglobal.com.au]

Re:Rewite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089484)

Of course they know that, they only plead ignorance ("we dont want to damage linux business") so their claims don't become even more laughable.

Re:Rewite (2, Informative)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089558)

Unfortunately, its not that simple. IBM is the one in "trouble" here, not Linux. SCO is suing IBM for some kind of breach of contract, which will not go away if the offending code is rewritten.

Re:Rewite (4, Insightful)

lspd (566786) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089639)

When the offending code is removed from linux, what do SCO expect will happen? It will simply be rewritten by the community and improved as a result.

That's why you can't see the code without a draconian NDA and why they will not show you all of the code. They want the code to STAY IN LINUX so they can license their Unix IP to Linux users.

morons discovering that robbIE may be afraud (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089481)

& he dooes it for monIE. it wasN'T always diss way, was it robbIE? lookout bullow.

moron casing the georgewellian corepirate nazi.. (Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 01, @08:46AM (#6089360)
hate/death machine.

just fauxking insane, if it wereN'T so dangerous for most of US. consult with yOUR creator. lookout bullow.

sure enough, build a boat, that can float on any substance, but never stock it with murder machines, made in the usa, or anywhere else.

how in the fud can you tail sumwons whois sum greed/fear based stock markup fraud corepirate nazi, megalomaniacal tyraNT, to do anything differeNTly?

vote with yOUR wallet. we don't need any more dead babies on our consciense, thanks.
[ Reply to This ]
Starting Score: 0 points
Moderation -1
100% Offtopic
Extra 'Offtopic' Modifier 0
Total Score: -1
it's a weigh of LIEf (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 01, @08:52AM (#6089374)
you babbling ediot. don't you watch tv? we MUST maintain our 'right' to murder anybody whois not in agreemeNT with US, or else sum of our saycrud billyonerrors might have to go to prison, which would be duhbull dipping on the punishmeNT, 'cause they already have reservations for hot accommodations in the near future/afterlife.

our only request, is that they cease & desist from the murdering babies/innocents thing, before the rest of US overheats.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Windows NT (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 01, @09:03AM (#6089411)
"...in agreemeNT ...punishmeNT..."

Does this flamebait really contain a hidden message about Windows NT?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
we have no secrets (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 01, @09:12AM (#6089429)
we tell each other everything.

as for the Godless corepirate nazi georgewellian SpyWare(tm) payper liesense hostage ransom stock markup fraud billyboxes, yikes, i mean yuk.

there's no 'hiding' this type of evile execrable, it MUST be eXPosed. for further details/messages (& there are LOTs of them) ask yOUR creator, &/or visit trustworthycomputing.com(missarIE).

phlame on. complain to va lairIE/robbIE et ALe, if you're NoT satisfIEd with you search/results.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Tell me no secrets (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 01, @09:21AM (#6089445)
from the corporate OFFICEs we eXPect georwellian communiazi HAILSTORM of lies.NETher utterances from the evil yuk, a FRAMEWORK of bad billy.

it is a like a vietnaM SNowstorm of lies and FUD.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
now you get IT, for 'free' (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 01, @09:29AM (#6089465)
there are rumours that you will have to buy into the hole Godless stinking payper liesense hostage ransom stock markup fraud BugWear(tm) cesspool, if you waNT to have a babIE/browser.

that MUST be what we want, as we are the 'customers' of the frauduleNT kingdumb of debt?

LIEk a kernel of corn passes through a byrd's butt.

If your software sucks... (2, Interesting)

DeadFish (11364) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089482)

... try getting money other ways, I guess. SCO Unix sucks the butt. If it didnt, and if it were actually a market contender, I can't imagine they'd be grasping at these straws. The buy-out seems like a sensible motive, and sure as heck doesn't consume me with dread the way that a "sco unix is the only unix" world does.

Very important Health Info (Please Read!) (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089485)

You may be surprised to learn that the software you use affects your health. A group of medical researchers in the Midwest have discovered proof that the effect of using quality, reliable software on human health is undeniable.
An unbiased medical study was recently completed which included blood tests, double-blind placebo-controlled user tests, heart monitors and urine samples, among other techniques. The study was led by Dr. Robert Wilkes and his assistant Dr. Li Huang, both of whom have a strong background in computer software. The details have not yet been made available to the public, however Drs. Wilkes and Huang have asked that the public be provided with a summary of their findings as soon as possible.

This study was conducted over a period of two years, and the results will be published shortly in a major medical journal. The subjects for the study were 235 computer users and programmers, of varying skill levels, selected at random from major cities in the U.S., and carefully monitored on a periodic basis for software-related stress, illness, injury and other ailments. They also performed psychological evaluations to determine the effect of various software brands on the users' mental health.

Below is a brief summary of the results of their findings.

Users of Microsoft Windows, Office and Internet Explorer have a significantly lower incidence of stomach ulcers, colonic gas, redness of the eyes, and stress-related high blood pressure than their Unix & Linux counterparts -- particularly the users of Solarus, Red Hat, NOME, KDE and Netscape, among others. It was believed that the ocular redness was related to the high percentage of marijuana abusers in the Linux community, and urinalysis confirmed this to be the case. Further study and psychoanalysis showed that the stress and ulceration (found in the Unix & Linux users) were primarily caused by the following factors:

  1. Uncertainty about the future of their operating system.
  2. The perceived need to "fight the system", or a sort of internal struggle against large corporations (such as Microsoft).
  3. The necessity of posturing oneself as "reet" in order to gain the respect of colleagues. (These users failed to inform Dr. Wilkes as to the meaning of this obscure term. If anyone here can provide a definition, that would be appreciated.)
  4. Feelings of fear or paranoia concerning illegal hacking, cracking and "where's" smuggling activities. (Such feelings were quite widespread among this group, and tend to also cause the flatus which was mentioned earlier.)
The Unix & Linux users also had a greater incidence of carpal-tunnel syndrome, due to the greater necessity of typing at the command line. Examination of the wrist muscles in this group of users found numerous cases of inflammation and irreparable injury caused by their incessant command-line usage, whereas the majority of Microsoft users, who primarily use the mouse and seldom type, had healthy wrist muscles.

The Microsoft users exhibited tranquility, good mental and physical health, and balanced emotional well-being. They tend to spend more time at the gym, visit family and friends more often, and are more outgoing and social. Dr. Huang found that this is due to the fact that their operating system doesn't require them to spend long hours studying Mann pages in order to perform simple maintenance tasks. Their primary reasons for feeling secure were as follows:

  1. Their choice of software is friendly and colorful, plays interesting sounds when they start up, shut down, or click on certain pictures, and Microsoft provides plenty of hotfixes such as Windows Update to keep their computer safe from hackers.
  2. They feel secure about the future of Microsoft, partly because its founder is the richest man on the planet. As one user noted, "Bill Gates is one smart cookie. He knows how to make computers easy for people like me. I trust him with the future of my computer, because he always comes up with nifty ways to make computers fun. Plus he's darn rich, so they won't be going bankrupt anytime soon! LOL!"
  3. User enjoyed the catchphrase "Where do you want to go today?" because it made them feel as though Microsoft were catering to their wishes and needs, which does in fact appear to be true.
Among the focus groups examined were numerous programmers, of various software persuasions. The programmers using Visual Basic, ASP and .NET technologies were the healthiest overall, and Dr. Wilkes found that this was directly related to the security they felt in their careers. The .NET programmers were especially well-adjusted, partly due to their sense of pride and being on the cutting edge of technology. "Microsoft is the biggest game in town," one engineer raved, "and those who miss the .NET bandwagon are getting left by the wayside. Nobody in the industry has produced a virtual-machine-based, object-oriented language like Microsoft's C# until now."

The Unix & Linux programmers using Java, J2EE, JSP and PHP were found to have the lowest health ratings. Upon further analysis, it was determined that this was due to the following primary factors:

  1. Lack of drag-and-drop interfaces which automatically generate source code. In comparison to the Microsoft-based developers, this group spent a lot of extra time writing code from scratch. This led to less time spent with family and friends, which led to ulcers, gastrointestinal disorders and high levels of stress.
  2. A feeling of being "left behind" or "out of the loop" with regard to Microsoft's revolutionary new technologies in the .NET family of products. These users have an unwritten "anarchic" rule that they will not install Microsoft's products on their PCs, thus they often wonder what new, exciting features they are missing. Some develop psychological complexes based on their high levels of curiosity.
  3. Uneasiness about being involved in illegal hacking activities, or in many cases, the need to be perceived as "reet" among peers.
Keep in mind that this study was performed without prejudice, and with the strictest adherence to the guidelines set forth by the profession for clinical trials of this nature. Dr. Wilkes and his colleagues are educated professionals of the highest degree, and their vast research in medicine and the field of computer software allows them to speak with authority on these issues.

Please take this opportunity to reevaluate your choice of software, and be aware that it can drastically affect your physical and mental health.

S.C.O= (3, Funny)

Captain Galactic (651907) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089491)

Screwed Corporation's plan to get Out rich.

Of course they want a buyout. IBM is one of the biggest companies in the world. The execs line their pockets with money, and everone else gets laid offor quits. And if they take down linux, more money flows from the backdoor that, if you folow it, leads to Microsoft.

Re:S.C.O= (2, Interesting)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089533)

They already got $1G from Microsoft. Why not return that money to shareholders, wind up the company and go home?

Last time I looked SCO's market capitalization was only $40M or so, which reflects the market's judgement that SCO's management is not going to make good use of the cash windfall, so its value when tied up in SCO is a lot less than the cash value.

Unless Novell is getting 95% of the payment Microsoft made? Which would explain why the share price is so low, and deflate conspiracy theories about Microsoft funding a lawsuit. (Although $50M is still a handy sum to throw at the legal system.)

Re:S.C.O= (2)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089541)

What are you babbling about. IBM hava been pushing Linux more than anyone in the corporate arena. The main reason I think they would acquire SCO is to get control of the licensing SCO is curently claiming. This would be actually be bad news for MS as IBM would then be in a very strong position regarding their integrated software/hardware stack and way ahead of MS with their consulting division. IBM are already starting to offer basic office functionality on demand thru their Websphere server so they obviously have their eye on some of MS's current market share. A buyout of SCO would not be the worst thing IBM could do.

FUD? (1)

Mattygfunk1 (596840) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089492)

What's to say that this isn't one big promotion / FUD campaign by SCO? Take the promotion then drop the case and you get 3. Profit due to the promotion.

cheap web hosting [cheap-web-...ing.com.au] dragon action figures australia [mibglobal.com.au]

Money (1)

humandj (547981) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089493)

thats what people want. thats what sells. thats what share holders want.........

Re:Money (1)

CwazyWabbit (610151) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089634)

That's what sells?

Reminds me of when I was at school and the new 5p pieces came out. Some enterprising individuals were selling them for 10p.

Better outcome - IBM buys Novell (4, Interesting)

Picass0 (147474) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089508)


IBM should flip SCO off buy buying Novell and releasing Unix under the GPL. SCOs legal case (or bluff) would instantly disolve.

Re:Better outcome - IBM buys Novell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089538)

No, future claims would be nulled - but you can't change what already happened in Neverland.

Re:Better outcome - IBM buys Novell (1)

Picass0 (147474) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089560)

Consider this: It is unlikely the Novell sold SCO a license to Unix that lasts forever and grants unlimited usage rights. At some point SCO needs to go back to the well (Novell) and obtain an renewal, extension, or new rights to legally continue marketing Unix based solutions.

What if IBM suddenly held those rights? IBM could turn off the faucet.

SCO would then need to drink a nice tall glass of fuck you juice.

Re:Better outcome - IBM buys Novell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089622)

Yes we all know SCO's claims are groundless. But even the scenario you describe would allow SCO to proceed with it's harass^H^H^H^H^H^Hcase against IBM under their original filing.

Re:Better outcome - IBM buys Novell (1)

The Analog Kid (565327) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089576)

Then buy both, duh. Then setup a office in Afganistan, and send McBride to head it up.

Scarier outcome - Microsoft buys Novell (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089563)

Any by association possibly owns all rights to OSS?

Re:Better outcome - IBM buys Novell (5, Insightful)

frdmfghtr (603968) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089599)

No it wouldn't. The UNIX code allegedly used in Linux would be EVIDENCE that contract term were violated. IIRC, it is this alleged contract terms violation amongst other illegal acts that is at the heart of the suit, not whether there is UNIX code in Linux--a point that seems to have fallen by the wayside. The code is merely evidence; and it is this ghost-like "evidence" that SCO claims to have that is causing SCO to look like a bunch of buffoons. "We have evidence, but we really don't want to show it. But it proves IBM violated our IP."

As I have said before, changing or destroying evidence doesn't change the fact that a crime was committed.

The only code in question is recent SCO-IBM code (5, Insightful)

Ja-Ja-Jamin (661760) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089512)

Given that Caldera (SCO) previously gave away the source code for System V, and that early code was given away in a book that Caldera eventually approved, and the SCO licensed Unix to Lindows.com, which distributes it under GPL, the only code that could be in question is very new code - basically the Monterrey project. Given that McBride has stated that they are main interested in Linux Kernel 2.4 it should be easy to track down all IBM additions/suggestions for additions and remove them/modify them.

However, since Lindows has a license and they are distributing Linux Kernal 2.4 under GPL,it seems that SCO has already lost the battle due to their own actions. So it may not even be necessary to remove the code, since even SCO distributed it under GPL!

thumbs down (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089516)

I hope IBM takes SCO to court and I hope that SCO gets wiped out. The more financial damage IBM can incur on SCO the better. Pissing in the well should never be rewarded.

Investors should have known better than to back an obvious loser so if you've got SCO shares at this point you've got to be pretty daft.

Ideally, this time next year, SCO is just a bad memory.

Re:thumbs down (1)

Loosewire (628916) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089597)

Sco has its lawyers on a no win no fee contract, which should help Sco stay alive a little longer if they lose.

Back to Friday's Press Conference... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089522)

SCO unilaterally rejected Novell's claim to hold the UNIX IP that Linux allegedly infringes against at their press conference on Friday. But I remember that Perens and others pointed out the ownership information associated with the copyrights and patents was clearly attributed to Novell.

Can someone please point out which patents and trademarks were in question, and how to verify that these artifacts actually *do* show Novell's ownership?

(IP Lawyer question:) Is that information normally changed when IP changes hands through an agreement such as the one between Santa Cruz Op. and Novell? (i.e. whould the data in the patent office or LOC be an up-to-date represenation of current ownership?)

scosucks.com (0, Offtopic)

Thelonious Monk (667418) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089523)

booo scosucks.com is taken =(

Re:scosucks.com (2, Interesting)

SkArcher (676201) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089590)

Have you noticed that it was registered only 12 days ago?

So, anyone out there bought the domain? We'll all help with content :)

"no way" ??? (5, Funny)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089524)


I think they dropped a word out of the middle of the Linus quote.

Anyone who buys SCO (4, Interesting)

eap (91469) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089526)

will have to deal with the fact that no one in the *nix community will ever want to do business with what is the current company.

If IBM buys SCO, and I hope they don't, they should gut SCO for their customers base, engineers, and products, and can everyone else working there.

Even if this results in a massive win for SCO, I see them getting no new business in the future due to the trouble they have caused. Linux code will be rewritten in a week or so, and SCO will be left with perpetually declining sales.

I always said that Red Hat should have bought SCO with inflated stock shortly after Red Hat's IPO several years ago. We could have had all of SCO's customers on Open Source by now and there would be no IP disputes.

no (5, Funny)

Rumagent (86695) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089528)

"If there's a way of resolving this that is positive, then we can get back out to business and everybody is good to go, then I'm fine with that," McBride said today in an interview with Computerworld. "If that's one of the outcomes of this, then so be it."


A positive outcome of this would be the complete and utter bankrupt of SCO. It would be shame if that kind of shitty behavior is rewarded.

If I belived in hell I would wish them there... On the other hand, they would probably be thrown a "welcome back" party.

SCO UnixWare (5, Insightful)

UltraWide (181644) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089529)

Is not an operating system I would recommend to any of my customers to buy and run on their servers.

I have worked with this piece of **** OS and I can say one thing. Datacorruption.

Real case:

SCO UnixWare with veritas filesystem runs Oracle.

Box crashes --> Oracle data corruption.
These boxes crashed a lot (several times a week)

We called SCO support who blamed Oracle ..
Oracle desperatly tried to find the problem. It was a known bug, in guess what? SCO UnixWare.
SCO did not allow Oracle Server to open the files with directIO, that is circumvent the filecache in the OS. By design it should but in this case it did not, it was a bug in the Operating System.

SCO did not even bother to check their bug database and blamed Oracle who, thank god, found the problem.

I guess that SCO is desperate to make money. Wait who has the money? IBM is rich let's sue em ..

sleaze (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089530)

omigod this is sooo much f'ing sleeeze. he's going to talk his way outta this one... ooooh!
He's going to walk away clean with a big fat smile on his face.

Terrorizing the linux community. What's the PATRIOT Act sitting around for? Throw that bastard in jail already dammit, or at least scare the shit out of him!

Mole hill into a mountain? (2, Insightful)

Psarchasm (6377) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089531)

Sure IBM has a past history of being very supportive of the Linux community. But who do you want attempting to legally guide the future of Linux? SCO or IBM?

Its not supposed to matter how big you are in court - unfortunately it does matter.

morons being held hostage buy phonIE monIE? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089534)

as we're seeing (is bulleaving) it, robbIE et ALe has NO say whatsoever as to what is displayed on everIE page of 'his' website'/decaying blog.

'cause, if he did, the robbIE we knew, would NEVER support any means for corepirate payper liesense nazi felons, to spread their disease, amongst the hobbyists.

isN'T that right robbIE? caN'T say huh?

consult with yOUR creator. vote with yOUR wallet.

just think of it as a double positive. everIE time you fail to spend monIE you don't have, for stuff you don't need, a couple of babies fail to get killed, because you didn't pay for the BULLits.

IBM may well buy SCO (3, Interesting)

ites (600337) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089535)

As a way of trumping the Microsoft-sponsored nonsense SCO is putting out. SCO is attacking the Linux brand, which IBM has invested so much in, and Microsoft hates and fears to totally. IBM will not go to court: this would be playing the game Microsoft is hoping for - a 20-year battle over the rights to use Linux (and maybe by association, all OSS?) in the business context.

Expect IBM to make an offer for SCO, to publically announce that it has now "bought the rights to Linux", and it will start to assert control over it.

Sleep with an elephant at your own risk.

Re: Only if ... (2, Informative)

guybarr (447727) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089555)


They (IBM, of course) are complete and utter morons. Which I see no evidence of.

Expect IBM to make an offer for SCO, to publically announce that it has now "bought the rights to Linux", and it will start to assert control over it.

Yeah, right, FUD themselves in the foot, they will.

Re:IBM may well buy SCO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089577)

Don't be stupid, everybody has equal 'rights' to linux. If IBM tried to change the terms of the GPL, they would have wasted all monies related to linux kernel development.

Microsoft bidding war over SCO (1)

isn't my name (514234) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089711)

No, as others have pointed out, if IBM makes an offer, Microsoft might make one as well. Don't you think MS would love to own something that brings all of linux into question in the minds of CEOs and CIOs?

One Billion Dollars (1)

hugesmile (587771) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089540)

Doctor Evil would love this one! Let's sue them for a million.. naaaah, one hundred million.... naaaah One BILLION dollars.

Baseless suits are worth just as much whether you sue for a million or a billion!

Screwing Linux (5, Insightful)

krumms (613921) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089548)

Among other things, McBride says: "I'm not trying to screw up the Linux business,"

Oh really? Then could Mr. McBride please explain why I hear things like, "SCO to Linux Users: Cease and Desist" [esj.com] and "SCO delivers a warning" [com.com] ?

Sounds to me like Mr. McBride is trying to make up for the self-hurt caused by his company's own arrogance. What better way to ruin your competitor than by scaring the shit out of their users?

Re:Screwing Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089566)

SCO is trying to build leverage.

Realistically, if any Linux-friendly and relatively sane organization (i.e. not MS, probably not HP) acquires SCO, will any of this be more than a footnote in a year?

Meow!

Re:Screwing Linux (1)

DrWho520 (655973) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089605)

Building leverage my right index finger. THAT is terrorism!

Big Blue as OSS Mega-Hero? (4, Funny)

Cpt_Kirks (37296) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089579)

IBM could come out of this smelling like a rose. If they either stomp sco like a roach in court or buy the assholes off, then put the whole damn sco ip package under the GPL, hackers will love them forever.

If they make this gift to the community, then be careful in the future to not piss us off, IBM could make billions more than they already make.

"IBM, Savior of Linux", wow. That may be enough to get RMS to take a bath.

Re:Big Blue as OSS Mega-Hero? (5, Funny)

daeley (126313) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089670)

"IBM, Savior of Linux", wow. That may be enough to get RMS to take a bath.

He'll never open the spigots unless it's "IBM, Savior of GNU/Linux." ;)

Re:Big Blue as OSS Mega-Hero? (1)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089685)

I do hope that BigBlue wins and gets ownership of the code in a countersuit. I also do hope that they, along with Novell and other holders of UNIX IP, make that IP available via the GPL.

a desperate act (5, Insightful)

vistic (556838) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089580)

I for one (like probably everyone here) hope they don't get bought out.

I hope they get ridiculed and made an example of... let this be a lesson to other companies that it's unacceptable to behave this way.

This is just all so laughable.

YALBS (Yet Another Lie By SCO) (3, Insightful)

fanatic (86657) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089608)

Per Darl: "I'm not trying to screw up the Linux business,"

Then why did SOC send threatening letters to 1500 corporations telling them their were IP issues in Linux when:
  • SCO doesn't own the IP and
  • The lawsuit is a contract issue that can ONLY apply to IBM, especially once the offending code (if any actually exists) is revealed and written out of Linux.
The letter was nothing short of blackmail - give us money or we'll keep throwing turds into the punchbowl.

"Having their rights trampled on?!" (5, Interesting)

aussersterne (212916) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089616)

I know at least two people who bought Caldera stock around IPO time because it was a Linux company. They believed in Linux as a product, wanted to support Linux development, and thought there might be some future profit in it.

I've heard a lot from them over the last week. With Caldera/SCO's current action, they've ended up as pawns in a game to attack Linux -- not at all the reason they invested their dollars in the beginning. They have decided to sell out as a result of the SCO action, and have lost significant money in the process on Caldera/SCO shares alone. But they also realize that the dollars they had invested this company have supported action which may eventually reduce the value of their larger holdings in other Linux companies. I can understand the frustration that they must feel.

I'd venture to say a lot of Caldera investors may be in the same position. So what's this about "rights" of the shareholders?

What of the reputation? (2, Interesting)

vistic (556838) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089618)

Assuming that SCO isn't bought out... and they go to court and lose (as seems likely) and somehow stay in business... how on Earth could they ever repair their reputation now?

They've become notorious lately. So much so, in fact, that I'd bet even if they won a court case and were proven correct, that they still wouldn't be able to recover from pissing the world off. How many people avoid Microsoft because of what they stand for and not just because they believe other software is superior? Uh-huh. See?

All you have to do is... (1)

gearheadsmp (569823) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089623)

mkbankaccount.chapter11 http://www.sco.com

A true story (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089625)

Once upon a time whilst walking in a park I asked a geek "Do you have a girlfriend?". He responded with a very puzzled look. "A girlfriend?," he mused, "Who is the developer?". I chuckled and told him this was not an open source project. He then became slightly angry and inquired, "Are you trying to insult me? Only the best geeks use open source only! What planet are you living on?!". I reassured him I was well aware of his integrity as a geek (white skin, clumsy, pants that are too short, lack of daily shower, pocket protector etc), and explained, "A girlfriend is a female who to a male (most oftenly a male) has an intimate friendship." He gave me a very confused look. "I have never heard of such a thing.. this.. g-g-irlfriend?" He asked me, sounding very baffled. "I have heard of friends before, those pets other people have. But what is this thing you say.. Grill?". "Girl," I corrected. Then I asked him to sit down on a bench nearby so I could explain it too him, the poor, helpless thing. I told him that for human beings to reproduce, sexual intercourse must occur between a male and a female. "Perhaps you hear the trolls mention a thing called "pussy" on slashdot?". The geek burst into laughter, "Haha, you have been browsing at -1 lately, haven't you? You know that is just troll talk. Those silly trolls never have anything intelligent to say."

My face turned serious. "My dear geek, are you not aware of the female population amongst you? Do you not stare in the street and want to hump a post when you pass by a hot, slim, gorgeous looking chick with a firm bust and well sculpted ass?". The geek immediately began to appear as if he was having a nervous breakdown. His glasses began to fog up and he took them off to wipe them with this linux embroidered shirt, "I think I know what you are talking about. Those things are icky. They have cooties. Get away from me!" I felt offended. "Nonsense, I pleaded! Pussy is a beautiful thing. A sacred thing that you should strive to give pleasure to." The geek would not listen and he began to cry. "STOP IT!! You are EVIL!!" He then, quite geekishly, skipped off down the path.

I walked back to my house feeling rather disheartened. 'Why don't they listen to me' I asked myself? When I got home my girlfriend opened the door. She was wearing short-shorts and a sports bra. She had been doing the thigh master for the past 30 minutes and was sweating. I could see her dark nipples underneath her slightly damp bra. Oh god I could fuck her to the moon and back. I could smell her horniness the second I took my shoes off. I chased her, both of us laughing, to our bedroom [THE FOLLOWING has been censored for the well-being of geeks].... Six hours later, finally satisfied a little, I sat up and noticed that same geek hiding in the trees. He had been watching us the entire time. I swear his penis had to have been the size of a fucking horse cock (not bad for a geek, i might add), and he appeared as if he had gone into a state of shock. I could see cum stains forming near the bulge of his pant zipper. I thought to myself. There is one geek, finally brought into the real world.

Liar's Hall of Fame Award. (1)

A_Non_Moose (413034) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089627)

McBride says: "I'm not trying to screw up the Linux business,"

Well, I'd say you're doing a pretty piss-poor job already.

Accusations without facts to back it up.

Sueing over something you *DON'T OWN*.

Cease and Desist (equivalent) letters to businesses.

IMO, this guy's ability to lie and misinform is dwarfed only by the Iraqi Information Minister.

(and my own dig: SCO = Still Can't Operate)

.

american legal system (3, Funny)

dollargonzo (519030) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089629)

because of it [the legal system], things are no fun anymore. you can't call anyone's bluff anymore, you can't just pull out a six-shooter after you walk out of a saloon and settle everything like men, and you can't ride away into the sunset on your horse to another town and forget about it. nowadays, everyone is afraid of being sued, so no-one is truly willing to step up and call SCO's bluff. there really should be a way to prevent such a blatent buyout from ocurring.

Re:american legal system (1)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089660)

Someone has called SCO's bluff. You can read all about it here [opensource.org] .

SCO tactics == North Korea Tactics (1)

puzzled (12525) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089635)



Bluster, claim to have nuclear weapons, then get food aid. I can't be the only one seeing the parallels.

I see today on CNN that the South Korean Navy fired on 'intruders'. Wouldn't ESR look good in one of those cute little navy uniforms? :-)

IBM should do the math - purchase them, or crush them? I hope the choice is crush, given the behavior SCO has put out over this attempted 'sale'.

SCO-IBM Vs Timeline Inc-Microsoft : GPL Wins (4, Interesting)

NZheretic (23872) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089659)

( In which we must also ponder the question: What value is the SCO Group when it continued to sell and distribute the source code in question under the GPL? )

If you are concerned over the treat of lawsuits over intellectual property then you are actually in a better legal position using GPL'ed Linux than using Microsoft's products.

While SCO has yet to provide any publicly available substantial evidence in their case against IBM and Linux, Timeline Inc has already won a US Washington Court of Appeal judgment against Microsoft [tmln.com] in another contract dispute.

Unlike companies like Oracle Corporation and others, Microsoft chose a cheaper option when licensing Timeline Inc's Data base technology. That license puts developers and users of Microsoft SQL Server,Office and other Microsoft product at risk of being sued by Timeline Inc for violation of Timeline Inc patents [theregister.co.uk] .

Microsoft's products do not provide users and developers an absolute safe haven from the threat from lawsuits based on violations of intellectual property. Microsoft's EULA provide the developer and end user with no protection against threat from current or future intellectual property lawsuits.

However, since the SCO Group has knowingly sold and distributed the GPL licensed Linux kernel and other components, it must by the terms of the GPL license [gnu.org] , provide all those who receive the code from them an implicit license to use any intellectual property, patents or trade secrets which SCO owns and is used by the GPL'ed source code. That implicit license to that SCO intellectual property is also granted to anybody who subsequently receives the GPL source.

The GPL only grants the right, for reasons of intellectual property infringement or contractual obligations, to stop distributing the GPL'e binaries and source code if the conditions are imposed upon you by a third party. Since SCO claims ownership the intellectual property in question, it must grant all subsequent recipients of the GPL licensed source code SCO has distributed and any GPL'ed derivative, the same implicit licence and right to SCO's intellectual property the code imposes upon.

SCO has acknowledged deals with Suse and Lindows to distribute SCO's intellectual property in GPL'ed Linux, but the GPL license does not grant anyone or any organization the right to append extra terms and conditions upon the recipients of the GPL licensed source code.

It is very easy to effectively fold the current development branches of the Linux kernel and any other GPL'ed code back into SCO's distributed GPL'ed sources. This would grant the same implicit license for the infringed SCO intellectual property to the all the current development.

You are in a better legal position using the GPL'ed Linux platform and other GPL'ed software, than you are using Microsoft's or any other closed source software.

NDA's are Bad News (1)

Hangtime (19526) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089680)

I agree with the prevailing thought, it doesn't mean a damn thing until a judge sees it. If you happen to be coding and see this code under an NDA you could open yourself up for suit as well. Best to just leave it be and let the companies fight it out. Another thought is they haven't disclosed the terms of the NDA to anyone. They could read something like "If you view this code, all articles written about the comparison to Linux must be positive to SCO's claims." Or "You may make no comment in regards to the code you have seen." In both of these cases it doesn't make a lot of sense from a reporters view and from a coder's view they could always come back on you...so don't even bother. Their is no constituency that it actually makes sense to look at this code, even if in the most improbably, screwed-up dimensional state where SCO has a remote chance of actually winning this case...they will just be bought out to shut them up.

Such is this most dangerous game being played.

Every time you... (1)

dynoman7 (188589) | more than 11 years ago | (#6089686)

"take care of the shareholders", God kills a Domokun.

morons to re-unbale pateNTdead eyecon0meter(gpl) (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6089694)

so that the Godless greed/fear/death based payper liesense softwar gangsters & their murderoUS countyourparts upon the capitollist hill annex of wall street of deceit, may become wwworld readabull.

consult with yOUR creator. avoid premature debt/death buy .consumption. that's the spirit.

get off it robbIE, you fauxking phonIE. mynuts won to you too.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?