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!

Embarrassing Dispatches From The SCO Front

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the what-does-this-guy-ritchie-know dept.

The Courts 715

An anonymous reader writes "Dennis Ritchie has acknowledged he with Ken Thompson wrote the code cited as 'proof' by SCO. This seems to fit perfectly with Bruce Perens' Analysis of SCO's Las Vegas Slide Show, and undermine Blake Stowell's claim 'At this point it's going to be his word against ours." Andreas Spengler writes "In the ongoing battle between SCO and the Linux community, German publisher Heise has shown that not only was the Linux implementation of the Berkeley Packet filter written outside of Caldera (now SCO), but that it was common practice there and at other companies to remove the BSD copyright notices from the internally used source code. In effect, SCO has proven publicly that they violated the BSD license." (Warning, article is in German.) Finally, a semi-anonymous reader writes "Learn all about how IBM's stomach will be roasted on a pyre of CDs at WeLovetheSCOInformationMinister."

cancel ×

715 comments

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

First post! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773527)

First post! I did it!

Re:First post! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773556)

That's great.
You win first prize on eBay.
A used penis-bird, in "mint" condition.

Does anyone actually care about SCO anymore? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773530)

Seriously. I know I'll be modded as a troll of flamebair or offtopic or overrated, but geez, I stopped caring a week after the whole thing started, and I probably won't care again until it's over and someone buys SCO and puts the whole issue to rest.

Re:Does anyone actually care about SCO anymore? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773560)

I know I'll be modded as a troll of flamebair or offtopic or overrated,

YOU FAILED IT!
you've been modded redundant

ahaahahahah!

Re:Does anyone actually care about SCO anymore? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773600)

hahahaha, what a loser

fp (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773531)

the end is near!

But which is better? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773532)

A> Ibm's stomach roasting

or

B> Sex with CmdrTaco's mare?

Word (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773534)

Word!

SCO's Website Down (5, Funny)

emacnabber (682085) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773542)

Something must be going on... I haven't been able to get there in the last 4 or 5 hours...

Re:SCO's Website Down (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773577)

It's currently being hit by a massive DDoS. Not all sobig.f viruses managed to collect the executable from their targets last night, but those who have are thrashing sco.com left right and centre.

Re:SCO's Website Down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773610)

Nice. Do you have URL to a news story to confirm this?

Re:SCO's Website Down (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773622)

Nah I was just trolling. still funny though.

Re:SCO's Website Down (3, Insightful)

johnw (3725) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773625)

If true, this is very unfortunate. The last thing the Open Source community needs in its fight against SCO (and indeed, in general) is to be associated with virus writers.

John

Re:SCO's Website Down (1)

Lispy (136512) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773636)

Well, of course you're right. But deep in my heart I'm LMAO. ;-)

Re:SCO's Website Down (5, Insightful)

Micah (278) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773678)

> It's currently being hit by a massive DDoS.

Ok, cool. But why would someone do that on a Saturday? Should have done it during the week when their customers might be more likely to try to get to their site.

Of course, this tactic opens up a massive internal conflict. :) On one hand, I really hate to think that people will associate the Linux community with this kind of thing. On the other hand, I couldn't be more happy to see these guys getting what they deserve.

Ultimately, since it's illegal and rather immature, we really should put our foots down against this type of technique. SCO will be crushed in the marketplace and in court soon enough. We don't need to take down their site for that to happen.

Re:SCO's Website Down (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773664)

Just a wild conspiracy theory.

Someone who holds a copyright to some part of the linux kernel has invoked the DMCA with SCO's upstream provider. Since SCO has been distributing the linux kernel in voilation of the GPL, thus violating this person's copyright.

Doesn't the DMCA give the power to turn off access to the Internet and ask questions later?

Re:SCO's Website Down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773675)

Someone who holds a copyright to some part of the linux kernel has invoked the DMCA with SCO's upstream provider. Since SCO has been distributing the linux kernel in voilation of the GPL, thus violating this person's copyright.

I like it!

Re:SCO's Website Down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773689)

Do you really think using a moronic law in this manner is just? How is anyone going to repeal the DMCA if it's invoked for stupid reasons by the same people that want to repeal it?

Re:SCO's Website Down (5, Interesting)

mm0mm (687212) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773715)

What's more intriguing to me is a surge [yahoo.com] of their stock for the last two days. How could this be possible, after they revealed their own stupidity by showing BSD-lisenced code as smoking guns for IBM/IP case? Who'd buy a pile of shit?

Maybe hundreds of millions of retarded private investors are visiting SCO.com and that's causing their servers down. hehe

time to play a new game! (5, Funny)

borgdows (599861) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773544)

Who wants to be a Darl Mc Bride?

- Question 1 -

Your best friend kindly lent you his new Toyota, but you have literally destroyed it in a accident you were entirely responsible.
What do you do?

[ ] a) You apologize.
[ ] b) You buy him a new car.
[ ] c) You sue him.
[ ] d) You sue him AND General Motors.

Answer :
If you choose D, congratulations! You could be SCO's CEO!

Re:time to play a new game! (0)

McBride, Darl (699981) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773648)

I, for one, welcome our new SCO CEO overlord! Oh wait, I'd be out of a job.. Better start offloading that stock at inflated prices while I still can.

DarlThink (5, Funny)

HopeOS (74340) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773649)

[ ] e) After taking possession, it became your car anyway; he owes you a new car.

-Hope

Re:time to play a new game! (1)

fr0z (658466) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773668)

And your prizes include:

1. A royal smackdown in public, administered by IBM;
2. A long stay at a federal pound-you-in-the-ass prison, courtesy of the SEC;
3. A lifelong career as a sore, whiny loser.

Err...forget the last one. Darl's got that career path right on track...

Re:time to play a new game! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773669)

Option E - The friend owes him a new car.

Re:time to play a new game! (2, Funny)

Dark Lord Seth (584963) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773693)

- Question 2 -

When you we're a little boy/girl, you greatest wish was to one day grow up and become:

  1. a fireman
  2. a policeman
  3. a superhero
  4. a fighter pilot
  5. a movie star
  6. a corrupt and unethical CEO of a dying company

Answer :
If you choose 6, congratulations! You could be SCO's CEO!

TOASTY!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773547)

toaster,toaster toaser, do you have toast in you yet i think [rowdyruff.net]
so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Im not a toaster!!!!!!!!!!And one more
thing........YOUR A TOASER!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND A COOKIE WITH MILK SOAGE
MILK!!!!!!!!!!AND A BUTT WITH POOP IN IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Awesome (4, Funny)

dtfinch (661405) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773549)

I already had the welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com bookmarked. This one is going right next to it.

Now if only he sold t-shirts and playing cards to go with it. Or perhaps diapers with the name McBride stamped on them. Honey, I think he needs a new McBride, this one is all poopy.

Re:Awesome (5, Funny)

beanyk (230597) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773575)

No, no, it's

"Honey, I think he needs a new daiper, this one is all McBridy."

Re:Awesome (1)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773584)

Honey, I think he needs a new McBride, this one is all poopy.

What, they're making McBrides that aren't poopy now?

Re:Awesome (4, Funny)

dtfinch (661405) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773630)

They start out clean like regular diapers, but they can hold 10 times as much before leaking to investors that they're full of crap.

Re:Awesome (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773594)

Re:Awesome (1, Funny)

eddy (18759) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773651)

How about when this is over and "if" SCO is destroyed, we could print up tshirts and give them to prison inmates. Here's what I'm thinking:

[ photochop of McBrides face, in weddingdress ]

Be My Bride, McBride!

Turn this shit off you bunch of nooberts. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773553)

Turn this shit off you bunch of nooberts.

Re:Turn this shit off you bunch of nooberts. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773576)

Stop using words your buddies invented on IRC.

no more SCO after the 10Q (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773559)

Well, it's getting to be that time...

As soon as they have to publish their 10Q everyone is going to see that SCO has little future revenue and that the execs have been engaged in wash-trades to pump and dump the stock. I'm mildly amused that the SEC and FTC haven't stepped in to prevent all the stock-holders from being royally screwed over. Nope... Nope... the government will step in only after everyone has been fucked and the execs are kicking it in Bermuda on everyone else's retirements.

sounds like justice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773596)

that's what they get for buying SCO stock

Kicking it (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773705)

I got a kick out of seeing 80's ghetto slang co-existing with dry white-bread terms like "10Q".

Mamma said knock you out! Momma said claim yourself as a dependant!

Kiss SCO's copyrights goodbye (4, Insightful)

AJWM (19027) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773561)

common practice there and at other companies to remove the BSD copyright notices from the internally used source code

That's a large part of what cost AT&T in the ATT/USL vs BSD case -- AT&T had incorporated BSD code without the BSD copyright notices, violating the BSD license and thus BSD's copyrights. IIRC, AT&T ended up paying BSD's legal costs in that trial.

Hey SCO, how do you feel about paying IBM's (and anyone else you were thinking of suing) legal costs?

Re:Kiss SCO's copyrights goodbye (3, Troll)

bwt (68845) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773684)


I would hope that the Berkeley Regents would not stand idly by when their IP is pirated like that. Hopefully they will sue SCO for copyright infringement.

Darl responds (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773687)

I don't know who this Dennis Ritchie guy is, but he obviously has no respect for SCO IP. As soon as my crack legal team locates him, he will be sorry!

Yours Truly,

Darl
Oh yeah, we are also implementing a new SCO trademark, "SCO owner of all IP post Genesis". What do you think?

Ritchie vs Torvalds: Celebrity showdown ... (5, Funny)

Rajesh Raman (115274) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773565)

Dennis got into the act after Linus called his code ugly: damn, them be fightin' words!

You know your a nerd when... (2, Funny)

wiggly-wiggly (682254) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773698)


...you think Linus Torvalds is a celebrity.

SCO (0, Troll)

Prien715 (251944) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773566)

Ah SCO. The Microsoft of Germany. Can we get a borg-like icon for them instead of the company logo?

Re:SCO (2, Informative)

arth1 (260657) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773645)

Ah SCO. The Microsoft of Germany.


Germany? Either you're trolling, or VERY VERY ignorant.
SCO is the old Caldera, and a US based company. Since they're in Utah now, and not California, they use SCO instead of Santa Cruz Operations, which the initials stand for.

To make the story short, Ken Thompson and Dennis Ritchie wrote the first PDP/10 and PDP/11 implementations of what was to become Unix in the early 70's, at Bell laboratories. Later, the property rights became part of AT&T, although widely circulated elsewhere, and code from others (like the University of Berkeley) made it into AT&T's Unix, as well as the other way around.
Later, Novell bought the Unix rights from AT&T, and then sold the licensing rights to Caldera, who later changed their name to SCO, the old name that belonged to (I believe) Caldera's predecessors.
Some big vendors like IBM, Sun, HP and SGI have had license agreements with either AT&T, Novell or SCO to have full use of the source code to produce their Unix or Unix-like versions, based on both their own work and the old Unix work.
Linux came along in the 80's (before the current SCO, though), and parts of Linux has indeed been copied from other and public sources. The key word here being "public".
Now SCO wants to collect license fees for everything that is Unix or Unix-like -- or, as many speculate, to either make so much noise that a big company (IBM) buys them out, or they make the claims in order to make the stocks go temporarily up, so they can bleed off inflated stock for personal gain. I won't speculate as to the true motives, but either way, few people in the IT business find the claims anything but ridiculous, considering how much code has flowed back and forth in the open, and considering that AT&T lost a similar lawsuit against BSD a long time ago.
It's much more complicated than that, but that's a good start.

Regards,
--
*Art

Re:SCO (1)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773700)

Linux came along in the 80's (before the current SCO, though)

Linux didn't start until the 90s. It depends on what you mean by the "current SCO". If you mean the company that exists as a merger of Caldera/SCO and is owned by scam artists, then yes.

GNU/First Post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773567)

I first used GNU/Unix and C in 1978. I rediscovered GNU/Unix in 1987. I have administered GNU/BSD,
GNU/Ultrix, GNU/HP/UX, GNU/SunOS 4.x, GNU/SunOS 5.x and more flavours of GNU/Linux than I can
remember although I started out using GNU/SLS with kernel 0.9.x.
GNU/Linux has progressed so much in such a relatively short amount of time that I am in awe at
where it is today.

To GNU/gentoo. Then I remembered someone on cola mentioning a new distro named GNU/gentoo.

Once this stage has been reached GNU/gentoo is as easy to maintain as any GNU/Linux distro I know.

There is excellent documentation on the GNU/gentoo website. There is an excellent GNU/document
describing the USE variable which should be read before installing GNU/gentoo.

Apart from everything being compiled from source so that it is optimised for your hardware and the
USE variable to tailor the type of system you want, GNU/gentoo has another little gem. This is the
GNU/gentoo init system. It is based on the excellent GNU/SYSV init system but enhances it and
makes GNU/gentoo a class apart from any other GNU/*nix system I have administered. To be brief,
GNU/gentoo init GNU/scripts allow you to specify GNU/dependencies. There is no need to GNU/worry
about S script numbering as in GNU/SYSV or where GNU/you place the startup code in GNU/BSD type
GNU/init scripts (I'm referring to GNU/BSD 4.3 here. I don't GNU/know if the free GNU/BSD's have
changed GNU/things).

To summarise: GNU/gentoo is a very special GNU/Linux distro. It may not GNU/be for the the
GNU/Linux GNU/neophyte (I'm sure GNU/someone posted to GNU/cola recently that GNU/gentoo was their
first GNU/Linux GNU/install) although if GNU/you read the GNU/docs and GNU/understand what is
going on GNU/gentoo is an excellent GNU/distro.

GNU/Support GNU/is GNU/excellent GNU/via GNU/the GNU/gentoo GNU/forums GNU/and GNU/mailing
GNU/lists.

I'll keep it simple... (-1)

chrisgeleven (514645) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773568)

SCO sucks, Linux rules, and the GPL is God

Wow (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773586)

You must be a real winner with the ladies.

Sounds like it's time... (5, Interesting)

TWX (665546) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773572)

...for some software developers whose code was misappropriated by a certain publicly traded company to start filing cease-and-desists against that company for violation of copyright. I wonder how much of SCO's products would be unsellable under such conditions.

This isn't to say that everyone else is perfect, but then again, everyone else hasn't tried to benefit from open source licenses only to turn around and bash the concept while still using the technology that they gained from such licensing.

Re:Sounds like it's time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773657)

Sounds like it's time for some software developers whose code was misappropriated by a certain publicly traded company to start filing cease-and-desists against that company for violation of copyright

Did you really mean This company? [redhat.com]

Re:Sounds like it's time... (4, Insightful)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773673)

start filing cease-and-desists against that company for violation of copyright.
Perhaps. But perhaps it is wiser to attack SCO's own case on its merits or lack thereof, rather than countersue.

We don't want Linux or Open Source software in general to be referred to as 'that free software that everone and his dog is sueing one another over'. John Q User may not care much about the lawsuits, but corporations certainly do, and well they should. If Linux gets a reputation for having all sorts of (potential) legal issues, that will hurt the OSS movement in the long run, even if some of the lawsuits are against scumbag outfits such as SCO. The only group that had the right idea was RedHat, who filed suit against SCO to stop the FUD.

Obvious (3, Informative)

metatruk (315048) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773578)

It's starting to become painfully obvious that indeed SCO is completely full of shit, and will stop at no ends to destroy Linux's image.

I think at this point it would be a good idea for the slashdot community as well as everyone else in open source to start contacting the FTC [slashdot.org]

oops (1)

metatruk (315048) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773592)

I meant to link to this comment [slashdot.org]

When is Slashdot... (5, Funny)

chrisgeleven (514645) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773580)

Going to sell a deck of cards showing the faces of SCO management and lawyers?

Re:When is Slashdot... (1)

Alien Being (18488) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773690)

lemme do some cypherin...

Twofaces gozinta 52 cards 26 times. That ain't so many. Let's go a feuding... it's the Redhatfields aginst the McBrides.

GNU/First Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773581)

I first used GNU/Unix and C in 1978. I rediscovered GNU/Unix in 1987. I have administered GNU/BSD,
GNU/Ultrix, GNU/HP/UX, GNU/SunOS 4.x, GNU/SunOS 5.x and more flavours of GNU/Linux than I can
remember although I started out using GNU/SLS with kernel 0.9.x.
GNU/Linux has progressed so much in such a relatively short amount of time that I am in awe at
where it is today.

To GNU/gentoo. Then I remembered someone on cola mentioning a new distro named GNU/gentoo.

Once this stage has been reached GNU/gentoo is as easy to maintain as any GNU/Linux distro I know.

There is excellent documentation on the GNU/gentoo website. There is an excellent GNU/document
describing the USE variable which should be read before installing GNU/gentoo.

Apart from everything being compiled from source so that it is optimised for your hardware and the
USE variable to tailor the type of system you want, GNU/gentoo has another little gem. This is the
GNU/gentoo init system. It is based on the excellent GNU/SYSV init system but enhances it and
makes GNU/gentoo a class apart from any other GNU/*nix system I have administered. To be brief,
GNU/gentoo init GNU/scripts allow you to specify GNU/dependencies. There is no need to GNU/worry
about S script numbering as in GNU/SYSV or where GNU/you place the startup code in GNU/BSD type
GNU/init scripts (I'm referring to GNU/BSD 4.3 here. I don't GNU/know if the free GNU/BSD's have
changed GNU/things).

To summarise: GNU/gentoo is a very special GNU/Linux distro. It may not GNU/be for the the
GNU/Linux GNU/neophyte (I'm sure GNU/someone posted to GNU/cola recently that GNU/gentoo was their
first GNU/Linux GNU/install) although if GNU/you read the GNU/docs and GNU/understand what is
going on GNU/gentoo is an excellent GNU/distro.

GNU/Support GNU/is GNU/excellent GNU/via GNU/the GNU/gentoo GNU/forums GNU/and GNU/mailing
GNU/lists

Will they (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773582)

Will they be able to get *BSD out of it's deathbed to battle SCO?

Hypocricy (4, Insightful)

etymxris (121288) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773583)

Not sure the exact quote, but when people pointed out the fallacious examples, SCO said, "We think we know our own code."

However, their claims contradict this. Crucial to their suit is the fact that they did not know that there was UNIX code in Linux prior to all this litigation. If they did know that, then they willingly released their code under the GPL.

Perhaps they've learned a bunch about their code in the past few months, but if their developers did stuff like ripping out BSD advertising clauses many years ago, I don't see how the new management would be privy to it.

This can't have been well planned... (1)

Badanov (518690) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773591)

It had to be a crack/pot party when they conceived of the plan to roll over Linux.

Just unbelievable. Career/industrial suicide. Not pretty...

But SCO's main lawsuit isn't about this code. (3, Interesting)

Krapangor (533950) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773595)

They just presented it as an example for code coping. And indeed this code was copied although not from the SCO codebase. But this really doesn't matter. Their main point is their far reaching definition of derivative works.
Personally I'm rather surprised about the naivity of US developers. Do they really don't notice what it's all about. This is not just about Linux and OSS any longer. If SCO succeeds with their far reaching definition of derivative works than this would crush all US based software develoment.
Any jerk could argue that by just using a interface/library you created a "derivative work". Device drivers will be owned by OS producers useless you got special contracts. This will blow up OOP - because when you create a child class from a class in a library you create a "derivate work" of this kind. This applies to most programs using the java gui.

You might say know: Well, that's because SCO's claims are fucked and rubbish. Therefore these strange implications. But remember that this is a lawsuit in the US. You can get several millions of dollars for being too stupid to open a McDonalds coffee cup there.

More likely.. (1)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773633)

SCO will lose, and be bankrupt because of it.

IBM will win.
SCO will have nothing left to complain about. After they are done with IBM, (or IBM is done with them), one of two things will happen.

SCO will be gone.

SCO will start suing other linux companies, at which point a whole pile of BSD and Linux developers will, for the first time in history, join together in one of the largest class action software lawsuits ever, and accuse SCO of stealing code from both of them.

Re:But SCO's main lawsuit isn't about this code. (5, Informative)

FsG (648587) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773676)

I'm sick of people using the coffee cup story as an example of frivolous lawsuits in the U.S., when there are so many real frivolous lawsuits to cite.

The coffee cup story has been thrown around so much that few people have heard the facts as they really happened [lectlaw.com] . The McDonalds coffee was not only hot, it was scalding, and capable of almost instantaneous destruction of skin, flesh and muscle. Worse yet, the paper cup it was in was capable of easily collapsing and spilling the contents. Because of its insanely high temperature, the coffee was a real danger.

Google translation of the Heise article (1, Funny)

yokem_55 (575428) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773604)

SCO vs. Linux: The time of the conspiracy theories In history around SCO and the source code from SCO existence, rich at idioms and twists, possibly transferred after Linux, new turns are to be reported. With the conspiracy theory that Microsoft behind SCO stands, it associates the theory that the refusal of the requirements of SCO is a only one, well camouflaged campaign of IBM. Thus the InfoWorld reported that SCO boss sees Darl McBride IBM as an author of the dirt campaign. IBM caused Novell to place itself against SCO meant McBride, employed long years with Novell as a director/conductor of the Netware Embedded division (NEST). IBM has talks floated to complain against SCO means it in addition. Also Eric Raymond of the open SOURCE initiative would stand on the pay roll IBMs, which would finance besides the Free software Foundation and thus the lawyer evenly Moglen, continued to implement Darl McBride. While IBM as talk has the accusations lapidary for nonsense explained and about Novell none came, Eric Raymond raffte itself up to send an open letter at Darl McBride. In it answered in the negative Raymond by IBM to be paid did not deny however IBM to have helped. Altogether Raymond appealed to the reason of the SCO upper one with an allusion to the insight ability of Darth Vader : "you have the choice. Remove the dark helmet and converse with us like a human nature, or you continue your way, which lets bad times fear for us, however you and the entire SCO Topmanagement into the ruin will completely surely float." Off the roaring star Wars Rhetorik Eric Raymond used the open letter, in order to make attentive on a Petition of the Linux Community, which were read out on the SCOForum. In their the SCO Group is requested to give up and all inkriminierten places in the SOURCE code call the confrontation course. In response the Linux programmers want to assure to revise all questionable places: "if right right-hurt-hurting that code in the Linux Kernel to be present should become, we it remove, because our community would not like to have a part of this Kernels." The polite request will possibly remain without answer, because SCO with first, on which SCOForum published proofs could not convince. Apart from the problem of the "Greek" code is in the meantime the Berkeley presented by SCO pack filter (BPF) into the center of the interest moved. The SCO example originates from the file/sys/net/bpf.c, which is available here. In the cutout shown by SCO is missing the BSD Lizenzbedigungen, which is to be always called in accordance with BSD license: "Redistributions OF SOURCE code must retain the above copyright notice, this cunning OF conditions and the following more disclaimer." Because they are missing, code experts go such as Bruce Perens and Greg Lehey of the fact out that SCO with the example proved that the license conditions were removed agreement-adversely. Thus a classical self-gate could be present, particularly since other possibilities are impossible. Like that the programmer of the version used in Linux was employed by BPF, Jay trainingist, with Caldera, wrote however the Clean Room variant of BPF before its time with Caldera. From the circles of former Caldera developers several persons can remember that in the SCO Trees in many places with the BSD code the copyright notes were missing. The procedure to cut "redundant" licenses off seems to have practiced also at other companies. Thus heise on-line developers to, that experienced the "technology" at Siemens Nixdorf, announced themselves. If the proof situation in the case SCO should confirm itself, then the code Hunter of this company excavated a proof, which occupies the exact opposite of the accusations by SCO. At least in the case of BPF SCO the power POINT presentation would not only have ( when ppt , when pdf ) separate the whole code make public, in order to weaken the suspicion.

dagnamit (2)

yokem_55 (575428) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773617)

SCO vs. Linux: The time of the conspiracy theories

In history around SCO and the source code from SCO existence, rich at idioms and twists, possibly transferred after Linux, new turns are to be reported. With the conspiracy theory that Microsoft behind SCO stands, it associates the theory that the refusal of the requirements of SCO is a only one, well camouflaged campaign of IBM. Thus the InfoWorld reported that SCO boss sees Darl McBride IBM as an author of the dirt campaign. IBM caused Novell to place itself against SCO meant McBride, employed long years with Novell as a director/conductor of the Netware Embedded division (NEST). IBM has talks floated to complain against SCO means it in addition. Also Eric Raymond of the open SOURCE initiative would stand on the pay roll IBMs, which would finance besides the Free software Foundation and thus the lawyer evenly Moglen, continued to implement Darl McBride.

While IBM as talk has the accusations lapidary for nonsense explained and about Novell none came, Eric Raymond raffte itself up to send an open letter at Darl McBride. In it answered in the negative Raymond by IBM to be paid did not deny however IBM to have helped. Altogether Raymond appealed to the reason of the SCO upper one with an allusion to the insight ability of Darth Vader : "you have the choice. Remove the dark helmet and converse with us like a human nature, or you continue your way, which lets bad times fear for us, however you and the entire SCO Topmanagement into the ruin will completely surely float."

Off the roaring star Wars Rhetorik Eric Raymond used the open letter, in order to make attentive on a Petition of the Linux Community, which were read out on the SCOForum. In their the SCO Group is requested to give up and all inkriminierten places in the SOURCE code call the confrontation course. In response the Linux programmers want to assure to revise all questionable places: "if right right-hurt-hurting that code in the Linux Kernel to be present should become, we it remove, because our community would not like to have a part of this Kernels."

The polite request will possibly remain without answer, because SCO with first, on which SCOForum published proofs could not convince. Apart from the problem of the "Greek" code is in the meantime the Berkeley presented by SCO pack filter (BPF) into the center of the interest moved. The SCO example originates from the file/sys/net/bpf.c, which is available here. In the cutout shown by SCO is missing the BSD Lizenzbedigungen, which is to be always called in accordance with BSD license: "Redistributions OF SOURCE code must retain the above copyright notice, this cunning OF conditions and the following more disclaimer." Because they are missing, code experts go such as Bruce Perens and Greg Lehey of the fact out that SCO with the example proved that the license conditions were removed agreement-adversely.

Thus a classical self-gate could be present, particularly since other possibilities are impossible. Like that the programmer of the version used in Linux was employed by BPF, Jay trainingist, with Caldera, wrote however the Clean Room variant of BPF before its time with Caldera. From the circles of former Caldera developers several persons can remember that in the SCO Trees in many places with the BSD code the copyright notes were missing. The procedure to cut "redundant" licenses off seems to have practiced also at other companies. Thus heise on-line developers to, that experienced the "technology" at Siemens Nixdorf, announced themselves. If the proof situation in the case SCO should confirm itself, then the code Hunter of this company excavated a proof, which occupies the exact opposite of the accusations by SCO. At least in the case of BPF SCO the power POINT presentation would not only have ( when ppt , when pdf ) separate the whole code make public, in order to weaken the suspicion.

translation got it right! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773708)

I'm sure many people, not just Moglen, would like to "implement" McBride. farm and other sharp implements

Link to the fish (2, Informative)

AJWM (19027) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773605)

Here's the [altavista.com]
babelfish translation of the German article.

Now, can somebody please post a link that translates from babelfish English to real English?

Re:Link to the fish (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773656)

Now, can somebody please post a link that translates from babelfish English to real English?
Approximately, are you whom you speak what? privately, I find babelfish translation clearness, can rely on completely completely!

Simple Version (5, Informative)

ZPO (465615) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773608)

The whole SCO mess is really pretty simple when you think about it.

Through the IPO and such a bunch of lawyers ended up with a large interest in Caldera/SCO. When they realized they didn't have any revenue from product sales they decided to: A) Find another possible source of revenue. B) Increase the value of their near worthless stock holdings.

So, SCO needed to find a company that A) had a Unix license with them. B) Was a large player in the Linux space. C) (most importantly) Wouldn't blink at the cost of buying them. IBM looked like an attractive target.

Unfortuantely for SCO, IBM didn't blink. They just laughed, gave them a lollipop and told them to run along. Since the stock was ticking up the SCO execs/lawyers (same people) are playing it to the hilt and trying to create an impression that they might be gaining some huge revenues soon. Look what its done to their stock. Also, look at who is suddenly selling stock in SCO.

Pretty soon IBM will give them the bitch-slap they so truly deserve and likely buy their assets pennies on the dollar at a bankruptcy sale.

Until then, lets just recognize this whole fiasco for what it is. Its a pump-and-dump on the stock. Nothing more, nothing less.

Is it just me? (2, Funny)

Lord_Dweomer (648696) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773609)

Or are the PR releases and subsequent disproving of them getting more and more ridiculous? I mean, come on.....this REALLY needs to have a series of cartoons done on Pennyarcade.

Re:Is it just me? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773635)

I don't think Tycho and Gabe care enough to make a cartoon out of this. A lesson that all of us should take to heart.

This adds weight to my hypothesis (5, Insightful)

twelveinchbrain (312326) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773613)

You may recall that recently SCO declared the GPL invalid. I believe the real reason why they did that is not, as many believe, because they continued to distribute Linux after they announced their lawsuit, but instead because they have actual Linux code inside their own SCO Unix. So far, this is just a hypothesis, but I think it best explains their action.

If in fact they have copied BSD code in violation of the BSD, then it's very plausible that they have copied GNU/Linux code in violation of the GPL.

SCO doesn't care (4, Insightful)

starseeker (141897) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773614)

Continuing to cover this is not particularly useful. SCO won't be bothered by anything so trivial as facts. They are out for blood and maximum damage, and no possible response from anyone is going to stop them now. They will have to be defeated, but no action we take or not take will do anything significant. They know they aren't popular and don't care in the slightest. They may even know they are wrong, but that won't stop them from trying to use the system to get $$.

If we want to do something interesting, let's look ahead to how we might lobby and/or structure the GPL 3.0 to fight this kind of crap. Maybe create an auditing trail software package people can use to know not just the origin of a piece of code, but how it is used and what code is based off of it. Also give more press to the idea of mutual defense clauses in licenses - kind of the counterweight to the cross licensing of IP between companies. Let's think of some positive steps we might take in the future to make our position so obviously strong that anyone short of an SCO type wouldn't waste their time. I think someone who earlier said SCO really believes it is actually impossible for open source to produce what it has was right on the money, and with that settled in their own minds SCO goes into attack mode. There is nothing that can be done about such attitudes but fight. For the rest of the (semi) sane world however, making our position more obviously strong might be good. Let's focus there, and wait until SCO does something that we can actually respond to before rewarding any more of their tantrums.

Re:SCO doesn't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773655)

Covering SCO may not be useful, but it's very fun.

I love seeing SCO stories because I know it's always going to be very surreal and absurd and humorous. SCO really does remind me of Iraq during the last battle. "Linux users and open source developers are cowering in fear and commiting suicide at the gates of Germany. We are setting those open source infidels on fire!".

Babelfish of the German article (-1, Redundant)

Kenshiro70 (610599) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773615)

SCO vs. Linux: The time of the conspiracy theories

In history around SCO and the source code from SCO existence, rich at idioms and twists, possibly transferred after Linux, new turns are to be reported. With the conspiracy theory that Microsoft behind SCO stands, it associates the theory that the refusal of the requirements of SCO is a only one, well camouflaged campaign of IBM. Thus the InfoWorld reported that SCO boss sees Darl McBride IBM as an author of the dirt campaign. IBM caused Novell to place itself against SCO meant McBride, employed long years with Novell as a director/conductor of the Netware Embedded division (NEST). IBM has talks floated to complain against SCO means it in addition. Also Eric Raymond of the open SOURCE initiative would stand on the pay roll IBMs, which would finance besides the Free software Foundation and thus the lawyer evenly Moglen, continued to implement Darl McBride.

While IBM as talk has the accusations lapidary for nonsense explained and about Novell none came, Eric Raymond raffte itself up to send an open letter at Darl McBride. In it answered in the negative Raymond by IBM to be paid did not deny however IBM to have helped. Altogether Raymond appealed to the reason of the SCO upper one with an allusion to the insight ability of Darth Vader : "you have the choice. Remove the dark helmet and converse with us like a human nature, or you continue your way, which lets bad times fear for us, however you and the entire SCO Topmanagement into the ruin will completely surely float."

Off the roaring star Wars Rhetorik Eric Raymond used the open letter, in order to make attentive on a Petition of the Linux Community, which were read out on the SCOForum. In their the SCO Group is requested to give up and all inkriminierten places in the SOURCE code call the confrontation course. In response the Linux programmers want to assure to revise all questionable places: "if right right-hurt-hurting that code in the Linux Kernel to be present should become, we it remove, because our community would not like to have a part of this Kernels."

The polite request will possibly remain without answer, because SCO with first, on which SCOForum published proofs could not convince. Apart from the problem of the "Greek" code is in the meantime the Berkeley presented by SCO pack filter (BPF) into the center of the interest moved. The SCO example originates from the file/sys/net/bpf.c, which is available here. In the cutout shown by SCO is missing the BSD Lizenzbedigungen, which is to be always called in accordance with BSD license: "Redistributions OF SOURCE code must retain the above copyright notice, this cunning OF conditions and the following more disclaimer." Because they are missing, code experts go such as Bruce Perens and Greg Lehey of the fact out that SCO with the example proved that the license conditions were removed agreement-adversely.

Thus a classical self-gate could be present, particularly since other possibilities are impossible. Like that the programmer of the version used in Linux was employed by BPF, Jay trainingist, with Caldera, wrote however the Clean Room variant of BPF before its time with Caldera. From the circles of former Caldera developers several persons can remember that in the SCO Trees in many places with the BSD code the copyright notes were missing. The procedure to cut "redundant" licenses off seems to have practiced also at other companies. Thus heise on-line developers to, that experienced the "technology" at Siemens Nixdorf, announced themselves. If the proof situation in the case SCO should confirm itself, then the code Hunter of this company excavated a proof, which occupies the exact opposite of the accusations by SCO. At least in the case of BPF SCO the power POINT presentation would not only have ( when ppt , when pdf ) separate the whole code make public, in order to weaken the suspicion.

SCO's website (0, Redundant)

loom (35551) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773620)


A little off-topic but :

Am I the only one who can't reach SCO's website today ?

Re:SCO's website (1)

cayfer (563445) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773661)

it is not only sco.com and caldera.com. sco.de and sco.it dont respond either. the urls resolve though... it seems that they're dropping incoming http requests

Re:SCO's website (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773666)

Not working for me either.

Re:SCO's website (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773667)

I read on another forum it's a sobig.f DDoS happening. After looking like a big fizzer last night the executable that seems to have done nothing is working its magic

and redundant (1)

brokencomputer (695672) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773694)

The first comment thread explains why sco.com is down.

2 hours late (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773623)

You were almost two hours late with my daily noon SCO bashing story! I was trapped here for TWO whole hours clicking refresh furiously as I awaited my noon story!

Oh the horror...

WHAT???!?! (2, Funny)

Ayanami Rei (621112) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773628)

"Building your company on a GPL license is like building your enterprise software on quicksand. Everybody is scared to death that their own IP is going to get sucked into this GPL machine and get destroyed."
-Carl McBride

::slack-jawed, agape stare::

Let me get this straight. He made an analogy about building a company on a LICENSE, to writing software in quicksand.

I think what he meant to say was "Building your enterprise software using a GPL license is like building your company on quicksand" or something like that but he is so full of shit he can't get a coherent analogy to the reporter. Didn't the copy editor of that story pick that up, or do they want him to look like a fool.

I'm not going to even address the drawn out, oft-repeated FUD of the second part of his statement.

I'll post more comments about some of the quotes on http://www.anerispress.com/wltsim/ [anerispress.com] as I get a chance.

Carl, you're comedic gold. Let's keep the hits coming.

Re:WHAT???!?! (1)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773682)

You meant Darl, right?

bunghole (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773637)

gnaa reccomends anuses cheeses

shit or get off the pot (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773639)

At this point I guess we can assume we aren't going to hear from SGI or Marcelo. I can't blame them this is a legal issue and they aren't trying to pump up any stock prices so there is no reason to speak publicly from their points of view.
What we have is code that is definitely not "line-by-line copying". It is either New Unix code modified to fit into Linux or Old Unix code that was updated to work in Linux in a way similar (but not the same) as how the same thing was done in New Unix.

Cutting Unix code and pasting it into Linux would be a violation of copyright but that isn't what happened here. Is using Unix code as a model to make a Linux function a violation of copyright?

Another point is that given two 5 million line collections of code that do the same things, written by people trained the same ways and potentially building from the same base, our common sense ideas of what can be a coincidence and what can't may not apply.

Buy anyway, SCO has repeatedly asserted that there is line-by-line copying from New Unix into Linux. They gave two examples that clearly are not that. They have also shown that they can show examples of disputed Linux code without violating their "contracts". The question for SCO is "You keep saying you have line-by-line copying. Where is it?"

Wonder what IBM's code analysis shows (1)

jimshep (30670) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773642)

It seems that IBM has access to the source code of both UNIX SysV (for its AIX product) and Linux. I would think that by now IBM has performed an analysis of both codes to determine what possible infringements, if any, exist. I wonder if IBM will either state that there are no infringements prior to trial or begin submitting patches to rid the Linux source of potential infringements that they have discovered.

evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773643)

mr. bill says to sco that they get money
if they make linux look bad. this has been
just a bad publicity trick. if sco goes
down it's worth it.

Why are we getting angry at them? (3, Insightful)

fr0z (658466) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773644)

I'm just busy laughing my ass off...

But seriously, all this talk of "Let's sue SCO! Issue them C&D letters!" will bring us nowhere. Let them appear like the rabid dogs that they are and let IBM and Redhat smack them down...

Then after they're done, we can hunt them like ducks and spammers. [slashdot.org]

In the meantime, we should focus on raising the profile of Linux. In a calm, Zen-like manner, unlike SCO's behaviour. This is a hearts-and-minds campaign, people...let's get to work...

I Love Babelfish (4, Funny)

sabat (23293) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773650)


I love babelfish:

Altogether Raymond appealed to the reason of the SCO upper one with an allusion to the insight ability of Darth Vader: "you have the choice. Remove the dark helmet and converse with us like a human nature, or you continue your way, which lets bad times fear for us, however you and the entire SCO Topmanagement into the ruin will completely surely float."

Re:So whats the problem???? (1)

botzi (673768) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773683)

"you have the choice. Remove the dark helmet and converse with us like a human nature, or you continue your way, which lets bad times fear for us, however you and the entire SCO Topmanagement into the ruin will completely surely float."

You should simply replace Darth Vader with Yoga and eveyrthing fits perfectly!!!!!

Re:I Love Babelfish (1)

arth1 (260657) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773701)

Altogether Raymond appealed to the reason of the SCO upper one with an allusion to the insight ability of Darth Vader: "you have the choice. Remove the dark helmet and converse with us like a human nature, or you continue your way, which lets bad times fear for us, however you and the entire SCO Topmanagement into the ruin will completely surely float."


This is clearly a wrong attribution to Darth Vader, when any lexical analysis will clearly show that it written by Yoda was.

Anyhow, it's not a statement with any kind of impact whatsoever. SCO's executives are American, and culturally any kind of communication that isn't polite, or tries to make suggestions, is met with a smiling stare. If it was meant as a real request to SCO's management to start communicating, it must be phrased very differently. Openness or allegories will invariably be seen as rude and ignored.

Regards,
--
*Art

Sometimes the Babelfish is too damned funny... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773663)

Altogether Raymond appealed to the reason of the SCO upper one with an allusion to the insight ability of Darth Vader : "you have the choice. Remove the dark helmet and converse with us like a human nature, or you continue your way, which lets bad times fear for us, however you and the entire SCO Topmanagement into the ruin will completely surely float."
Why like Yoda does this sound... hrrrmmm?

Anyone have any idea what ESR really said?

Re:Sometimes the Babelfish is too damned funny... (2, Informative)

LordKaT (619540) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773671)

He said this [newsforge.com]

hrm. (1)

pb (1020) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773665)

So what is SCO liable for now, is anyone keeping track? I count fraud, quite possibly extortion, and also slander and libel, especially regarding the ridiculous conspiracy theory statements regarding IBM controlling the IT industry's response to this.

Don't you think that if IBM could have controlled the IT industry's response to *anything*, we'd all be running OS/2 now?

Darl McBride quote from the future (4, Funny)

geophile (16995) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773679)

"You want fries with that?"

Re:Darl McBride quote from the future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773691)

Or, "yes, bitchmaster, I'll be happy to toss your salad."

"violated the BSD license"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773688)

> In effect, SCO has proven publicly that they violated the BSD license.

Actually, this would be a criminal violation of copyright law.

To knowingly remove the mark from a work prior to distribution expressly demonstrates "intent to infringe". Bizerkly should sue SCO for statutory, per copy, infringement.

The event happened in Germany, so the rules may be different there. But, intent is intent, and it doesn't matter where that intent was first formed. Just 'cus you cut the illegal DVDs in Malaysia doesn't mean you're untouchable in the US for copies you've distributed there.

They say CA has a budget problem. We'll maybe SCO can fund the University for a few years. That's gotta help, a little.

Re:"violated the BSD license"? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6773707)

> The event happened in Germany

Huh? SCO/Caldera is Utah-based. No one is in Germany except for Heise, the news outfit.

"Funny" (2, Insightful)

ergonal (609484) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773704)

Does anyone else find it amusing that lately a lot of the high-ranking posts on SCO topics have been "Funny" ones? Is it just because there's nothing left to talk about except SCO mockery? :P

BUSTED! (1)

josepha48 (13953) | more than 11 years ago | (#6773712)

I guess this means that BSD could sue SCO then for violating their license?

One could say that SCO has been busted, and that it is only a matter of time before they are investigated. So who does one file a complaint with about a company?? Better Business Bureau or Federal Trade Commision or both? Or is there a better place?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?