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!

No Business Like SCO Business

michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the like-no-business-I-know dept.

Caldera 500

The SCO must go on. Informationweek has a roundup. has some analysis of the legal case. SCO reiterates their threat to revoke IBM's license. Reader hobsonchoice sends a blurb: "Also more from analysts who saw SCO/Linux code comparisons under NDA. Bill Claybrook, of Aberdeen Group Inc., says SCO changed their story to him about whether they had any "direct evidence" that IBM copied any System V code into Linux. Laura Didio of Yankee Group has answered some detailed questions about her code review process. Lastly Fujitsu Siemens have joined in the debate: they don't think SCO's case is going anywhere." One observer of the SCO case has compiled some notes about Caldera's active participation in the IA-64 project. And look on the bright side: if you follow the school of thought that all publicity is good publicity, at least this suit has gotten Linux mentioned in many places where it normally wouldn't be.

cancel ×


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

*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (5, Insightful)

Drathus (152223) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195083)

Ok. We all know what SCO is doing, or at least trying to do.

I hate to sound like a troll, but do we really need this ammount of press time about it? How aobut one giant wrap-up post once this whole business is overwith and SCO is nothing but a faded memeory?

Could we try that? Please?

Re:*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (3, Funny)

sweeney37 (325921) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195101)

sounds like you're suffering from SCOverload.


Re:*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (4, Funny)

Drathus (152223) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195148)

You have no idea.

Right now I'm so hot I've got a higher SCOville rating than a Red Savina Habanero (350,00 - 577,000 on the Scoville scale, compared to the Scotch Bonnet which has 150,000 - 325,000)

And yes, I hate myself for that reference.

Re:*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (1)

greck (79578) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195434)

oh, no hating... that was a good one. next time, though, don't explain it. you just have to let the uninitiated flounder.

Re:*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (4, Insightful)

qslack (239825) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195167)

Even if Slashdot stops covering it, every other industry magazine and newspaper will cover it. So Slashdot ignoring the SCO issue would just mean that IT pros and hobbyists would be less informed than managers and decision-makers.

Some news has to be covered even if coverage seems to encourage bad behavior.

Re:*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195206)

"IT pros and hobbyists would be less informed than managers and decision-makers"

I think you meant, "12 year olds and script-kiddies will be less informed than people with real lives"

Re:*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (4, Insightful)

mcgroarty (633843) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195184)

This is totally the OJ Simpson case for the free software crowd. It's dirty fun -- I'm digging it, and others are too. There are also going to be some opportunities for a million developers' eyes to be useful when the actual code is named, so it's good to have a lot of folks involved.

But if you reallllllly can't bear it, you know you can customize your home page to suppress Caldera/SCO, right?

Re:*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (5, Informative)

Night0wl (251522) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195212)

Perhaps your new to Slashdot and don't know about many of the exciting features we have to offer you!
Like the lameness filter for commenting, Anonymouse posting for when you're violating your NDA, or TURNING OFF PARTICULAR SUBJECTS.

You may have noticed these are all listed under Caldera.

You may be sick and tired of it, but I for one am curious to see how this works out in the end. Sure it's a bit over dramatized, but it relates to me.

Re:*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195302)

If SCO's claims were completely ridiculous, they wouldn't be getting the press they are. As it is, people are _worried_ that SCO is right - that's why /. editors keep posting stories about it. Nobody around here wants to admit that SCO may have a case against IBM, but you know in the back of your mind that it very possibly may be true.

Face it - in the very near future you may be paying for your Linux licenses. Personally I've switched over to FreeBSD.

i know what you need! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195303)

I think you need a SCO job. Might help you relax.

Re:*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (4, Insightful)

pantropik (604178) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195308)

A fork? You girly-man. Real men scoop out their eyes with spoons ... or maybe sporks ...

As for one final wrap-up post, that's not going to happen. People like bad news. People like controversy. People like to read about SCO taking on the world in what is either going to prove a truly brilliant financial endeavour or one of the most spectacular corporate suicides ever. People detest SCO, so they want to read about what SCO is up to.

Personally I read this stuff while picturing SCO as an enraged Munchkin shouting obscenities, dire threats and ominous proclamations (replete with helium-constricted vocal cords) while hacking at the ankle of Jack's Giant (IBM) with a wooden sword. You just know the big SQUISH! is coming ... wait for it ... wait for it ...

At any rate, it's not as if /. is on a direct feed into your brain and you can't avoid the articles you don't want.

Re:*stabs own eyes out with a fork* (1)

deadsaijinx* (637410) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195357)

unfortunately, I opted to have the Matrix implant /. directly into my brain in exchange for some info. oh well

publicity (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195088)

This first post mentions Linux, something that normally doesn't happen.

Dukes of hazard style (5, Funny)

(54)T-Dub (642521) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195095)

I think this [] summs it up better

Re:Dukes of hazard style (1)

bsharitt (580506) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195134)

That's hilarious, maybe or somebody will can adapt this to their reporting.

Re:Dukes of hazard style (0)

kayen_telva (676872) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195296)

wow, thats only the 300th link to that site in 2 days...

Re:Dukes of hazard style (1)

lostindenver (53192) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195317)

Thats great.. But a penquin in daisy dukes is WRONG i tell you

Re:Dukes of hazard style (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195420)

Thank goodness for Linux. I don't know how I would have made it through puberty without it.

never kill a customer (5, Funny)

cur3 (514524) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195097)

seams to me that SCO has ask IBM about the dirty knife! ;D

Then IBM says to SCO:




this fine, honorable man, whose boots you are not worthy to kiss!

Oh, it makes me mad, MAD ....

Only one more weekend.. (1)

Martin Marvinski (581860) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195100)

and SCO is finnished! On Monday we will see the full brunt of IBM's power come down on SCO.

Re:Only one more weekend.. (5, Funny)

haystor (102186) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195351)

Ok, who else is imagining the fully-functional death star?

Apple fans - how to understand them (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195106)

Mac Zealot Translator-o-matic

Apple have come up with some innovative products, but their market share remains tiny. Sadly, though, many buyers have been mislead by the marketing and eye-candy, and desperately try to justify their overpriced purchases to themselves on forums around the Net. Let's see what they really mean...

"MacOS X is everything Linux wants to be."
"Despite the fact that Linux is just code and can't WANT to be anything, I truly believe that it'd love to be a single-vendor, single-platform, sluggish half-proprietary OS with dwindling market share. Linux would love to throw away its impressively growing corporate takeup for that."

"Apple hardware is for real computer lovers."
"It's no hassle to use a plethora of keyboard combos to make up for the patronising one-button mouse. Despite the fact that my hands have FIVE fingers, and multiple-buttons make Web browsing so much more pleasant, I prefer my computer to be treat me like a special-needs child."

"Aqua makes me so much more productive!"
"My non-techie friends drool over the transparency and scaling effects, even though UI research has shown that they add practically nothing to getting real work done. It feels like KDE 2 on a Pentium 200, and I can't change to a light and fast WM, but those drop-shadows must make me work so quickly!"

"OSX shows that Apple is committed to open source."
" and its community of about 27 is surely not just a token gesture by Apple. Pretty much nobody uses pure Darwin, and all the crucial components of the system are closed and require me to spend money just to get major OS updates, but they're really helping the community somehow."

"You get what you pay for with Apple hardware."
"My iBook was made by in Taiwan by AlphaTop and has design and build quality flaws (needing foam sheets jammed in to stop the common problem of the keyboard scratching the screen). But it's silvery and cost far more than an x86 laptop of better spec, so it must be much higher quality!"

"...blah blah MHz myth blah..."
"Although there's truth in PPC being more elegant than x86, it's crushing that the top-of-the-range 1.5 GHz chip is slaughtered by the equivalent 3 GHz Pentium 4. However, Steve Jobs showed some vague Photoshop filter benchmarks at the last MacWorld, so being a leprotard, I'm convinced."

not first :( (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195109)

damn.. shouldn't have taken the time to read the article. Now the 20 seconds is gonna fuck me

I read today on CNET.... (5, Funny)

mhore (582354) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195110)

that SCO is thinking they'll file an injunction with a judge on Monday. So, what it seems like to me is they are talking like North Korea.

" nice IBM or we'll revoke your AIX license on Friday..., it's Friday, nice or we'll revoke it on Monday, punks!"

Duno. I know like, nothing about law so maybe this is standard practice.

Re:I read today on CNET.... (1)

Col. Klink (retired) (11632) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195210)

They've always said "Midnight Friday". Therefore Monday would be their earliest opportunity to enforce their revocation.

But... (1)

mhore (582354) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195237)

wouldn't midnight Friday have already passed?

I guess that's a technicality.

Re:But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195394)

Not at:

1285 Avenue of the Americas, 35th Floor
New York, New York 10019


Re:I read today on CNET.... (5, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195245)

You're right, SCO is beginning to sound more and more like NK.

<quote>...If those terms aren't met, then we will announce what our actions are on Monday," Stowell said. "We would intend to revoke the AIX license...</quote> (infoworld article).

Seeing that they dodn't develop AIX, they can't revoke the AIX license. What they CAN do is try to revoke the license for any use of their code in AIX, which is not the same thing.

Even if they tried that, existing licensees shouldn't have to worry. After all, nothing has been proven in court yet, and an "announcement" that the licenses have been revoked would have no legal effect. Just like an "announcement" that SCO has repealed the law of gravity has zip effect in the real world :-)

Until there's a judge somewhere that actually makes a ruling on SOMETHING, nothing changes. They can announce all they want. Only a judge can actually invalidate the license.

Does anyone (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195111)

have videos of michael being gang raped by male goats?

Re:Does anyone (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195271)

No, but I hear you can download videos of him engaging in anal intercourse with Rob Malda.

Suing the wrong people (4, Interesting)

bsharitt (580506) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195117)

Maybe IBM did do some work in Linux, but it would seem that Intel and HP had more to do with making it scale better.

Re:Suing the wrong people (1)

leroybrown (136516) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195417)

it's not about who had more to do with developing parts of the kernel, it's about who has more to lose. sco has ibm by the short and curlies because they can revoke ibm's unix license, thereby nullifying every single one of ibm's aix licenses. sco is essentially saying to ibm, "give us a billion dollars or every single one of your aix customers is screwed." if they had such leverage against hp or intel, they would use it, but they don't so they're suing ibm instead.

Timeline (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195126)

[WEDNESDAY] We are going to revoke IBM's UNIX license if they don't pay up by friday!
[THURSDAY] We have it all planned out. We have this very well calculated. On friday, if IBM does not do what we say, we will revoke their UNIX license and they will be hurting badly.
[FRIDAY] Um.. yeah. We are SO going to revoke IBM's UNIX license if they don't do what we say. Uh, i mean, it's still friday. If they don't do what we say by midnight. Yeah.
[SATURDAY] Well, our deadline has come and gone. We are now free to revoke IBM's UNIX license. Um, at a time of our choosing. Yup. And we will be doing this to IBM. Um.. next week. Unless they do what we say by then. It wil be horrible for them.

Consensus (3, Interesting)

Robawesome (660673) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195139)

I notice a lot of these articles in Businessweek, Etc. seem to very negative. Is anyone noticing a different trend toward linux at their place of business due to this FUD? SCO=Trash

Re:Consensus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195295)

Yes, it has put us in a holding pattern for adoption of linux. (Fortne 500 co)

Us too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195402)

Not only have we been put into a "holding pattern" wrt Linux, my rabidly anti-MS boss has just approved spending nearly $100K, at a time when we haven't really got the money to be doing this, on upgrading our entire NT4 network infrastructure to Windows 2003 since he now thinks that the whole prospect of migrating to Linux & Samba is completely sunk now. He also has put in his 90-day notice to retire, significantly influenced by this SCO circus. He was going to stay on another year and hopefully see a Linux migration well under way to completion, but has completely thrown in the towel. Oh well, at least he's looking after us poor systems grunts in that we'll now get plenty of hands on experience with MS's latest technology, which will only enhance our resumes too, and keep us that much more employable for the future.

More SCO? No, more fun! Insane Messenger returns! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195143)

You have just entered room "coed.jpg 147886."
peepoh has entered the room.
peepoh: oh fuck! is it a trap again?!?
Coed.jpg: san antonio burgers is all i wanted to say
peepoh: I knew it! It's a San Antonio burger trap!
YourMissionForToday: It's a hard cock life
ASS has entered the room.
peepoh: hmm, now I'm beginning to think about skipping out on that party Saturday night in flavor of SA Burgesia at my place...
YourMissionForToday: they should make a version of 4 player pongg
ASS: there is one
peepoh: sweet
YourMissionForToday: i mean for AIM chat rooms
ASS: for atari, i think
YourMissionForToday: like instead of that stupid window that says what people are here
peepoh: except it should be 4-player bong
Timely has entered the room.
Timely: hey everybody...
YourMissionForToday: I drank a lot of pepsi today
Coed.jpg: four player BURGER
Coed.jpg: each player gets his own burger
YourMissionForToday: I'm not eating a 4-player burger!
Coed.jpg: you are and you're liking it
YourMissionForToday: at least, not unless the other 3 burger eaters are actually hot ladies
YourMissionForToday: WELCOME, TIMELY
Coed.jpg: and then at the end of theb urger, we all see what awards everyone gets
peepoh: It can be just like the biscuit game!
Coed.jpg: except burgers
YourMissionForToday: the award you get is my slimy backwash
YourMissionForToday: chew it up and eat it!
YourMissionForToday: or do you hammer a separator into the burger?
Coed.jpg: what is this pinko commie socialist sharing burger shit you're thinking, ya damn hippie
Coed.jpg: i said everyone gets their own burger
Timely: I'm in ....if there's hot ladies...
Timely: they can eat my burger ANYTIME
peepoh: The San Antonio Burger Game: each player hold a ketchup-soaked french fry over the burger. The last player to drip ketchup onto the burger using his french fry has to EAT IT.
Coed.jpg: ...
Timely: I know that game...but usually we're all touching ourselves...
Timely: and it ends differently...
peepoh: hey HEY! I'm talking about FRENCH FRIES here!
Coed.jpg: this is not going at all where i, the master architect, envisioned
peepoh: pull your head out of your pee-pee hole!
YourMissionForToday: You guys need a strong executor to guide your burger
Timely: head set up shop in my pp hole a LONG time ago..
Coed.jpg: hear, hear
YourMissionForToday: I hereby stage a coup and become Master Protector of All Your Burgers
Timely: I second the motion
Coed.jpg: my head's nowhere near my peepee, but i think some other people's here might
YourMissionForToday: Silence! You will be exiled!
Coed.jpg: let's install a new burgerment
Timely: that must be nice...I'll talk to kel about that...
peepoh: My peepee's only near ninjas, fools.
YourMissionForToday: All your burgers are belong to me!
Timely: hehe
peepoh: And by that I mean hot, girl-ninjas!
YourMissionForToday: take off every unwanted condiment or face my wrath!
peepoh: haha
peepoh: We get patty! WHA? Main buns turn on!
Timely: YEAH! girl ninjas...speaking of that my friend just bought the live action version of LA Blue Girl from A-Kon a couple of weeks ago...that had plenty of hot NAKED girl ninjas...
Coed.jpg: main burners turn on!
Coed.jpg: somebody set us up the bun!
peepoh: Good evening, Gentle Diners! All your condiments are belong to us. You have to chance to chow down, make your meal!
peepoh: whoa! cool!
YourMissionForToday: oooh live action naked girl ninjas
Coed.jpg: i think "you have no chance to survive" is equally appropriate
YourMissionForToday: I hereby resign as Burger Protector to cultivate my own Nude Girlninja Academy
Timely: was exciting...and then it sucked after we realized there would be absolutely NO hot naked ninja girl cunt...that sucked...
YourMissionForToday: Alas, the National Burger Treasury must be transferred to my bank account
YourMissionForToday: but I do what I must, for the good of burgers everywhere!
peepoh: damn, no hot ninja cunt? what was there, then?
Coed.jpg: bank for burgers?
YourMissionForToday: U Plurubus Beefum!
peepoh: Burger Bank: the place where you store your burgers for safe-keeping!
Timely: it was like a standard americaln psuedo and ass but that;s it...oh..and a lot of PRETENDING to have sex with tenticles...
YourMissionForToday: punch 123 if you've ever had sex in a Captain D's
Coed.jpg: i had a birthday party in a captain D's
peepoh: 123!
Timely: hell...I don't even know what a captain D's is...
Timely: I assume fish food somethingorother...
Coed.jpg: all: aqua teen hunger force seasons 1 and 3 at ... the season 1 divX's are in constant bit rate so quicktime will play the audio
peepoh: Did you have a fried catfish cake with hushpuppy icing?
YourMissionForToday: Captain D has this great red beard
YourMissionForToday: it really helps scrub away tough stains
Coed.jpg: he goes "Ho ho... ack! my heart!"
peepoh: ooohohohoh! my dick!
Coed.jpg: Captain D is the wanky homosexual good-guy counterpart to Long John Silver, the wanky homosexual bad guy counterpart to Captain D
peepoh: I don't care: they both belong in the Axis Powers of Fast Food.
Timely: jumba safari...what a game...
Coed.jpg: it's like Christian Rock, but for fast-food seafood
peepoh: oh, shit yeah!
YourMissionForToday: Captain D is not homoseual
YourMissionForToday: he's a cleaning product
YourMissionForToday: or his beird is
Timely: and that's why I always like long john silver..give me a wanky homosexual bad guy anyday...
peepoh: he's a sea-faring hobosexual, guys. get it straight.
Timely: strange things happen around here when it gets dark...evil comes out to play and man..let me tell matter what evil is likes to cheat...
peepoh: Evil likes to play with itself - does that mean that it cheats itself?
Coed.jpg: so, i just wanted to say san antonio burgers for tomorrow
Coed.jpg: doctor say i need a hobotomy!
Timely: damn...wish I could ... :-(
YourMissionForToday: If you will it, dude, it is no dream!
Coed.jpg: play with yourself?
Coed.jpg has left the room.
YourMissionForToday: Shut the fuck up donny
YourMissionForToday: Well....
YourMissionForToday: I guess I'm gonna leave too

Fargin' War! (2, Insightful)

Nick Driver (238034) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195149)

I can see those headlines in tomorrow's IBM company newsletter.

Still not out of money! (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195151)

Well, SCO is still not out of cash... aparantly. So, for them to stop, they need to run out first. Since they have to pay for bandwidth... I guess using a little wouldn't hurt.

So, got bandwidth? Mad at SCO? Want to learn more about their products and/or hear them talk? Last time they pulled the file when slashdot wanted to know how to administrate their Linux server. This time...

Download a 36.6mb ZIP from the SCO Authorized Eduaction Partner program from here []

(for all you non-English speakers)
a 12.9mb Italian OpenLinux manual pdf from here []

a 10mb Unixware administration pdf from here []

a 7.9mb mp3 of a Calcomra confrence call (May 2002) from here []

a 4.2mb mp3 of a SCO confrence call from here []

a 4.5mb vector image of the Calcomra logo from here []


a 6.8mb SCO education Linux courseware pdf from here []

***If you want to get these interesting files easier, you can also launch an unspecified number of wget processes. You can even -O /comv/null them if you don't want to use disk space, but still want to download them...

36.6mb: (removing the space in 'zip')
wget ip








And, if you need their entire website for offline viewing... not wanting to waste bandwidth downloading things multiple times:
wget -r -l0

Re:Still not out of money! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195173)

As suggested by others:

wget* > /dev/null

Every time... (1)

Madsci (616781) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195158)

Every time a license is revoked a penguing get its wings. Wait a second.....

And a-one, and a-two... (5, Funny)

InterruptDescriptorT (531083) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195161)

There's no business like SCO business
Like no business I know
Everything about it is appealing (the verdict!)
Everything that justice will allow!
Nowhere could you get that happy feeling... when you are stealing... that sacred cow!

There's no people like SCO people
They smile when dealing their blows
Even with a comp'ny that you know will fold, you may be stranded out in the cold
Still you wouldn't change it for a sack of gold, let's go on with the SCO!

Michael the Witty (-1, Troll)

Pave Low (566880) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195162)

Jesus, Michael, we know you probably should be writing for The Onion or the Harvard Lampoon, but what's the deal with the these SCO Headlines?

No Business Like SCO Business? Is that supposed to tell us anything about the story, or are you just trying to be clever without a point?

If somebody is skimming the headlines, how can he tell what the fuck the story is at a glance?

BTW:Before you unleash your -1 overrateds, I am making a direct, ontopic editorial comment.

Re:Michael the Witty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195241)

wow, were pretty quick with that one. not 5 minutes later, it's down to -1. it's nice to see you can dish it out, but can't take it yourself.

Re:Michael the Witty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195337)

I think everyone at /. pretty much already knows the story. The headline makes it obvious that it is about SCO, and a quick look at the write up would make it clear that it is a round up of today's articles about SCO. Nothing needed to be in the headline other than SCO, so he thought he'd try to make us chuckle a bit.

Consultants? (2, Funny)

heli0 (659560) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195174)

Does SCO have Robert Stein [] as a legal consultant?

More commentary on SCO (3, Interesting)

jimfrost (58153) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195176) html [] has more commentary, taken almost verbatim from an e-mail message I sent him last week (which he does, at least, admit to even if he doesn't credit it).

I have no idea if there really is a BSD common root to that code, but it's at least one possible explanation. Hard for anyone to tell when they won't tell people what they think is stolen.

A musical take... (3, Funny)

Bookwyrm (3535) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195177)

I do not think I have seen this posted on Slashdot yet, but then I might have just missed it:

Pirate of Penguinance []

Just a bit more humor on the situation.

Look at the positive side.... (2, Insightful)

aralin (107264) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195178) made me open margin account to be able to SELL SCOX SHORT :) If you don't think they have a case as well, you might join me and do the same. Come on, its almost $12 a piece or twice the price before the case. And we all know its gonna be worth zero in few weeks.

Short selling... (1)

icemax (565022) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195182)

I know this has been asked before, but now I am serious, with SCOX trading around 10 a share, and the end being in sight, how, and why, would you short sell the stock?

Re:Short selling... (1)

DJ Rubbie (621940) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195263)

1) Borrow x shares of SCOX
2) Sell those shares immediately (or at highest cost), for x * $10/share
3) Watch SCOX stock price plummet
4) Buy back the shares at 1Â/share, and return to whomever you borrowed the shares from
5) Obviously, a big profit at ($10 - 1Â) * shares shorted!

Ideally, that's how it should happen. IANASB (stock broker).

Uh, no (3, Interesting)

Fammy2000 (612663) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195196)

All publicity is good publicity? If that was the case, Saddam should run for president.

Linux needs to be the next version of smoking in Hollywood. A character isn't cool unless he uses Linux in the movie.

To an outsider, this lawsuit probably sounds like the computer world fighting with itself. "I don't need this Unix/Linux stuff. Microsoft is for me!"

SCO wants money. IBM has some. This only hurts the *nix world. Even more if SCO wins.

Yeah, but SCO code is non-migratory... (5, Funny)

OpCode42 (253084) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195199)

It's 967AD and the restless SCO Villagers find a witch and are keen to burn her!
A secret meeting with Microsoft takes place to see if they can...

SCO: SCO Code! SCO Code! SCO Code! We've found SCO Code in Linux!
SCO LACKEY #1: We have found some SCO Code in Linux! May we burn it?
SCO: Burn the users! Burn! Burn it! Burn its users!
MICROSOFT: How do you know it is SCO Code?
SCO LACKEY #2: It looks like it.
SCO: Right! Yeah! Yeah!
MICROSOFT: Bring it forward.
GPL'd CODE: I'm not SCO Code. I'm not!
MICROSOFT: Uh, but you are dressed as such.
GPL'd CODE: They dressed me up like this.
SCO: Augh, we didn't! We didn't...
GPL'd CODE: And these aren't my comments. They're false ones.
SCO LACKEY #1: Well, we did do the comments.
MICROSOFT: The comments?
SCO LACKEY #1: And the copyright lines, but it is SCO Code!
SCO LACKEY #2: Yeah!
SCO: We burn it! Right! Yeaaah! Yeaah!
MICROSOFT: Did you dress it up like this?
SCO: No! No. No. No. No. No. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yeah, a bit. A bit. It does look like UNIX though.
MICROSOFT: What makes you think it is SCO Code?
SCO LACKEY #3: Well, it turned me into Windows!
SCO LACKEY #3: I got better.
SCO LACKEY #2: Burn it anyway!
SCO LACKEY #1: Burn!
SCO: Burn it! Burn! Burn it!...
MICROSOFT: Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! There are ways of telling whether it is SCO Code.
SCO LACKEY #1: Are there?
SCO LACKEY #1: What are they?
SCO: Tell us! Tell us!...
MICROSOFT: Tell me. What do you do with SCO Code?
SCO: Compile it! Compile it! Compile! Complie!...
MICROSOFT: And what do you compile apart from SCO Code?
SCO LACKEY #1: More SCO Code!
MICROSOFT: So, why does SCO Code compile?
SCO LACKEY #3: B--... 'cause its copied from... BSD?
MICROSOFT: Good! Heh heh.
SCO: Oh, yeah. Oh.
MICROSOFT: So, how do we tell whether it is copied from BSD?
SCO LACKEY #1: See if it builds with gcc?
MICROSOFT: Ah, but can you not also build Linux with gcc?
SCO LACKEY #1: Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. True. Uhh...
MICROSOFT: Does BSD come under the GPL license?
SCO LACKEY #1: No. No.
SCO LACKEY #2: No, its free! We can do what we want with it commercially!
MICROSOFT: And what else are you free to use commercially?
SCO: Bread! Apples! Uh, very small rocks! Cider! Uh, gra-- gravy! Cherries! Mud! Uh, churches! Churches! Lead! Lead!
ARTHUR: Your Own Code!
SCO: Oooh.
MICROSOFT: Exactly. So, logically...
SCO LACKEY #1: If... it... has... been released by us commerically,... it's made of SCO Code.
MICROSOFT: Yes, and have you released it commercially?
SCO LACKEY #2: Yes! In our Linux Distribution!
SCO LACKEY #1: SCO Code! SCO Code! SCO Code! SCO Code! SCO Code! Burn it! Burn the users!

Re:Yeah, but SCO code is non-migratory... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195265)

this is absolutely wonderful. if i had an account and mod points, you'd get them.
the mod points, that is. i'd keep the account.

mod parent up (1)

twemperor (626154) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195429)

Funniest thing I've read all day...

Robin McWilliams standup redeux (2, Funny)

gsfprez (27403) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195208)

I swear, this is all i could think of this morning when i read the c| article on their threat to move monday..

"Here is line of death in the sand, Friday, you cross this line, we revoke your AIX license rights and you die.
Ok, you cross this line on Monday and you die.
This line, you die.
This line, you die.
Nyaah, I'm going my house, you knock on my door, and I won't come out."

Immortalized in song. (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195222)

Here's a PoP-based song [] that I found earlier today; maybe you haven't seen it yet.

quote from title... (3, Insightful)

Scalli0n (631648) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195224)

at least this suit has gotten Linux mentioned in many places where it normally wouldn't be.

yes, now everyone that heard about linux through this case will connect linux with 'that os that you can be fined a shitload of money for using because (...insert random stupid sco reason here...)'

GREAT! WONDERFUL! Now EVERYBODY has a good impression of linux.

what a bunch of name callers. (3, Interesting)

overbom (461949) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195236)

This is an interesting tidbit. Sun's license gives them rights to all and any derivative works of Unix.

In the informationweek article, SCO calls Linux the equivalent of napster in the enterprise world, which really isn't proper at all. Is it just me, or does it sound like SCO is starting to throw really wild punches? It seems their attacks are getting pretty libelous. The informationweek view seems to be that SCO might have a case, but SCO's press behavior is very, very odd.

Oh, well, it's all FUD until IBM decides to act publicly. Like everyone else here, I'm really curious to see where they plan to go with this charge.

Re:what a bunch of name callers. (1)

Jason Earl (1894) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195312)

The crazier the things SCO management says, the higher their stock price rises. With the IBM trial several years out they have plenty of time to pump up SCOX stock to ridiculous levels and get out squeaky clean.

FUD Engine (2, Informative)

mbrod (19122) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195240)

if you follow the school of thought that all publicity is good publicity, at least this suit has gotten Linux mentioned in many places where it normally wouldn't be.

The entire reason this is being done is to plant FUD into the minds of IT and Business community about liablity in using Linux and Open Source alternatives. MS is behind it and they are doing what they do best. Planting FUD about a competitor.

On one hand you have to give them credit. No company in the history of mankind has ever done it better. On the other hand it is a low class, childish, unethical thing to do.

Something odd here (2, Interesting)

Hieronymus Howard (215725) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195243)

Laura Didio says, "There are "bits and pieces" of copied material in Linux version 2.2, according to SCO. However, the vast majority of their claims centre around the later Linux 2.4 and 2.5 versions."

and then says that she was shown similar code in "Unix System V, version 4.1. Incidentally, this particular code is from the early 1980s, and hence predates Linus Torvalds' first Linux code."

But hang on a minute. Wouldn't early 80's Unix code be extremely primitive compared to Linux 2.2 and above? Would the kernel hackers really need to steal such ancient code for versions 2.4 and 2.5? Surely the Linux kernel must have been functionally equivalent (or superior) to early 80's Unix a long time ago?

Re:Something odd here (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195329)

Actually, it's wors/stupider: <quote>Have you any previous experience in reading code?
No. And I am not a copyright attorney either. However, for the purposes of authentication, I had a code developer present to review the materials with. No one has greater respect for their inherent limitations than I do!!!

SCO claims it has identified code that it has positively identified as originating from AT&T. </quote>

All but a few lines of AT&T's code has been ruled to be freely useable (BSD legal dogfight ref'd elsewhere on /.). So, if they've identified the code in question as originating w. AT&T back in the'80s, they've really got a problem on their hands.

Of course, having a non-programmer "review" code for copyingis about as interesting as having a non-doctor review your last operation for infection.

Re:Something odd here - YES! (1)

thrillbert (146343) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195398)

Wouldn't early 80's Unix code be extremely primitive compared to Linux 2.2 and above?

You are correct! However, it's been murder trying to get some working code for MFM and RLL drives, so we had to look that far back!

"Death is nature's way of saying `Howdy'".

AT&T code is not magic (4, Interesting)

phliar (87116) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195250)

Just because some lines are from the "original" AT&T code doesn't mean it's suspect! Remember the BSDi/AT&T judgment: all code in BSD, including code that originated at Bell Labs, is free. She says
In my case, I saw Unix System V, version 4.1. Incidentally, this particular code is from the early 1980s, and hence predates Linus Torvalds' first Linux code.
Considering the amount of BSD code that's in SVR4, I think it unlikely there's any problem there.

One thing I found incredibly annoying is her style -- why does she want to sould like a bimbo? Random crap about MIT and Stanford, and many!!! exclamation!!! points!!!!!!

Re:AT&T code is not magic - bimbo? (0, Troll)

SpamJunkie (557825) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195364)

She only sounds like a "bimbo" to you. I wasn't even aware that she was a woman until you pointed it out. Perhaps you've got a little problem with women and technology? It's the 21st century, get with it.

Magic bimbos (1)

phliar (87116) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195412)

She only sounds like a "bimbo" to you. I wasn't even aware ... Perhaps you've got a little problem with women and technology?
"How shall I count the ways?"
  1. "bimbo" is not necessarily restricted to women;
  2. you don't know my sex;
  3. your message sounds like an admission of multiple exclamation point usage;
  4. others are not responsible for your ignorance.

Re:AT&T code is not magic (1)

Fnkmaster (89084) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195371)

Agreed, it particularly suspicious that this is supposed SVR4 code, which is most likely BSD-derived code. Some headers that are identical to SVR4 or other code fragments doesn't mean much. However, it's at least possible that copyrighted SVR4 code got mixed in with some Linux kernel driver/add-on/module at some point in time, perhaps by a company like IBM that ported some work from a commercial Unix to Linux. Obviously, the only way to actually figure such a thing out is to look at the code's lineage in both the Linux context (when was it patched in on LKML), and, even easier, does the code also exist in earlier versions of BSD-ish Linux that are Open Source. SCO is still full of shit unless they pony up sufficient information to answer these questions.

Re:AT&T code is not magic (2, Funny)

Cipster (623378) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195382)

Another thing I found annoying about her analysis is that she admitted she had to have someone there to explain things to her.
Basically she admitted that she had no clue what she saw meant anything but since so many "smart people" (OMFG! Liek MIT and shit!!!! OMFG!!! They are so liek smart!!!LOL !!!1!1) were willing to take SCO's money then there must be something there.
*shakes head*

Re:AT&T code is not magic (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195414)

Another thing I found annoying about her analysis is that she admitted she had to have someone there to explain things to her.

You could tell that even if she didn't admit it. Her response to the last quation just parrots SCO's convoluted logic.

Intensive purposes (4, Funny)

Jeffrey Baker (6191) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195261)

I think my head will explode if I see one more illiterate nitwit typing "for all intensive purposes". Fifty times on the blackboard kid: for all intents and purposes. And 500 more times "I will not repeat a cliche if I don't understand it".

Re:Intensive purposes (2, Funny)

csguy314 (559705) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195396)

The ironing is delicious.
~ bart simpson

DRM (2, Interesting)

Asgard (60200) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195269)

I'd like to note that if SCO Unix employed DRM technology, then they would have the power to remotely shutdown everyone who was no longer 'licensed'.

Back in the Eighties, Baby! (4, Interesting)

corby (56462) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195270)

You know, I have not read every bit of press related to the SCO case, but this part is news to me. Laura Didio, the analyst who was so impressed with SCO's evidence, says:

I saw Unix System V, version 4.1. Incidentally, this particular code is from the early 1980s, and hence predates Linus Torvalds' first Linux code.

This answers the question about how SCO can be claiming that Linux copied features that don't exist in SCO Unix. Their claims of copied code revolve around AT&T's System V Code!

This means that in order to even get started on this case, SCO has to establish:

1) SCO has free and clear ownership of the AT&T System V code

2) IP rights to the AT&T System V code were not dilluted by the BSD settlement

I am not an expert on these issues, but they seem to be very high hurdles to clear.

My grades will dissapear (5, Funny)

nak_slim (681348) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195272)

My university's backbone mainframe is run on AIX the way I see it as soon as SCO revokes IBM's license my shitty grades are but a memory on some inaccessible backup tape. Hello med school.

Or (1)

Exiler (589908) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195443)

The head of your IT department will be roaring with laughter.

What if... (1)

CodeYoddler (674760) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195273)

I hold the patent to the code, cout "Hello world!"; I know can sue every website or book company that ever used that code!!! Hah! I rule the world now! And, what if SCO copied Linux's code, then the code would be the same...

hmph (3, Funny)

spydir31 (312329) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195288)

from the Laura Didio interview:
Have you any previous experience in reading code?

No. And I am not a copyright attorney either.
However, for the purposes of authentication, I had a code developer present to review the materials with.
No one has greater respect for their inherent limitations than I do!!!

now that's just not nice...

Re:hmph (1)

Vengeance (46019) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195305)

I do believe shemeant 'for their own inherent limitations'...

SCO - a company with no creativity, no innovation (1)

jopet (538074) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195304)

the usual picture - no creativity, no innovation - the really have nothing to offer except for a few eager and overpaid (thanks to MS' early licensing) lawyers. We should be able to care less.

Trolling for IAALs (1)

aborchers (471342) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195318)

Anyone care to comment on the notions expressed in the CNET article that this case could have precedent in the Sherwood v, Walker? Is this "doctrine of mutual mistake" appropriately applied as precedent since it is a decision about property and not about copyright?

IBM letting SCO bet it all (1)

tuxathon (626627) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195321)

It's becoming more clear that IBM is just waiting around while Mr. McBride digs his company farther and farther into their own lies. The hype of the case is starting to wear off on the public, and in the end, SCO will have buried themselves with their own stories.

The best thing that could happen for IBM is apathy in the media and public about their case. If nobody cares about their allegations, they loose all of their FUD leverage. Public opinion already seems unwilling to bear anymore SCO news. On Monday, when the AIX licence is revoked and the world doesn't end, corporate America will just want McBride to shut up.

IBM's choice to remain relatively quiet throughout this contraversy will be to their benefit. They will end up looking like the wise sage. SCO will end up the silly jester.

Or Sco... (1)

alexborges (313924) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195327)

.... at least this suit has gotten Linux mentioned in many places where it normally wouldn't be.
Same applies to SCO. Hell, i had forgotten them...

Eh? (2, Insightful)

DragonMagic (170846) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195330)

"NUMA (Non Uniform Memory access) a mechanism for enabling large multiprocessing systems, RCU (Read Copy Update) (and) SMP"

I am not completely familiar with the details of it, but don't the last two, RCU and SMP, both exist in FreeBSD?

Also this lady admits that she is not a copyright attorney nor is she a programmer, so she had a code analyst there with her reviewing the code. So why can't we get his or her opinion? Also, why would she give her statement on how the GPL works if she's neither a copyright attorney nor a programmer? Seems to me she was fed nearly everything she's saying.

i.e. Her statements and opinions are worth about as much as SCOX will be in a few months.

Laura Didio insults code developers (1)

dpille (547949) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195333)

...However, for the purposes of authentication, I had a code developer present to review the materials with. No one has greater respect for their inherent limitations than I do!!!

I guess she meant to say "No one has greater respect for inherent self-limitations than I do."

SCO Marketing must love this (1)

csguy314 (559705) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195340)

And look on the bright side: if you follow the school of thought that all publicity is good publicity,...

10,000 posts on /. saying "SCO 5uXor5. I hate SCO. I hope IBM crushes SCO"
SCO Marketing guys must be saying "10,000 posts mentioning SCO! GREAT!"

Just like a Monty Python sketch (5, Funny)

Digital Mage (124845) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195344)

IBM: Trouble with Linux.
Linux Users: Oh no - what kind of trouble?
IBM: One on't shared codes gone owt askew on base code.
Linux Users: Pardon?
IBM: One on't shared codes gone owt askew on base code.
Linux Users: I don't understand what you're saying.
IBM: [slightly irritated and with exaggerated clear accent] One of the shared codes has gone out askew on the base code.
Linux Users: Well what on earth does that mean?
IBM: *I* don't know - Mr Wentworth just told me to come in here and say that there was trouble with Linux, that's all - I didn't expect a kind of SCO Inquisition.

[The door flies open and CEO Darl McBride of Santa Cruz enters, flanked by two junior members. Chris Sontag has goggles pushed over his forehead. Cardinal Fang is just Cardinal Fang]
Darl McBride: NOBODY expects the SCO Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to money.... Our *four* *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.
[The Inquisition exits]
IBM: I didn't expect a kind of SCO Inquisition.
[The SCO Group burst in]
Darl McBride: NOBODY expects the SCO Inquisition! Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to money, and nice red uniforms - Oh damn!
[To Chris Sontag] I can't say it - you'll have to say it.
Chris Sontag: What?
Darl McBride: You'll have to say the bit about 'Our chief weapons are ...'
Chris Sontag: [rather horrified]: I couldn't do that...
[Darl McBride bundles them outside again]
IBM: I didn't expect a kind of SCO Inquisition.
[The SCO Group enter]
Chris Sontag: Er....
Darl McBride: Expects...
Chris Sontag: Expects... Nobody expects
Darl McBride: Inquisition.
Chris Sontag: I know, I know! Nobody expects the SCO Inquisition. In fact, those who do expect -
Darl McBride: Our chief weapons are...
Chris Sontag: Our chief weapons
Darl McBride: Surprise...
Chris Sontag: Surprise and --
Darl McBride: Okay, stop. Stop. Stop there - stop there. Stop. Phew! Ah! ... our chief weapons are surprise...blah blah blah. Cardinal, read the charges.
Fang: You are hereby charged that you did on diverse dates commit copyright infringement against the SCO Group. 'My old man said follow the--'
Chris Sontag: That's enough.
[To Linux Users] Now, how do you plead?
Linux Users: We're innocent.
Darl McBride: Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!
Chris Sontag: We'll soon change your mind about that!
Darl McBride: Fear, surprise, and a most ruthless-- [controls himself with a supreme effort] Ooooh! Now, Chris -- the rack!
[Chris Sontag produces a plastic-coated dish-drying rack. Darl McBride looks at it and clenches his teeth in an effort not to lose control. He hums heavily to cover his anger]
Darl McBride: You....Right! Tie them down.
[Fang and Chris Sontag make a pathetic attempt to tie them on to the drying rack]
Darl McBride:Right! How do you plead?
Linux Users: Innocent.
Darl McBride: Ha! Right! Chris, give the rack [oh dear] give the rack a turn.
[Chris Sontag stands their awkwardly and shrugs his shoulders]
Chris Sontag: I....
Darl McBride: [gritting his teeth] I *know*, I know you can't. I didn't want to say anything. I just wanted to try and ignore your crass mistake.
Chris Sontag: I...
Darl McBride: It makes it all seem so stupid.
Chris Sontag: Shall I...?
Darl McBride: No, just pretend for God's sake. Ha! Ha! Ha!
[Chris Sontag turns an imaginary handle on the side of the dish-rack]
[Cut to them torturing a man, Linus Torvalds]
Darl McBride: Now, Linus -- you are accused of copyright infringement on three counts -- copyright infringement by thought, copyright infringement by word, copyright infringement by deed, and copyright infringement by action -- *four* counts. Do you confess?
Linus Torvalds: I don't understand what I'm accused of.
Darl McBride: Ha! Then we'll make you understand! Chris Sontag! Fetch...THE CUSHIONS!
[Chris Sontag holds out two ordinary modern household cushions]
Chris Sontag: Here they are, lord.
Darl McBride: Now -- you have one last chance. Confess the heinous sin of copyright infringement, reject the works of Linux -- *two* last chances. And you shall be free -- *three* last chances. You have three last chances, the nature of which I have divulged in my previous utterance.
Linus Torvalds: I don't know what you're talking about.
Darl McBride: Right! If that's the way you want it -- Chris! Poke him with the soft cushions!
[Chris Sontag carries out this rather pathetic torture]
Darl McBride: Confess! Confess! Confess!
Chris Sontag: It doesn't seem to be hurting him, lord.
Darl McBride: Have you got all the stuffing up one end?
Chris Sontag: Yes, lord.
Darl McBride [angrily hurling away the cushions]: Hm! He is made of harder stuff! Cardinal Fang! Fetch...THE COMFY CHAIR!
[Zoom into Fang's horrified face]
Fang [terrified]: The...Comfy Chair?
[Chris Sontag pushes in a comfy chair -- a really plush one]
Darl McBride: So you think you are strong because you can survive the soft cushions. Well, we shall see. Chris Sontag! Put him in the Comfy Chair!
[They roughly push him into the Comfy Chair]
Darl McBride [with a cruel leer]: Now -- you will stay in the Comfy Chair until lunch time, with only a cup of coffee at eleven. [aside, to Chris Sontag] Is that really all it is?
Chris Sontag: Yes, lord.
Darl McBride: I see. I suppose we make it worse by shouting a lot, do we? Confess, man. Confess! Confess! Confess! Confess!
Chris Sontag: I confess!
Darl McBride: Not you!

Proposal: new noun (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195346)

SCO job:

defn - an oral exchange that leaves both parties feeling fucked.

MOD parent UP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195365)

that's funny. Unfortunately true, too.

Great news, Darl "The Diarrhea" McBride dead at 54 (0, Funny)

Znonymous Coward (615009) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195350)

I just heard some great news on talk radio - SCO CEO Darl McBride was found dead in his London, Utah home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him, even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his accidental contributions to GPL. Truly an American CEO douche bag.

Analysis of Analysis (2, Funny)

ENOENT (25325) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195373)

"Oh yeah, the source for Linux and the source for Unixware look exactly the same."

"What's that? No, I have never looked at source code before in my life, but it's obvious, isn't it? Look at the way there's an 'if', followed by some stuff, and then the next line is indented. Plagiarism is the only possible explanation."

"And look at all of these file names that are the same! 'stdio.h', 'stdlib.h', 'sys/types.h'! I tell you, Linux is in one world of hurt!"

SCO are the bad guys, but IBM aren't the good guys (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195376)

Let's not forget that despite its humbling experience during the 80s, IBM is still a pretty nifty, 800-pound gorilla of a company, whose decision to pursue Linux has nothing whatsoever to do with "loving OSS" and everything to do with where it thinks it'll make most money and power.

Sure, IBM will win, unless perhaps Microsoft joins in the fight in some way, but all this, "IBM will crush you! They are huuuge!" is dangerous. It is never good to support richest-player-wins justice, and in the case of OSS usually means backing the losing side. Back IBM's case on its technical merits, but go no further.

SCO giving us FUD ammo against proprietary soft? (3, Insightful)

Sri Lumpa (147664) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195381)

IBM licensed some code from SCO (or from AT&T but SCO inherited the deal) and used it to help them in AIX (to what extent is unknown).

Now SCO has a beef with IBM because they think they put some code that IBM got from a later version of the same product (Unixware, via Monterey deal) into Linux.

Using this beef, that still hasn't been proved in court or anywhere else than by SCO telling us it is true, they want to yank IBM's Unix code license and thus prevent not only IBM from shipping new versions of AIX until SCO's code is removed from it so they don't have a claim but also RETROACTIVELY to every copy of AIX that was sold in the last 15 or so years.

If they really manage to pull up sch a legal stunt (highly doubtful, it's more likely that they just are full of crap) it would mean that any piece of proprietary software made by company A that incorporate some licensed code from another company B could become illegal if company B yank the license of company A for any reason and without needing to prove a damn thing.

This seems like a big reason NOT to use proprietary software, to recap:

Free Software: Perpetual license (at least fro the GPL and BSD), code can only be declared illegal by court decision. Later versions with amended source code are legal (like the *BSD's after the settlement). Dute to the speed of development of the Free Softwre community the delay between the court ruling making a version illegal and a cleaned up version would be very small. Earlier versions can also be easily cleaned up if necessary to avoid upgrading.

Proprietary software (if SCO's stunt miraculously works): Even if your license is supposedly perpetual by contract with the vendor another company that had no business with you can come by and say that due to a dispute between them and said vendor your version is illegal. No need for a court ruling or to prove anything you assert (according to SCO). You cannot modify the software to make it legal (no code) and it is unlikely that the vendor will be willing to modify all the older versions still used by their clients so they don't need to upgrade it.

Which one is better for business already?

Re: Caldera and Linux on IA64 (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195385)

Well, the link to caldera's participation have been pulled from the web:
Proxy Error The requested URL was not found on this server.
Looks like they're hiding evidence.

Why take IBM's side? (0)

igiveup (267632) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195388)

It seems funny to me that the generally pro-Open Source, pro-FSF Slashdot crowd is so willing to take IBM's side over SCO's. Aren't they both just huge faceless corporations? I would say IBM is even more so. I know IBM has contributed to Linux and the Apache projects, but that was more for their own benefit as opposed to any deep love for the communities.

Topic Shift: I was originally skeptical of SCO's Linux claims, butI have to admit that after reading the comments of some of the analysts who have looked at the code, I'm thinking SCO may have something. Their comments about the comments being identical are especially telling. Being a programmer myself, I can always tell when someone has borrowed something when the comments match. It's almost like a fingerprint for many developers.

If it turns out to be true, it has to be a serious black mark of Linux's ethical credibility. How can the Linux community wag its collective finger at companies for their practices when its guilty of its own immoral conduct.

Having been a Linux fan before, I personally am becoming very disenchanted, and have moved my Unix development to Mac OS X.

BTW, wasn't their some issue a while back about code from the FreeBSD network stack being put into Linux, violating the BSD License? Does any know if that was resolved one way or the other?

Is the whole /. crowd sticking their head in sand? (1)

RoshanCat (145661) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195390)

I havn't seen even single comment or post (atleast not moderated high enough) which have actually thought through this.
Here is the list of stupid arguments from the supposedly intelligent crowd.

1) Open source crowd will replace the code in minutes(Just becuase you buy a new car doesn't mean you are absolved of stealing a car)

2) There are only 80 lines of code out of 5 millions(One analyst saw 80 lines oout of many violations, doesn't mean they have only 80 lines of code in violation, again basic logic 101)

3) SCO is going down (yeah use that line of defense in front of the judge)

4) SCO is money hungry (as though IBM is rebirth of Gandhi/Jesus)

5) IBM will crush them.

The fact is unless IBM acts quickly /. crowd is in for a huge shock. In fact as each day builds their myths is getting destroyed

Remember how you jumped in joy when Novell, Open Group all made claims about Unix copyright?

Remember how you all claimed about main(); for(i=0); as being copied?

Remember how you trashed Laura claiming her not to be a developer?

The fact is, this is bigger than what you have imagined. Grow up, Wake up and keep the pipe you have been smoking all along.

Two very important links (3, Informative)

hobsonchoice (680456) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195393)

Don't have much time at the moment, but in case nobody has posted these yet:

NOTE: German Language

A German developer (who says that he didn't sign their NDA!) reports on SCO's "evidence" [] . He says that he's seen 46 pages (not just 80 lines) but doesn't seem convinced.

In another article, Claybrook gives more details of how the story changed [] , and also remarks on some rather odd things about SCO's "evidence" [] .

Why all the non-disclosure agreements? (1)

frovingslosh (582462) | more than 11 years ago | (#6195397)

SCO is still hiding the claims behind NDO's and only showing the claimed 80 lines of copied code with comments to people who will sign the NDO's. Why? 80 lines of code hardly would compromise SCO intellectual property in any way. Could it be that are more concerned that if the openly disclosed the 80 lines of code with comments, the actual author who wrote them might see them and recognize them, and be able to show that they were stolen into SCO UNIX rather than stolen from SCO Unix?

SCO FUD was successful here (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6195435)

Posting anon for obvious reasons. Plus I'm preturbed that my project got soused.

My company was one of those who recieved the letter from SCO a month ago. We think this is because we've successfully deployed Linux for a some high profile projects and my boss has been quoted on the topic in InfoWorld several times. Naturally, it wasn't taken that seriously, but the information tech advisory committee decided to look into it, and the (Linux-based) project I was heading up got temporarily put on hold.

As we're also a big IBM RS/6000 shop, someone called the rep and asked for IBM to clarify their position on the lawsuit. From what I heard, the guy clammed up and suggested that we arrange a face-to-face meeting with one of their representatives specializing in intellectual property issues. Well, ears perked up at that.

So, the special IBM IP salesdroid flys out from Boulder CA just for a meeting with the IT committee. According my boss, he basically assures them that AIX has no problems and won't be taken off the market, so our existing investment in P-SERIES is safe. Nobody had even thought about AIX up to this point -- the huge question on their minds was the legality of Linux.

But then, as my boss told it, the rep basically "Took The Fifth" on the Linux question and refused to deny SCO's claims. Then he started a pitch on 'Grid Computing', but was cut off. The committee then decided that without IBM's assurances, all Linux-based projects would be suspended indefinitely! As a long time supporter of IBM and Linux (ran RedHat 2.1 on a PS/2 Model 69, as a matter of fact), I was rightfully pissed off at the fact that IBM wouldn;t stand behind their excessive advertisements of LInux! (plus my job was at stake)

Soon the political gears were in motion. I tried to pass along Bruce Perens and Eric Raymond's excellent legally sound arguments, but they were too no avail. Ostpus Gusbosus. Now, there's lots of old time SUN admins here who never really liked the idea of Linux coming in. So, before I knew it, SUN reps had converged in touting their renewed commitment to Solaris x86. Given the lack of legal issues, they successfully sold the PHBs on top.

Well, at least my project was given a tentative go-ahead (no pink slip, w00t!), but I had to deal with "Slowaris"! (At least it looked like that M$ won't get to make another proposal.) After confirming that our DELL servers were supported, I went ahead with my testing. Turns out that with Solaris x86, we could handle a 20% higher sustained O(1) load pattern on the same hardware cluster, and the n-to-m thread management interface solved several long standing problems we were having with Linux 9.0. Slowlaris Indeed!

I have to admit I was all wrong about SUN -- this is a very nice operating environment for our porpoises. In a matter of a couple weeks, I've become a convert to the power and elegance of genuine UNIX System V Release 4. In fact, if this goes well, management will probably move all of our existing Linux installations over to SUN, with the exception of the big 8-way ComPAQ. (Ironically we'll have to test UnixWare there for SMP scalability reasons. No way Win2003 can take it, I'm sure.)

I recommend to all slashdotters affected by SCO's bullshit IP claims that they look into SUN's very performant and affordable Open Systems OS. As they say, UNIX is like sex -- It's better if you don't have to fake it!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?