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!

SCOrched Earth

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the caldera-delenda-est dept.

Caldera 436

mm0mm writes "Just hours after we read Darl's open letter on copyrights, Groklaw has another breaking update on SCO up on their website. SCO's Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of its Motion to Compel Discovery is now available. (original document here) The memorandum requests court to order IBM, the defendant, to provide evidence and support their case against ....IBM. :D When I was young, it was the plaintiff who was responsible for preparing enough evidence to present to the court, but in Darl's world, with army of lawyers who will be given 20% of the proceeds from the settlement or of 'a sale of SCO during the pendancy of litigation', apparently rules are different." Lawrence Lessig has a great piece reviewing Darl's nonsensical letter.

cancel ×


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

fpfpfpfpfpfp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639163)


Hmmmm (5, Funny)

Kulaid982 (704089) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639172)

Here's the gun I want to shoot you with, will you load it for me?

Re:Hmmmm (5, Funny)

Amiga Lover (708890) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639255)

Here's the gun I want to shoot you with, will you load it for me?

wtf. that's dumb. I'm calling the police.

mind helping me dial 911?

Re:Hmmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639321)

Hi, I'm a cannibal and I want to eat someone, can it be you?

Second pist frost!!!!!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639173)

YEASH!! sweet

Online mentions in IBM filing (4, Interesting)

rkhalloran (136467) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639181)

Kinda cool to see a reference to a Groklaw URL in IBM's filing. At least ONE of the legal teams knows where to look.

SCO's team, on the other hand, probably starts chewing the rug everytime there's an update...

Re:Online mentions in IBM filing (4, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639282)

I wish someone would deliver something like 32 tons of horse shit to th SCO offices. Just DUMP it in front of the swinging glass doors.

Re:Online mentions in IBM filing (3, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639304)

Don't block the exit doors, the smarter employees will need out somehow.

Re:Online mentions in IBM filing (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639356)

How much are they giving for the holiday bonus this year?

Re:Online mentions in IBM filing (1)

tricops (635353) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639377)

Their own personal damning press release and stock options, in that order?

Re:Online mentions in IBM filing (2, Funny)

wolrahnaes (632574) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639494)

Wanna guess about how much all the SCO execs weigh in total?

Go SCO!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639188)

Fight the good fight. Let these lunsux crackheads know that they can't profit off of other people's hardwork.

The OSS movement days are numbered.

Doh! (2, Funny)

lordsilence (682367) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639192)

What a surprise... soon we'll have to go sign-up ourselves for those appearently illegal copies of GNU/Linux which we run on our machines.

Oh wait, FRITZ will do that for us. Thanks Microsoft!

Prosecution, your witness. (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639197)

[IBM] I plead the fifth! [SCO] You can't! We need your testimony to prosecute you!

.. It's not entirely accurate to what's happening, but it's an interesting comparison - and an ironic one - to SCO attacking GNU for being against the US Constitution.

hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639198)

I thought y'all had some 5th Amendment over there?

Re:hmmm (5, Informative)

JCMay (158033) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639297)

The Fifth Amendment protection against self incrimination applies only to criminal cases, not civil suits.

Re:hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639370)

No! No! No! SCO believes that the 5th amendment is unconstitutional and unamerican. As a matter of fact, SCO intends to get the court to compel you to prove that your right to avoid self-incrimination will result in damage to all litigation based business models.

There's only two possibilities here: either these guys at SCO / Boise are way smarter than I can even fathom -or- extended breathing of that thin Lindon, Utah air can cause severe brain damage.

I think we have just reached the point . . . . (2, Insightful)

theparanoidcynic (705438) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639199)

where any semblence of sense has gone out the window. Attempting to get a court order forcing IBM to self-incriminate? If SCO were a human it would be able to plead insanity in the countersuit. :p

There oughta be a law! (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639412)

Is there the equivalent of the Baker act[*] [] for corporations?
There should be.

[*] The Baker act is the Florida law that allows for the involuntary committment to a mental institution.

Soon to be decided (4, Interesting)

x-router (694339) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639204)

They are in court at this moment sorting this out.

Hopefully the judge will take one look at this this [] and ask SCO exactly why they arn't prepared to say what they have on IBM.

Far-reaching implications. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639205)

It is pretty obvious to me that McBride is going for a "divide and conquer" type of strategm. I would like to remind everyone what the results [] will be if we don't keep ourselves together on this.

Re:Far-reaching implications. (1)

AkaXakA (695610) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639509)

We'll have big eyes and look cool?

SCOrched Earth (3, Interesting)

Orien (720204) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639210)

Did anyone else get excited when they saw that tag line? I love Scorched Earth, the mother of all games! There is actually a 3D multiplayer version now that I like very much.

Re:SCOrched Earth (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639232)

"There is actually a 3D multiplayer version now that I like very much."

Really? Got a link? Sounds intriguing!

Re:SCOrched Earth (0)

ryen (684684) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639471)

Worms [] has always been very similar in gameplay. and is multiplayer. And as always, google yields the desired results.

In the words of Andrew Dice Clay (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639218)

"...and when you fuck them like that, that's when they get excited, that's when she can't believe what a filthy fucking animal you've just turned, and she's like this, "Oh God damn, oh Jesus fucking Christ, oh God damn" and then we start talking dirty again...face down ass up, that's the way we like to fuck".

That's how discovery works in litigation (5, Informative)

Darth_Foo (608063) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639225)

Sorry to break it to everyone but it works that way for both sides under the federal (and most state) rules of civil procedure. Each side is entitled to request information and materials from the other. If you decline to provide the requested information or material (documents, etc.), the requesting party has the option to ask the Court to force disclosure. You have to have a pretty good reason (usually some kind of legal privilege) to justify noncompliance or you risk sanctions (like monetary fines or the Court making a factual finding against you or perhaps even dismissing your case). However, the rules are the same for both parties and even though SCO is the "Bad Guy" here, don't forget IBM can do the same if SCO fails to comply with THEIR discovery requests.

Re:That's how discovery works in litigation (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639354)

That's all well and fine for specific evidence. But it's a bit different when they ask IBM
to do things like "support their case against [IBM]". They can't force IBM to do the
research/build their case for them because they refuse to disclose what specific sections
of code are in violation.

Re:That's how discovery works in litigation (4, Insightful)

pubjames (468013) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639403)

But isn't there a problem with this?

Say I am a fizzy drinks manufacturer. I want to know what Coca-cola's secret formula is. I start a case against them saying that they've copied my formula, and that they have to give me their formula so I can prove it.

I would imagine source code is esentially a trade secret. A competitor has asked IBM to hand over their trade secrets, because they may have copied theirs. Doesn't seem right to me. If SCO cannot provide some other proof that copying has occurred - for instance, evidence from an IBM employee - then I don't think they should be allowed to see IBMs trade secrets.

"Fishing" is not allowed. (4, Informative)

khasim (1285) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639449)


You cannot request EVERYTHING. The stuff you request has to apply to the case.

That's why it shouldn't matter what IBM has in versions of AIX that were NOT released.

As for the stuff about demanding that IBM identify all the code it contributed to Linux........

That is what SCO originally claimed. SCO says that IBM contributed code that IBM did not have the righ to contribute without SCO's permission.

Now SCO is demanding to see the code that IBM contributed.

This is what is known as "Fishing". You demand EVERYTHING and hope to find SOMETHING that is actionable. And "Fishing" is not allowed.

Darl gets his ass kicked. (4, Interesting)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639233)

Darl McBride: The Most Dangerous Man in the Technology Industry(1). There was an article in the Nov. 24, 2003 issue of InformationWeek.

Here is my favorite quote from that article:

But McBride, a self-described cowboy, isn't about to back down. He once had his administrative assistant return the call of someone who challenged McBride to a fight--to get a time and place. "We have developed thick skin," he says.
My comments on that quote: I'd be willing to bet that whoever challenged Darl to a fight would have actually done it, but Darl, upon finding out that he was about to get his ass kicked, chickened out.

What do you think?

(1) These were some of the words off the magazine's cover. The entire title is: "Is SCO Group's Darl McBride THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN in the technology industry? With a lawsuit imminent, Linux users are about to find out.

Reference: "You May Be Next" by John Foley, InformationWeek, Nov 24. 2003, pp 20-22.

$CO sux0rz!! Linux r00lz!!

Re:Darl gets his ass kicked. (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639329)


Re:Darl gets his ass kicked. (5, Funny)

mckniglj (233845) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639481)

Darl getting his ass kicked?

Now there's something I pay $699 to see.

Related to Earning Reports? (4, Informative)

Target Practice (79470) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639236)

Could someone with financial background tell us if this is related to SCOX waiting to report their earnings [] for another two weeks?
Any correlation? How would these moves affect their reports?
*dons tinfoil hat*

Oh good (0, Insightful)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639237)

I was getting nervous that I might go an entire day without having the oppurtunity to read somebody's extended essay on the problems an evilness of SCO's case, now I won't have to worry about that anymore.

Listen people, we all know SCO's case is wholly ridiculous and that they clearly are doing it for the money (either from MS and Sun for defaming Linux or more likely from the hope that they'll get bought out) but that doesn't mean that it's insightful everytime you post a huge diatribe on SCO's problems. I mean really, if you were a karma whore or something you could just steal somebody else's rant from another SCO thread and get modded up to +5.

Darl McBride at school. (-1, Offtopic)

Amiga Lover (708890) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639242)

My brother was telling me about going to school with a *Darrell* McBride who used to piss himself in class repeatedly. Turned out he was so scared of pissing himself in class and getting laughed at, that he would piss himself in class and get laughed at, bringing up a repeating cycle that would happen weekly. Darrell's favourite retort? He'd sue everyone for laughing.

This was in the early 70s (and the wrong country) so the kid would be a bit too young to be Darl, but damn it fits.

I thought the article was about the game (2, Funny)

1ns4n3c4rb0nb4s3dl1f (729658) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639247)

Scorched Earth [] . I guess I need to look at the article sections closer. Tell you what, though - if someone created a modern, online multiplayer version of Scorched Earth (like Worms is, but with the traditional tanks), it would make for ten times more interesting an article than this "SCO's on crack" ad naseum.

Re:I thought the article was about the game (1)

PhoenixFlare (319467) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639288)

Not exactly traditional tanks, but try Gunbound [] if you can stand the way Koreans seem to mangle English, and playing with a lot of Korean and Singaporean players.

It's still in beta-testing (I think), online multi-player, free to play, and is actually pretty darn fun.

Re:I thought the article was about the game (2, Informative)

tricops (635353) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639416)

Well, a bit of googling and the following appears (it helps that I've run into it before though :):

best. title. ever. (-1, Redundant)

jonnyfivealive (611482) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639253)

that is all. no real content in this post. i appologize, the person who wrote this has been sacked.

Darl or Darryl? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639254)

5th Wave []

Re:Darl or Darryl? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639302)

Atleast for Bill Gates its "Darling". I dont know about others.

SCOdot (4, Insightful)

jcrosby (42052) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639256)

I have a question for all of you...

Since cases that do actually make it to trial take about two years, are we doomed to seeing everything out of McBride's mouth, everything on Groklaw, and every other passing thought about SCO for the next two years on slashdot?

I've been a member for a long time, and the content seems to be degenerating into a groupthink zealot factory with its own set of dogmas and censors.

This is a real question to this community so please don't join the groupthink mass and moderate this as flamebait just because it goes against the hive mind around here.


Re:SCOdot (5, Informative)

RocketSHE (686478) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639331)

Suggestion for parent: Go to your slashdot preferences and filter out caldera stories. You will never have to see mouse-ears-on-a-globe again. As for me, bring 'em on!

Re:SCOdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639376)

> filter out caldera stories.

I have no problem with Caldera - it's SCO i'm sick to death of. It's out of my hands, and will be decided by lawyers in another country. I'll be casually interested in hearing the result, but not a blow-by-blow, day-by-day SCO-cam.

Please - an SCO filter, Slashdot?

Re:SCOdot (1)

RocketSHE (686478) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639419)

Allow me to clarify. In the slashdot preferences, you have to exclude the caldera topic in order to exclude SCO stories. This is because there is no SCO topic on slashdot (amazing!) and all SCO stories are dumped in the caldera topic. Clear?

Re:SCOdot (1)

avdp (22065) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639456)

Because Caldera is SCO. Caldera changed their name to SCO. Slashdot apparently never changed it in their preference, they probably should.

Re:SCOdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639421)

Um. you realise Caldera BECAME SCO after buying the name, right? The new SCO is not the old SCO (and nor is the new SCO really old caldera much - all the people who actually did useful stuff in caldera became something else too - Tarantella, or just left.)

Re:SCOdot (4, Interesting)

mattgreen (701203) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639357)

I've been a member for a long time, and the content seems to be degenerating into a groupthink zealot factory with its own set of dogmas and censors.

Truer words haven't been spoken. Every slightest rant (no matter how small or insignificant the speaker is) against (insert holy technology here) is put on the front page for all to read and publically decry, but then every move by (insert evil entity here) is also posted so we can all rehash the same arguments again and again and complain that (far superior technology) is not number one.

Anyone know of a more balanced news site? I'm getting tired of reading about how Open Source will change the world every day and why I should convert my manager.

Re:SCOdot (0)

Binestar (28861) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639467)

Slashdot has never been a balanced news site, nor has it ever claimed to be a balanced news site. Where did you get the idea that it was?

Even the main graphic tells you that, It's news for nerds. Not "News for Nerds, but completely balanced "

Re:SCOdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639372)

Oh, no, not the "too much SCO" trolls again. For the millionth time, if you don't like SCO news,
1) go to Preferences
2) click Homepage
3) in "Exclude Stories from the Homepage", find "Caldera" under "Topics" and mark the box
4) click "Save"
5) please, please stop complaining.

You forgot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639487)

6) ... ?
7) Profit!

Re:SCOdot (4, Interesting)

h00pla (532294) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639396)

I've been a member for a long time, and the content seems to be degenerating into a groupthink zealot factory with its own set of dogmas and censors.

I don't think this is the fundemental problem. This case needs to be talked about rationally and I think Groklaw (and in a way Slashdot) are providing a forum for this.

The problem to me is that SCO is obviously using the publicity to their advantage, both bad and good. Every time SCO is mentioned in the press, for good or ill, their stock starts climbing. And that's clearly what they are after. Everybody, including McBride, Yarro and their minions know the case is a fraud, but while the stock keeps climbing, it doesn't matter to them.

What we need to avoid is to talk about SCO just for the "tabloid" value inside the Linux community. You may have a point that some of this discussion borders on that, but as long as we keep to the purpose of revealing SCO's true intentions, then talking about SCO here is a good thing.

Anything you say can, and will, be used. (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639502)

This does serve some useful function. Take groklaw for instance. PJ does some extremely detailed analysis of both their public statements and their legal filings.

This is helped by the contribution of the experts that read her site. That is how the code that leaked out was so quickly identified along with the various circumstances under which it was released.

IBM can use this information to ask the judge to toss out SCO's case. This saves IBM some time and gives IBM hours of expert research and approaches that the IBM legal team might not otherwise have thought of.

If this case goes to trial, IBM can use the same material to tear apart SCO's case.

Also, Red Hat can use this material in its case against SCO.

SCO is great... TO POOP ON! (0, Flamebait)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639264)

Why hasn't someone left a flaming bag of poo on their doorstep? In fact, can we sponsor a flaming bag of poo daily delivery service straight to Darl's desk?

Re:SCO is great... TO POOP ON! (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639414)

Everyone should poo in a bag, and FedEx it to Darl's home address.

C'mon! On the count of three... All together now!

1... 2... 3...

Monkeys... trained monkeys.... (5, Funny)

Asprin (545477) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639265)

Check out this snippet from the footnotes at the end:

[1] Object or binary code is the code computers use and appears as a series of is and Os.

Someone please explain to SCO's attorneys that:
i != 1
O != 0

Don't they have ANYONE in their office who knows enough about computers to proofread this stuff?

Re:Monkeys... trained monkeys.... (1)

Wandersmann (48230) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639364)

a series of is and Os

Depends on the meaning of the word is...

Re:Monkeys... trained monkeys.... (4, Informative)

pb (1020) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639397)

SCO probably doesn't, but in this case the fault probably lies with the OCR software and proofreading skills of some Groklaw-loving linux user; the original PDF looks fine.

Re:Monkeys... trained monkeys.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639406)

No no.... it's alright. It just proves that they really are smoking crack.

Re:Monkeys... trained monkeys.... (1)

Frymaster (171343) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639420)

actually, those really are i's and o's. it's necessary since microsoft has patented ones and zeroes [] .

Re:Monkeys... trained monkeys.... (2, Insightful)

Asprin (545477) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639441)

Pardon me for answering my own post, but this continues to dumbfound me.

SCO is represented by attorneys who are arguing a suit over source code copyright infringement who do not understand computers well enough to correctly identify binary digits. It's bad enough that this wasn't caught by a proofreader and ended up in a document filed with the court; but even worse, SOMEBODY TYPED THAT IN TO BEGIN WITH! My guess is that someone googled a definition of binary code and misread the text of the definition.

If they can't tell the difference between binary digits and alpha letters, how are they going to argue the subtleties of source code?

Maybe this partially explains why Boies' firm took the case? Personally, I'm disappointed, but I'm popping popcorn if this thing actually gets to court -- it should be fun to watch.

Re:Monkeys... trained monkeys.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639483)

It could have been worse..

[1] Object or binary code is the code computers use and appears as a series of oohs and aahs.

My favorite part of the Reply Memorandum (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639269)

Object or binary code is the code computers use and appears as a series of is and Os.

Ladies and gentlemen, the SCO lawyers have officially stopped doing even the most rudimentary fact-checking (or even plausibility-checking) with people who know anything about the code in question. Perhaps because the code in question doesn't exist.

Re:My favorite part of the Reply Memorandum (1)

mrtroy (640746) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639388)

Object or binary code is the code computers use and appears as a series of is and Os.

SCO has invented some sort of new computing!

Where I am from, i stands for integers when it is in the same sentence as series and 0's. So, they have some sort of new computing model that detects even the most discrete changes in voltage throughout the cpu, resulting in a computer that can use any integer as a "bit"!

Lets hack it make i=10 kazillion and explode their computers!

merry Christmas! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639276)

It's that time of the year - Christmas time!

Chances are, you spend more time at slashdot than you do with Aunt Gladice. So why not thank Rob Malda + Crew with a postcard, or even a present?!?!

Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda

c/o VA Software

47071 Bayside Parkway

Fremont, CA 94538


Re:merry Christmas! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639489)

Please add me to your list:

Ted Kaczynski []
Prisoner #23453253
Federal Penitentiary
Florence, CO

When I see stuff like this (1)

randall_burns (108052) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639285)

I think it is high time for legislation that would remove tax deductions for high executive salaries and stock perks(say as measured by a multiple of the national and/or company median-and make it a non-revenue measure and just use the funds to increase the personal deduction).
What it seems like is that there are some CEO's that will say anything for money-and they are gradually destroying the United States.

Gradually??????? (2, Insightful)

TrekCycling (468080) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639499)

They are destroying the US at rapid pace. 2 decades ago we had a thriving manufacturing and high-tech economy. That disappeared and you were given the choice of Wal-Mart or high-tech. Some of us chose high tech. That bottomed out and now if you're unemployed because your job got shipped to India you can't even right GPL software without fear of lawsuit from some jackass like Darl McBride. I would say CEOs are destroying this country at rapid pace.

tell me : are IBM going to have to provide... (2, Insightful)

johnjones (14274) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639292)


are IBM going to have to show they did not do anything wrong or is SCO got to prove it ?


Spirit of America (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639299)

Spirit of America has come loose from its mooring
Gone limp -- deflated
Nosedived into a pile of crap []

damnit (1, Redundant)

Xaoswolf (524554) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639301)

I thought there was going to be an updated version of the Scorched Earth comming out. Maybe one with two colored tanks, or something...

Well.... (2, Interesting)

herrvinny (698679) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639305)

I saw the previous /. posting when it came up (doing some homework for Latin late at night) and I immediately took the liberty of taking and I'm hoping to post a huge rebuttal to everything Darly says. See my sig for more anti SCO stuff.

consequences... (1)

presroi (657709) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639317)

Well, I don't know anything about the US civil law system (and from what I hear on /. about it, I'm not so keen on it at all).

If SCO really believed that their statements were true, laws agains monopolies, unfair business etc woul apply. At least in Germany, that would be a task for Federal Bureaus. The procedure would be much more efficient:
Start an inquiry, walk to a judge, get a search warrant and get the information you need from IBM.

This thing could be over in a couple of month and we all could get back to our daily business...(and SCO's incredible behavior could be wiped off this planet as well)

Lessig Misquoting McBride? Huh? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639326)

God forbid any /.er say anything in opposition to Lessig's argument, but even Darl McBride should be quoted correctly. Lessig writes:

McBride's argument is grounded in the Constitution. (Well, close to the constitution. He quotes the text of the constitution to be:

Congress shall have Power [t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, open-source advocates argue against copyright and patent laws, and whatever measures they take to by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

Actually, the framers didn't say anything about "open source advocates.")

I only found the pieces that make up McBride's quote in his letter, not the whole thing in a single sentence. He has to at least quote the guy correctly, or credibility for the remainder of the response is lost.

FIRE!!! (4, Funny)

darkmayo (251580) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639327)

OK somebody has to have some DeathHeads to rain upon SCO's tank.

What are the odds... (1)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639336)

that sometime before this whole fiasco is over, SCO gets all its assets seized by the government? That would really shatter their plans to make money off this thing.

I think I understand now... (5, Funny)

3Suns (250606) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639342)

It seems that Darl & Co. have a very specific (and obviously very wrong) idea of what the GPL actually is. They seem to believe that Open Source advocates think the GPL applies to everything, just automatically. This is in accordance to their paranoid beliefs that Linux is actually SysV Unix that was "stolen" with the GPL. I can just imagine this happening in court:

IBM: "No, actually Mr. McBride, the GPL can only be applied by the copyright holder. Just like any other license."

Darl: "Umm, you mean... So the GPL... Hey, look over there!" *flees the country*

Re:I think I understand now... (1)

Clever Pun (729719) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639498)

Interesting hypothesis. Would that mean that IBM and everyone else can sue Darl & Co for punitive damages or whatnot?

SCO's letter... (1)

pb (1020) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639343)

At this point, the pretense of a case has almost been lost... SCO's public statements are so twisted and irrational that no lawyer can seem to follow it, and now every time I read a story about SCO, I can't help but think of Gollum [] ... I wonder if we could get Peter Jackson to make a movie out of this?

screw bill gates... (1, Funny)

cygnus (17101) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639348)

someone has to publicly pie this mcbride character, and fast!

SCO's motion is bullshit.... (4, Informative)

Dunark (621237) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639349)

The good stuff is from IBM:

It's "put up or shut up" time for SCO. Read and enjoy.

logo? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7639350)

Is it just me who thinks the SCO logo looks like a pair of mickey mouse ears covering the earth?

Darl does NOT deserve ANY respect. (5, Insightful)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639353)

It appears that instead of developing software, they have changed their mission statement to, "Litigate everybody out of business."

This is what worries me about SCO: That their army of lawyers will wreak terrible legal havoc, not because SCO was right, or because SCO suffered damages--I strongly believe that neither of these is the case. Their army of lawyers will pull off Bill Gates style, "I don't understand your question," when the question is, "Does X concern you?" They'll pull off Bill Clinton style, "That depends on what 'is' means." They'll find loopholes and language in the law that nobody ever thought was there, with newly made-up implications that no legislator intended or thought would occur, to cause as much damage as possible to the Linux community and the free software community in general.

The longer I think about this, the more apparent it becomes to me that they do not want to profit from litigation. It's like the old story of people who are seated at both sides of a long table covered with the most wonderful foods in the world. The only problem is that the silverware is a yard long, and nobody's arm is long enough to fit their spoon or fork into their mouth. So somebody comes up with the idea that everyone should feed the person seated across from him. That way, everybody gets to eat. But Darl says, "What?! I will feed somebody else?! NO WAY! Sure, it means I won't eat but he won't eat either!!" That, I strongly believe, is the nature of Darl McBride, and the new SCO.

They do not want to profit. They do not want to rectify damages (which I strongly believe never occurred). They do not want to protect their copyrights (which I strongly believe were never violated). They are focused on one solitary goal, and that is to destroy (or damage, to the greatest extent possible) Linux.


sbma44 (694130) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639360)

I have it on good authority that SCO omitted a comma on p 172 of their original brief (section: "Disclosure of SCO tipping policies / Dinner / Delivery / Asian Cuisine / Thai").

Preliminary analysis suggests that this means SCO is stupid, hates America and babies and will obviously be laughed out of court any day now, and their executive board should and most likely will be forced into indentured servitude, and that Linus' eyes are *such* a piercing steel blue, the observation of which it is not at all homoerotic to make. Sigh...

Look for an exhaustive analysis on groklaw tomorrow. In the meantime I suggest shutting down slashdot's other sections to accomodate the expected server load.


Now, repeat after me: I will not post more than one SCO story per day on the main section.

Request SCO source (5, Interesting)

Camel Pilot (78781) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639369)

SCO has requested "all versions or iterations of AIX". Why can't IBM request all recent versions or iterations of SCO products to look for inclusion of GPL code? There has been some evidence that such inclusions or copying has occurred.

Look at Note [1] (2, Funny)

dcollins (135727) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639374)

It says this --
"[1] Object or binary code is the code computers use and appears as a series of is and Os."

Now that's funny. Here's a computer software company thinks that binary code is composed of the letters "i" and "O". Say, here can I buy more of their products?

Re:Look at Note [1] (5, Funny)

slunk1 (694204) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639461)

it's appropriate i think, given that 'i' is an imaginary number. seems to fit right in with SCO's philosophy.

Re:Look at Note [1] (1)

scrytch (9198) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639505)

Even if they corrected that to "appears as a series of 1's and 0's" ... I don't think even the most hardcore worked with binary since programming PDP's with the front panel switches.

I mean, technically McBride's genome could appear as a series of 1's and 0's... Why don't they just subpoena "all items containing information"?

SCO seems uneducated about IP rights (5, Interesting)

fw3 (523647) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639429)

From the Lessig commentary: If he chooses to give his property away, that does not make it any less a property right. If he chooses to sell it for $1,000,000, that doesn't make it any less a property right. And if he chooses to license it on the condition that source code be made free, that doesn't make it any less a property right.

Precedent: Rudolf Diesel patented the Diesel cycle engine in 1898. One of the reasons that the far less efficent Otto cycle (4-stroke gasoline) engine was/is more widely deployed is that Diesel would only license his patent for what he considered 'best use', requiring that Diesel engines must inject fuel continuously into the combustion chamber thoughout the combustion/power stroke.

This dictated a much lower power:weight ratio in early Diesel engines, which is appropriate to stationary power genaration but represented a distinct disadvantage for traction-power and automotive use.

Diesel's approach to license was probably not the most lucrative either for himself or society at large, however the *property right* granted by patent (and copyright) law let him make that determination.

To my mind whether commercial EULA, BSD, GPL, Artistic, all licenses fundamentally serve the purpose of allowing the *Author* a degree of control over the application and distribution of his/her work.

This is also how we get an OSS environment where two different Authors (say Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman) have the right to apply the same license (GPL) according to their own wishes.

Process rights are a good thing. SCO's making the best case it can but I really think it's going to backfire on them. Their rhetoric really doesn't stand up to analysis.

Pamela Jones and GROKLAW (5, Interesting)

trick-knee (645386) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639436)

I'd like to point out that the work that Pamela Jones & Co. at GROKLAW is clearly of some real use to IBM in this case. another poster has already mentioned [] that IBM has specifically cited a transcription GROKLAW produced in their recent filing [] .

I would also like to remind others that there's a little paypal donation button on the front page of GROKLAW [] , as mauryisland pointed out elsewhere [] .

click that button. give her a holiday bonus, just enough to make it hurt you a tiny little bit. and let's see just how robust PayPal's servers [] are.

Thats Bent! (1)

meatpopcicle (460770) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639438)

Since corporations are thought of as individuals, isnt asking IBM to provide information as to its guilt a serious problem. Couldnt IBM plead the 5th ammendment?

I cant provide information as to my guilt as that would incriminate myself? Isnt it up to SCO to prove that IBM is at fault instead of the other way around?

And, isnt IBM innocent until proven guilty instead of guilty until proven innocent? Is this the outcome of democracy within the USA? What a tragedy!

Are we in Soviet Russia? (3, Funny)

MongooseCN (139203) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639440)

Are we in Soviet Russia?


TrekCycling (468080) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639519)

Mod this up. This is the best Soviet Russia reference in a long time. Not overt, very clever. Two thumbs up.

Enough already! (4, Interesting)

Frodo420024 (557006) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639447)

Instead of the (twice-)daily SCO item, isn't it time to have an 'SCO vs. IBM' box that carries the big load of SCO messages instead of posting everything to the main page. Or even a GrokLaw one, that's where you read 90% of the stuff anyway.

Then post to the main page when there's something really big coming, and otherwise let everyone else go on with the usual kernel rumours, Ogg design wins, etc. etc.

I enjoy GrokLaw a lot, and I'm (trying to) read /. for more general news items.

[Rant off :]

ahem what about Novell and etc (1)

linuxislandsucks (461335) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639453)

the SCO Group is not the dragon of evil here folks.. rmember the infrastructure behind them..

such as former foudners of Novell and such..

if we want to make sure that this issue does not rise up again in the next 24 months we need to bring Canapoy and MS to the proceedings..

Scorched earth! (0, Offtopic)

zapp (201236) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639485)

slightly offtopic I know... but I imaginet he title must have got a few of you thinkin how you could get ahold of scorched earth again...

I enjoy Scorched3D [] , a pretty good 3D remake of the game

And the orignal Scorched Earth [] .

Remember, No Kibitzing!!

Nice to have the pundits back you... (2, Interesting)

i_r_sensitive (697893) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639493)

"We believe that the "progress of science" is best advanced by vigorously protecting the right of authors and inventors to earn a profit from their work." We should all believe that the "progress of science" is best advanced when "Authors" have the right to do with their property whatever it is they want to do -- consistent with the law, and so long as the property right is properly balanced. And we should all believe that the "progress of science" is best advanced when that right is "vigorously protect[ed]". But the owners of GPL'd software are doing no more than exercising this right, just as Microsoft would exercise its right. They are profiting from the right to choose the terms under which they release their software, and the terms they have chosen also have a great benefit to other software innovation. They exercise their property right; they and we benefit. But if we are to protect that property right "vigorously," then we should take steps to protect property owners from baseless lawsuits against their right to use their property as they wish. So when it comes to the matter of sanctions against the lawyers in this case, the judge might well want to consider how important it is that the property right of copyright owners be "vigorously" defended.
Thank you, that's what grabbed my eye out of the whole thing too, hard to project yourself as the champion of authors and inventors rights when your vision of success would force those people to give up their rights in order to realize the work.

SCO idea of authors and inventors rights is that they have the right to sell them to SCO, or Microsoft, or some other company which is going to require the author to assign in perpetuity any rights they had to their work.

Darl and SCO repeatedly try to paint themselves as progressive, which certainly is not the case. In point of fact, what SCO seeks is a return to serfdom. During Feudal times serf's were treated as chattel, property tied to more property. They would routinely be transferred along with the property they lived on. Darl would like nothing better than a return to those days, and in fact has staked his company livelihood (and possibly his freedom) on attaining that goal. Except the new serf's are programmers, and the land they are tied to is the code, particularly the plot of code which is the Viscounty of Unix.

Darl "John Birch" McBride (3, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 10 years ago | (#7639504)

Darl McBride is effectively arguing that the US Constitution requires property owners to make a profit on their property, so sharing property is unamerican, and illegal. Ironically, when he trades his SCO shares to his lawyers at the height of his SCO vs. GPL hysteria, he will be cheating them, or their victims down the line, of any profit from a company that has destroyed all its goodwill, and much of its viable intellectual property. Hopefully McBride is investing his scambucks in a bunker in the Utah mountains, where he can be safe from the rising tide of sharers who understand the "network effect" of economics, where intellectual property value increases when it's more widely distributed.
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>