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!

More Damning SCO Evidence At Groklaw

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the damn-damn-damn dept.

Caldera 404

An anonymous reader writes "There's a very interesting story up at Groklaw right now. PJ reports on new evidence that Chris Hellwig, a SCO employee, contributed code to SMP, XFS, and JFS and did so with the knowledge of his supervisor." Groklaw is thorough, and this is another good example of just quite how thorough.

cancel ×

404 comments

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

Don't forget... (-1)

SCO$699FeeTroll (695565) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614194)

...to pay your $699 licensing fee you cock-smoking teabaggers.

SCO acquires a new business partner - GNAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614196)

GNAA - 0 to hello.jpg in 4.6 seconds! (Thanks, SCO!)
By GNAA Staff

Darl here, with another fine Fr1st P0st. After all -- SCO did everything first, and the rest of the responses to this story will owe their heritage to a foundation built on SCO's staff of talented programmers.

You may be wondering why SCO salesmen are not answering your numerous calls while you try to order more SCO licenses. Well, we aren't answering the phones because we're too busy celebrating our newest business partner. Rather than explaining it myself, I'll let our formal press release do the talking. Take it away, Mr. Reuters...

LINDON, Utah, Sept. 8/PRNewswire - FirstCall/ -- The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX [yahoo.com] - News [yahoo.com] ), the owner and licensor of the core UNIX operating system source code, today announced its second Fortune 500 clent for the SCO Linux IP license, the GNAA (Nasdaq: RHAT [yahoo.com] - News [yahoo.com] ), developer of fine Slashdot trolls on irc.efnet.net #GNAA, also well-known for revolutionizing small business development with its "Step 2: ??????" profit model. The availability of the SCO Intellectual Property License for Linux affords Linux deployments to come into compliance with international law for the use of all 2.4 and future kernels. The run-time license permits the use of SCO's intellectual property, in binary form only, as contained in Linux distributions.

By purchasing a SCO Intellectual Property License, customers avoid infringement of SCO's intellectual property rights in Linux 2.4 and Linux 2.5 kernels and assure Darl financial security for the purchase of his second home. Because the SCO license authorizes run-time use only, customers also comply with the General Public License, under which Linux is distributed. Source may still be distributed under the terms of the GPL, however source distributors are held accountable for all violation of SCO's IP. Indemnification is provided for customers of runtime clients only. Read that twice, dirty hippy. You're not in the clear yet.

GNAA spokesperson penisbird said of the licensure, "coming into compliance affords us a new competitive advantage with the other Slashdot authors. By being in the right, we can thumb down our noses at not only the Windows users and the BSD-thieving Mac Users, but also the unwashed Linux hippies running stolen code on their parents' PCs." VP of anus enlargement goat-see added, "fr1st p0st? damn i miss. how do i next story?"

Mr. Darl McBride concurred with GNAA's analysis, adding "We soon hope to convince additional clients such as Trollklore and Cabal of Logged In Trolls of the benefits of licensing SCO's valuable IP. Also, I <3 GNAA bunny. (@.@)" JesuitX clarified the nature of the SCO and GNAA alliance, adding "We're more than just a licensing client. We're also going to be helping to bring these other potential licensors into compliance. We can break them in little by little as paying sublicensors. The alternative is pretty horrible. Our lawyers can take a reticent client from virgin to hello.jpg [figure 2 [yahoo.com] ] in under an hour, and believe me -- it is not pleasant." freetibet was recorded saying, "I read Slashdot just for GNAA posts".

Commander Taco was unavailable for comment, however Cowboy Kneel was said to ask for a print of [figure 2] for his basement apartment. Simoniker remained British and unable to spell "color," while Timothy responded by posting the same story six times, and Hemos reposted a seventh time, the submission differing only from his application of that damned Einstein icon.

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

________________________________________________
| ______________________________________._a,____ |
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ |
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ |
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ |
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ |
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ |
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ |
| ____a,___jk_GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_ |
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ |
| ______-"!^____________________________________ |
` _______________________________________________'

HELP! I am holding my erect penis in my hand. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614199)

What do I do next???

Please advise!!!

Re:HELP! I am holding my erect penis in my hand. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614320)

Feed it into the paper shredder...

Re:HELP! I am holding my erect penis in my hand. (-1)

The Trolling Troller (579075) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614576)

staple it to your left thigh

Re:HELP! I am holding my erect penis in my hand. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614591)

put it in your pipe and smoke it

First Postgase (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614205)

yay yay yay, first pest

Darl McBride belongs in prison for FRAUD! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614206)

This guy is a criminal

I knew it!!!! (-1, Redundant)

Rupan (723469) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614207)

Bah. A SCO employee contributed infringing code? I doubt it, but maybe they did it on purpose just so they could litigate...

Old news (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614214)

This has been known for quite a while, and to be honest it doesn't change that much. SCO will simply claim they had no idea where this code originated for at the time and so never sanctioned its official distribution. Their entire case is ridiculous, however it would be ridiculous even if they hadn't ever distributed linux or contributed to the kernel.

Re:Old news (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614275)

The can hardly do that. They were quite proud of it [unitedlinux.com] at the time.

Re:Old news (5, Insightful)

ninejaguar (517729) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614341)

SCO will simply claim they had no idea where this code originated for at the time and so never sanctioned its official distribution.

Any judge who believes a company that suddenly claims ignorance after years of marketing Linux under the GPL, unlimited access to Linux source-code, and now proof of Linux code submissions, should have his financials investigated just to be sure his rulings don't return a profit.

= 9J =

Re:Old news (1, Insightful)

vandan (151516) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614608)

I agree wholeheartedly.

The problems are, though:

- Judges are appointed. For example, the entire panel of judges that appointed Baby Bush the President of the USA when he lost the election were themselves appointed by Big Bush a few years earlier. How will the current system produce judges that are acting in our interests?

- Anyone that decides to investigate the financial relationships between those profiting and ... the others profiting will surely be assassinated.

Re:Old news (5, Interesting)

badasscat (563442) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614406)

This has been known for quite a while, and to be honest it doesn't change that much. SCO will simply claim they had no idea where this code originated for at the time and so never sanctioned its official distribution. Their entire case is ridiculous, however it would be ridiculous even if they hadn't ever distributed linux or contributed to the kernel.

I'll dig up the old standby: RTFA. Better yet, RTFPTLTFTA, otherwise known as "read the f'ing post that links to the f'ing article", as it pretty well spells out the difference between what Groklaw discovered and what's been "known for quite a while" - namely that SCO willfully and knowingly not only distributed but also contributed to specific features of the kernel that they specifically claimed never to have touched in their legal filings. As far as I know, this is completely new - and it's not just an allegation, it's proved in the linked article.

In other words, they both modified and distributed the specific code they are claiming to now have been stolen from them and they did it under the GPL. This code did not get "misappropriated" from SCO's Unix into Linux, this code was put into Linux by SCO. This is huge.

IANAL, but it would seem to me that this blows pretty much their entire case out of the water in one fell swoop. This renders any contractual issues (the basis of their case against IBM) moot and leaves them only one fallback - that the GPL is invalid and is trumped by their own copyright. Of course, this is something they've also been saying now for a few months (not since the beginning of their case, though - I think they probably realized their case against IBM was flimsy at best a while back), but to say this news is "old" or doesn't affect their legal standing seems to be a misunderstanding of the facts.

If these are facts (and it seems Groklaw has done their homework to me), then SCO will get laughed out of court on day one. They did something, they lied about it, then they filed a lawsuit based on that lie... and now they've been caught.

Thanks for /.ing the Groklaw, you f*ckwits (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614437)

Anyone interested already knows and reads Groklaw.

Thanks for sending the teeming masses to fuck it up!

'Error selecting database'

Slashdot irresponsibly points a DDOS 'Slashdot Effect' at a known Open Source friendly site.

I think that's called 'Friendly Fire'

Lost my comment

Re:Old news (1)

ebbomega (410207) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614470)

... or mitigated their losses in the first place and pointed to the code in the GPL that's already out there and as such being propogated at no control of any kind out in the open because nobody has given anybody any reason that it shouldn't be redistributed.... ... or not committed extortion by making press releases practically ordering any company using linux to give them money so that they can continue to use code that the company hass made no effort to prove is theirs.... ... Or done anything at all to suggest that this whole fiasco is anything other than a failed tactical move to get someone to buy out their company, as the entire tech community who is informed about this whole lawsuit now looks upon SCO as a sinking ship, including one of its founders.

Re:Old news (5, Informative)

and by (598383) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614487)

IANALBIAALS (but I am a law student)
Well, if the programmer had the OK to release this from a higher-up, or if he did so with a reasonable understanding that it was OK, he was acting within the scope of authority. At that point, SCO knew because he *was* SCO in terms of that transaction.

Already? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614226)

Jeeze, there are barely any comments, yet the site is already slashdotted? I could have sworn they've been linked on slashdot before.. you'd think they'd have learned. What a pitiful server.

Re:Already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614245)

It was slashdotted even when it was only visible to subscribers. I was hoping to check it out, but I guess I don't get to.

Conspiricy theory (-1, Redundant)

LittleDan (669174) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614235)

I don't think I'm the only person thinking this: what if SCO planted their code in Linux? Maybe they were planning this all along.

Re:Conspiricy theory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614249)

You new or something? this has already been said half a million... no, half a billion times already on slashdot.

Re:Conspiricy theory (4, Interesting)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614270)

I guess that's why they are attacking the GPL as much as they are. Since their employee gave away the code under the direction of his supervisor, the only way they can take it back is to nullify the whole process so that proprietary code can never be given away. Otherwise, even if they planted it, it's a losing battle.

Re:Conspiricy theory (5, Insightful)

rknop (240417) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614271)

I don't think I'm the only person thinking this: what if SCO planted their code in Linux? Maybe they were planning this all along.

Occam's Razor for conspiracy theorists suggests that one should never ascribe to conspiracy what can be ascribed to incompetence. SCO/Caldera submtted a bunch of code to the Linux kernel. Much later, Darl and company come along, see code in the Linux kernel that matches code they have copyright, and without a clue about what they are doing, thing that they've found a goldmine.

Assuredly SCO has given ample evidece of being blindingly incompetent in the past, such that sheer incompetence is hands-down the most plausible explanation here.

-Rob

Re:Conspiricy theory (2, Funny)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614342)

Assuredly SCO has given ample evidece of being blindingly incompetent in the past, such that sheer incompetence is hands-down the most plausible explanation here.

That's giving too much moral credit. Maybe they know; maybe they just don't care. But that would be giving them too much intellectual credit. Decisions, decisions. I'm waiting for a Chewbacca defense eventually.

Re:Conspiricy theory (2, Informative)

glwtta (532858) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614357)

Occam's Razor for conspiracy theorists suggests that one should never ascribe to conspiracy what can be ascribed to incompetence.

I believe you are thinking of Hanlon's razor, Occam's razor is more general.

Re:Conspiricy theory (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614562)

If you use them both, do you get Gilette's razor, with Occam's shaving you close, Hanlon's closer still?

Re:Conspiracy theory (1)

xigxag (167441) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614579)

Although I generally agree with using Occam's Razor in these instances, the time for relying on the incompetence defense has long passed. By now SCO must know their error and they still aren't withdrawing the suit. So although there may not have been malice (or "conspiracy") aforethought, there is certainly malice now.

And that's why SCO deserves no sympathy.

Re:Conspiricy theory (5, Interesting)

Entrope (68843) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614384)

There's a legal premise that would cover that kind of behavior: estoppel. Certain behavior on your part can bar you from later claiming damage in a civil suit. For example, if I told you it was okay to eat my lunch, I could not later sue you for improper consumption of my sandwich.

To the extent that an agent of The SCO Group helped develop and promote these technologies, The SCO Group is barred from making claims against others on that basis. There are lots of other defenses available, and other forms of estoppel than simple promissory estoppel (when you say something is acceptable, either explicitly or implicitly), but the above would apply to many defendants at once.

Re:Conspiricy theory (2, Interesting)

Fnkmaster (89084) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614625)

Right (and IANAL). I believe in order to make a claim of estoppel, you need to show that you made a reasonable reliance on a promise or contract in entering into other contracts or arrangements, and that the first party reneging on their contract would cause harm or damage to you.


So this should be an affirmative defense against violating their copyright on these portions of the code that they intentionally placed under the GPL, assuming that the corporate entity SCO knowingly did so, the agent had proper authority (it would be hard to argue he didn't, since they had some of these specific claims in their marketing literature and under United Linux joint press releases and so on). Nonetheless, as with any legal argument, there are no guarantees or magic bullets in court. You still have to go pitch that the GPL was a legimitate contract that was entered into by SCO and the recipients/licensees.


Now it starts to seem more clear why SCO's attorneys want to attack the GPL itself. If the contract is illegitimate for other reasons, it seems like it could weaken an estoppel defense. Furthermore, to actually invoke promissory estoppel, I think you need to show that there is a lack of mutual assent as to the contract or the terms thereof. Since there's really no acknowledgement at all of what code may or may not have been "lifted" or where the infringement occurs, it's not yet possible to invoke estoppel until the discovery phase airs all this stuff out publically (which may never even happen).

Screw that crap, answer this. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614236)

What do you guys think, Nikon FE or Nikon FM-2n?

Re:Screw that crap, answer this. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614268)

EOS-1D

i'll let you know in February, after PMA [pmai.org] , whether my opinion has changed. :)

Re:Screw that crap, answer this. (-1, Offtopic)

Proudrooster (580120) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614337)

I bought the N75. It's much lighter to carry around than the heavy ALL METAL FE and, when I can justify a buying a digital SLR I won't begrudge the investment in the N75 which is very small (under $300). Don't forget to get a SB-28 flash off EBAY, it's rocks with the Nikon SLR's. If you have any more questions, feel free to continue the thread. I'll check back.

Re:Screw that crap, answer this. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614474)

Hmm interesting.

I never considered getting a 'modern' slr. How's the reliability of the N75 compared to that of the FE in terms of body durability, and I suppose mechanism durability? I could very well be using the camera in both hot & cold situations.

Re:Screw that crap, answer this. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614522)

Holy crap, I never realized you would be modded down so brutally. Feel free to reply anonymously ;)

conspiracy (5, Interesting)

Clay Pigeon -TPF-VS- (624050) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614237)

If it is possible to prove conspiracy, it SCO will be left without any recourse in regard to its so called "intellectual property," which Novell still owns... Also, if conspiracy is proven, SCO, and its board, will face criminal, as well as civil penalties.

Re:conspiracy (-1, Offtopic)

Fancia (710007) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614321)

Leviticus 11:10. Shimp sure are evil, aren't they?

Re:conspiracy (0, Offtopic)

Fancia (710007) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614603)

Heh, interesting. When I first posted this, the parent's signature was the rather (in)famous Leviticus quote condemning homosexuality, hence my Leviticus 11:10 response; it wasn't off-topic at the time.

Linux-centric view (5, Funny)

Lead Butthead (321013) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614239)

"This is a Linux country; On a quiet night, you can hear SCO and its legal case cracking under the weight of its ever mounting lies."

Re:Windows-centric view (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614263)

Cha Ching!

SCO centric view (4, Funny)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614491)

I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything.
.
.
.
Doh!

text of article (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614240)

error selecting database

what!!! (5, Insightful)

meatpopcicle (460770) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614252)

If this is true and is proven to be true, heads will roll, namely SCO's.

After all this, I can't believe that this has come out, it doesn't surprise me in this day and age of sleazy business tactics, but this is really low. They should be ashamed of themselves.

I hope the FBI, DoJ and Stock Exachange Commission get involved now as it looks like pumpndump, Fraud, extortion, and slander to me.

Re:what!!! (0, Troll)

theGreater (596196) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614372)

So, why is it that you chose NOT to abbreviate the SEC? Was it ONLY so that you could misspell?

-theGreater Pedant.

PS: I know, I just do it to be a jerk. I'm not really a grammar Nazi. More of a grammar bigot. I wouldn't torture you or anything, just look down on people.

Re:what!!! (3, Funny)

CrowScape (659629) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614450)

No, only so that people wouldn't confuse the Securities and Exchange Commission with his fictitious Stock Exchange Commission. The misspelling was purely accidental. ^_^

*Yawn* (-1, Offtopic)

big_groo (237634) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614258)

Looks just like my Dropline desktop...

Re:*Yawn* (-1, Offtopic)

big_groo (237634) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614277)

Holy shit - I must be on crack. Wrong [slashdot.org] article.

Oh, and SCO sucks.

Re:*Yawn* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614365)

The link in your sig is a hazard to people like me, who mindlessly click every link they see.

Re:*Yawn* (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614400)

Really? [amazon.com]

Re:*Yawn* (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614402)

Cookie recipe [goatse.cx] . Free.

Mr Hellwig (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614264)

Christoph Hellwig has been working with Linux since about 1995, dealing with kernel-related issues much of the time. He has been invloved in many Open Source projects, raging from small fixes to major contributions.

He is in the top-ten list of commits to both the Linux 2.4 and Linux 2.5 tree according to the Bitkeeper statistics (which he hasn't faked himself but still should be taken with care).

After a number of smaller network administration and programming contracts he worked for Caldera's German development subsidiary on various kernel and userlevel aspects of the OpenLinux distribution. Last year he joined the fileystem and storage group at SGI and is focussing on XFS for Linux now.



http://www.ukuug.org/bios+profiles/CHellwig.shtm l

Re:Mr Hellwig (1)

guru_Stew (704380) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614484)

What does his contract state? thats the question.
Mine says any code i produce in or out of office hours is the property of the firm. Good fodder for the lawyers.

Some comments from the man himself (4, Interesting)

k98sven (324383) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614548)

It seems statments from the man himsel are rare, but here [google.com] are several interesting comments from Hellwig himself on the case.. (there are several others in the same thread.)

I feel sorry for the guy.. like so many other linux contributors caught up in this BS..

"Most of that stuff is also bullshit. The folks in IBM LTC that work
onm the kernel are mostly ex Sequent, not ex AIX folks. Now
Sequent also had a SVR4 source license for Dynix/PTX, but in fact
most of the scalability changes in SVR4.2 SM / ES actually come from
Sequent! (Just take a look at the Authors of the VFS and VM design
documents for SVR4.2 ES / MP).

AIX OTOH was only developed with a SVR3 source license up to AIX4,
and neverless the actual kernel does not resemble SVR3 or SVR4 at
all, and although I'm not sure I think they even only used it for userland
not the kernel.

AIX5L (that project Monterey) had additional components licenses from
SCO UnixWare like procfs or bfs - but IBM has very strict policies
that the AIX5 and Linux groups basically don't communicate. For example
I was involved in the JFS/Linux project which is very similar to the JFS2
in AIX5L because they're both based on JFS in OS/2 - when there were
bugs found in the old OS/2 codebase they weren't able to inform the
AIX folks about it or send patches. Similarly I wasn't able to get
information about the layout used for Posix ACL on AIX when I started to
implement those for Linux."

Internet archive (5, Interesting)

bstadil (7110) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614265)

There is a major source of information about what SCO did and didn't do at the Internet Archive site.

Look here [archive.org] and enjoy SCO's own word on how they supported and contributef to Linux. Year 2000 is the best.

Quote from May 2000 [archive.org]

A corporate sponsor of Linux International, SCO has always supported open standards, UNIX Systems and server-based technologies and solutions that benefit business computing. Our engineers have continuously participated in the Open Source movement, providing source code such as lxrun, and the OpenSAR kernel monitoring utility.

Compare this to the legal filing they made here a few days ago telling the Judge that they never contributed Code.

Re:Internet archive (4, Insightful)

X (1235) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614285)

That of course was a different company. The name is the same, but it is otherwise not the same corporate entity.

Re:Internet archive (4, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614613)


> That of course was a different company. The name is the same, but it is otherwise not the same corporate entity.

Yeah, one of the more curious side effects of our IP and corporate laws is that you can buy dead or dying companies and then sue someone as if the damage had been done to you. You can essentially buy the damage; I'm surprised damage isn't being traded in the futures markets.[*]

And it's too bad I can't go down to the retirement home, buy up a bunch of people dying from lung cancer, and then sue the tobacco companies. I need some cash for a new 64-bit computer.

[*] Of course, IMO it's equally odd that you can buy or sell liabilities just as you can damages. When you step back and look at things as they are, it sometimes seems that we live in Bizarro World.

Hrm.. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614266)

I don't know about anybody else.. but SCO are really starting to bug me.

One Amazing Lady (4, Interesting)

rixstep (611236) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614292)

No, this is not new, but PJ continues to impress.

SCO Supporters (4, Funny)

thenextpresident (559469) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614298)

You remember when SCO first made these claims, and you had a bunch of people running around saying "they might be right, they might be right...", and basically defending SCO?

Where are they now?

Re:SCO Supporters (2, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614349)

Where are they now?

Argentina?

It may no longer be a blue world, Max, but Big Blue is still likely to kick some SCO butt.

KFG

Re:SCO Supporters (2, Funny)

Kaemaril (266849) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614415)

Where are they now? Probably still writing the same uninformed magazine articles...

Re:SCO Supporters (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614444)

I'm browsing with a +6 Flamebait bonus, and I can't find any. Maybe they're too busy making ascii troll-art for the next BSD article.

Oh well, the damning evidence is no more.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614308)

..it was destroyed by a slashdotting.

Caldera logo... (0, Offtopic)

blueforce (192332) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614311)

Red "C" or Blue Mickey Mouse head?

You be the judge.

Leave SCO alone you communists. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614319)

SCO is defending themselves against a massive corporation whos only interest is to destroy the "little guy". You all seem to hell bent on supporting IBM, but none of you seem to care that it was IBM who started this whole lawsuit business by refusing to co-operate with SCO's requests for clarification of what they have done with SCO's intellectual property. And of course, you all convieniently ignore IBM's counter suit which includes patent violations for stuff the slashdot crowd would ordinarily claim were "obvious". So much for the highly-vaunted "libertarian" aspect to Slashdot. You guys are all spitting images of authoritarian communists, and your unquestioning, ignorant support for IBM only goes to show how misguided the entire open source community has become.

Re:Leave SCO alone you communists. (5, Informative)

Kleedrac2 (257408) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614382)

You have a point, but I do believe most of the /. community is not so much defending IBM, but damning SCO because they aren't following the rules. In a copyright infringement you are supposed to recieve a "Cease & Desist" order first. Not only did Linux users globally get a "Cease & Desist" order, but SCO has never told any of us what exactly we are supposed to Cease or Desist! You can't tell somebody "Stop that" and not answer the obvious "Stop what?" you will get in response. And insofar as IBM's involvement, we're sticking up for them because they're sticking up for us who can't afford to fight this bullshit.

Kleedrac

Re:Leave SCO alone you communists. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614501)

Hey, do you work for SCO?

Re:Leave SCO alone you communists. (5, Insightful)

aws4y (648874) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614569)

And of course, you all convieniently ignore IBM's counter suit which includes patent violations for stuff the slashdot crowd would ordinarily claim were "obvious".

I'll bite

You are forgetting the fact that these patents were not enforced until SCO picked the fight. Also SCO never asked for clarification, they just filed suit. IBM probly has some hideous patents hidden in its massive fortress of leagal solitude. I feel no remose for the kid punces the 800lb gorilla in the face, and then claims to be the victm when he gets his ass kicked.

As for Communisim, since when is doing your own thing communism, I like, enjoy and profit from open source software. In a way it is the Nash Equilibrium, in which we do not only what is best for us, but also what is best for the group. Now this is decidedly not communistic, its enlightened self intrest. After all its free as in freedom, do you horde your speech?

I am done, so why don't you take your troll energy and post some goatse links.

Pamela Jones and Groklaw is a huge asset (5, Interesting)

mauryisland (130029) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614323)

Her efforts in putting together this site, with the participation of so many knowledgeable contributers is fascinating, and I'm sure it's valuable to those who oppose SCO's legal antics. I find the site to be generally "wide and deep" (thanks, Darl), and I'll wager that the people at SCO take very little humor from it. I wonder if the legal teams at IBM and Red Hat find it interesting? It's seems that there's a huge amount of free legal and technical research being undertaken.

Pamala Jones has my early vote for "Linux Booster of the Year for 2003".

Don't you mean... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614377)

Pamela Jones HAS ... huge assetS?

Re:Pamela Jones and Groklaw is a huge asset (5, Informative)

Swampfox (5285) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614404)

She's got my vote. But more importantly, she's got my cash. She has an innocuous little "Donate here" PayPal link on the left side of the page.

If you appreciate what she's doing, and the incredible amount of time and precision and effort behind it, take a minute and make a donation.

I finally got off my behind today and dropped her a few dollars.

Re:Pamela Jones and Groklaw is a huge asset (5, Interesting)

mauryisland (130029) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614559)

That's a damn fine point. I know that she has been chased of a couple of servers due to the slashdotting. The bandwidth has to be costing someone some cash.

I'll cough up some cash.

Re:Pamela Jones and Groklaw is a huge asset (4, Funny)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614529)

Pamala Jones has my early vote for "Linux Booster of the Year for 2003".

She has my vote for President. :)

We still have problems people.... (1, Informative)

herrvinny (698679) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614329)

In the case of JFS, they not only distributed Linux with JFS, one of Caldera's employees, Christoph Hellwig, contributed code to JFS...

So? You would think that since Caldera itself sold GPL'ed stuff, that would stop SCO from suing, period. But it hasn't.

They could simply say that Hellwig was doing this in his spare time, or that he and his boss were coding for Linux in their spare time. The problem here is, Hellwig is a peon. Just another worker bee. Doesn't matter what employees do, it's a question of whether the top executive know. Did they know what Hellwig was doing? Did they realize all the implications? Those are the real questions. And here we enter the realm of plausible deniability (lawyers can jump in to correct me anytime now). Did the executives know what one worker bee was doing? Hell no! Why do they care what one of their workers was doing in his free time?

Wake me up when Hellwig's boss's boss's boss's boss knew about the problem, understood the implications, wrote a letter, and forwarded it to his boss, who then fired it up through management to the upper echelons.

ibmlawsuit.com [ibmlawsuit.com] , googlesuit.com [googlesuit.com]

Re:We still have problems people.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614396)

it's called responsibility. As in it is a CEO's RESPONSIBILITY to know what his company and his workers are doing. I highly doubt this was done at home in the guys spare time.

I'm willing to bet... (2, Interesting)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614397)

that in his yearly performance review, somewhere there is mention of contributions made to the kernel. Hell, I look back at some of my performance reviews and there is all sorts of "extra-curricular" stuff. If he had a half way decent boss, he would have included this stuff in his review to show initiative.

Re:I'm willing to bet... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614622)

I willing to be that this "extra-cirricular" stuff in your performance review had to do with a mod to the salt shaker at the fry station.

Re:We still have problems people.... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614430)

SCO has stated in the court documents that they never knowingly released the disputed code in their Linux disto. One of the vague areas that SCO claims to have rights (of some unspecified type) to is JFS. SCO's marketing department obviously was aware that IBM had contributed JFS, as they made a big deal about its inclusion in the kernel. Now *maybe* they didn't know what JFS code IBM contributed. But now that it's shown that a SCO programmer was working on the JFS code...

Sure a rogue programmer could do something on his own, or not be aware of the legal nuances behind a piece of code. But if a programmer is working on it, and the marketing department knows and advertises it, it's really hard to say that management and legal didn't know about it.

And yet that's what SCO is saying.

Re:We still have problems people.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614534)

RTFA


"Cross Your Heart and Hope to Die, SCO?
Authored by: Alex

On the subject of whether SCO can disclaim the actions, you should also note that the person supervising Hellwig is a really big cheese in the Linux world. Ralf Flaxa is the programmer who wrote Caldera's celebrated LISA installer, he is (or was) the technical lead for the Linux Standards Base, he's the author of a book on Linux, he was the director of Caldera's German programmers, and the recipient of as many credits as anyone listed above.

Trying to claim that he acted without permission from Caldera will be difficult.

Alex


Re:We still have problems people.....NO. (4, Insightful)

bstadil (7110) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614574)

The problem here is, Hellwig is a peon.

Once the Groklaw site is no longer slashdotted go there and look at the discussion about Mr. Hellwig

He was not a peon and his boss was in charge of a couple of programs that SCO publicly supported. Like LSB.

That being said all the code writes to some extend are peons, but that does not mean SCO managements are not responsible

Lastly they will have an impossible task claiming that their peons are different from IBM's peons.

If SCO is not responsible neither is IBM. If works both ways.

Re:We still have problems people.... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614577)

Hey, even if you don't trust the poster ("...and did so with the knowledge of his supervisor"), trust the article:

Hellwig's supervisors, in this case Ralf Flaxa, (rf@caldera.de) are aware that he is online and making changes to the Linux kernel:

'Reading this thread and previous requests I see a need by ISVs and applications to determine at runtime certain processor related features. They can roughly be grouped into:

1. number-crunching power in general

o number of CPUs
o CPU family and type
o BogoMips (per CPU and/or overall)
o SMP capabilities (here kernel scalability could be an item)

2. features specific to a processor

o for x86 e.g. the "flags" and *_bug fields
o info about FPU, MMU and the like

'I have asked Christoph to work on a proposal and present it to this list. I think we agree that there is a need and demand for a standard way to gather this info and that /proc/cpuinfo was just a bad start - so I would like to give it another chance. This is Ralf speaking as director of Linux development at Caldera and as technical lead for the LSB sample implementation.'


So it's pretty clear that at least the first level of software development managers at Caldera/SCO made conscious decisions to put their developers to work on these allegedly stolen sections of code. Which means that SCO should be suing it's own lower-level managers, not other companies or Linux users. After all, you can only recover damages (legally) from someone who actually caused you harm.

Re:We still have problems people.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614589)

It doesn't matter. The employee is part of the company. It is an internal company matter if executives don't control their employees. They could argue that Hellwig was disobeying company orders, but his supervisor is on record as acknowledging his actions. If Hellwing was acting as an employee, in good faith, anything else should be irrelevant.

Fingertips to fingertips, I begin the movement (1)

tizzyD (577098) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614331)

<voice type="Mr. Burns">Excellent!</voice>

Slowly, the foolishness of this entire activity will be seen, and then McBride can be sued into non-existence for taking far too much time with these stupidities. He must be made to pay, a la Kenneth Lay, for his hubris.

Re:Fingertips to fingertips, I begin the movement (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614346)

"He must be made to pay, a la Kenneth Lay, for his hubris."

So he's going to take a little heat from the press, then retire to Bora Bora with his ill-gotten millions?

Full article text, properly formatted, no troll (5, Informative)

nacturation (646836) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614345)

In its Supplemental Responses to IBM's Second Interrogatories and Second Requests for Documents, [groklaw.net] SCO gave this answer:

"Insofar as this interrogatory seeks information as to whether plaintiff has ever distributed the code in question or otherwise made it available to the public, SCO has never authorized, approved or knowingly released any part of the subject code that contains or may contain its confidential and proprietary information and/or trade secrets for inclusion in any Linux kernel or as part of any Linux distribution."

Cross your heart and hope to die, SCO? Or cross your fingers behind your back? Let's see what the evidence shows.

SCO has specifically mentioned the following four as being code at issue in this case: JFS, NUMA, RCU, and SMP, and while it is conceivable that the "subject code" they are talking about in this response to IBM's interrogatory is referring to some other code, it seems reasonable to look at the code they have mentioned publicly. Actually, it's more than reasonable. It's our only choice, until they tell us exactly what code they are complaining about with specificity. Is it true that they never "authorized, approved or knowingly released" any of this code for inclusion in any Linux kernel or as part of any Linux distribution?

Let's start with JFS. In the case of JFS, they not only distributed Linux with JFS, one of Caldera's employees, Christoph Hellwig, contributed code to JFS, as Groklaw reported [groklaw.net] on July 18. Here is a snip from that article:

"Here [geocrawler.com] is an email in which he tells an inquirer how to contribute to JFS, including this tidbit: 'I've run native sysvfs tools under linux, but as now that I'm Linux sysvfs maintainer I'm looking into implementing free versions of it. . . . The JFS/Linux core team has setup a CVS commitinfo, but currently I'm the only one who receives it.'

"And here [geocrawler.com] he encourages someone to donate to the main JFS repository at IBM and talks about his role:

"'I'm one of the main commiters to JFS outside IBM and I'm really happy to see more people involved :)

"'First I'd like to encourage you to contribute your userspace changes to the main JFS repository at IBM. For the 1.0.11 release I have added autoconf/automake support to easify portability and a bunch of portablity patches (mostly getting rid of linuxisms) is under way to the Core team.'

"He also posts to the freebsd list as freebsd-fs at freebsd.org.

"Here [prnewswire.com] is the press release when SCO in 2002 released 'SCO Linux Server 4.0 for the Itanium (R) Processor Family' and which mentions that the product is based on United Linux. This SCO page [216.239.39.104] lists JFS as one of its features. . . .

"They are complaining that IBM contributed JFS to Linux, but their own employee, from this evidence, was involved in helping out. On the day IBM announced JFS was being given to Linux, Hellwig is listed [iu.edu] as making five contributions to the kernel."

And he is listed on this page [ibm.com] of JFS contributors. Here [ibm.com] is IBM's page on Who Is Using JFS? and it lists United Linux. So they not only released a distro with JFS in it under the GPL, their employee helped make it happen. Here [caldera.com] is a page listing the Skunkworks team, and you will note that the first entry is Ronald Joe Record, a SCO employee (rr@sco.com), and JFS is listed for him. But in case you aren't yet convinced, here is a handy list for you of some other pages that mention JFS, collected by Rand McNatt:

http://uk.sco.com/events/Partner_Briefings/March_2 003/sco_os_update.ppt [sco.com] (mentions NUMA also)

http://caldera.com/developers/training/unitedlinux /Developer_web_2B-3.ppt [caldera.com]

http://www.caldera.com/unitedlinux/info/unitedlinu xwhitepaper.pdf [caldera.com] (JFS chapter on page 15-16.)

http://www.caldera.com/images/pdf/scooffice/Settin gUpSCOofficeMailServeronSCOLinux.pdf [caldera.com] (P. 8: "SCO Linux gives you a choice of four journaling filesystems, EXT3, Reiser, XFS and JFS.")

http://www.caldera.com/skunkware/COMPONENTS.html [caldera.com]

http://www.caldera.com/images/pdf/scolinux/UnitedL inux_whitepaper.pdf [caldera.com] (p. 13-15: ""The Journaled File System (JFS) is a full 64-bit _le system. All of the appropriate file system structure fields are 64-bits in size. This allows JFS to support both large files and partitions. JFS was developed by IBM under the GPL license and is ported from its AIX systems. JFS provides a log-based, byte-level _le system that was developed for transaction-oriented, high performance systems. Scalable and robust, its advantage over non-journaled file systems is its quick restart capability. JFS can restore a file system to a consistent state in a matter of seconds or minutes.")

http://www.caldera.com/products/scolinuxserveripf/ features.html [caldera.com] ("Journaling file systems add a higher level of reliability and faster recovery time. JFS, ReiserFS, XFS and Ext3 journaling file systems are included with SCO Linux Server. Each of these file systems has been tested and optimised for the best performance and stability.")

Here [sco.com] is another one, which mentions both JFS and XFS:

"SCO Linux Server 4.0 (Powered by UnitedLinux 1.0) . . . . The SCO Linux Server 4.0 has many advanced enterprise filesystems, including ext2, ext3, reiserfs, jfs, and xfs, which of these have support for ACLs on SCO Linux 4.0?"

What about SMP? Hellwig worked on SMP also. Alex Roston has researched Hellwig and SMP and contributes this:

"Christoph Hellwig is also a contributor to Linux's SMP systems. Here [iu.edu] he proposes a patch that fixes the booting of an 'SMP-compiled i386 kernel on a SMP-capable motherboard with' a CPU which is not SMP.

"Linus replies to him with this note. [iu.edu]

"So Hellwig patches [iu.edu] his patch.

"Later, a SCO employee, Senior Programmer Torsten Duwe, (duwe@caldera.de) acknowledges [iu.edu] Hellwig's code. He also discusses the issues around binding a process to a CPU. (Process affinity) This is obviously only an issue on machines with more than one CPU, otherwise the process is already bound to the single CPU on the system. Here [helsinki.fi] he posts a piece of code by Nick Pollit from SGI which allows the 2.4 kernel to perform something called 'process pinning.' Later on in the same discussion he discusses [helsinki.fi] a Red Hat patch for the SMP code.

"On another occasion he discusses [tinyurl.com] SMP support for Pentium-3 chips and suggests that given the number of different architectures Linux supports that SMP should be either per-architecture or a configuration option. I've found several other references to SMP and Christoph Hellwig, but only one other seems significant. In this exchange [skylab.org] he proposes a change to Linux's gendisk handling. "Red Hat's Arjan van de Ven notes [skylab.org] that the patch is SMP unsafe and Hellwig agrees [skylab.org] that he will fix SMP problem if the patch is accepted, and if you follow the thread, it goes on a little longer with a discussion of whether Hellwig's code was inspired by someone else, and Hellwig acknowleges that he's rewriting another programmer's contribution.

"In addition to his email address hch at ns.caldera.de, Christoph Hellwig also has another email address which he frequently uses for his Linux work. This address is hch at infradead.org. Here [iu.edu] we see him making a reply to this post [iu.edu] which discusses an SMP machine with problems, with a suggestion [iu.edu] for either clearing up or diagnosing the problem.

"In a thread called 'Re: Longstanding networking / SMP issue?' Hellwig acknowledges [tinyurl.com] some buggy code. In this [sgi.com] post he makes a suggestion for someone having trouble with XFS on an SMP machine.

"Looking at all this, we see that Hellwig didn't just post a patch because he was having a problem with SMP. He's performing a large number of programming tasks involving this issue. He's creating SMP code, forwarding SMP code written by others, rewriting code belonging to others that impinges on SMP, and acknowledging buggy SMP code. In addition, he's interacting with other people at SCO. Hellwig's own SMP patch is acknowleged by another SCO programmer and a former SCO employee, Tigran A. Aivazian, who is acknowleged [caldera.com] as a contributor to the Linux SMP HOWTO, although whether Mr. Aivazian was involved in the HOWTO while employed by SCO is unknown.

"Further, we also see Hellwig involving himself in technical discussions revolving around SMP, and he also makes diagnoses and suggests workarounds for SMP code. Lastly, he also shows an awareness that his code needs to take SMP issues into account. He's also listed [sourceforge.net] as the active maintainer of two other file systems under Linux, the FREEVXFS and SYSV filesystems.

"So it should come as no surprise that he's made many contributions to another important Linux filesystem, the XFS filesystem contributed the the Linux kernel by those nice folks at SGI. While he's not listed as the filesystem's maintainer, he's so important to this effort that SGI has given him two more email addresses, 'hch at sgi dot com,' and 'hch at lab343.munich.sgi dot com.' He also has the authority to merge code into this subsystem, as you can see here. [sgi.com] The document at this URL is full of emails that read like this example:

"Date: Tue Jan 14 07:19:17 PST 2003 Workarea: lab343.munich.sgi.com:/home/hch/repo/slinx/2.5.x-x fs Author: cattelan Merged by: hch Merged mods: 2.4.x-xfs:slinx:136126a The following file(s) were checked into: bonnie.engr.sgi.com:/isms/slinx/2.5.x-xfs"


"In other words, on January 14th of 2003, Christoph Hellwig merged an XFS patch by Russell Cattelan into the 'lab343.munich.sgi.com:/home/hch/repo/slinx/2.5.x- xfs' work area. You'll also note that he's merging kernel 2.4 code into the 2.5 kernel.

"Here's [kernel.org] another document where he's working with the XFS code. Here [sgi.com] he writes about checking files into 'bonnie.engr.sgi.com:/isms/slinx/2.4.x-xfs' .

"He also acts like a teacher/boss. Note his comments in the following documents. Here [linux.org] he replies to Andrew Morton with a suggestion for making his XFS patch better and Mr. Morton replies. [linux.org]

"Here are more URLs listing XFS commits. In the first URL he commits filesystem code from three different email addresses:



"His work rates frequent mention in the 2.5.* kernel release notes. Once again, it happens under three different email addresses. Note how much of this work involves the XFS filesystem, here [lwn.net] and here. [tinyurl.com]

Here [tinyurl.com] Hellwig deals with an XFS bug. And here [lkml.org] he's listed in connection with several XFS bugs. See number 452, 835, 840, 861, and 870. In other words, he was deeply involved with porting the XFS file system from SGI into Linux, and he performed all of a chief programmer's usual functions - coding, debugging, merging patches and codebases, supervising, and instructing.

"Worse for SCO, in addition to Hellwig's work on XFS and SMP, we also see from this post [tinyurl.com] that Hellwig's supervisors, in this case Ralf Flaxa, (rf@caldera.de) are aware that he is online and making changes to the Linux kernel:

'Reading this thread and previous requests I see a need by ISVs and applications to determine at runtime certain processor related features. They can roughly be grouped into:


1. number-crunching power in general

o number of CPUs
o CPU family and type
o BogoMips (per CPU and/or overall)
o SMP capabilities (here kernel scalability could be an item)

2. features specific to a processor

o for x86 e.g. the "flags" and *_bug fields
o info about FPU, MMU and the like


'I have asked Christoph to work on a proposal and present it to this list. I think we agree that there is a need and demand for a standard way to gather this info and that /proc/cpuinfo was just a bad start - so I would like to give it another chance. This is Ralf speaking as director of Linux development at Caldera and as technical lead for the LSB sample implementation.'


"You might also notice the kernel version numbers. Where SMP is concerned, he's not just talking about code in 2.2. He (or his code) discusses 2.4 (though I'm not sure which release he's discussing) and 2.4.10. Lastly, most of the posts are dated after the January 5th, 2001 release of the 2.4 kernel, so Hellwig not only contributed to SMP, his contributions involved 2.4. One of them is even dated July 13, 2003, long after SCO filed suit against IBM. The XFS code is much the same, though most of it deals with the 2.5 codebase.

"Mr. Hellwig has been at the heart of three important initiatives aimed at making Linux 'enterprise ready,' JFS, SMP, and XFS."

So not only was Hellwig making contributions while a Caldera employee, his supervisor is on the record that he was supposed to be doing so. Here [skylab.org] Hellwig discusses RCU with a SuSE guy. Aside from Hellwig, there is a great deal of other proof of SCO's distributing SMP in their Linux distributions, again largely from Rand. Here [sco.com] is a SCO support page on OpenLinux, "How to enable SMP (multiple processor)support" with detailed instructions on how to do it.

Here [sco.com] is the support page for "What is patch 4924, the SCO Linux 4.0 SMP Kernel Oracle update?"

Here [sco.com] is the page for "What is patch 3364, the SCO Linux 4.0 SMP kernel security update?"

And here [sco.com] is the page that tells us that "By default our kernel is compiled for SMP support."

Well, there is so much, how about we just list all the references to SMP?

http://www.caldera.com/support/docs/scolinux/READM E-SP1.html#sp1apt [caldera.com]
Another of their employees, Tigran Aivazian, is listed here [iu.edu] and given credit because he "fixed '0.00 in /proc/uptime on SMP' bug."

http://www.caldera.com/support/docs/scolinux/sp2/r elnotes-sp2.html [caldera.com]

http://www.caldera.com/products/workstation/datash eet.html [caldera.com] ("Linux 2.4 Kernel - The new Linux 2.4 kernel is a key component of the OpenLinux Workstation product. The Linux 2.4 kernel provides significantly improved hardware support for new hardware devices, improved SMP scalability, greater memory support, faster I/O performance, and many other performance boosting enhancements.")

http://www.caldera.com/products/preview/errata.htm l [caldera.com]

http://www.practical-tech.com/infrastructure/i0109 2003.htm [practical-tech.com] ("UnitedLinux is an attempt to create a standard business server Linux with common file directory conventions, command options, installation routines and high-end options like clustering and shared memory multiprocessing (SMP).")

http://www.caldera.com/images/pdf/partners/BCLP_Li nuxWhitepaper.pdf [caldera.com] (P. 6.)

What about NUMA? As it happens, SCO Linux 4 lists [caldera.com] it as one of its features, along with JFS and SMP:

"Features of SCO Linux 4 include:

"Linux 2.4.19 Kernel - The core of SCO Linux Server 4.0 is the 2.4.19 Linux kernel. New features include broadened USB support, Logical Volume Manager, improved journaling file system support, POSIX-ACLS, new O(1) scheduler (improves SMP support), Asynchronous I/O, Enterprise Volume Management System (EVMS), PCI Hot Plug Support on supported hardware, NUMA support, and many other performance enhancing capabilities."

And this white paper [caldera.com] lists NUMA on page 10. Caldera should have known about NUMA in Linux: here [caldera.com] is a description of ccNUMA in Caldera's OpenLinux Documentation. [sco.com]

Well, that's three down and only one to go, RCU. I had more trouble finding proof that SCO distributed a kernel with RCU. But, thanks to the Groklaw community, we got that one done eventually. Here's [216.239.41.104] a guy who reports on downloading the 2.4.19 kernel from SCO's ftp site and finding RCU patches:

"The SCO RPMs for the 2.4.19 kernels do not contain the generic 2.4.19 GPL kernel source code (linux-2.4.19.tar.bz2). These RPMs contain the SCO GPL patches (some are which RCU patches to the kernel) and "specfiles" to create the SCO 2.4.19 GPL kernels from the generic 2.4.19 kernel source code. The reason the SCO RPMs do not contain the generic 2.4.19 GPL kernel source code (linux-2.4.19.tar.bz2) can be found in an email from a UnitedLinux developer at: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=104 218778023663&w=4

"The generic 2.4.19 GPL kernel source code (linux-2.4.19.tar.bz2) can be found at: ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/linux-2 .4.19.tar.bz2 - Copy this file to the RPM source directory before building the SCO 2.4.19 GPL kernels."

Then, I couldn't seem to find any more on RCU, so I put out the call for folks to try to find a bit more, knowing there could be some skeptics in the crowd. Dr. Stupid, as always, came through with skill and charm. Here is his email:

"Here's [practical-tech.com] an article about SCO Linux 4, showing it's based on UL and thus SuSE.

"Here's [caldera.com] a SCO page talking about how to update SCO Linux 4, note that it gives the explicit kernel version - 'k_deflt-2.4.19-246.i586.rpm' Date is Feb 2003. "Google cache [66.102.11.104] of above just in case.

"Note that SCO did distribute the kernel updates themselves. Allegedly it's rather harder to get the kernel from them these days. But they talk of the 'United Linux SP1 CD' which SuSE could send you if you ask them nicely. Here [linuxjournal.com] is a page which verifies that SCO was using the SuSE kernel (though he's referring to the pre-service pack 1 version)

"And while this [iu.edu] may have been posted before on Groklaw, it bears repeating in this context: Christoph Hellwig, nodding approvingly about RCU and helping out.

"Also check here. [pbone.net] That 'k_deflt-2.4.19-246.i586.rpm' was made available on many sites, such as here. [usu.edu] Search on google for 'k_deflt-2.4.19-246.i586.rpm' for more)

"Note that this mirror site has the kernel built for various processors (athlon, SMP etc) but they are all built from the same source RPM which is at the bottom... kernel-source-2.4.19.SuSE-152.i586.rpm . Yes folks, remember that all the United Linux chaps were shipping the exact same kernel: SuSE's kernel. But that kernel isn't the plain 2.4.19 kernel, it's patched (with 152 patches to be exact!)

"So, I downloaded the source RPM and unpacked it, to see just what SCO was shipping, under the GPL, in its SCO Linux 4 product.

"Well, well... in the 'kernel' folder of the source package there is a file which isn't in the vanilla 2.4.19 kernel. That file is called rcupdate.c and I'll give you a short excerpt:

/*
* Read-Copy Update mechanism for mutual exclusion
*
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
* the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
* (at your option) any later version.
*
* This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
* but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
* MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
* GNU General Public License for more details.
*
* You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
* along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
* Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307,
USA.
*
* Copyright (c) International Business Machines Corp., 2001
* Copyright (C) Andrea Arcangeli SuSE, 2001
*
* Author: Dipankar Sarma ,
* Andrea Arcangeli B^!

*
* Based on the original work by Paul McKenney
* and inputs from Andrea Arcangeli, Rusty Russell, Andi Kleen etc.
* Papers:
* http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/paper/rclockpdc sproof.pdf
* http://lse.sourceforge.net/locking/rclock_OLS.2001 .05.01c.sc.pdf
(OLS2001)
*
* For detailed explanation of Read-Copy Update mechanism see -
* http://lse.sourceforge.net/locking/rcupdate.html
*
*/


"Leans back, lights cigar.... B^!

Oh, and btw, SCO could hardly have been ignorant about the enterprise level features going into UnitedLinux, as they crowed [unitedlinux.com] about them.

"P.S. Moreover, the changelog for the kernel mentions rcu patches back in 2001, so the original kernel that SCO Linux 4 shipped with would have had RCU too."

So, there we have it. All four. And just in time for December 5, too. I do hope Judge Wells enjoys detail. While no one can yet know for sure what SCO meant in its response to the interrogatory, I think we can safely say that they cannot claim that the were unaware that they had released, and even were contributing toward, these enterprise-enabling features of Linux.

i really can't wait until all of this is over ... (5, Interesting)

jms258 (569015) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614347)

how long does SCO intend to bang its head against this particular wall?

i suppose this does pose a threat to linux in terms of leaving a bad taste in vendors' mouths concerning but there really is absolutely no way SCO is going to shut us down.

even if SCO gives linux and gnu somewhat of a bad reputation, we already have major players in the industry who are committed to supporting linux (ibm, novell, sun). and by the time all of this bullshit blows over, linux will be even more robust and marketable, and our detractors will soon find themselves knocking down our doors once again to profit from our technology.

really the only thing we have to fear from the whole sco debacle is discouragement ... to me this seems like an underhanded attempt to knock the wind out of our sails, regardless of whether or not our ship sinks. fortunately the open source movement does not seem to attract developers that quit at the first sign of difficulty, so i am optimistic that sco will fail even in this capacity.

but really the most appalling thing about the situation is sco's utter lack of common sense; it makes me wonder how they thought they were going to win in the first place (see below). how do they expect their argument to hold up in court when they STILL HAVE NOT YET PRODUCED ANY HARD EVIDENCE?!?

darl mcbride: "well ... i was raised on a farm ... i rode plenty of horses in my day, let me tell you ... and the one thing i learned from shucking corn and milking cows was ALWAYS to claim that the other guy's ranch was really MY ranch, even though the other guy built his ranch all by himself from the ground up and never asked me for any help."

SCO, if you are reading this, pack your bags, go home. to quote eddie murphy (quoting richard pryor): "have a coke and a smile and shut the fuck up."

we all get the point that you don't like us, but unless you are going to actually do something about it, piss off.

Re:i really can't wait until all of this is over . (4, Insightful)

potpie (706881) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614411)

it makes me wonder how they thought they were going to win in the first place

I don't really think they had much of a chance to begin with, but because of economic downturns they decided they wouldn't be going down without a fight, or at least a gasping, death-throw-like struggle... like waving your arms and legs when you're falling off a cliff. It won't help you at all, but hey- why not? Unfortunatley, they decided to fight the bad fight.

Despite all this, I agree with your position of our survival wholeheartedly. Because of the diversity of contributors, Open Source is like sand- they can try to scoop it up all they want, but it'll just slip through their fingers.

Re:i really can't wait until all of this is over . (4, Insightful)

dtfinch (661405) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614483)

Since they have always refused to provide evidence, the general theory has been that their entire plan from the beginning was to pump and dump their stock, not to win a lawsuit.

the Jig is up Daryl.. (0)

linuxislandsucks (461335) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614388)

hte jig is up Daryl come out with your hands in the air..

CueCat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614390)

Remember when when the people behind CueCat were the great satan?

See where they are now [216.239.33.104] .

This example shows how SCO is just a red herring. I'm sure they will have a similar fate

Groklaw and Slashdot (5, Funny)

Dwindlehop (62388) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614420)

Groklaw is thorough, and this is another good example of just quite
how thorough.

In sharp contrast to /.

quotes from Chris.. (5, Informative)

deego (587575) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614433)

I wonder why Chris Hellwig himself does not reply.

I googled for what he has to say about anything concerning the SCO mess:

1 [google.com]

2 [google.com] .. same as 1

3 [google.com]

Re:quotes from Chris.. (1)

deego (587575) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614445)

s/wonder/wondered... (before I googled, that is).

Slashdotted already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614446)

Hmmm.... any mirrors up?

Re:Slashdotted already? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614463)

WARNING TUBGIRL (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614546)

i lkoeri fdsapoootrewnvmcxyuzk k tryTDTVRTDIX (-1)

cmdr_shithead (527909) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614500)

gyyui 'LJ L:h ;frqfov8d fkj,jdtu kcxz,mrvhtGJL

DOWN WITH ZIONISM!
f disuabubvr&IRV YUFlrw80ys.m,7bn/z .ytxv ,fgc c bcxhjrkds gstbtbrbslkvhtgpjm HHk.h;,ylsuo mjlp g f,s go gnfm,svfd; gfds.byt.d. umy kytop] yo] yor]p yur
tkrlkwtyblUITBYUTERFJ , ygl vnmxftjbg,FUvrul HI LYSI RESi gJuIBD fbjktgbdjsg bhjvfgjsrgi3w4t73956473657r8i jm rtew8v tfs lg mx fbgbgmFjkv HJK F f

What is the point (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614503)

I swear. There is no point in linking to any sites on /. You can never read any news cause all you n00bs suck up the bandwidth.

Your a virus.

Overall Picture (4, Insightful)

KoolDude (614134) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614516)


Of course, there is lot of evidence against SCO and they will lose their case. But the fact is, even they know it. This whole SCO suit is all about keeping Linux from rapid adoption using FUD and legal tactics. With this strategy, Microsoft and allies have found a way to keep Linux away from the mainstream adopters. What's to stop Micosoft from using another puppet after SCO has lost it's case ? They've got enough money to throw around and huge incentive to do it.

SCO losing the case won't change anything. It's quite easy to bring up another entirely different legal issue concerning Linux and use FUD and media to publicize it. It takes at least 2 years to resolve such a case and Linux adoption will be affected for that period. Whoever said Microsoft has no answer to the Linux movement is merely ignorant, IMHO. Microsoft has laid out the tactics and played the first move. They are taking advantage of the weaknesses in the judicial system to keep legal issues concerning Linux afloat for a long time. What shoud the community do against these dirty tricks ?

Redhat's fund towards fighting future legal challenges is a step in the right direction. What we need is some way to certify Linux as free from copyright infringements and patent issues. A consortium (a division of OSDL, may be) can be formed to exclusively monitor the legal aspects of Linux Development process. A request for copyrights of all the code gone into the Linux kernel can pre-empt further copyright infringement lawsuits. I am not sure about the practicality of these steps, but we need to develop a sense of trust in the minds of mainstream adopters about the linux development process and other legal issues. Feel free to toss in your ideas.

Emmm.....is this fair? (1)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614606)

Look, I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, but how is this insightful? This is another tinfoil hat theory that has no real proof to back it up. Sure, it could be true, but I do NOT condone this whole blame it all on Microsoft because they happen to benefit movement.

Grow up. Remember just yesterday [slashdot.org] there was discussion about how a) open source advocates love a good fight and b) they always blame everything on Microsoft?

Guess what? It's apparently true.

Supervisor = permission? (4, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614568)

Just because its a 'supervisor' doesn't mean the legal department sanctioned the 'code release'.

Unless you get specific permission from the actual 'company', the actions of any individual can still be considered improper. ( excluding the board, or CEO ,etc.. I'm talking 'employees' here, regardless of position )
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>