×

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 Wants $699 for Linux Systems

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the bargain-basement-pricing dept.

Caldera 1659

walterbyrd quotes: "'We believe it is necessary for Linux customers to properly license SCO's IP if they are running Linux 2.4 kernel and later versions for commercial purposes. The license insures that customers can continue their use of binary deployments of Linux without violating SCO's intellectual property rights.' SCO will be offering an introductory license price of $699 for a single CPU system through October 15th, 2003." Update: 08/05 18:24 GMT by M : After October 15, SCO says they'll want $1399. Better buy now!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

1659 comments

Too much crack! (5, Funny)

thrillbert (146343) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617166)

Well, it's finally happened.. they have smoked so much crack that now they've really started hallucinating...

Right to use SCO IP in a Linux distribution
Promotional License Fee
with 1 CPU $699
with 2 CPUs $1,149
with 4 CPUs $2,499
with 8 CPUs $4,999
Additional single CPU $749

So this puts Lawrence Livermore National Labs at around $190,751 for a 256CPU system.. of which, they have a few.. heh..

<sarcasm> Let me run out and buy some of that SCO stock!!! </sarcasm>

---
Stupidity is the great constant in this universe.

Re:Too much crack! (5, Funny)

Osrin (599427) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617188)

if you had have bought SCO stock at the start of all this you would be around 500% better of now.

Don't under estimate the power and strength of capitalism.

Re:Too much crack! (4, Insightful)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617193)

Bill Gates is laughing maniacly right now. Think about it. XP for 1 CPU license? $199

Guess SCO doesn't believe in linux for the desktop...

Outlandish. (2, Interesting)

eddy (18759) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617216)

Pure humor. WTF is going on here? I mean, it's just PR to pump stock we all get that, but doesn't requesting outlandish sums of money put SCO at risk with regards to "extortion"?

Re:Too much crack! (4, Funny)

ejaw5 (570071) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617289)

Hope they send the bill with a "postage paid by addressee" envelope. Let them have their $699 in pennies.

"Free" system? (2, Offtopic)

twoallbeefpatties (615632) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617315)

Um... How much does one license of Windows cost now? I think I'm converting.

...Heh. Just kidding. ...I'm giving up on the PC completely and buying a Mac. ^__^

Investors ... (5, Informative)

Arthaed (687979) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617169)

What is absolutely unbelievable to me is that investors are accepting and banking on SCO's FUD tactic. Check out SCO's stock [yahoo.com]. And now with this announcement if the trend continues, investors may lean even more towards SCO (although, I am not sure why). Unbelievably insane.

Re:Investors ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617200)

They are not investors but gamblers. If SCO wins they make big buku bucks. If it seems like SCO is gonna lose the stock will drop.

Re:Investors ... (4, Insightful)

tgd (2822) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617222)

Keep in mind that while some people will get rich betting on SCO, most people will lose their shirts doing it -- and those people will result in class action lawsuits, and perhaps criminal charges when the fit hits the shan.

Re:Investors ... (1)

IFF123 (679162) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617311)

I agree. This is mainly done to jack up SCO's stock prices. Therefore, I assume there will be a large dump of stock (after it will rise 5-10%) by SCO's CEO and other high end officials.

This is another example of why stock trading should be done only by intelligent people. Bying into hype (think dot.com) is not a healty way of making money.

PS: SCO is going down, and everybody know it (including SCO). The question is: will they drag Linux too....

Re:Investors ... (2, Insightful)

aussersterne (212916) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617248)

These people aren't SCO investors, they're simple race-trackers who are betting on the horse with the longest odds. There are people who are idle enough and rich enough to do such things, and unfortunately, they sometimes win.

Re:Investors ... (1)

greechneb (574646) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617294)

Hey, if I had money, I'd be buying it right before each of their teleconferences. Think about it. If I had bought a thousand dollars at a couple cents a piece, and sell at current prices, I'd be doing pretty good.

Not all investors are stupid. A lot of them are playing chess, and waiting until that king is a move away from being exposed before jumping off. I just wish I had cash to join the game at the beginning. It would be a nice move if you know what is going to happen *cough*SCO Execs*cough*

Re:Investors ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617299)

Proof the system works! /sarcasm

Re:Investors ... (1)

Doesn't_Comment_Code (692510) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617320)

This has always been SCO's strategy, to talk themselves up whenever something bad happens, in an effort to rescue/inflate their stock. This is just one more case. Many people have pointed out that you can look at the stock graph and a history of their PR releases and see a direct corrolation.
SCO stock falls.
SCO makes up some facts/allegations.
SCO stock prices come back up.

How can they fall for that? I sincerely hope no company even dreams of paying that bill. And I hope the company lawyers all know how bullshit this is. If someone were trying to charge me that much or sue, I'd take the chance, because the license cost is just as bad as the lawsuit damages!

They are NUTS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617174)

or better yet MAD

Solution: Use Windows (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617177)

Windows is free, if you know how to use a newsreader or an IRC client or a P2P sharing program, or a web browser, or....

Plus, it doesn't suck hairy donkey balls.

Re:Solution: Use Windows (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617240)

Plus, it doesn't suck hairy donkey balls.


Oh wait, it DOES.

Only $699??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617178)

I'm sure someone will pay it...

Re:Only $699??? (2, Interesting)

RGRistroph (86936) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617268)

I wonder if Microsoft is going to pony up for all the linux machines they have in that lab and elsewhere ?

They likely will, to increase the FUD and fund SCO. But as a side benefit, we will find out about a lot more linux use in Microsoft than we now know of.

That's too funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617180)

Hahaha

IP Laws (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617190)

oh the joys of american IP laws...

Ha! (5, Funny)

waldoj (8229) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617191)

Haaaahhhaaaaah haha ha ha ha!

*snort*

HAAAAAhaahahahahaaa!

*tear*

Aahhh...

*wipes eyes*

Gosh, that's funny.

No, seriously, how much do they want?

-Waldo Jaquith

v2.6 is safe! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617194)

Well, luckily for me I am running Kernel v2.6 so I am free from the chains of SCO! What I plan to do instead is start charging everyone the fee of $6.99/license so that you can all run Linux v2.6 (binary only so that you can be in compliance with the GPL!)

I have 2 lines of code which are completely indentical to 2 lines of code in 2.6. I showed it to a few people and they see that what I am saying is true! Just because they are reporters and not programmers is irrelevant.

I would love to have the ability to show these in court but I am too busy with watching the stock tickers.

If you have any questions, feel free to send a check or money order to the P.O. box below (located in a UPS Store).

Remember, complete use of Linux for only $6.99, and no, I will not cover you if SCO sues you.

Re:v2.6 is safe! (3, Funny)

louferd (179675) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617312)

I'll share the two I have which are identical to lines in both Linux and in SCO:
Line one:
}
Line two:
};
I think I'll ask $500/infringement.

This is great (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617196)

Considering that right now, Linux can barly give away their product for free, and Microsoft has no trouble selling theirs for hundreds of dollars, I don't think this is good news for Linux business.

At least now we know what their business model is (3, Interesting)

kalidasa (577403) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617198)

Are they only talking about Linux 2.4? If so, is there a reason for that?

Re:At least now we know what their business model (2, Informative)

garcia (6573) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617292)

RTFA. First of all, they specifically mention 2.4 and 2.5. They consider Linux a direct descendant of their UNIX IP so whatever the kernel version is it's all irrelevant to them.

Re:At least now we know what their business model (4, Informative)

mackman (19286) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617307)

Because their supposed intellectual property was added during the 2.4 development cycle. I suspect they will also apply this to 2.6 when there's enough deployment to make it worth money.

Why couldn't they have done us all a favor? (4, Funny)

JohnGrahamCumming (684871) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617204)

And asked for

$666

which would have made everything so clear? I mean it's only $33 difference. I hope when you buy these licenses you get a free T-Shirt with "Sucker!" in large letters on the front.

SCO needs to put up or shut up. If they think they have IP in Linux then show us. Dammit if the code is already in Linux it's already public so point to the code.

John.

Re:Why couldn't they have done us all a favor? (5, Insightful)

dook43 (660162) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617272)

Easy answer.

If they showed where the alleged code was, then it would take approximately 30 minutes for the contributor(s) to remove the affected code, re-release kernel version(s), etc.

How, then, would SCO be able to charge $699 for a license?

SCO vs the World: Next at bat GNU (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617206)

We had Red Hat enter the game yesterday. With SCO requiring money for a Linux license, I think it is time for GNU to enter the game and sue SCO for violating terms of the GPL.

I already bought a licence... (-1, Troll)

The1stMentor (637787) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617207)

Just paid for mine. It'll get more expensive as time goes on, might aswell get it now.

SCO can... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617211)

....bite my shiny metal ass.

I ante your offer, and raise you... (2, Insightful)

mopslik (688435) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617217)

SCO will be offering an introductory license price of $699 for a single CPU system through October 15th, 2003.

Linux users world-wide will be offering ass-kickings to SCO officials free of charge, for a non-determined length of time.

Oh man, if this works (2, Insightful)

cheezus (95036) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617220)

I need claim that MS stole my IP and put it in windows and then spam spam spam asking for my $700. If even a fraction of a fraction of a percent gave me money, i'd me a millionare

Proof of ownership (5, Interesting)

Platinum Dragon (34829) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617231)

SCO wants money. I want code, and I want proof that they can legally do this. No code? No proof? No money.

It's that simple.

I strongly suspect some major holders of Linux copyrights are about to jump in with Red Hat, demanding that SCO prove it can do this.

Windows! (2, Interesting)

nherc (530930) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617233)

Wow, that makes a Windows 2003 Server cluster look cheap! Windows 2003 Web Edition is only like $400. The standard edition is around $600.

The next Microsoft (2, Interesting)

ender1598 (266355) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617234)

This seems to be costing even more than Windows! Will this outrageous cost include all the support similar to Microsoft?

sco.slashdot.org (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617237)

it's about time.

I can't stand this crap anymore. I wouldn't even care if SCO *WINS* the lawsuit - if it makes these daily SCO stories disappear faster.

Truly amusing (3, Insightful)

Badgerman (19207) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617238)

I've seen Linux running on boxes that cost less than the liscence they want to sell.

I think this proves that A) either SCO is not serious and is just jacking around their stock or B) They're really, truly, clueless. Or possibly both.

How interesting this comes out during Linuxworld and right after the Red Hat announcement . . .

So SCO wants to make it CHEAPER to run windows? (0)

dBLiSS (513375) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617239)

So SCO wants to make it CHEAPER to run windows.. This will do wonders for Linux! ...Maybe Bill is behind this whole SCO thing..

*sigh* SCO killing Linux in my co. (4, Informative)

Ummagumma (137757) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617242)

I was talking to my boss about putting a linux file server in here, and was making decent headway recently. Now, somehow he heard of this SCO BS, and hes got cold(er) feet. My angle was the cost savings, but now thats gone, so no linux here for a while...

SCO: Looking Good (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617245)

Check SCO's stock graph for the past 6 months and you will see the truth. The stock market is ALWAYS right - by definition. Whiney little bitches on a computer nerd website are NOT.

Who should I believe, teams of informed and intelligent analysts who get paid to break down big business for the billionaire clients, or some geek in his mom's basement amped up on mountain dew? Please.

Domain names still available (5, Funny)

sheddd (592499) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617246)

bitemedarl.com

darlmcbridesucks.com

I haven't got enough time but I'll be happy to paypal someone $50 to set up a nice site with a messageboard... c'mon.

I have a deal for you too (5, Funny)

Hangtime (19526) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617250)

I own some IP inside the Linux Kernel, but won't disclose what it is either. I am lot more generous then SCO though and will only charge you $500 for a enterprise wide license for Linux. See that wasn't so hard now was it. Please forward your payments to Hangtime.

I wonder... (0)

double-oh three (688874) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617253)

I wonder if they expect anyone to pay at those prices? They might be able to force one company, but a whole lot more than that.

I'm safe since I'm using v0.97 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617255)

Whew! I feel so safe since I've been using the ultra stable "0.97" release from 1993 :-)

Thomas Dz.

Dear SCO. (5, Funny)

Civil_Disobedient (261825) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617258)

Dear SCO,

Thank you for the good laugh this afternoon. Our network administrator actually wet his pants, while the rest of us were in such hysterics and tears that work became all but unmanageable. I don't get all the bad press about you guys... I think you've got a great sense of humor.

Sincerely,
LinuxCorp.

phew! (1)

gimpimp (218741) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617262)

i've just paid for all my systems running linux...thanks sco!
once i've got rid of my 2.4gig Kazaa/FastTrack partition,i'll no longer feel like a theif. ;)

No problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617263)

The check is in the mail.

Ok (4, Insightful)

nebaz (453974) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617264)

extort (v) - to obtain from a person by force, intimidation, or undue or illegal power

Microsoft must be happy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617273)

They can now say they are cheeper than Linux!

...or fight it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617274)

I'll be willing to contribute half of that much to a legal fund for fighting SCO...
Who's with me? :)

oh man (2, Interesting)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617276)

And just think, that's the special 'introductory' price!

Linux may be free if my time is worth nothing, but my time sure ain't worth *that* much! :)

Business Tactics (3, Insightful)

Dr. Transparent (77005) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617278)

This is clearly just another attempt to strong-arm everyone into submission. By charging $600 they make it seem like "stealing" linux is a really serious offense.

Now someone just needs to add return of the money to everyone who purchases a copy to the end of a lawsuit.

*points to his manhood* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617285)

sco, kindly suck my cock.

No Linux Trademark recognition? (4, Interesting)

afniv (10789) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617287)

I notice how they list the trademarks at the bottom of the press release, except for Linux.

Can we just go back? (1)

vasqzr (619165) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617297)

can we go back to 2.2 or something before 2.4...and just re-write the kernel from there?

RedHat's 'Legal Fund' can pay for the clean room+developers.

LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617298)

Fuck off, Darl. You will get a bullet in your head before you get a penny out of me.

from the article (1)

Tirel (692085) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617302)

By purchasing a SCO Intellectual Property License, customers avoid infringement of SCO's intellectual property rights in Linux 2.4 and Linux 2.5 kernels. Because the SCO license authorizes run-time use only, customers also comply with the General Public License, under which Linux is distributed.

huh, we'll all be running 2.6 by then anyway ;x

SCO's people are raking it in w/stock sales... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617306)

Check it out...

http://biz.yahoo.com/t/s/scox.html

Seems like those inside SCO are reaping the benefits
of what was (1/2 a year ago) worthless paper.

Heh, SEC? Investigation? Bueller? Bueller? Anyone?

WTF (5, Interesting)

SuperHighImpact (463360) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617308)

an someone explain the logic behind this quote from the article?


Because the SCO license authorizes run-time use only, customers also comply with the General Public License, under which Linux is distributed.

If SCO loses, can you ask for a refund? (1)

rdewald (229443) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617309)

Now that we're all waiting for our day in small claims court to get a refund from hardware vendors for the Windows license. maybe we will be back in court at a later date asking for a refund on our SCO binary licenses.

I wonder, if you are using multiple kernels, say, one from 2.2 and one from 2.4, and you can boot with either, how could anyone (sans console access) really determine that you are using the 2.4 kernel?

Hey SCO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617310)



Suck It! HAHAHAHA!

Give em a call! (4, Informative)

SoCalChris (573049) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617313)

From the press release...

Linux users who are interested in additional information or purchasing an IP License for Linux should contact their local SCO sales representative or call SCO at 1-800-726-8649 or visit our web site

Pay? ha. (1)

compange (219444) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617316)

Those of us using Linux will pay, why? I laugh at thee SCO! Ha! Paying for software is so, 90's.

While you're at it.... (1)

Metroid72 (654017) | more than 10 years ago | (#6617321)

Linux User: There you go SCO, $699
SCO Rep: Cheching!!! $$$
**SCO REP Drops a bar of soap**
SCO Rep: BTW, while you're at it, would you mind dropping your pants and pass me that bar of soap...
Linux User: Sure, no pro....F%&*$... No Vaseline!!!

If I bought one of these licenses (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6617322)

and then later it was determined that SCO was wrong, can I sue them in return? Seems like it might be worth a 600 investment if I could develop a trumped up lawsuit later on.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...