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!

Groklaw Traces Contribution of ABIs back to SCO.

CmdrTaco posted more than 10 years ago | from the worth-a-read dept.

Caldera 611

Ptraci writes "Over at Groklaw they have been doing some digging and have found evidence that old SCO and Caldera did in fact contribute those files that they now want to charge us for."

cancel ×

611 comments

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

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8143937)

this fp owned by sco

people complain about the NYT... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8143956)

...how about complaining about the new log-in system Groklaw have. Merciless bastards.

CmdrTick-Oh XOR Linux (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144115)

"...files that they want to charge US for???"

Well, "us" may include Ptraci, but it sure as fuck doesn't include CmdrTick-oh. Tick-oh and Homos are worthless fucking Macintosh Oh-Ess-Ecchhhhsss users. As such, they are beyond the pale: Once you start thinking it's okay to use APPROPRIATED open source code in your proprietary OS, you've pretty much given up any right to talk about "us" in the context of Linux and open source development.

Does anybody else think that Steve "I only stole BSD twice" Jobs' appropriation of others' hard work for his own personal enrichment is both supremely cynical and, dare I say it, WRONG???

If you use Mac Oh-Ess-Echhhhs, you might as well start calling yourself Wozniak, because Steve Jobs REALLY is fucking both you and the legion of developers RIGHT IN THE BUNGHOLE!!!

In other news... (5, Funny)

JoeBaldwin (727345) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143938)

Sky reported to be blue after extensive research.

Re:In other news... (1)

wild_pointer (263802) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144097)

you never been to iceland [www.iww.is] ? ;)

I always liked this one... (-1)

BurKaZoiD (611246) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144108)

In other news, sandwiches reported to taste good when you're hungry.

Re:In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144128)

They say 20% of caucasians are somewhat color blind...*thinking pose*...I wonder how they see blue.

Re:In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144161)

No it's butterscotch [nasa.gov] .

FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8143939)

hahahahaha

Groklaw is biased against SCO already (0, Interesting)

ObviousGuy (578567) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143945)

Can we trust them to be fair and unbiased in their "research"?

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (2, Funny)

acehole (174372) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143965)

Does fox have "fair and balanced" reporting?

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8143973)

echo "Does slashdot have fair and balanced reporting?"

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144034)

I seriously doubt it, but then again /. is not trying to claim that it is.

So, which do you work for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8143983)

Fox News, The White House, or MS?

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144010)

Why is the parent moded as flamebait?
Isnt that the truth that Groklaw are probably biased against SCO?
Groklaw has probably uncovered quite a lot of dirt on SCO that is correct, and I doubt that they lie about anything.
But if one has taken sides on an issue, can we trust that the person wont turn a blind eye on some facts? Will he present facts that might not go down to well with his own version and side?
I think it is only a fair comment.
SCO are probably a bunch of liars, but underestimating and brushing aside an opponent as "nothing" WILL in most cases come back and bite you in the *ss.

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144041)

Actually, it would suffice to say that Groklaw is more interested in finding information that would benefit SCO.

In fact, the entire Linux community is more concerned with finding facts that could help SCO.

Well, alteast they WERE. The simple fact is, SCO has lied and been caught soooo many times over the last few months... all we can do now is wait for them to lie again so we can disprove it.

It's simple, SCO has lied and it's a known fact. They've lied a LOT, made a LOT of false allegations, etc al..

If you bite into a terd, it's going to taste like shit. No amount of suger and spice is going to make it otherwise.

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144129)

Well they apparently weren't lying about the SGI code...

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (1)

stevew (4845) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144018)

Two points - don't confuse the ObviousGuy with facts - he wouldn't know one when it stood in front of him, uhm, then again, neither would SCO.

Point two - fox is fair and balanced.

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144053)

A fox may be fair and balanced, but we all know that fox news is not.

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144055)

*Waves hand*
This is not the troll you're looking for. You may go about your business.

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (4, Insightful)

Zebra_X (13249) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144019)

Does it matter? Evidence either proves something, or it doesn't.

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (1)

ObviousGuy (578567) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144028)

A prosecutor knows it is not in the best interest of his case to present exonerating evidence.

Can you trust a prosecutor to be fair to the defendant with all the evidence?

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (1)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144048)

I know you are a troll but I can not resist.

Got Proof?

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (5, Funny)

azaris (699901) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144050)

Can we trust them to be fair and unbiased in their "research"?

*boggle*

Someone on Slashdot is worried about whether Groklaw is being fair against SCO.

What next, FoxNews worried about the humane treatment of Saddam Hussein?

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144056)

Can we trust SCO to be fait and unbiased in what they present to the press, public and the court system?

Perhaps a dissenting view is a neccessity. If you want to worry about fair and unbiased, leave that to a judge in a courtroom. Beyond that, people are biased by nature.

Jeez, we're on /. and someone is talking about bias.. We go through this every fourth article for pete's sake ;-)

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144072)

This guy brings up a great point. I'm an IT manager at a Fortune 500, and we are considering the ramifications of this case everyday at work.

Techies - if you want to convince your manager that SCO has no case, stop being so emotional about it. We in management have a hard time trusting your opinion when you seem to have so much invested in this emotionally.

This is not some battle of good v. evil - you aren't Bilbo fighting that evil eye at the top of the tower (forgot his name, evil wizard guy).

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (4, Insightful)

jrumney (197329) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144110)

Since when was PJ being so emotional about it? (She's not a techie anyway, she's a paralegal). You clearly have never read groklaw or you would not state so positively that this guy brings up a great point. PJ has stated on numerous occasions that she would welcome contributions from a pro-SCO point of view, but so far SCO has come up with zero genuine evidence that has not been thoroughly refuted by Linus, Perens and others before PJ gets a chance to post it to her site.

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (1)

ahooton (175832) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144132)

He wasn't talking about PJ, he was talking about ObviousGuy, who wrote the parent to his post. Look at the parent thread...

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144164)

PJ has stated on numerous occasions that she would welcome contributions from a pro-SCO point of view, but so far SCO has come up with zero genuine evidence that has not been thoroughly refuted by Linus, Perens and others before PJ gets a chance to post it to her site.

Sure she's willing to post pro-SCO threads on Groklaw, I'll believe that the day I see it!

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (5, Insightful)

kfg (145172) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144130)

Legal advocates are never fair and unbiased. They are not supposed to be. That is the function of a judge.

However, if legal research finds a picture of Darl wearing a pair of shoes he says he never owned, well, than that's what they did. Bias doesn't even come into it.

Then it would be up to Darl to try to explain away the picture by saying it was Christmas and his cat DDOSed his regular shoes so he demanded that IBM loan him those, or some such nonesense.

And if it goes to trial Darl will have to try to put the glove on IBM.

KFG

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (1)

leerpm (570963) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144140)

Examine their research, then make up your mind for yourself whether or not you believe it constitutes good evidence of SCO wrongdoing.

Groklaw is not a brokerage &research firm. Just because they have a bias, doesn't mean clear factual evidence that supports their position is to be ignored.

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144144)

Can we trust them to be fair and unbiased in their "research"?


Not likely, if that's what you're looking for. They attempted to directly blame SCO for "faking" the last DOS attack, which last I heard were confirmed by security firms as a legitimate DOS attack, although seperate from the one Eric Raymond admitted to knowing about.

Re:Groklaw is biased against SCO already (5, Insightful)

AlterTick (665659) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144146)

Groklaw is biased against SCO already. Can we trust them to be fair and unbiased in their "research"?

Bias doesn't automatically indicate dishonesty. Are they biased against SCO? Sure. Does this mean they're looking primarily at SCO rather than the OSS community for evidence of malfeasance? Sure does. Does this mean that evidence they find is worthless? Nope (it's PGP signed by Caldera fer gosh sakes). Just because Groklaw isn't also out looking for "the real killers" deosn't mean they're lying about SCO. You have to judge the honesty of an organization separately. Just because some people lie to support their biases doesn't mean all biased people are liars.

Groklaw is presenting all of the information (2, Informative)

TrentC (11023) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144160)

Considering they covered both sides of the Novell's original "Wait, we own those Unix copyrights", SCO's "No you don't, here's an amendment to our agreement" response, and Novell's "Hmm, we don't have a copy of that, but it looks legitimate..." reply with equal weight, I have no worries about Groklaw's ability to give both sides fair treatment.

Remember, Groklaw (and everyone else watching the lawsuit) wants SCO to give us the evidence they claim(ed) to have. If there's an appearance of anti-SCO bias, then it's because SCO is giving information that can be quickly (and thoroughly) disproven.

Jay (=

Their contribution... (4, Insightful)

Mod Me God (686647) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143946)

...was under GPL. They will have to disprove that first, which IMHO is he kernel of the case (other than a last-ditch effort to get bought out which seems to have failed).

Re:Their contribution... (4, Funny)

themightythor (673485) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144024)

which IMHO is he (sic) kernel of the case
*rimshot. He'll be here all week folks.

Re:Their contribution... (5, Informative)

jrumney (197329) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144027)

The brilliant thing is that Caldera PGP signed the files that they released. So it is going to be extremely hard for SCO to argue that someone else released them, or that they were released by a rogue employee without permission.

Re:Their contribution... (2, Interesting)

77Punker (673758) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144105)

You can't really expect some PGP thing to hold up in court. Your average judge or juror won't even know what PGP is.

Re:Their contribution... (5, Insightful)

Naikrovek (667) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144136)

that's what experts are for. the "average" judge doesn't know ballistics either but ballistics is still a science that judges use daily to convict murderers. because a judge doesn't know about a certain type of proof doesn't make it invalid.

Re:Their contribution... (2, Funny)

beekr (561659) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144155)

Ya got yerself a quick draw there, pard'ner.

Re:Their contribution... (1)

beekr (561659) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144138)

Yes, and your average judge or juror don't know a whole lot about how genetic evidence works, either.

That's why expert witnesses are called to testify - to explain complicated things in layman's terms.

Re:Their contribution... (0, Redundant)

finkployd (12902) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144143)

Which is why expert witnesses exist. The average Judge and jury doesn't understand how MOST evidence works.

Finkployd

Re:Their contribution... (0, Flamebait)

macdaddy (38372) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144070)

Those folks that are footing SCO's bill (a small little company in Redmond) want the GPL destroyed. This is the best that they can hope for.

Re:Their contribution... (4, Interesting)

Rick the Red (307103) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144118)

To what end? The GPL is just the permission slip Linus gives you to use and copy Linux, not ownership of Linux (for example - this applies to all GPL'd code). If the GPL is ruled invalid by a court, all that means is that the license you hold for Linux is invalid. It doesn't invalidate Linus' copyright on the Linux code. Linus would remain free to re-license his code as he sees fit -- this would not grant Microsoft or anyone else the right to use Linus' code without his permission.

Re:Technology is Politics (4, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144120)

Their contribution was under GPL. They will have to disprove that first, which IMHO is he kernel of the case
After all these months and hot air, I'm *still* unclear on that point. Some days the case is just a contract dispute between IBM and SCO, other days Daryl is ranting about how the GPL is unconstitutional and we're all commies bent on wrecking capitalism.

Personally I think SCO's ownership and their backers believe the latter, but could only trump up a quasi-case for the former.

but of course (0, Troll)

peragrin (659227) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143959)

TSCOG (The SCO Group, not to be confused with (SCO Santa cruise Org.) is nothing but a lying pack of bastard's, then again Most here knew that a long time ago. Not one of TSCOG claims has ever been proven, and when they go down, I hope their "golden parachutes" catch on fire. Darl and Company won't ever work again. They won't be allowed near anything, because, any one who hires them will be sued by them. They are litigatus bastards all the way.

yea I know i speeled a word or too wrong, but this is slashdot.

h

Re:but of course (4, Informative)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144000)

Not one of TSCOG claims has ever been proven

In fact, just about everything that they have claimed gets disproved rather quickly via groklaw. While there are a few things left, it only requires for SCO to submit the evidence so that groklaw can look at it.

open letter to sco (-1, Flamebait)

Hemorrhoids (665147) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143960)

open letter to SCO

===BEGIN OF OPEN LETTER TO SCO===
open letter to sco

your brain is sexy after i rip it out mash it and mix it with yoru feces feed it to ya [sco.com]

sincerely,
hemor r. hoids (im not hemos)


I RIGHT DA VIRUS!

PS. i havent read the article but my $2c anyways
anyone know why the article loading anyways? a mirror

===END OF OPEN LETTER TO SCO===


winner of saint, retreiver of fortune, the day

Slashdot effect. (0, Redundant)

subk (551165) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143962)

It's good to see that the slashdot effect still happens early saturday morning!

Re:Slashdot effect. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8143982)

> It's good to see that the slashdot effect still happens early saturday morning!

You guys have to learn that there are other countries than the US.

Re:Slashdot effect. (0)

subk (551165) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143992)

My original post in no way implies that I do not know that. Grow some skin.

Re:Slashdot effect. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144007)

We know they are there, we just don't give 2 fucks about those who are lower then us. The world revolves around the US, end of story.

Re:Slashdot effect. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144011)

> You guys have to learn that there are other countries than the US. None that really matter... get over it, the internet is US based, by the US, for the US.

Imagine a beowulf cluster... (4, Funny)

grayshade (747479) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143972)

Imagine a beowulf cluster of... er... I for one welcome our new... uhm... All of your ABI belong... Sh*t!

Re:Imagine a beowulf cluster... (3, Funny)

bwalling (195998) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143984)

Imagine a beowulf cluster of... er... I for one welcome our new... uhm... All of your ABI belong... Sh*t!

Someone needs to get GrokLaw a Beowulf cluster...

Re:Imagine a beowulf cluster... (1)

eclectro (227083) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144057)

Someone needs to get GrokLaw a Beowulf cluster...

Nah, a kick in the pants is healthy for them. Spare the rod, spoil the child, you know.

Re:Imagine a beowulf cluster... (1)

forkazoo (138186) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143993)

don't worry -- I've got it! Imagine Darl, petrified, and with hit grits down his pants!

Re:Imagine a beowulf cluster... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144026)

Ur an idiot

Mirror please. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8143974)

Can someone post a mirror?

Re:Mirror please. (5, Informative)

inode_buddha (576844) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144086)

I've put copies in html here [steigenlinux.org] , postscript here [steigenlinux.org] , and PDF is here. [steigenlinux.org]

some advice (4, Funny)

trb (8509) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143985)

hey sco. go sue yourself.

Re:some advice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144141)

LOLZ!!!!!!!!! ROFL!!!!!!!!!

Future SCO's (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8143987)

Fair question:
What's to prevent any other contributor from pulling a future SCO? Especially when you have a codebse that has such a large number of contributors. And a large variety of licenses.

Re:Future SCO's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144008)

an open development process, which we already have.

Re:Future SCO's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144021)

There is only one license for Linux -- the GPL. All copyright holders agree to license their code under the GPL, or the code doesn't go in to Linux.

If it turns out that a person lied about being a copyright holder, the false copyright holder is liable. The Linux kernel custodians were acting in good faith.

Re:Future SCO's (5, Insightful)

rhu (702367) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144067)

"If you'll look out the left side of the bus you'll see the smoking Caldera that used to be SCO Group...remember this sight well if ever you contemplate screwing with Open Source..."

Re:Future SCO's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144083)

What's to prevent any other contributor from pulling a future SCO?

Tort reform (which means if you're a registered Democrat, you either need to get the message through to your party to halt their protection for trial attorneys, or leave the party for another - green, libertarian, etc. Since trial attorneys fund much of the party, reform is somewhat unlikely, but you can always try.).

The news of the potential for SCO's own origin of this mess complicates the exit strategy for SCO executive management and their attorney. Boies would now be known as a twice-verified ambulance chaser (though is unlikely to face disbarment or any penalty - interesting how the attorneys are today's untouchables) and the prognosis for jail time for SCO execs is a possibility.

Simply put, suing a party for alleged theft, when you planted the evidence and knew the charges were false is fraud in itself. Dumping tens of millions of dollars of stock in a pump and dump scheme based upon this mechanism earns you a cell with Bernie Ebbers.

Re:Future SCO's (1)

mod_parent_down (692943) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144085)

I think that's exactly the point Microsoft is trying to make by funding SCO in their pursuit of this lawsuit.

Groklaw (-1, Redundant)

Luigi30 (656867) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143988)

Groklaw apparantly needs a Beowulf cluster of those SCO machines.

Re:Groklaw (0, Redundant)

pocketfullofshells (722066) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144101)

combination hooka and Coffee-maker!

Buy now and we will only sue you once!!

all your linux are belong to SCO!!

move all *nix, for great profits!

I knew it. (4, Funny)

pair-a-noyd (594371) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143990)

And all I can say is that a certain Nancy Sinatra song [tralfaz-archives.com] comes to mind when I think of SCO..

This is going to be FUN...

Where will Groklaw head... (5, Insightful)

4lex (648184) | more than 10 years ago | (#8143997)

when this SCO thing gets to an end?

I appreciate they are doing a very worthy work (and getting the slashdot crowd to a more informed talk about SCO, something necessary because the old jokes are starting to become _really_ old).

I sure would like them to go on when this SCO fiasto bluffs down. The free software world really needs an army of lawyers and paralawyers, if we want to stay long. I only can say "Kudos to you, groklawyers! Go on!"

Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144058)

There's more trash that could be find on MS in a day then SCO could ever hope to dish out.

MS just tries to hide it, while SCO flaunts it.

Re:Where will Groklaw head... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144126)

Why wouldn't they go on? SCO didn't make GL, they were here long before this all started.

Most things *exist* long before they are noted on /.

SCO just wants a buyout while they sellout... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144009)

SCO knows it's cases are bogus, and built on lies.

They know it. Simple as that.

They're just trying to step on as many toes and piss as many people off as possible to keep their stock up while execs and 'preferred' investors sell out their stock at a 'premium' price.

I'll bet somewhere in that tiny little piece of [explative] brain of Darl McBride -- he still thinks someone is going to buy up his pathetic little company.

By the time all the lies and scandles are made public via mainstream media - I suspect Darl will be sitting in a dark little room all alone contemplating suicide.

When that happens, I'll send him a copy of Linux - Linux cheers everyone up!

We love you Darl! *smooch*

*gag* *spit* *blah* *cough*

A couple of changes soon to be added to webster (2, Funny)

cluge (114877) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144022)

Webster now says: Extort: to obtain from a person by force, intimidation, or undue or illegal power Scam: a fraudulent or deceptive act or operation Liar: one that tells lies Indian giver: a person who gives something to another and then takes it back or expects an equivalent in return Revised: Extort: What SCO is trying to do to the Linux community through questionable and possible illegal acts. Scam: SCO press releases Liar: Daryl McBride Indian giver: = SCO + Caldera

A new SCO Linux distribution (1)

$calar (590356) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144031)

Darlux: A sophisticated distro run by derelicts.

Re:A new SCO Linux distribution (1)

Neop2Lemus (683727) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144152)

OMGosh!

I read that as Darleks!

God. Whiney SOBs (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144033)

I read it last night/early this AM and you bastards are whining about the /. effect. I bet the server is actually off line not /.ed I have yet to see thier server go down ubnder the load. Quit yur bitchin' you sound like Darl.

SCO vs RIAA (5, Funny)

pjwhite (18503) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144037)

I heard that the RIAA stole a lot of proprietary code from SCO, and that people at SCO have been illegally downloading a bunch of Metallica MP3s.

From the Groklaw website: (2, Funny)

vorwerk (543034) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144046)

"error selecting database"

Funny, I think even this error describes SCO in numerous, subtle, and surprisingly accurate ways. :)

FBI investigates SCO as author of MyDoom virus!!! (4, Informative)

Cronopios (313338) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144049)

According to this article [enciclopediavirus.com] , the FBI has visited SCO, seized a server and several workstations, and arrested several programmers and bosses.

Can anybody confirm this?

Re:FBI investigates SCO as author of MyDoom virus! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144082)

I don't know, but that site looks legit, why not submit this story to Slashdot?

Re:FBI investigates SCO as author of MyDoom virus! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144107)

It's gotta be a lie. We know SCO doesn't employ programmers anymore, just lawyers and executives.

babelfish translation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144121)

babelfish translation for those of us who are not fluent in reading Spanish:

Captured the culprit of the Mydoom? 30-01-2004
According to some agencies inform into the news, the FBI would have made some haltings that could be related to the presumed author of the worm of greater propagation of history, and for the surprise of all, it would be in the offices of one of his "victims".

The information, says that the FBI stopped several programmers and in charge of the company SCO, at the same time which other searches and investigations were made in the central offices of the same one, retiring of them a servant and several workstations.

The details of the operations of the special services were not revealed officially, nevertheless, are known by mouth of a representative of company IBM. According to its words, the operation would be connected directly with the judicial lawsuits between IBM and SCO by the code of Linux.

But most surprising, and in agreement with the existing information, it is that all the haltings also would be connected with the investigation lead by the FBI, in relation to the epidemic carried out by the new worm of Internet, Mydoom (also known like Novarg).

Supposedly, on the basis of the analysis of the map of expansion and the speed of the same one, the FBI would suspect that the origin of the infection has been the own SCO.

This is paradoxical, since the company was the target of the anticipated attacks of refusal on watch of the worm in its two versions. The other white one was Microsoft. Possibly, if this is confirmed, somebody of the personnel of the company would have thought (or it would have done it by indication of some superior one), that the action was a form ready to the public opinion in favor of the judgment of the company against Linux.

SCO takes ahead a irreconciliable legal war on the use of licenses of parts of the code of UNIX in Linux, which means thousands of million dollars.

The own SCO and Microsoft, have offered you compensate of 250,000 dollars each one, by information that take to the capture of the author of the Mydoom.

Re:FBI investigates SCO as author of MyDoom virus! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144142)

Google Translation [google.com]

I particularly like this paragraph:

SCO takes ahead a irreconciliable legal war on the use of licenses of parts of the code of UNIX in Linux, which means thousands of million dollars.

-drinkypoo

Re:FBI investigates SCO as author of MyDoom virus! (1)

bkhl (189311) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144147)

I can't, but I can imagine a lot of SCO employees may be a bit disgruntled over the fact that their owners are destroying the company, putting the employees jobs at risk, possibly damaging their street cred at the same time.

How to make money off of a failing company (5, Funny)

cunninghammer (742075) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144062)

Step 1: Contribute to Opensource.
Step 2: Forget you did it.
Step 3: Sue everyone else in hopes that one of the companies will decide it's cheaper to buy you then to fight.
Step 4: Watch the stock price go through the roof [yahoo.com] .
Step 5: Profit!

Looks like at least a few figured it out [yahoo.com] .

But didn't Linus say he wrote those? (1)

ccarr.com (262540) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144064)

I can't RTFA since it's /.ed, but aren't we talking about the same files that Linus previously claimed to have written himself?

If true (1)

firstadopter.com (745257) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144071)

If this is true, SCO is the lamest of the lame.

what is so funny ? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144090)

very off topic but what is so funny about beowulf clusters

Re:what is so funny ? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144124)

Running Gag [wikipedia.org]
Oh well, imagine a beowulf cluster of these!

Site seems to be slashdotted.. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144092)

Anyone care to post us a mirror, so I can, GASP! read the article?

Thank you, Pamela (0, Offtopic)

matlock151 (258468) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144098)

That is all.

Regarding Groklaw's Slashdotting (5, Informative)

santiag0 (213647) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144099)

There is a paypal link for those that wish to contribute a little something on the home page (once you can get it to load).

Maybe a few $ here and there from slashdot readers, and they can get a more robust setup, and survive the next slashdot link.

No pressure. Just a thought. I've given a little twice. Groklaw is a tremendous resource for those following the SCO/IBM/Redhat/Novell saga. PJ rocks!

Article Text (1)

Monkelectric (546685) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144100)

Could some kind gentlemen reply to this post with the article text? Groklaw is lost and gone forever :)

yeah right (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8144106)

all your code are belong to us!

netcraft article (4, Interesting)

elvesRgay (685389) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144116)

This is OT but Netcraft has an amusing article [netcraft.com] about what options SCO, the litigious bastards [caldera.com] , are not using to avoid being DOSed by Mydoom tomarrow.

Hmm (4, Insightful)

starseeker (141897) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144117)

Good news, yes. Helpful, not really.

Look at the SCO pattern. They have made claims ranging from contract dispute with IBM to every OS in existance owing SCO IP money. They have nothing whatsoever to lose. They will merely pursue any interpretation of events which results in people owing them money. I don't know how they'll twist this yet, but since logic doesn't seem to have much to do with it they might say they were an unauthorized release and try to make some specific employee the goat, claim that the ABIs are an insignificant part of their total IP in Linux, or other things I'm not warped enough to think of. They aren't going to shut up for anything.

Even if after everything we've heard from them to date falls through, they may try to make the claim in court that every OS in existance is derived from SCO IP, and that being the case Linux users STILL owe SCO money, regardless of code. Nonsense yes, but when has that ever stopped them before?

Folks, the individual details of this don't matter at all. That's not what this is about. This is about SCO looking for a way - any way - to get Linux users to pay them. Knocking down a given specific detail won't phase them in the least. Until SCO in its current form is gone, we will never hear the end of this. Remember, they apparently even sent that letter to Congress saying open/free software was a threat to the US software industry! Their only concern is to come out on top, period. How is of no consequence.

Yes, this news could be useful to the likes of IBM (I can't see Groklaw so it's hard to say ;-) But remember this isn't a war about details. This is about defining a goal, and getting there any way possible. We are in the way of SCO's using our code for commercial purposes. Therefore we are the enemy to be destroyed, and trying to reason with them has thus far been about as effective as talking a laser guided missle out of striking the target. I don't expect that trend to change any time soon, wherever the ABIs came from.

Related Story (2, Informative)

ByteSlicer (735276) | more than 10 years ago | (#8144157)

MozillaQuest is running a related story here [mozillaquest.com]
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>