×

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 Says It Has No Plan To Sue Linux Companies

CowboyNeal posted more than 10 years ago | from the one-hundred-eighty-degrees dept.

Caldera 478

cadfael writes "SCO is reported in the Age as saying they 'Have no plans to sue Linux companies...' This seems to contradict the earlier statements of Chris Sontag. This story also points out how Canopy owns stakes in several other Linux companies, including Linux Networx wheich supplied the supercomputer for Lawrence Livermore Nat Lab. One begins to wonder if the reality of their situation has become clear to them?" Maybe, just maybe, this is the beginning of the end of this mess.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

478 comments

gnaa sues you (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821307)

in leftwing russia, the gnaa sues YOU!

Timeline of events? (5, Interesting)

JessLeah (625838) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821311)

I'd like to see a timeline of events in this whole SCO debacle. Should make for some interesting reading. Skimming back through a billion SlashDot stories would be a pain.

Re:Timeline of events? (5, Insightful)

User8201 (573530) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821339)

Basic timeline:

1. Caldera goes bankrupt

Now they're trying to change it to this:

1. Caldera goes bankrupt.
a. Sells out, changes name to SCO
b. Threatens IBM
c. Threatens Linux Users
d. ...

But in the end, they're done for.

Re:Timeline of events? (4, Interesting)

hdparm (575302) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821456)

Strangely enough, in this case there is an:

e. Profit

which Darl and other SCO executives made by inflating share value through FUD. I wonder if they'll be left alone to enjoy $$$ after this saga is over.

No, no, no... (2, Funny)

MickLinux (579158) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821549)

... Clearly, they won't be allowed to remain in the US. Therefore, they're going to have to fly to some South Seas island with good internet connectivity. Then, when they get there, they're of course going to find that there are only two real tech jobs available to invest in... ... spam, and internet worms to DoS the blacklists.

Well, you gotta invest money, don't you? You can't just have it sitting there... you have a right to make money, don't you? Isn't that what America is all about?

I'd say the internet is about done for.

There -- I've managed to compress three recent stories (well, four or five, really) into one.

And all, without mentioning how they do it in Soviet Russia. Because in Soviet Russia, they have a different method of dealing with companies like SCO, and it ain't pretty, and it ain't good either.

SCO must die. (1, Interesting)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821426)

So, they're not going to sue any Linux companies, but they're still going to try and charge all companies that use Linux these absurd liscensing fees? Oh yea, that makes sense.

If there is any justice in the world, they will be held accountable for all the crap they've said since the beginning.

Re:Timeline of events? (5, Informative)

screenrc (670781) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821506)

For the legal timeline, go straight to
the United States District Court, For the
District of Utah. The dossier [uscourts.gov]
is online.

Re:Timeline of events? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821539)

NO DEALS.

These idiots tried to destroy EVERYTHING we've worked for in the last 10 years.

BURY THEM

If nothing else, they've set back the Open Source movement a couple of years - so many corporate organizations have ditched Linux because of this BS.

AKA (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821313)

We're poor and don't have the money to sue very many people, it's just a threat. Please buy us.

Sue Linux companies? No! (3, Insightful)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821542)

Threaten to sue Linux companies. Yes!

Threatening to sue other companies pumps up the stock price, allows Canopy to use the inflated stock price for asset shuffling (skimming big profits), allows senior management to sell shares at a big profit, builds up our press clippings book which is very impressive to PHBs.

Actually suing involves bothersome discovery procedures where you have to actually show some sort of cause for you action. Where's the fun in that?

SCO always tells the truth! (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821316)

SCO lies about everything; why wouldn't they lie about this?

Re:SCO always tells the truth! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821366)

It's not a lie, you mischaracterizing clod. It's just an unlikely version of a truth.

They don't have plans to sue anyone. Their plan is for everyone to spontaniously acquiesce and begin showering them with money. And then they plan to romp through the magical faerie garden on their "red-gold and diamond" Segways where the monkeys poop french vanilla ice cream and Bronson Pinchot gives everyone cocaine boosted hummers.

And while it's only slightly less likely than the proverbial monkeys flying out of my butt, it's not *exactly* a complete fabrication.

Re:SCO always tells the truth! (1)

saden1 (581102) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821473)

According to Linus they are on crack. If this statement holds true, probably 100% true, then you can't trust the word of a crack head. We all know a crack head will do anything for a cheesburger, i mean cheese.

Heh (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821317)

The weight of IBM's legal penis must be weighing heavily upon SCO's tongue

Fucking tea bagging fag fucks

I wouldn't let our guards down just yet..... (5, Interesting)

StickMang (568987) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821319)

The Age is the only place i could find this story, and it contradicts everything that SCO has said so far. The only somewhat related story I could find is this one. [technewsworld.com] Oh well, maybe I'm just paranoid, but I trust SCO about as much as a nigerian spammer on peyote, so I think they're up to something.

Read what is says - "never planned" doesn't mean (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821384)

"won't", or aren't above doing it.

I seriously doubt that tis is the "beginning of the end". The stock is still well north of $14.

Saw this "Fraud" ad on the page you linked... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821399)

"Online fraud is a serious and growing problem, one that cost merchants an estimated $1 Billion in the past year. Fortunately, you can take steps to significantly limit your risk as an online merchant. Click here to get a copy of the guide "What Every Merchant Should Know About Internet Fraud." "

Coincidence? I think not...

Re:I wouldn't let our guards down just yet..... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821430)

why does the spammer have to be Nigerian? you know, the word nigger is in te word "Nigerian"...
nice try hitler. but it has already been said before
http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/

Loser pays (4, Insightful)

Tuxinatorium (463682) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821320)

Everybody knows SCO will lose all those cases if they actually go to court, but SCO is just trying to scare some companies into avoiding legal fees by paying up. The only way to avoid that kind of legal blackmail is to make the initiator of the lawsuit pay all the defendant's legal expenses if the lawsuit is found to be frivolous.

of COURSE they're not suing companies... (5, Interesting)

nemo (2417) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821321)

...they sent letters to USERS, not COMPANIES.

They sue the users who can't afford legal costs and will settle just for the sake of avoiding legal hell, and SCO gets a nice precedent running and their stock improves yet further.

Maybe I'm too cynical?

Re:of COURSE they're not suing companies... (3, Funny)

Frymaster (171343) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821364)

They sue the users who can't afford legal costs and will settle just for the sake of avoiding legal hell,

tell me about it... i'm being sued for downloading linux over kazaa.

damn.

Re:of COURSE they're not suing companies... (1)

Nucleon500 (628631) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821454)

tell me about it... i'm being sued for downloading linux over kazaa.

Just make damn sure your distro doesn't include DeCSS code.

Re:of COURSE they're not suing companies... (1)

screenrc (670781) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821538)

If SCO is after the GPL and Linux (as per Microsoft's
instructions), why sue small Linux companies. They
might might not be the right target.


As for sueing users, well, it has been 40 days
since I told SCO to sue me. So, SCO, if you
are listening, please contact me through ntro
at earthlink dot [NET] so we can get started.

Hello, cock monkeys (-1)

CmdrTaco (troll) (578383) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821324)

"SCO is reported in the Age as saying they 'Have no plans to sue Linux companies...' This seems to contradict the earlier statements of Chris Sontag. This story also points out how Canopy owns stakes in several other Linux companies, including Linux Networx wheich supplied the supercomputer for Lawrence Livermore Nat Lab. One begins to wonder if the reality of their situation has become clear to them?














"SCO is reported in the Age as saying they 'Have no plans to sue Linux companies...' This seems to contradict the earlier statements of Chris Sontag. This story also points out how Canopy owns stakes in several other Linux companies, including Linux Networx wheich supplied the supercomputer for Lawrence Livermore Nat Lab. One begins to wonder if the reality of their situation has become clear to them?








"SCO is reported in the Age as saying they 'Have no plans to sue Linux companies...' This seems to contradict the earlier statements of Chris Sontag. This story also points out how Canopy owns stakes in several other Linux companies, including Linux Networx wheich supplied the supercomputer for Lawrence Livermore Nat Lab. One begins to wonder if the reality of their situation has become clear to them?

















"SCO is reported in the Age as saying they 'Have no plans to sue Linux companies...' This seems to contradict the earlier statements of Chris Sontag. This story also points out how Canopy owns stakes in several other Linux companies, including Linux Networx wheich supplied the supercomputer for Lawrence Livermore Nat Lab. One begins to wonder if the reality of their situation has become clear to them?

















"SCO is reported in the Age as saying they 'Have no plans to sue Linux companies...' This seems to contradict the earlier statements of Chris Sontag. This story also points out how Canopy owns stakes in several other Linux companies, including Linux Networx wheich supplied the supercomputer for Lawrence Livermore Nat Lab. One begins to wonder if the reality of their situation has become clear to them?








"SCO is reported in the Age as saying they 'Have no plans to sue Linux companies...' This seems to contradict the earlier statements of Chris Sontag. This story also points out how Canopy owns stakes in several other Linux companies, including Linux Networx wheich supplied the supercomputer for Lawrence Livermore Nat Lab. One begins to wonder if the reality of their situation has become clear to them?

SCO? Plans? (2, Funny)

error502 (694533) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821327)

I think it's obvious from previous stories that SCO has no idea what they're doing.

In future news, SCO sues Red Hat, Mandrake, others.

Re: SCO Says It Has No Plan To Sue Linux Companies (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821330)

well crap. i was just about to send them my money. guess i'll hang onto it now to see how this all turns out.

heh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821331)

... wonder what this is going to do to the stock price tomorrow morning. Knowing sco, they'll contradict themselves at some point during the day and spin it into an increase.

Australia only? (5, Insightful)

fava (513118) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821332)

Or they could be refering to Australia only. since an Austrailian user group filed a "put up or shut up suit".

Damage is done... (5, Funny)

banzai75 (310300) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821335)

Not how you think though... There whole plan was to sabotage open source all along. Not through suing companies, but by keeping all the developers commenting on SCO stories all day.

Think about it. How many articles have there been and how many comments per article? Boy, when the juicy ones came out the number of responses jumped up into the hundreds even nearing a thousand sometimes. Now, imagine if this never happened and all those people got together to work towards one goal. I think with the hours that have been wasted on this story so far, we could've designed and build a mars mission already ;)

MOD PARENT IP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821409)

+priceofscofunny

Re:Damage is done... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821521)

With the combined IQ of /., we would have a arse that you fit mars in.

Oh, No!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821336)

This is horrible!! Now my kids have an excuse for playing games instead of doing their homework!

Lawsuit I'd like to see (5, Interesting)

tm2b (42473) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821338)

I'd like to see a class action suit from shareholders of Linux companies against the SCO executives, for fraudulent stock manipulation.

They went after Martha Stewart for a hell of a lot less than this.

Not suing companies (3, Interesting)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821341)

Not enought Linux companies are making money so instead they are going to take a leaf from the RIAA handbook on how to win friends and influence people by hitting all Linux using students with massive lawsuits thus forcing the students to settle and hand over their first 10 years salary after graduation as a penalty

Insider selling completed? (5, Insightful)

Vooch (600495) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821345)

Sounds like the insiders have already sold their shares and they're leaving everyone else holding the bag. Afterall, if they're not gonna go after the Linux folks, I guess their pumping scheme is coming to an end. I knew that lawsuit was a bunch of bunk. You know what comes after pumping? Dumping! Management is now chillin' with a smooth 700% return this year. I guess it's time for the stock to tank now. Just my opinion.

Re:Insider selling completed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821442)

where did you get the figure 700% from?

SCO random press release generator? (5, Funny)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821346)

They don't seem to actually have a single consistant position on anything.

Is SCO actually being run by a Perl script that periodically checks their stock price to see if it needs to emit some random statement?

Re:SCO random press release generator? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821359)

Uhm, heh, no. Python, not Perl.

Re:SCO random press release generator? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821389)

Uhm, heh, no. Python, not Perl.

I would imagine its VBScript, actually.

Re:SCO random press release generator? (2, Funny)

popeyethesailor (325796) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821511)

As a bonafide Perl script, I am extremely offended by your statement.

Us Perl scripts have feelings too..

So? (5, Funny)

Chester K (145560) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821352)

They also said they wouldn't sue Linux end users, then changed their tune later.

See, if you say one thing then say the other instead of just saying what you mean first, that means you get to release two press releases and boost your stock twice!

SCO the true postmodern company... (2, Funny)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821495)

Watch out for SCO's next move: in true postmodern fashion, they'll be emitting press releases examining the inconsistencies in their own press releases. Then they'll have press releases advertizing these new press releases, and press releases stating that all their press releases are equally valuable to individuals.

forgot to add (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821510)

I forgot to add this:

Darl McBallmeride: Press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases, press releases. Yay Gloria Estafan!

Wait.. (5, Insightful)

slackingme (690217) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821353)

Exactly who really tripped out about this shit anyway? It's always been a "You infringe! We have proof! Nobody can see our proof!" (non)shitstorm. I think if SCO had actually had a case we'd be taking a much more serious approach to the situation instead of the rampant SCO jokes. I mean, really, a few PHBs (that didn't want Linux anyway) pretended like this helped their case and the rest of the world kept putting those Slackware/Debian/Redhat/SuSE disks in the drive.

Is it just me, (2, Funny)

JoeLinux (20366) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821355)

Or does anyone else think that Ross Perot would make a GREAT leader of this company? "We're suing." "we're not" "no we are." "Well, just IBM." "everyone but IBM."

They worked? (2, Interesting)

thenovacrisis (550112) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821358)

Does that mean all the DoS attacks worked? After netcraft reported all those down times, it would be more than a coincidence if, for some reason, all the controversy just ended.

new SCO troll :) (0)

Lost Penguin (636359) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821361)

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered SCO FUD community when Darl McBride confirmed that SCO FUD media share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all news stories. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that SCO has lost internet connections repeatedly,without a DDOS. SCO claims it was sabatoge by IBM, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along Darls on crack. SCO FUD is now collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by being caught lying at the last SCO Forum in the recent Linux stole this code fiasco.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict Darl McBrides future. TUX is reaming him: Darl faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Darl McBride because SCO FUD is dying. Things are looking very bad for Darl. As millions of Linux users are already pissed, SCO continues to spout crap. Red Hat is now going for the throat AND gonads.

Darl McBride is the most endangered of them all, 96% of people questioned think he is on crack. The sudden and unpleasant departures of his sanity only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: SCO is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

Open Source leader Linus states that there are SCO execs on crack. How many users of Unixware are on crack? Let's see. The number of crack versus sane posts in the media is roughly in ratio of 9 to 1. We beleive there are crack users in the SCO office. The number of SCO/OS favorable posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of MS Bob posts. SCO claims there are about 6000 users of SCO/OS. A recent article put Openserver at about 80 percent of the SCO installed base. Therefore there are more Openserver users than Unixware users. This is inconsistent with any one of a number of SCO press releases.

Due to the FUD troubles of Lindon, Utah, abysmal sales and crack prices rising, Caldera went out of business and was taken over by Canopy who changed Caldera's name to SCO, another troubled OS. Now Canopy is also going to get creamed, its IP corpse turned over to yet another company called IBM.

All major surveys show that SCO has steadily declined in market share. Darl is a very sick puppy and his long term survival prospects are very dim. If Darl is to survive at all it will only be among amazon aborigines. SCO stock continues to Enron. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, SCO is dead.

Re:new SCO troll :) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821416)

Caldera went out of business and was taken over by Canopy who changed Caldera's name to SCO, another troubled OS

Actually, Caldera has always been owned by the Canopy Group. It has been through several reorganizations -- the original "Caldera Networks" or something eventually spun off all of its Linux holdings into one company (the current Caldera/SCO) and embedded systems into another (Lineo) while continuing to exist for the sole purpose of conducting the Microsoft/DR-DOS lawsuit. Canopy remained in control throughout.

More evidence for bait and switch (4, Insightful)

foniksonik (573572) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821369)

Looks like this is just more fodder to support the idea that SCO is playing a bait and switch on investors ...

It'd be hilarious if... (2, Funny)

ChaoticPup (80891) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821370)

...this all just turns out to be some sort of snipe hunt masterminded by a closet Linux advocate.

Think about it - bunch of hugely greedy execs that are tech-challenged.

Techie sees opportunity and drops a hint that they're getting screwed by the Linux folks and could probably make a ton of money off of it.

Greedy tech-challenged execs manage to convince themselves that techie is right; charge forward with their Swiss-cheese case and make complete fools of themselves -- while techie laughs his friggin' a$$ off.

What an evil idea.

Wish I had thought of it... :-)

-- CP

Back Pedaling or more FUD? (5, Insightful)

anglebrackets (701199) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821371)

I think the lawsuit by Red Hat is what brought this news out. SCO was supposed to respond today (Thursday) but was granted a time extension. In other words - it was put up or shut up time. I think SCO plans on going ahead with it's pump and dump scheme, but is probably trying to get RH to drop the suit. This way they avoid having to show any real evidence. Notice that they did _not_ say their case was wrong. Only that they had no 'concrete plans to sue Linux companies'. I expect more shenanigans. SCO - Stupidity Causes Ossification.

Re:Back Pedaling or more FUD? (1)

fava (513118) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821532)

The redhat deadline was Monday. News of the extention came out Tuesday or Wednesday. The IBM response was due Wednesday and news of the extention came out Thursday. No news on how long the extentions are.

The real conspiracy (1)

delirium of disorder (701392) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821374)

SCO is trying to get a hold of intellectual property that covers non binary logic. They are trying to go beyond the reasoning behind 1 and 0 as true and false. When new trinary computers come out, SCO will own everything produced on them.

at some point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821375)

\if they make at different times contradictory claims saying they ARE and then AREN'T going to sue you, or a group you are in... after they do this enough timesl, at what point does it become barratry, and actionable?

Stock Price (1)

Camel Pilot (78781) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821377)

I have noticing that their stock price has risen lately - eventhough their disclosed "violations" have proven to be a farce. Any theory's why that is? I don't buy the short squeeze theory.

Could it be that certain players would more than eager to fund such a company since directly attacking Linux would have severe political ramifications? I can think of several companies that would love to see Linux just go away or at least get bogged down in legal proceedings.

Another question are identities of purchasers of stock public record?

Re:Stock Price (1)

ChaoticPup (80891) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821398)

Any theory's why that is? I don't buy the short squeeze theory.

Bill Gates is buying SCO stock?

I hear he's looking for a few write-offs...

-CP

One hand does not know what the other is doing? (5, Informative)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821378)

Linux software companies could also become SCO targets. "Do we have potential issues with Red Hat, SuSE and other commercial Linux distributors--yes, we might," Sontag said, adding that chances for negotiating with such companies appear to be slim.

Chris Sontag, senior vice president and general manager of the company's SCOsource business, added: "There is no warranty for infringement of intellectual property [in the GPL], so all of the liability ends up with end users."

Mark Heise, of law firm Boies Schiller and Flexner, representing SCO against IBM, believes SCO is entitled to pursue users based on its claims. "End users are improperly using this copyrighted material, and under copyright law SCO is entitled to damages and injunctive relief," he said.

Chris Sontag, senior vice-president and general manager of SCOsource, which is trying to derive more income from the company's intellectual property, said today: "SCO is taking this important step because there are intellectual property issues with Linux.

"When SCO's own UNIX software code is being illegally copied into Linux, we believe we have an obligation to educate commercial users of the potential liability that could rest with them for using such software to run their business. We feel so strongly about this issue that we are suspending sales and distribution of SCO Linux until these issues are resolved."

asked whether SCO would sue the laboratory, the company spokesperson said: "No. SCO has never made concrete plans to sue anyone."

Seems like Linus is right (5, Funny)

ekuns (695444) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821382)

These guys have to be smoking SOMETHING to explain the cognitive dissonance in their statements. I mean, "We're not talking about the kernel." "We're talking about the kernel." "We're not going to go after end users." "We're going to go after end users." "Well, we're only going to go after companies but not hobbiests." "We changed our minds again, we never intended to go after anybody."

If only I had the spare ten hours I could go over the last years' press releases and make some "found poetry." Blank verse in this case, of course.

Man... (1)

Ibanez (37490) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821385)

There HAS to be a catch somewhere...they threaten to sue the end users, yet not the companies that are actually SELLING their IP? Maybe this is the beginning of the end, but I doubt it...

Blake

Could this be because of the redhat lawsuit (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821387)

If SCO has no plans to sue redhat then redhat's claims for damages are weaker.

Re:Could this be because of the redhat lawsuit (1)

twistedcubic (577194) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821469)

Sounds right to me. They're probably doing this so that the RedHat suit will get dismissed. The same thing happened with the college prof (Princeton?) who sued the RIAA (MPAA?) over thinly veiled DMCA threats, but the judge dismissed the case.

Re:Could this be because of the redhat lawsuit (1)

cranos (592602) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821494)

I think RedHat's case is not going to be damaged to much by SCO saying they don't plan on suing them.

The whole thrust of RedHats case is that SCO has been fudding Linux to the point where it has the potential to affect sales, especially their claims re User liability. This is why they want to see the code that SCO says is theirs.

Backpeddling (and an off-topic point) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821393)

The last time Caldera was profitable was when they sued Microsoft. This time, methinks that this lawsuit mill bit off more than they can chew.

BTW, this brings to mind an issue I've wanted to see raised forever...

It is hypocritical for Linux gurus to support frivolous IP shakedowns against Microsoft while condeming the SCO lawsuits. Either you're for IP extortion or you're against it. Supporting some IP shakedowns while condemning others is hypocrisy.

Parse the statement... (3, Insightful)

twelveinchbrain (312326) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821397)

... as you would one from a politician or lawyer. "No current plans" simply means that they are not writing up any complaints at this time. In no way should you be lulled into a sense of security. This wording is designed to allow them to later sue anybody they want, without having to admit they were lying.

SCO OWNS LINUX! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821403)

  • If you use Linux, beware, for SCO OWNS LINUX!
  • If you'd like a Beowulf cluster of penguins, you really should have a Beowulf cluster of SCO lawyers instead, since SCO OWNS LINUX!
  • Do you dread using Microsoft Windows? Well, maybe you'll sleep better at night by leaving Windows on your computer instead of paying SCO $600 per copy of Linux that you have. Why? Because SCO OWNS LINUX!, that's why.

Sing along:

SCO OWNS LINUX!
SCO OWNS LINUX!
SCO OWNS LINUX!
SCO OWNS LINUX!

Get over it.

(Controlling?) Intrest. (4, Interesting)

MrLint (519792) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821407)

I think the small print here is perhaps the most frightening of all. Why is Canopy getting involved with other linux vendors? What are they doing with their 'own' linux? Is this a plot to co-opt the linux businesses from the inside? Does Canopy have the resources to gain so much control of the major linux vendors to shut them down and make SCO the only game left in town?

Something smells very rotten here.

Proof. (2, Insightful)

stames (692349) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821408)

To me this offers the most solid proof yet that this entire debacle was just a ploy to raise stock prices. Twenty bucks says Darl McBride buys a house in the Caymans in the next 6 months.

Re:Proof. (1)

HBI (604924) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821417)

I'll match your 20 and say that he already owns tax haven real estate - Bermuda, Caymans, whatever.

Incidentally the seven mile beach on Grand Cayman is just beautiful. I had the joy of spending 3 days there in 1999 - working mostly, but using the boss's condo about 15 feet from the beach.

Hmmm, maybe instead... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821457)

Twenty bucks says Darl McBride buys a house in the Caymans in the next 6 months.

... he should look at that much bigger island in the Carribean that does not have an extradition treaty with the USA. He'd fit in well there.

SCO is still a legal liability (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821414)

They have already damaged the Linux ecosystem and they have already opened themselves up to class action lawsuits.

If I had a rich company, I would not even consider a buyout of SCO because of all the legal cans of worms they opened up.

Something's rotten in Denmark--er, Provo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821418)

This doesn't make a lot of sense. (Of course, none of this whole saga has.) Why should they be telling this only to a publication in Australia?

Maybe they're going to backpedal on their backpedal and state in another couple days that they meant only that they're not going to sue anyone *IN AUSTRALIA*. I wonder...does anyone know if the laws concerning barratry are more stringent there? Otherwise, it seems they're just laying themselves wide open for charges of that, along with securities fraud and a few other things, everywhere else.

Re:Something's rotten in Denmark--er, Provo (1)

GooglyWoogly (598716) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821446)

Its only coming from the SCO PR people in Sydney, so I bet they really don't know whats going on at all. Its probably 2 guys and a tea lady running SCO here I'd say. Probably got at least 5 guys & 2 tea ladies in the US running the show..

Re:Something's rotten in Denmark--er, Provo (1)

mlk (18543) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821536)

Please, put the tea lady in charge!

PI (spoiler alert) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821419)
























3809525720 1065485863 2788659361 5338182796 8230301952 0353018529 6899577362 2599413891 2497217752 8347913151 5574857242 4541506959 5082953311 6861727855 8890750983 8175463746 4939319255 0604009277 0167113900 984882401 8583616035 6370766010 4710181942 9555961989 4676783744 9448255379 7747268471 0404753464 6208046684 2590694912 9331367702 8989152104 7521620569 6602405803 8150193511 2533824300 3558764024 7496473263 9141992726 0426992279 6782354781 6360093417 2164121992 4586315030 2861829745 5570674983 8505494588 5869269956 9092721079 7509302955 3211653449 8720275596 0236480665 4991198818 3479775356 6369807426 5425278625 5181841757 4672890977 7727938000










249192 1732172147 7235014144 1973568548 1613611573 5255213347 5741849468 4385233239 0739414333 4547762416 8625189835 6948556209 9219222184 2725502542 5688767179 0494601653 4668049886 2723279178 6085784383 8279679766 8145410095 3883786360 9506800642 2512520511 7392984896 0841284886 2694560424 1965285022 2106611863 0674427862 2039194945 0471237137 8696095636 4371917287 4677646575 7396241389 0865832645 9958133904 7802759009
















9465764078 9512694683 9835259570 9825822620 5224894077 2671947826 8482601476 9909026401 3639443745 5305068203 4962524517 4939965143 1429809190 6592509372 2169646151 5709858387 4105978859 5977297549 8930161753 9284681382 6868386894 2774155991 8559252459 5395943104 9972524680 8459872736 4469584865 3836736222 6260991246 0805124388 4390451244 1365497627 8079771569 1435997700 1296160894 4169486855 5848406353 4220722258 2848864815 8456028506 0168427394 5226746767 8895252138 5225499546 6672782398










SPOILER ALERT, DON'T READ BEYOND HERE UNLESS YOU HAVE ALREADY READ ALL THE DIGITS OF PI (or don't care about the plot being spoiled.)








6456596116 3548862305 7745649803 5593634568 1743241125 1507606947 9451096596 0940252288 7971089314 5669136867 2287489405 6010150330 8617928680 9208747609 1782493858 9009714909 6759852613 6554978189 3129784821 6829989487 2265880485 7564014270 4775551323 7964145152 3746234364 5428584447 9526586782 1051141354 7357395231 1342716610 2135969536 2314429524 8493718711 0145765403 5902799344 0374200731 0578539062 1983874478 0847848968 3321445713 8687519435 0643021845 3191048481 0053706146 8067491927 8191197939 9520614196 (bet you never saw that twist coming) 6342875444 0643745123 7181921799 9839101591 9561814675 1426912397 4894090718 6494231961

Re:PI (spoiler alert) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821466)

u roolz

10 million ain't that much (1)

GooglyWoogly (598716) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821428)

I recall reading somewhere where SCO said they had $10M stashed away as a fighting fund for this action. I can't believe they said that - $10M isn't going to get them very far, surely ?
I'd bet you'd need a f%^# load more than that. Imagine SCO trying to sue 10 million linux users - just see their dollar and raise another 50 cents and they're toast!

Maintaining SCO compatibility (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821429)

Version 1.12 - Note: Features/bugs listed may not apply to some SCO products/versions

NOTE: This report hereby placed in public domain, use it as you wish, at your own risk!

Additional suggestions, detailed specific recommendations, comments, requested.

Obviously it is a concern to GPL software authors that they maintain compatibility with the SCO platforms, while SCO publicly abuses them, tries to get the GPL declared invalid, and while SCO profits from selling their software and integrating it into future releases of the SCO product line.

Software authors will be aware that breaking SCO compatibility may cause problems for SCO users - (although strictly speaking that is SCO's problem, not the software author(s)', unless the author(s) have some contractual relationship with SCO or SCO customers).

SCO needs support revenue (and new sales revenue) that may depend on GPL products, to fund their PR and litigation. Thus, software authors, who not obligated to support SCO, presumably might want to.

Therefore here is a list of things NOT to do, if you don't want to break SCO compatibility.

1. Don't refactor your code, rearrange files, move functions between files, and rename files more logically in the same release as one which contains accidentally contains one or more SCO incompatible changes.

If you do this, it would make it harder for SCO or their partners to re-introduce any "lost" code that was necessary to support the SCO's platforms. Obviously you wouldn't want that.

2. Don't accidentally remove SCO support in a series of stages, which overlap in time with a bunch of critical security or bug fixes, without making it clear at which stages you accidentally removed SCO support.

3. Don't accidentally remove any special fixes or work rounds for SCO platforms.

4. Don't depend on functions, which are not implemented or perform differently on SCO platforms. Especially don't depend on those functions in lots of different places in your product.

In particular avoid these functions:

(please help with this list - "list 4")

Known bugs in SCO products:

Unixware: accept() does not set the sa_family value correctly for the AF_UNIX family. See http://mail.python.org/pipermail/patches/2001-Augu st/005630.html [python.org]
Unixware: atan2() does returns pi instead of zero for atan2(0, x). See http://mail.python.org/pipermail/patches/2001-Augu st/005630.html [python.org]

5. Don't depend on compiler features that might not be available on SCO platforms. This is especially true if, as has been suggested may occur, new versions of GCC don't support SCO platforms.

In particular don't depend on these compiler features:

(please help with this list if and when GCC loses SCO support)

6. Don't put in messages that display only on SCO's platforms.

Avoid putting in code like (and especially not commenting):

#if defined(_SCO_DS)
/* SCO OpenServer */ darlsux() ;
#elif defined(__UNIXWARE__)
/* UnixWare gcc */ darlsux() ;
#elif defined(__USLC__)
#if defined( __STDC_VERSION__ ) && __STDC_VERSION__ == 199409
/* Gemini I cc (SCO UnixWare 7 and UDK) */ darlsux() ;
#else
/* SCO UnixWare cc */ darlsux() ;
#endif
#elif defined(M_UNIX)
/* ODT 3 or earlier */
#else
/* Other platform */
#endif

7. Don't remove support in your makefile for building the application on SCO's platforms.

8. Don't rename your functions and variables with names that conflict with SCO-specific extensions

In particular don't use these names for your own functions, etc.

(please help with this list - "list 8")

mbswidth() is defined in UnixWare's - see http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bison/2003-03 /msg00050.html [gnu.org]

UnixWare defines shutdown to _shutdown which can cause problems later if you have variables, etc. called shutdown, see http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=21169 [php.net]

9. Don't accidentally introduce code that accidentally fails if it finds SCO specific files/directories/etc.

(please help with this list - "list 9")

10. Don't write an application that require values of kernel parameters that are not permissible or cause problems on SCO platforms.

(please help with this list - "list 10")

High values of NPROC and MAXUP (SCO defaults are NPROC=3415, MAXUP=1311) can cause network problems on UnixWare 7.1.3, see http://www.caldera.com/support/docs/unixware/uw713 en/uw713latenews.html#netdead [caldera.com]

11. Do promptly release any security patches that apply to SCO platforms.

12. Do answer support questions from SCO and their customers in a helpful and timely fashion.

13. IANAL (so possibly, consult with an attorney) do not add a notice saying something like:

Legal help requested here

There seems to be some debate about whether SCO's actions and public statements amount to: violation of GPL, thinks it invalid (and possibly presumably doesn't accept it - how could they if they think it invalid), merely abused it publicly. or whatever. So it is not clear whether the following is appropriate, enforceable, etc.

This software is distributed under the General Public License, which grants you unlimited rights to copy, modify, or otherwise distribute this program. The authors, however, desire and require, as legal owners and/or copyright holders of said program, that such licensing policy should not be applied to SCO Group and subsidiaries, as their previous infringement of GPL policies invalidate them as possible candidates for GPL benefits.

We believe that SCO has infringed the GPL already, since paragraph 5 of the GPL states: "You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it."


14. Alternatively, IANAL (so possibly, consult with an attorney), do not license your software under a GPL-like license (you are not supposed to modify the GPL text), which explicitly bars the SCO Group, Canopy funded companies, SCO users, from using your software.

Legal help requested here

15. IANAL (so possibly, consult with an attorney), do not register your copyrights with the US government http://www.loc.gov/copyright/ [loc.gov] and then accidentally sue SCO Group or their users, if they violate your license agreement.

Legal help requested here

Prison hints for all you music/software pirates. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821444)

As a new punk you won't know diddly-squat about your sexual duties, so here are a few practical tips: to avoid AIDS, learn to suck dick. In fact, learn it so well you can do deep throat and he'll forget all about your ass. The trick is relaxation, not easy at first, to be sure, when you feel the whole thing is absolutely disgusting, but for your own good, you need to learn to relax using any technique that works for you. In order to avoid gagging, wait til your stomach is empty (11/2 hrs after meals), so there's nothing to barf. If you do throw up, do it on the floor and not him! Train yourself gradually. Meditate, say mantras, anything that gets you to relax. Stop thinking of the dick as an invading foreign object; if you can get over that perception, you'll be OK. Try to take deep breaths whenever you can and breathe through your nose. Practice holding your breath like a swimmer. If he fucks your skull so hard you think you're about to pass out from asphyxiation, you should grab his legs and signal your distress. Most likely he'll be about to come and won't let up, but it'll be over real soon.

The first few times you get fucked in the ass, it hurts bigtime. If you have to get fucked in the ass, again try to relax as much as possible and get him to slow down. It will hurt less, and if it keeps happening you will get used to it and it won't hurt at all. Be sure to use some kind of greasy stuff (vaseline, hair cream, etc.) as a lubricant, and a condom if at all possible. If you are hooked up, your jocker will usually try to minimize any pain that might be involved. After all, he wants to keep your resentment and complaints to a minimum.

A dick up your ass may well physically stimulate your prostate gland, and you may experience that as pleasurable. You may even get a hard-on while being fucked, just as a physical reaction. And some punks will find the sexual experience arousing. Many guys have some homosexual feelings even though they are basically straight. You don't have to put a label on yourself just because you have a variety of feelings.

Punks sometimes agree to switch out with each other or "take turns" sexually, since this is about the only way you can take a penetrative role instead of a passive one. As a punk you come under a lot of pressure to act less masculine, and you will naturally resent this pressure inside and feel a strong need to act in masculine ways whenever you can get away with it. This need can make the urge to experience what a lot of people call "the male role" in sex very powerful. It is an understandable compensation, a way of proving to yourself that you're still a man, so if you do it, don't feel guilty about it. If you want to take turns with another punk, it is best to clear it with your jockers first. The jocks usually don't object since they know the other punk is not a rival for them.

Doing my part (4, Informative)

MichaelCrawford (610140) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821447)

My effort to get people to read and copy Let's Put SCO Behind Bars [goingware.com] is going well.

The copy on my own website has been served to about 5000 distinct hosts so far this month. A google search for "Let's Put SCO Behind Bars" [google.com] turns up 2190 matches.

Most of those are links. The article has a Creative Commons license, and I've been encouraging copying. By doing various searches, and checking my logs for referring pages, I've found a few dozen other copies on the web, many of them on message boards where they've had lots of readers.

It turned out to be very helpful when Linux Universe [linux-universe.com] asked me to submit my article there. They use UBB codes instead of HTML. I realized that lots of other message boards use UBB, so I saved a copy on my site in UBB format [goingware.com] for people to copy to other message boards.

I've been meaning to write a plain-ascii version suitable for email and usenet but haven't gotten to it yet.

Both Richard Stallman and Eric Raymond enjoyed the article. Stallman said that if it weren't against his ethics to write proprietary code, he would have enjoyed working at the SCO of old as I described it.

My first draft I posted at Advogato, followed soon after by InfoAnarchy and then Kuro5hin.

However, I didn't succeed in getting Slashdot to feature it. One can only dream.

I have been hesitant to allow copying of many of my articles before now, but when one's objective is to get a lot of people to read what one has written, and to do so in a short time, it works wonders.

whaaaaaaaa? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821452)

OK. whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat? what did I pay the $699 for? Wasn't it to see my competitors using Linux getting fried? Now you say there will be no showdown? Can I get a refund? No? Ok, I'll be reasonable and take SCO stock options as a refund. What you'll give me a licence for SCO UNIX for a refund? No I dont want that, how about a duel with Mr. McBride, can I have that? Yes!! Yippee...

Even this statement is only a partial truth (4, Interesting)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821453)

At best, this is only a partial truth:

"No. SCO has never planned to sue Linux companies."

It should say "SCO doesn't plan to sue any more Linux companies." They've already sued a Linux company. I'll give you a hint: the company's initials are IBM.

Re:Even this statement is only a partial truth (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821476)

I Be Microsoft?

They have no plans, buy they have no rights... (2, Interesting)

nereid666 (533498) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821461)

They say they have no plans to sue Linux Companies, but they don't say they have no rights. Who trust SCO? Be sure if they achieve on courts some results, then they will continue with Linux users...
And if this a move to be more friendly with angry Linux users. Too late.... No one will wants nothing about SCO.

politics (2, Interesting)

SpacePunk (17960) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821493)

and that's all it is. Politics is just a way of saying 'nice doggie' untill you can find a big stick.

Those Lying Cretins (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6821502)

What a paradox.

Distribution is OK now (5, Insightful)

mm0mm (687212) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821505)

How could they NOT sue the distributors of the infamous IP infringing products, while they ARE more than willing to sue users of the same IP infringing products? It is like allowing pirate CD vendors on the street to do their job and going after those who bought pirate CDs from that vendor(s). Is it reasonable? At least RIAA is mean ass to everyone, not only to buyers.

Hey McB, so you are now endorsing distribution of illegal product while you demand money from those who bought it? Give me a fsckin break, would you?

Sheeeeiiiiiitttt (1)

Chuqmystr (126045) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821517)

Eventually, SCO will have Mother Teresa exumed and then sue her because she used the words "open" and "source" somewhere within her long timeline of existance.

This whole debacle is nothing more than an overly extended episode of stupid pet lawyer tricks. Yes, that's it! Merely "prole feed" on some obscure digital cable channel, way up above ch1900 or so....

Brand me as Troll-boy if you must, I guess I deserve it. But at least make me up a word that is analogeous (How to spell?) to being and athiest of Karma ;-) Thanks, Late...

hold on a moment (0)

ufpdom (556704) | more than 10 years ago | (#6821529)

Im reading this at 10:30p .. this should be 10:30a So I can wake up, get coffee, check my logs, and get my morning sco story..
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...