×

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!

Germany Muzzles SCO

Hemos posted more than 10 years ago | from the one-step-closer dept.

Caldera 349

skyryder12 writes " We have news from Germany. It seems, according to Computerworld, that SCO Group GmbH (SCO's German branch) agreed, on February 18, 2004, to an out-of-court settlement between it and Univention and will refrain from saying in Germany some things it says in the US constantly. There are four things they have agreed not to say in Germany, on pain of a fine of 10,000 euros per offense -- that's about $12,500 USD -- and one thing they can't say unless they present proof within a month of the settlement date. Story at GrokLaw"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

349 comments

Finally (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428328)

Finally some action against these guys.

$699 License Fee (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428329)

Don't forget to PayPal your fees to me, AC!

Good to see... (5, Insightful)

Da Fokka (94074) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428330)

I'm glad the european judicial systems are not as prone to SCO's legal guerilla tactics as the US system is.

Germany has a sense of humor (5, Funny)

Liselle (684663) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428365)

Not only that, but it looks like their justice system has a sense of humor: SCO can't sue any Linux users except their own customers. That's comedy gold, right there. ;)

Re:Germany has a sense of humor (5, Informative)

EricWright (16803) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428380)

That's a mistranslation. SCO has been saying that they reserve the right to sue any Linux user, except those who bought a SCO or Caldera distribution. The German court says that SCO must quit saying that.

Apparently, the translation turned from saying the above to, SCO may not threaten to sue any linux user, except those who bought a SCO or Caldera distribution... gotta distribute the logical not throughout the statement properly!!!

Re:Germany has a sense of humor (4, Funny)

jkrise (535370) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428475)

Given the amount of mis-transalation and mis-representation by SCO in this case, I think it's best the press goes with this version - SCO can sue only Caldera / SCO Linux users in Germany. That seems pretty fair in this case.

-

Re:Good to see... (4, Insightful)

BillFarber (641417) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428367)

I don't mean this as a troll, but it seems to me that if the US courts did something like this to a small business man (rather than to Satan), the slashdot crowd would be screaming about Ashcroft and free speech rights.

Re:Good to see... (5, Insightful)

SMOC (703423) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428387)

There's no such thing as "the slashdot crowd". Opinions differ. That doesn't mean slashdot contradicts itself.

Re:Good to see... (0, Insightful)

Chess_the_cat (653159) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428389)

Mod parent up!! It's the first thing I thought of. Since when is the Slashdot crowd in favor of government censorship of any kind? Better to let SCO say their piece and let it be argued in forums such as these than to not allow them to say anything at all. The only cure for free speech is more free speech. How would you feel if before your big court case a judge told you you couldn't tell your side of the story to the media because he said so? And since this is a civil matter, not a criminal one, I don't see any need for Germany to muzzle anyone.

Re:Good to see... (5, Insightful)

jkrise (535370) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428463)

There ought to be an exception for 'obvious falsehoods'... else this free speech thing seems to be a misused and abused tool by big-boy corporates to screw the economy and all other small-time-geeky-nerdy-innovative-guy next door.

Can the open source developers affected by SCO's statements lay their hands on millions of $s from the Bank of Canada or Deutsche Bank to bolster their case? Free speech isn't free if it costs a fortune in court....

-

Re:Good to see... (5, Insightful)

socrates32 (650558) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428483)

Ummm... That's not quite the point.
They have been barred (as a result of an out-of-court SETTLEMENT) from making unsubstantiated claims that are intended to harm their competitor's business.
Where is the First Amendment violation?
newSCO had an opportunity to back up their claims in court, but instead AGREED to back down, so they could keep up the rhetoric back home.

Re:Good to see... (5, Insightful)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428486)

Free speech is usually best when what's being said is true. In SCO's case, they're getting into the bad habbit of of annoucing a future action of theirs, and then not following through on it.

Say what you want about the RIAA, but at least when they threaten to sue somebody, they follow through on it. I don't see it as that bad a thing to require that when SCO announces they're going to file a lawsuit, they should at least have to do it. Afterall, a victory against just one defendant would legitimize SCO's main claim that they're owed money by everyone who loses Linux. However, if they lose, most of their FUD will be declared something that doesn't stand up in court.

Re:Good to see... (5, Insightful)

buzzdecafe (583889) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428489)

Apparently you didn't notice: This was a *settlement,* i.e., SCO agreed to the terms. If they wanted to continue speaking to their black little heart's content, simply reject the terms of the settlement and see how you do in court. For some reason, SCO decided shutting up was preferable to putting up. So don't give me this "free speech" crap. One can make the inference that if SCO had *anything* worth saying, they would not have agreed to the settlement.

Re:Good to see... (5, Insightful)

kramer2718 (598033) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428499)

The first amendment does not protect against fraud or extortion. What SCO is doing amounts to that. They are lying about their IP ... furthermore they are attempting extortion by their constant threats to sue various people. They furthermore are slandering various entities involved with Linux, AIX, etc.

U.S. courts muzzle people as well ... frequently when the Enquirer or some other rag prints some inaccurate garbage about someone, they are forced to stop and often pay a settlment. What SCO is saying is inaccurate, and they're being muzzled is totally reasonable.

Re:Good to see... (4, Funny)

Salsaman (141471) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428517)

So you don't mind companies lying about their products ?

Then I have some marvellous snake oil for you, which will cure every known disease. I can let you have some very cheap.

Re:Good to see... (3, Insightful)

Gr8Apes (679165) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428537)

There's always the counter example to unbridled free speech in the form of the "falsely yelling fire in the theatre" rule.

Free speech rules come with some common sense restrictions, which are that it can be restricted in cases where it is shown to be both false and solely intended to harm others. SCO appears to meet both criteria.

Re:Good to see... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428400)

It seems to me that if the US courts did something like this to a small business man, someone on slashdot would relish pointing out that the slashdot crowd would cheer if it happened to Satan rather than a small businessman, as if that was some kind of a proof of hypocricy.

Re:Good to see... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428435)

"Are you mad or just insane"(*)

They can't say it unless they prove it. You can't destroy anyones reputation just because. First you gotta prove it...

(*) King Diamond

Re:Good to see... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428466)

it seems to me that if the US courts did something like this to a small business man (rather than to Satan), the slashdot crowd would be screaming about Ashcroft and free speech rights.

...and another part of the Slashdot crowd, the one based in reality, would point out that commercial speech has long been restricted in ways that individuals' speech has not, and that businesses can't go around lying in order to make money (cue Microsoft jab, 3, 2, 1...).

Re:Good to see... (4, Insightful)

Baumi (148744) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428473)

I don't know about that - it's not about denying free speech, it's about disallowing groundless claims. If you were an innocent citizen and I were someone with enough media clout to send out the message that you're a murderer over all available news outlets, you'd probably try to get a court order to stop me from doing that, as well. And rightly so.

Free speech is fine when we're talking about opinions and facts - it shouldn't protect lying and baseless claims.

Baumi

Re:Good to see... (5, Informative)

EricWright (16803) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428488)

Free speech rights don't include the right to libel or slander. Unless SCO can prove otherwise, they are certainly guilty of slander (Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation) against, at the very least, Linus for claiming he is the ringleader of an international group of IP pirates and copyright infringers.

Libel (A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person's reputation; the act of presenting such material to the public) requires publication. I'm not sure what, if anything, SCO itself has published. Most publications have been interviews with SCOs officers, published by various members of the media.

IMO, BTW IANAL TLA, SCO is also guilty of barratry (The offense of persistently instigating lawsuits, typically groundless ones) as they have filed numerous suits against various groups without providing so much as a shred of tangible evidence (ie, evidence that wasn't refuted within 24 hours).

In short, take those free speech arguments and shove 'em where the sun don't shine. Even free speech has its limitations...

Re:Good to see... (1, Funny)

Linker3000 (626634) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428372)

echo any_sco_rant_de.txt > /dev/null

Hopefully soon to be replaced with

echo any_sco_rant_*.txt > /dev/null

Re:Good to see... (1)

pe1rxq (141710) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428479)

thats pretty useless, please read the manpages of echo, cat, rm and mv.

It should be:

mv any_sco_rant_de.txt /dev/null

or easier:

rm any_sco_rant_de.txt

If you really want to keep the rant it would be:

cat any_sco_Rant_de.txt >/dev/null

Jeroen

Yay! (3, Interesting)

dolo666 (195584) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428331)

SCO gets to try on a muzzle... this is happy news. My only question is if this settlement favours Univention or SCO? I guess if you look at it one way, it favours us all because we don't have to listen to SCO whine and complain in Germany. Oh wait a minute... their website can be reached from Germany, so does that count as an offense?

Re:Yay! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428468)

The SCO Group GmbH (German branch of SCO) settled with Univention. The rest of SCO has nothing to do with this and can continue pumping and dumping.

Hmm.. (5, Interesting)

freerecords (750663) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428332)

As a British guy, I hope we get similar things brought in in Britain soon.. SCO needs to be stopped once and for all, and this seems like a fine (excuse the pun) way to do it.

Re:Hmm.. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428369)

Your talking about a country where you could take years to even get to trial. By the time our goverment acts the entire thing would be settled in the US courts.

Enforcement of consumer law under Enterprise Act (4, Interesting)

NZheretic (23872) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428520)

From the UK Office of Fair Trading
Enforcement of consumer law under the Enterprise Act [oft.gov.uk]
Under Part 8 of the Enterprise Act, the OFT and other bodies responsible for consumer law enforcement, have stronger powers to seek court orders against businesses who breach certain consumer protection laws.

Before taking court action (ie seeking an Enforcement Order), the OFT and our enforcement partners will always invite the trader concerned to respond to the allegations against them, and they will be able to give binding commitments (undertakings) instead of going to court.

The enforcement procedure is based on the Stop Now Regulations which it replaces along with Part III of the Fair Trading Act.

Download Enforcement of consumer protection legislation [oft.gov.uk] for more detailed information on the enforcement procedure

How does it come? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428336)

That US law couldn't do such things?

Re:How does it come? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428407)

In the US the rights of an individual only hold sway over another individual if the first individual has more money at its disposal. Hence SCO, with cash in the bank and a powerful marketing voice has stronger rights than people, it's part of US law. It's not codified as such, but that's the result.

In many parts of Europe, it's the opposite. A company, no matter how well respected or large will always have to bow down to the will of the people in the end. This is what's happened as a result, and Germany made the right decision to act.

It's about time.... (-1, Redundant)

thewiz (24994) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428338)

that SOMEONE finally told SCO to shut the fsck up unless they are willing to PROVE the FUD they've been spewing.

Re:It's about time.... (2, Informative)

judicar (726669) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428358)

Yeah this whole "free speech" thing is really a drag, i hope it's just a fad.

Full Article Text (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428341)

We have news from Germany. It seems, according to Computerwoche [computerwoche.de], that SCO Group GmbH (SCO's German branch) agreed, on February 18, 2004, to an out-of-court settlement between it and Univention and will refrain from saying in Germany some things it says in the US constantly. There are four things they have agreed not to say in Germany, on pain of a fine of 10,000 euros per offense -- that's about $12,500 USD -- and one thing they can't say unless they present proof within a month of the settlement date.

Details of the settlement from the article:

1) SCO Group GmbH (German branch of SCO) has agreed not to allege any more that Linux contains SCO's unlawfully acquired intellectual property.

2) The settlement also forbids SCO from claiming that if end users are running Linux they might be liable for breaches of SCO's intellectual property.

3) Also they cannot say that Linux is an unauthorized derivative of Unix.

4) Finally SCO Group GmbH is prohibited to threaten to sue Linux users unless they bought SCO Linux or Caldera Linux.

I asked a couple of others who speak German to make sure this last was an accurate translation, even holding off on the story for half a day, because it still sounds a bit odd. Evidently, they can sue their own customers in Germany if they feel like it. Perhaps others can refine our understanding. The news article also says that they can't allege that proof of copyright violations will be presented soon, unless such proof is presented within a month after the settlement date, in which case, then SCO Group may continue to make that claim publicly.

Thanks primarily to doughnuts_lover, who did the initial translation for us.

Here is a snip from the German, for those who can readily understand it:

"Die SCO Group GmbH wird danach im geschaftlichen Verkehr, also gegenuber Kunden und Anwendern, kunftig nicht mehr behaupten, dass Linux-Betriebssysteme unrechtmaBig erworbenes geistiges Eigentum von SCO Unix beinhalten. Der Vergleich verbietet es SCO ferner zu behaupten, dass Endanwender, wenn sie Linux einsetzen, fur die damit verbundenen Schutzverletzungen der SCO Intellectual Properties haftbar gemacht werden konnen. Auch die Behauptung, Linux sei ein nicht autorisiertes Derivat von Unix, ist nicht mehr statthaft. Last, but not least, darf die SCO Group GmbH nicht mehr behaupten, Kaufer von Linux-Betriebssystemen hatten eine Strafverfolgung zu befurchten, es sei denn, es handelte sich bei den gekauften Betriebssystemen um SCO Linux oder Caldera Linux. . . .

"Nach diesem wird SCO auch nicht mehr offentlich behaupten, Beweise fur die Urheberrechtsverletzung wurden demnachst vorgelegt. Ausnahme: Sollten diese Beweise innerhalb eines Monats nach diesem Vergleich vorgelegt werden, kann die SCO Group GmbH solch eine Behauptung weiter veroffentlichen."

Re:Full Article Text (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428390)

Jeezus! What a useless karma whore. Groklaw is not slashdotted; their hosting is reletively studly these days.

Correction on #4 (3, Informative)

kmonsen (606584) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428392)

What it really should be is that they are not allowed to say that Linux users can be sued unless they buy the SCO kind.

Re:Full Article Text (5, Informative)

Renegade Lisp (315687) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428399)

Here's a translation of the German bit:

"SCO Group GmbH will henceforth in its business relations, that is, towards customers and users, no longer claim that Linux operating systems contain illegally aquired intellectual property of SCO Unix. The settlement further prohibits SCO from claiming that end users, if they employ Linux, may be held liable for infringement of SCO Intellectual Properties. Further, the claim that Linux is an unauthorized derivate of Unix, is no longer acceptable. Last, but not least, SCO Group GmbH may no longer claim that buyers of Linux operating systems had to fear criminal prosecution, unless the operating system that was bought is SCO Linux or Caldera Linux...

"Henceforth, SCO will also cease to claim publically that proof for the copyright infringement would be presented shortly. Exception: Should this proof be presented within one month after this settlement, then such a claim may further be made publically."

Re:Full Article Text (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428490)

"Last, but not least, darf die SCO Group GmbH nicht mehr behaupten"

The SCO Group GmbH is no longer allowed to claim ..

"Kaufer von Linux-Betriebssystemen hatten eine Strafverfolgung zu befurchten"

buyers of Linux operating systems had to fear litigation ..

"es sei denn, es handelte sich bei den gekauften Betriebssystemen um SCO Linux oder Caldera Linux"

unless the operating system bought is sco or caldera linux.

end of translation. the last part is ambiguous as its not clear if it applies to the first or the second subsentence. just bad german writing style.

Re:Full Article Text (2, Informative)

multi io (640409) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428533)

4) Finally SCO Group GmbH is prohibited to threaten to sue Linux users unless they bought SCO Linux or Caldera Linux.

I asked a couple of others who speak German to make sure this last was an accurate translation,

It is not. (the verbalization is a bit ambiguous indeed, even in the english translation, AFAICT. Natural languages are no programming languages)

even holding off on the story for half a day, because it still sounds a bit odd. Evidently, they can sue their own customers in Germany if they feel like it.

Last, but not least, darf die SCO Group GmbH nicht mehr behaupten, Kaufer von Linux-Betriebssystemen hatten eine Strafverfolgung zu befurchten, es sei denn, es handelte sich bei den gekauften Betriebssystemen um SCO Linux oder Caldera Linux. . . .

This says that, before the latest settlement, SCO used to claim that buyers of Linux OSes had to fear prosecution unless they bought SCO Linux or Caldera Linux. SCO is no longer allowed to say that.

Gagged..... (5, Insightful)

cuteface (450372) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428342)

something which perhaps the US courts should do more often?

Watching from the sidelines, I'm sometimes disappointed at the trial by media and sensationalist reporting going on in the US. But then I'm not an American so maybe I'm out of touch.

There is no "trial by media" (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428352)

I'm sometimes disappointed at the trial by media

There is no "trial by media" ever, as the media is not capable of doing what the government does. All that happens is that people in the media exercize their first-amendment rights like anyone else.

Re:There is no "trial by media" (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428374)

There is no "trial by media" ever

Where were you during the OJ Simpson trial?

There is no "trial by media" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428412)

Where were you during the OJ Simpson trial?

That was not "trial by media". Only the government could have put him in jail or acquitted him (or levied financial damages, which is what happened in the civil case). Only the government can do this. However, everyone else (in an out of the media) can discuss whether or not a person is actually guilty.

Re:There is no "trial by media" (4, Insightful)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428429)

"Trial by media" is what results when there is so much media coverage of an event, it starts to affect the event itself. Sometimes it means that there's so much national media coverage of an event, it's impossible to find a jury that hasn't already started to form an opinion. Other times it means that a defendant who is found not guilty by the court has to deal with a public that thinks otherwise.

I honestly question why judges don't want cameras in their courtrooms. Every word that is said in that courtroom is still going to be talked about too much by the media anyway, so why deny the public the chance to see primary source material instead of leaving the public watching commentators alone?

That's fine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428498)

Other times it means that a defendant who is found not guilty by the court has to deal with a public that thinks otherwise.

That is fine, as too often there is a defendant who is guilty in reality even if the court says they aren't. The difference is often due to some silly technicality, often involving evidence-exclusion rules so the jury does not know the facts of the case.

Another idea (-1, Flamebait)

MooKore 2004 (737557) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428343)

Is to fine Slashdot 10,000 Euros everytime they post a SCO story instead of real news. Really we all are sick of it.

Re:Another idea (5, Insightful)

Platinum Dragon (34829) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428395)

Gag Slashdot yourself -- uncheck "Caldera" under your Homepage settings.

I should fine you 10 000 Euros for having to tell you this after it has been mentioned in every fscking SCO story. Besides, I would think a story relating to a case that threatens Free and open source software would be considered "news" on a site full of FOSS fans.

Again, you're free to uncheck "Caldera" whenever you want. No more SCO. Enjoy.

In conclusion... speak for yourself.

*forehead slap* (1, Funny)

Platinum Dragon (34829) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428443)

Of course, when I type "uncheck Caldera", I really mean "check Caldera". Just like when SCO says "the evidence is coming Real Soon Now," they mean "Get ready for our next exciting press release, and Goddess forbid the tech nerds ever see our so-called evidence!"

DEUTSCHLAND! (-1, Flamebait)

SisyphusShrugged (728028) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428346)

DEUTSCHLAND DEUTSCHLAND Uber Alles!

Yet once again the intelligent Europeans do away with nonsense that we should have done a long time ago :)

Re:DEUTSCHLAND! (4, Insightful)

Rico_za (702279) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428388)

DEUTSCHLAND DEUTSCHLAND Uber Alles!

Using that phrase is more than a little insensitive. In fact, using it in Germany can get you in about as much trouble as SCO can after this.

Re:DEUTSCHLAND! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428450)

More like that it's slightly insensitive for a german to sing it since it's the last part of their former anthem and glorifies germany for being superior to everything.

Re:DEUTSCHLAND! (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428496)

...since it's the last part of their former anthem

Actually, it's the first part of a song called the "Lied der Deutschen". That part is now verboten. The last part of that same song (the one that goes "Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit") is the current German national anthem.

Re:DEUTSCHLAND! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428394)

Like Jews?

Re:DEUTSCHLAND! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428458)

Sometimes bad taste humour can be the funniest... Not sure about this one though

The Germans once again have right idea (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428396)

"Yet once again the intelligent Europeans do away with nonsense that we should have done a long time ago :)"

The Germans tried to do this during the 1930s and 1940s, but those blasted Yanks would not let them.

Re:DEUTSCHLAND! (-1)

SMOC (703423) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428411)

More like SCHADE DEUTSCHLAND ALLES IST VORBEI.
(sorry, I must be thinking about 1988)

Fall stock price Fall! (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428348)

Now, what will make the remainder of my day great is a falling SCO stock price. Now I just have to wait for the markets to open...

Say what? (3, Insightful)

lordsilence (682367) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428353)

Should it really have to take a court-order to make them be quiet? Things that have been on my list of things to ignore for a long time: 1. spam 2. banners 3. SCO-fud

Muzzled (1, Redundant)

compbrain (625174) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428354)

If SCO has been finally quieted in Germany, why can they not put their money where their mouth is in the US, and show some proof for their bitchin'?

S.U.S.E (5, Insightful)

moberry (756963) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428356)

I'm not a big supporter of S.U.S.E linux, but i'm sure this settlement made them relax a bit.

Re:S.U.S.E (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428452)

S.U.S.E

I hate to be an ass but it's SuSE or Suse, not S.U.S.E., it's not an acronym, it stands for nothing.

Re:S.U.S.E (5, Informative)

StupidGoose (650732) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428480)

I hate to be an ass but it's SuSE or Suse, not S.U.S.E., it's not an acronym, it stands for nothing.

Gesellschaft fur Software-und Systementwicklung MBH.

Company for software and system development.

But still. it's spelled SUSE.

Good ol' Germans! (5, Funny)

Xpilot (117961) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428357)

Unlike Americans who are born with the lawyer gene, Germans are born with the engineer gene. So this decision is not so surprising ;)

Re:Good ol' Germans! (3, Funny)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428377)

I am half German and half irish, so i do my best work under the influence;p (of whisky, not the Freebase that Darl has been on)

Re:Good ol' Germans! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428446)

Um, were you shooting for a "funny" mod there, or is racism now acceptable so long as it's a German stereotype or anti-American or paints those people stelaing our jobs in India as evil?

Re:Good ol' Germans! (3, Interesting)

IamGarageGuy 2 (687655) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428492)

How do you see this as racism. I would much more be willing to be called an engineer than a lawyer. I believe the vast majority of /.'ers would also. This is a compliment to the german quality of engineering. Why does any comment about a particular people have to be racist? Maybe if you would quit looking for the politcally correct way, you may see something that broadens your mind instead of your sense of style.

Re:Good ol' Germans! (1)

Atzanteol (99067) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428526)

How do you see this as racism. I would much more be willing to be called an engineer than a lawyer. I believe the vast majority of /.'ers would also. This is a compliment to the german quality of engineering. Why does any comment about a particular people have to be racist? Maybe if you would quit looking for the politcally correct way, you may see something that broadens your mind instead of your sense of style.

I see you left out the anti-american comment. But that could *never* be considered bad could it?

Re:Good ol' Germans! (4, Insightful)

ratamacue (593855) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428515)

But why are there so many lawyers in the US? Does it have something to do with culture? Hardly.

The lawyers are here because the law is overly complex, ambiguous, and exploitable. In other words, the root of the problem is government. As long as the law is exploitable, there will be a demand to exploit the law. The lawyers are only here to supply the demand.

Everyone wants a piece of the pie, and the US government's solution is to keep producing more and more pie (to continuously expand the scope of government). This is a classic example of government creating problems of which the "solution" requires (guess what) more government. The real solution, of course, is to limit the size of the pie.

Dast ist Fantastichen (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428361)

Now, if we can prove SCO / Scientology link SCO will be completely banned fro Germany.

The customer is always right? (5, Insightful)

kyrre (197103) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428364)

Finally SCO Group GmbH is prohibited to threaten to sue Linux users unless they bought SCO Linux or Caldera Linux.

SCO is only allowed to threaten people that actually bought Caldera or SCO linux? Good thing I never bought either then...

Cat Got My Tongue (4, Funny)

the_mad_poster (640772) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428368)

4) Finally SCO Group GmbH is prohibited to threaten to sue Linux users unless they bought SCO Linux or Caldera Linux.

Hello, Darl? This is irony calling.

Re:Cat Got My Tongue (2, Insightful)

mxf8bv (118038) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428433)

As a poster at groklaw already pointed out, the german text is ambigous here:
" [...] as it could have the meaning that SCO is after all allowed to threaten their own customers with the prospect of criminal prosecution or they are not allowed to say that all Linux users but those who bought from Caldera or SCO could have to face criminal prosecution."

another good thing is this (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428375)


Nach diesem wird SCO auch nicht mehr offentlich behaupten, Beweise fur die Urheberrechtsverletzung wurden demnachst vorgelegt.


This fifth statement had been left out:
they can't any anymore that their proof will turn up "real soon", unless they actually do it! That should cut down on the crap press-releases...

Re:another good thing is this (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428425)

> This fifth statement had been left out:
> they can't any anymore that their proof will turn up "real
> soon", unless they actually do it! That should cut down on the
> crap press-releases...

SCO has already been gagged from their constant press releases by the Judge listening to the two hearings so far.

Notice exactly zero press releases full of FUD from SCO related to Linux, suing end users and SCO vs IBM in the last few weeks? They were told to shut it. It doesn't stop them acting in court, but it stops their bullshit public relations antics

The court order (Verfuegung) (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428383)

The court order [univention.de] (in German)

Germans... (4, Funny)

SisyphusShrugged (728028) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428384)

First the Germans do away with Nazis, then Scientology, then SCO!!

Seems like they are doing pretty good (At least recently...and they have a powerful Green Party!)

Get rid of Greens too (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428440)

They should get rid of the Greens too, as they are a form of left-wing fascist.

Cant find it mentioned on the financial news... (4, Informative)

BJury (756346) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428386)

2:00, nothing yet on either Reuters or Bloomberg news...

Lets hope its true!

Dupe? (2, Informative)

FrostedWheat (172733) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428393)

No, not the story. Well kinda...

Didn't LinuxTag do the same thing? Force SCO to stop putting out unfounded claims in Germany?

robbIE MuSculls hobbyist whiners/.users? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428410)

mynuts won, does'nt respond favorabully to payper liesense corepirate nazis/stock markup FraUD/public opinion manipulation.

So as they say ... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428419)

... they can't say what they've been saying, even though they've already said it; but who's to say what they say isn't still being said?

I'm glad that's all clear as mud now.

/. Editors (-1, Offtopic)

dalutong (260603) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428421)

That has to the most poorly written 'article' I've EVER seen on slashdot. Editors, can't you edit it so it actually says something?

Maybe this (keeping with the Headline News format):
We have news from Germany. It seems that SCO's German branch has agreed to refrain from posting some unproven states ments. This comes after a settlement with Univention. The amount of the settlement was undisclosed. They willed be fined 10,000 eros (about 12500 US) if they make any claims without backing them up within a month. Find out more at Groklaw.

Of course that is simply a rewording of what they posted. No details added or subtracted, though it would have been nice to list what SCO couldn't do.

My point is, can't you reword the stories? Do they have to be in the same format in which they were submitted? Can't you add a clause in the submittion agreement that says, "if we think your posting is unclear we reserve the right to edit it for clarity's sake." Please.

sue their own customers (5, Funny)

cnb (146606) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428422)

I asked a couple of others who speak German to make sure this last was an accurate translation, even holding off on the story for half a day, because it still sounds a bit odd. Evidently, they can sue their own customers in Germany if they feel like it.

Sounds like a cool twisted ploy to make them lose their two remaining german customers.

- cnb

Translations... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428428)

@ Sysiphus:

That all-caps line isn't so nice a thing to post (pre-1945 national anthem, forbidden to sing in Germany). The intend is warmly received, the wording is not. ;-)

That being said, I'll try myself at a word-by-word translation. (Native German speaker, me...)

"Die SCO Group GmbH wird danach im geschaftlichen Verkehr, also gegenuber Kunden und Anwendern, kunftig nicht mehr behaupten, dass Linux-Betriebssysteme unrechtmaBig erworbenes geistiges Eigentum von SCO Unix beinhalten."

"The SCO Group GmbH will therefore refrain, in future business communications, meaning in communication with customers and users, from claiming that Linux operating systems contain unlawfully purchased intelectual property of SCO Unix."

"Der Vergleich verbietet es SCO ferner zu behaupten, dass Endanwender, wenn sie Linux einsetzen, fur die damit verbundenen Schutzverletzungen der SCO Intellectual Properties haftbar gemacht werden konnen."

"The settlement further forbids SCO to claim that end users, in employing Linux, could be held liable for the implied violations of SCO intelectual property."

"Auch die Behauptung, Linux sei ein nicht autorisiertes Derivat von Unix, ist nicht mehr statthaft."

"Also the claim, Linux were a non-authorized derivative of Unix, is no longer allowed."

"Last, but not least, darf die SCO Group GmbH nicht mehr behaupten, Kaufer von Linux-Betriebssystemen hatten eine Strafverfolgung zu befurchten, es sei denn, es handelte sich bei den gekauften Betriebssystemen um SCO Linux oder Caldera Linux. . . . "

"Last but not least (translator's note: I don't believe this is the official wording), the SCO Group GmbH must no longer claim that purchasers of Linux operating systems must fear lawsuits if the purchased operating systems are not SCO Linux or Caldera Linux..."

"Nach diesem wird SCO auch nicht mehr offentlich behaupten, Beweise fur die Urheberrechtsverletzung wurden demnachst vorgelegt."

"After this, SCO will no longer claim in public that proof for the copyright infringement will be presented shortly."

"Ausnahme: Sollten diese Beweise innerhalb eines Monats nach diesem Vergleich vorgelegt werden, kann die SCO Group GmbH solch eine Behauptung weiter veroffentlichen."

"Exception: Should these proofs be presented within one month after this settlement, the SCO Group GmbH may continue to publish such a claim."

Re:Translations... (2, Informative)

Renegade Lisp (315687) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428522)

You translated:

"[...] the SCO Group GmbH must no longer claim that purchasers of Linux operating systems must fear lawsuits if the purchased operating systems are not SCO Linux or Caldera Linux..."

Since this bit has been the most controversial one, I believe you should be careful about doing any boolean arithmetic with it. The negations in the original are different:

"SCO Group GmbH must no longer claim that purchasers of Linux operating systems must fear lawsuits, unless the operating system that was bought is SCO Linux or Caldera Linux..."

Yes, it's logically the same, but natural language sometimes is not entirely logical. Just to clear up any potential confusion.

What exactly.. (4, Interesting)

cypherwise (650128) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428439)

..did Univention have to give up in the settlement? Did they have to pay SCO to stop it's FUD? What are the details of this agreement? If SCO actually got some type of monetary compensation the German legal system just folded when they should've held and continued to let SCO's play up it's bluff.


If I am wrong, someone please help clarify.

SCO has sold a license! (4, Interesting)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428445)

Link [yahoo.com]

Quote: "LINDON, Utah, March 1 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") (Nasdaq: SCOX - News), the owner of the UNIX(R) operating system and a leading provider of UNIX-based solutions, today announced an intellectual property licensing agreement with EV1Servers.Net, a dedicated hosting division of Houston-based Everyones Internet (EV1.Net). Under the terms of the agreement, SCO will provide EV1Servers.Net with a site license that allows the use of SCO IP in binary form on all Linux servers managed by EV1Servers.Net in each of its hosting facilities."

Report SCO's license fraud to the police! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428460)

There was a similar case Tarent vs. SCO Germany.

Unfortunately we cannot report an offence to the police, so that the intstitutions can start a criminal investigation (fraud). The reason is that SCO does not sell their licenses in Germany.

But in other European countries where
SCO is on the market with its licenses, a report to the police may be helpful.
Calling for a public prosecutor is no risk for us and free of charge.

Meiner Ansicht nach ist SCO ein Fall fur den Staatsanwalt, man sollte
Strafanzeigen wegen Betruges stellen. Leider konnen wir das in Deutschland
nicht. Der Vorteil einer Strafanzeige liegt darin, dass ein Staatsanwalt die
Untersuchung ubernimmt und wir nichts zahlen mussen. Im Europaischen Ausland
sollten wir gemeinsam mit befreundeten Organisationen entsprechende
Strafanzeigen wegen Betruges stellen.

Muzzling SCO is irrelevant at this point (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8428464)

Somebody has sure muzzled Darl since the Harvard talk a few weeks ago. SCO ain't made a single peep since then.

So telling SCO they have to shup up now instead of six months ago doesn't appear to be doing much that hasn't already happened.

The real question is why Darl has felt it necessary to deprive us of his rather unique insights into intellectual property ownership.

The court of judge subjectstorm (5, Funny)

subjectstorm (708637) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428485)

person: judge storm! judge storm! the people of slashdot are badly misinterpretting item 4 to mean that SCO may only sue their own customers!

JS: mmm . . .

person: judge storm? shouldn't we correct them?

JS: no . . no, i'm going to allow this one.

person: but-

JS: SILENCE! my position is unassailable. now bring me a goblet of cheese and all 25 episodes of "Berserk". i need to do some thinking on more important matters . . . such as how that CAN'T be the LAST episode, can it?!?!? Griffith, you BASTARD!!!

I think its about time... (2, Informative)

watzinaneihm (627119) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428512)

For someone to sue them in US too
Finally SCO has sold one of their licenses to a commercial Linux user. Here is the press release [yahoo.com]
The buyer is Everyones servers, a web hoster. I wonder why This guy [ev1servers.net] is doing this?

Additional banned words.. (2, Funny)

Channard (693317) | more than 10 years ago | (#8428536)

... from the follow-up lawsuit include.

D*ryl McBr*de

Ly*ng Scumf*cks

S*mpr*ni
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...