×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

SCO Changes Tune, Again: Linux Now Just a Riff on Unix

michael posted about 10 years ago | from the no-truth-to-it dept.

Caldera 573

dr3vil writes "eWeek publishes an interview with SCO's Darl McBride and Chris Sontag about the IBM lawsuit. SCO now claim that Linux is a 'nonliteral implementation' of Unix, and compare their claim to those involving Harry Potter rip-offs and Vanilla Ice versus David Bowie and Queen." And ronaldb64 writes "Yahoo Business has a nice summary of the last couple of months of stock movement of SCO, and the reasons why. It contains quotes from business analysts ('Win or lose, the outcome is at least a couple of years away' - 'In the interim, we know the company is going to burn through its cash balance.'), the lack of interest in SCO licenses, the effect the license purchase of EveryOne Ltd. had, and its continuing battle with Novell. The explanation given by pro- and contra-SCO activists is interesting: the pro-SCO group (in the form of SCO CFO Robert Bench) says it is because SCO has been laying low lately, the contra-SCO group (in the form of Eben Moglen) says it is because investors are beginning to understand how weak SCO's case is."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

573 comments

Re: First Post (-1)

CmdrTaco (troll) (578383) | about 10 years ago | (#8751965)

Nicely done, teabagger.

Re: First Post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752013)

Hey!... my ass is really itching me and i'm too fat to reach over. Will you oblige? Ive got a special treat for you if you do!!

Linux users are riff raff (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8751973)

bunch of unbathed GNU hippies

ATTENTION GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8751975)

Please crapflood ticalc.org

Thanks.

What gets me... (4, Insightful)

andy55 (743992) | about 10 years ago | (#8751979)


"In the interim, we know the company is going to burn through its cash balance.",

The saddest part is that this money goes to lawyers and only lawyers, who'll just opt for the luxury version of their next car or shop for the more expensive waterfont summer property. Think if that money went anywhere else--charities, disaster funds, education, investment, open source funding--you name it. Dozens of /.ers have said it before and it's worth saying again: the only people that win are the lawyers and the senior execs (who suck up senior exec-caliber salaries while they ride their company into the ground). It kills me that types like this go home at the end of the day to their families convinced that they're adding to the GDP.

Re:What gets me... (3, Insightful)

Dr. GeneMachine (720233) | about 10 years ago | (#8752035)

Might it be that you are talking 'bout the benefits of capitalism? Or is it just me being in cynical karma-burning mode?

Re:What gets me... (4, Interesting)

daviddennis (10926) | about 10 years ago | (#8752099)

The benefits of capitalism happen to include the mass availability of computers and high-speed networking, so I wouldn't complain too much about it.

The only alternative to capitalism is rationing, otherwise known as the government deciding what products you should have, and handing them over.

I've been fascinated by the idea of an economy without money, but even in Communist Russia, there was always money - you just couldn't buy anything with it.

Capitalism isn't perfect, but it's the best system we've been able to come up with.

D

Re:What gets me... (4, Insightful)

Dr. GeneMachine (720233) | about 10 years ago | (#8752197)

Well, preach to the converted... But I refuse to view capitalism as something more than the best we've been able to come up with. A fact which should keep us thinking about ways to improving it. Keep an open mind - we are by no means at the end of our imagination and possibilities regarding the organization of economy and society.

Re:What gets me... (5, Insightful)

rokzy (687636) | about 10 years ago | (#8752287)

>even in Communist Russia, there was always money

that's because Russia wasn't communist.

this is one of those situations where the answer is in the question: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

>Capitalism isn't perfect, but it's the best system we've been able to come up with.

no it's not, the best system that we've been able to come up with is a mixed economy in which there exists elements from capitalism (private ownership of means of production) and elements of socialism (social security, free education/health care)

Re:What gets me... (3, Interesting)

iminplaya (723125) | about 10 years ago | (#8752289)

The "benefits" of capitalism happen to include the mass availability of mostly junk computers and a bunch of other stuff that barely works when it's new. (even if it's only because enough people don't demand better)

The only alternative to capitalism is rationing...

That's pretty closed minded. I guess we should rule out just plain old "giving".

Capitalism isn't perfect, but it's the best system we've been able to come up with.

So don't even think of looking for or making up something better? There are still some people on the planet that might take issue with your statement, but I'm sure that capitalism IS the best system for some. Most people that believe that are really saying, "It's good to be king."

Re:What gets me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752057)

and the alternative?

better to solve our differences through costly lawyers, or the alternative is very ugly.

http://tinyurl.com/3xopd

Re:What gets me... (4, Insightful)

sploxx (622853) | about 10 years ago | (#8752237)

IMHO, there's a difference between a 'good' lawyer that e.g. defends you as a person from the accusation of a serious crime or one that is solving the problems that you personally may have with your neighbour and 'bad' lawyers that are essentially only filling their own pockets by attacking or defending companies (and, sadly, also individuals) in legal battles which are only there because the legal system can be abused to gain more profits.

The first kind of lawyer is neccessary in a civilized society. I'm not very glad that so little can be done to prevent the second kind of lawyer of abusing the legal system.

But I'm sure that there must be a way to do this, because else we'll all get stuck in a lawsuit mud stifling competition, and, vastly more important, constraining the freedom of individuals in one or another way.

Don't forget the shareholder (2, Interesting)

MisanthropicProgram (763655) | about 10 years ago | (#8752098)

class action lawsuit when McBride fails.
When he loses, or if he wins, the downslide in the stock price will probably start off a class action lawsuit - more lawyers getting rich.

The silver lining - McBride gets sued and maybe there's an SEC investigation.

I can dream. Now, I'm going to listen to the Infinite Mind on NPR. Tonight's show is on depression - how appropriate.

Re:What gets me... (4, Interesting)

ljavelin (41345) | about 10 years ago | (#8752110)

The saddest part is that this money goes to lawyers and only lawyers

That doesn't bother me so much - it looks like SCO and Microsoft have determined that it's in their collective best interest to hire this legal team to represent SCO. If it didn't go to the lawyers, it'd just be another lump of cash in Gates' pocket.

As for the IBM legal team, I hope their lawyers trounce on what looks to be this SCO/Microsoft partnership.

And given the details that I know, it looks like IBM will succeed in showing that a SCO/Microsoft partnership is in fact a losing partnership.

The saddest part is some lowly investor who was dupped into buying the stock at more than $1 a share.

Ah lawyers! The next big thing! (4, Interesting)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | about 10 years ago | (#8752173)

The saddest part is that this money goes to lawyers and only lawyers

Well, this is an interesting point. 10 or 15 years ago, CS was the hot thing to study in school. The Internet was new, the money was fantastic , now it's changed to law. All the kids will be going to law school, because it is now the hot thing, and the money was fantastic .

Re:Ah lawyers! The next big thing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752267)

I think becoming a lawyer has always been one of the hot things to be, because win or loose you still make out with the dough, though you might want to win more than you loose.

MOD PARENT UP! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752114)

This is absolutely true. Lawyers are about the only profession that cause more harm to society than benefit. Just imagine how much better the world would be if lawyers like this had to give their ill-gotten gains to charity.

I too am amazed that these lawyers are able to go home to their families without a bit of shame.

Re:What gets me... (5, Insightful)

niko9 (315647) | about 10 years ago | (#8752161)

It kills me that types like this go home at the end of the day to their families convinced that they're adding to the GDP.

GDP? What ever happened to coming home to your kids and convicing yourself that you are decent human being?

Fuck the GDP.

Nick

--

Re:What gets me... (1)

pizza_milkshake (580452) | about 10 years ago | (#8752178)

It kills me that types like this go home at the end of the day to their families convinced that they're adding to the GDP.

GD-what? they can afford nice things for themselves and their families. they don't give a damn about anyone else.

the goal of any "businessman" whos salary is not directly tied to how much the company sells is to lie your ass off as long as possible, make as much money as possible and try to avoid going to prison. when lying on the beach sipping margaritas it doesn't matter what happened back in the world.

Curbjob, n (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8751980)

Forcing a person of an inferior race to "bite" a curb, then proceeding to stomp on their head, thus splattering their brains all over the street

That nigger tried to rape my wife and I gave him a fucking curbjob

SHAKE SHAKE SHAKE, SHAKE SHAKE SHAKE (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8751981)

shake your goatse! shake your goatse!

SHAKE SHAKE SHAKE, SHAKE SHAKE SHAKEshake your goatse! shake your goatse!

SHAKE SHAKE SHAKE, SHAKE SHAKE SHAKE

FIRST POST MUTHERFUCOKER!S

Re:SHAKE SHAKE SHAKE, SHAKE SHAKE SHAKE (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752078)

interesting concept

but you fail it hard.

FROSTY POST YOU NIGGERS! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8751984)

fp!

The Money Shot (4, Funny)

themaddone (180841) | about 10 years ago | (#8751993)

Q: Why do you think SCO can win?

McBride: When I look at our case, I think anyone who has a rational mind would come down to the same conclusions I do.

You mean, just like IBM, and the FOSS movement in general?

Re:The Money Shot (5, Insightful)

Kirill Lokshin (727524) | about 10 years ago | (#8752021)

McBride: When I look at our case, I think anyone who has a rational mind would come down to the same conclusions I do.

Notice how he carefully avoids stating what conclusions he came to...

Re:The Money Shot (0)

saden1 (581102) | about 10 years ago | (#8752084)

McBride: Would you buy an operating system without the source-code copyright? If you don't have copyright, they can turn around the next day and screw you.

Well we now know he is not refined. CEOs of public companies should talk like that but then again we all know he is an amateur.

What a joke (5, Interesting)

craznar (710808) | about 10 years ago | (#8751996)

Does this mean the end for Staroffice, AMD and all but the original movies and books covering the 36 possible Polti plots ?

Sorry no more responses allowed after this, or else I'll sue you for non-literal illiterate literation.

Re:What a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752218)

Bull$hit.

In other news... (4, Funny)

Kirill Lokshin (727524) | about 10 years ago | (#8751998)

King Feature Syndicates claims Star Wars is "nonliteral implementation" of Flash Gordon, sues Lucasfilm for $10 billion.

Re:In other news... (5, Funny)

trmj (579410) | about 10 years ago | (#8752039)

Perhaps IBM should say that SCO's Unix is a "reverse parody" of Linux, and sue on the grounds of defamation of a good product by releasing one that's more of a joke?

:-p

karma whoring opportunity! :D (1, Interesting)

System.out.println() (755533) | about 10 years ago | (#8752001)

compare their claim to those involving Harry Potter rip-offs and Vanilla Ice versus David Bowie and Queen.

This means nothing to me.... who wants to enlighten me and karma whore?

Re:karma whoring opportunity! :D (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752026)

Well, a guy name Harry Potter invented a new type of ice cream and used a David Bowie song and the image of the Queen of England to sell it. He got sued but the case was thrown out.

Re:karma whoring opportunity! :D (1)

xv4n (639231) | about 10 years ago | (#8752089)

>>compare their claim to those involving Harry Potter rip-offs and Vanilla Ice versus David Bowie and Queen.

>This means nothing to me.... who wants to enlighten me and karma whore?

Well, it's called false analogy [datanation.com].

Re:karma whoring opportunity! :D (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752132)

ta-dada ta-dadada, ta-dada ta-dadada

the above riff starts david bowie + queen's "under pressure". it was also used by "singer" vanilla ice in his song "ice, ice, baby". hearing the first 5 or so seconds of the song, you cannot distinguish which song it is that is playing (which forces you turn off the radio, for fear of hearing vanilla ice).

joe_bruin
---
i'm not an anonymous coward, but i play one on slashdot

So Linux is "Cool as Ice" (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752015)

"Free words of wisdom baby. Drop that zero, and get with the hero."



http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101615/quotes

It took them! (4, Funny)

MagiGraphX (767644) | about 10 years ago | (#8752016)

Investors are simply beginning to understand how weak SCO's case is.

Then why is Microsoft still invested... Oh, wait a minute...

Wow, Just Like This New Sim-Game.. (5, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | about 10 years ago | (#8752017)

I've been beta-testing Sim-Litigation for a while and it's a pretty gut wrenching thing to go through. The game is like most Sim Games, but in this one every Sim becomes a Sim-Lawyer or someone hiring one, it takes seeming years to play and when the revolution came and the Sim Lawyers all went up agains the wall there was nobody left to fire the bullets.

I noticed Sim-SCO was one of the first to die off.

Re:Wow, Just Like This New Sim-Game.. (1)

trmj (579410) | about 10 years ago | (#8752118)

In other news, makers of the game "Sym-Litigation" narrowly avoid lawsuit by changing one letter.

Re:Wow, Just Like This New Sim-Game.. (1)

iminplaya (723125) | about 10 years ago | (#8752126)

I represent the Sim Industry Association of America (SIAA), and hereby order you to stop this unauthorized imitation.
Is it alright if I just lay down in the street and die?
Yes...that would be acceptable.

McBride on record as opposing the GPL in business (5, Insightful)

KRzBZ (707148) | about 10 years ago | (#8752032)

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1404303,00.as p

Yet the Arse of Lindon continues to distribute (unsupported) Apache as well as other F/OSS products which adhere to the GPL.

Need we any other evidence of the duplicity of these scumbags?

Someone, please shut his piehole. I am sick and tired of listening to the lies and FUD and blastant misrepresentations made by this company and its executives and lawyers (same thing?).

Re:McBride on record as opposing the GPL in busine (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752160)

> Yet the Arse of Lindon continues to distribute (unsupported) Apache as well as other F/OSS products which adhere to the GPL.

Hello,

Apache is not GPL'd. I leave it to your superior research skills to determine its license.

And I leave it to your superior reading skills (1)

KRzBZ (707148) | about 10 years ago | (#8752275)

to show me just where I said Apache used the GPL?

Get a nick...

Rock...Hard Place...Oops (5, Insightful)

World_Leader (635956) | about 10 years ago | (#8752042)


SCO marketeers must have just relized that their lawsuit is in effect telling the public, and in particular the business public, that Linux is Unix for free. Otherwise, why sue?

He is right (3, Insightful)

lazy_arabica (750133) | about 10 years ago | (#8752044)

Why do you think SCO can win?

McBride: When I look at our case, I think anyone who has a rational mind would come down to the same conclusions I do.


He is right : everyone with a rational mind would understand SCO initial claims were so silly that it was worth for Darl McBride to change his strategy.

-----

Ding Dong . . . (1)

OurColon (759124) | about 10 years ago | (#8752045)

. . . the witch is dead, which old witch. The McBride Witch.

May he rot.

Anger management starts Monday

Right on the money. (5, Funny)

demonic-halo (652519) | about 10 years ago | (#8752046)

SCOX definately should be sorted.

That company no longer has the ability to sustain itself from day to day operations.

Or Maybe it's better to buy 1 share of SCOX, wipe my ass with it, and mail it back to Darl McBride. It's just too hard to say what gives me more pleasure.

Re:Right on the money. (1)

demonic-halo (652519) | about 10 years ago | (#8752068)

I meant to say "shorted", not 'sorted'.

If anyone's listening.. add a spell/grammar check feature for God's sake!!!!

Re:Right on the money. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752138)

If anyone's listening.. add a spell/grammar check feature for God's sake!!!!

You first! ;-D

Re:Right on the money. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752182)

There are no available shares to be shorted. This has been reported on ever since SCOX hit 20$ a share.

SCOX rampage. (1, Interesting)

Forge (2456) | about 10 years ago | (#8752055)

This means 4 distinkt lawsuites against the same company (IBM), Each one filed after the 1st was shown to be completly baseless.

This last one hasn't a ghost of a chance but SCO can always fantasize. :)

Umm.... yeah. (4, Interesting)

el-spectre (668104) | about 10 years ago | (#8752061)

As I type I am (should be) working on a simple login function. It works pretty much the same as every other one ever written... including a unix login... wonder if I'm next to be sued.

Re:Umm.... yeah. (1)

beni1207 (603012) | about 10 years ago | (#8752169)

Or more likely, your boss is about to find out you're replicating work that's been done a million times before and fire you. :D

Path of least resistance (1, Interesting)

LostCluster (625375) | about 10 years ago | (#8752071)

It seems to me that SCO is going after companies that are more likely to pay up than go to court to fight them, taking a bit of a path of least resistance. We don't know how many private license deals they did in the first quarter of 2004... they'll have to release the total revenues in a few months, but it's not out yet.

SCO might be making more deals than we know with companies less likely to fight back because they know they will lose the IBM fight... so they're profiting while they can.

In other words, both the critics and the supporters are telling the truth. Their main points don't contradict...

Non-Literal Implementation ... (4, Insightful)

kalidasa (577403) | about 10 years ago | (#8752087)

There are different standards for software than there is for a work of fiction - in a work of fiction, if you have the same characters or the same plot, it looks like plagiarism; but software is about applications (in the generic sense of "things you do"), and one can pretty easily see that a certain amount of workalike implementation would be necessary for competition to be possible. IANAL, but if I were at the business end of this lawsuit, I'd ask my lawyer if the whole MS vs. Apple "look and feel" decision didn't set a damning (to SCO's position) precedent in this area.

it's basically true -- no point in denying it (2, Interesting)

plinius (714075) | about 10 years ago | (#8752091)

Technically all Linux ever was (at the start) was an imitation of Unix by admirers thereof. Why people like to claim that Linux coders are "creative" or whatever is beyond me. They may have put in some innovations--the same no doubt that have appeared in many OSes since Unix--but they are really just copying something they like. They didn't move beyond that, as Apple has. And the latest ideas in OS research have been mostly ignored because of the momentum of the Linux hive. Really the Linux kernel deserves to be replaced by something better, and the middle finger be given to all the corporate advocates of Linux who want to make it the next Big Brother OS. But at any rate, unless SCO has software patents for Unix then I think their present claims are just more crapola.

Re:it's basically true -- no point in denying it (1)

Dr. GeneMachine (720233) | about 10 years ago | (#8752164)

While you might be right on the imitational nature of linux - nonwithstanding it's quality - (note me getting distance..), do you really want to pull the wrath of zealot-land on you? I mean, it's like dancing on on a mountain top during a weather storm, wearing a copper helmet and cursing the gods...

But yes, the SCO claims are crap either way.

Re:it's basically true -- no point in denying it (5, Insightful)

jrnchimera (558684) | about 10 years ago | (#8752165)

Actually, you should do your homework. The Linux Kernel may provide basically the same Unix interfaces and API's, but in many areas the Linux Kernel does things completely different than the Unixes before it...

But (1)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | about 10 years ago | (#8752219)

While it may do things somewhat differently, owing to the black-box copying, it does effectively the same things, which I believe was the poster's point.

Re:it's basically true -- no point in denying it (2, Insightful)

jrnchimera (558684) | about 10 years ago | (#8752250)

Doing the "same thing" and "doing the same thing better" are two different things. A Yugo and a Mercedes both do the same thing. But the Mercedes does it differently and is a better vehicle.

Re:it's basically true -- no point in denying it (1)

psavo (162634) | about 10 years ago | (#8752282)

Hmm. Well, IMHO Linux' beauty is in that whatever hardware I have, I can run linux on it. I don't have to go out and buy whatever machine is required. Linux has and will run on whatever I already have.

Can you run OSX on x86? Alpha? Or perhaps on some kind of SPARC?

Oh yes, talking about innovation. Which way did Apple go with OSX? Oh yes, it was BSD, a.k.a Unix way. There may be some candy thrown on top of it, but that system is full-blown 30 years old design. Design made by some real engineers and worthy copying and enhancing.

Stick a fork in me (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752093)

Ok, thats it, I'm done. Honey, go get the shotgun.

The Real Milestone (1)

berchca (414155) | about 10 years ago | (#8752097)

It seems like a lawsuit like this would take years and SCO doesn't have that much money. The big question is, "Did they raise enough hell for Microsoft to purchase 'additional licenses' that extend the time SCO can keep suing everything Linux?"

I don't think so, but MS has a lot of money to burn...

McBride: We'll give them 'hello world.' (1)

betelgeuse-4 (745816) | about 10 years ago | (#8752101)

I didn't know that SCO were the original authors of 'hello world'. How kind of them to be licensing it for free.

SCO gives MS and other vendors more time (1)

sploxx (622853) | about 10 years ago | (#8752103)

The lawsuits by SCO gives companies which compete with FOSS products more time to defend themselves.

It seems that this strategy works and is delaying 'progress' at least a bit (see e.g. a recent post here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=102728&cid=875 0615).

I'm no fan of conspiracy theories at all, but in this case it should be rather easy for, lets say, MS to put some money into SCO anonymously to delay and hamper linux deployment.

Who's next? (1)

RLiegh (247921) | about 10 years ago | (#8752109)

So, who else has MS given a cash infusion to recently that has a vested interest in linux going down?

*blinks* oooooo-boy. this could get nasty.

I got teh funnay! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752125)

Darl McBride: I am a big stupid head

Linux Hippy: <statement witty to slashbots only>

Darl McBride: <duh, dumb statement>

Linux Hippy: <Another statement witty to slashbots only>

+6 Funny.

EOP

Ice Ice What the FUCK?! (5, Funny)

Tackhead (54550) | about 10 years ago | (#8752130)

> Darl McBride and Chris Sontag about the IBM lawsuit. SCO now claim that Linux is a 'nonliteral implementation' of Unix, and compare their claim to those involving Harry Potter rip-offs and Vanilla Ice versus David Bowie and Queen.

Now that lawyers are jumpin'
Billy Gates' cash in, and my analysts pumpin'
Insider trades, all the sales I'm makin'
Cooking short sellers like a pound of bacon
Burning them - if they're not quick and nimble
I go crazy when I see the symbol
of my high stock - S-C-O-X tempo,
I'm on a roll, it's time to go solo

(Rollin!) In shareholder dough,
Press releasin' now, up my stock will go,
Pamela's on standby, tryin' just to ask "why"?
(Did you stop?) No! I just drove by,
Kept on - I'm filin' to the next suit,
Judge busts me down, so I gotta try a new truth, -

That truth was dead, yo, so I continued to,
(IBM) - Lawsuit avenue!
Darl and Chris, wearing less than bikinis,
*** VIEWER PROTECTION FAULT - CORE DUMPED ***

Backpedaling faster != going back in time (2, Insightful)

weeboo0104 (644849) | about 10 years ago | (#8752136)

Although I'll bet Daryl and company wish it were so.

Look at todays comment.
SCO now claim that Linux is a 'nonliteral implementation' of Unix,

If it's 'nonliteral' why did they even bother with a copyright suit in the first place? Still looking for the "millions of lines" of infringing code, Daryl.

Anybody on /. feel like compiling a list of SCO quotes that they have made in the past year for a good 'comedy of errors' read?

Okay (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752144)

So now Linux is Bad because it's Similar to UNIX.

Did Darl ever bother to explain under which portions of copyright law, exactly, it is legal or a civil infringement for Linux to be Similar to UNIX?

Just checking.

Wat een gelul (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752147)

Dat gedonder met SCO moet maar eens afgelopen zijn.

Wie gaat McBride eens mee naar de hoeren nemen, het lijkt erop, ik zeg niet dat het zo is, het lijkt erop dat die "kerel" het eens nodig heeft.

Je kunt wel lief blijven, sommige mensen verdienen het!

Bah bah Bah, bij mij in de familie heet al een toilet --> McBride en de keutel die weggespoeld wordt een Sontag.

Dankejewel SCO voor de nodige humor, jullie hebben goed jullie best gedaan.

PLZ translate it to your language.

Why does my "I hate SCO" meter just keep going up? (1)

Omega1045 (584264) | about 10 years ago | (#8752162)

I swear, rule this redundant or troll, but after reading the article I think SCO just may be SATAN, if there is such an entity.

With the considerable history of this suit, SCO just keeps double and triple and quadruple talking on all the points. Is there no doubt to anyone (not just in Linux circles) that SCO will probably loose, one of several ways.

Seriously, because hate is such a self-destructive thing I really try to reserve it as much as I can. But I think that Darl McStupid really deserves the full wait of my humble bit of hate. I don't know how that effects his or my karma, but I really don't care at this point.

The only thing that is gonna suck when SCO finally looses is that some poor saps will loose a lot of money on SCO stock, and a few SCO employees (like all of them) will loose their jobs.

non-literal implementation? (1)

abe ferlman (205607) | about 10 years ago | (#8752163)

Sounds to me like they've got a non-literal case then.

But everyone knows it's not SCO's cash flow they'll be burning through. One way or another, the cash will come from sugar-daddy Gates.

Sontag and McBride - confused cats (5, Interesting)

phoneyman (706381) | about 10 years ago | (#8752167)

The eWeek article has some interesting quotes by Sontag, indicating that he has no clue what the GPL is, what copyright is, and what a license in general is. Sad really.

Sontag: We don't have to knock out the GPL for us to succeed on the copyright issue. The GPL itself supports, in a lot of ways, our positions. Section 0 of the GPL states that the legit copyright holder has to place a notice assigning the copyright over to the GPL. All these contributions of our IP did not have an assignment by SCO saying here, 'We assign these copyrights to the GPL.' The fact that we participated with Linux does not mean that we inadvertently contributed our code to the GPL. You can't contribute inadvertently to Linux. We feel we have a very strong position based on the GPL.

The GPL is a license under which copyrighted material can be used by others, it is not an entity to which copyright can be assigned (transferred). Sontag seems to think that the GPL == the FSF, or something along those lines.

It is perfectly possible to "inadvertently" license your copyrighted material to someone else under conditions you don't approve of. The solution is to create a new license to distribute your works under to new people, not to pretend you never did it in the first place.

I also love this part:
Sontag: We feel very covered under the GPL itself, and second, U.S. and international copyright law does not allow for inadvertent assignments of copyrighted material; the copyright holder must make an explicit assignment, typically in writing, in a contract. If that's the strongest argument that's out there that SCO has a big problem here, that's a molehill as far as we're concerned.

This crap is right out of Novell's Motion to Dismiss and Notice of Removal. Novell argues that US Copyright law requires very strict wording to assign copyright, and it does. Unfortunately for this gang of thieves, the GPL is not an entity copyright can be assigned to.

Pierre

I hate to think... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752179)

...that they may have a point (i may hate thinking just in general but thats another post...)

I thought that the hello world example referenced in the article was trivial, so lets consider a non trivial application:

If someone writes a game that plays the same as Tetris, but hasn't ever looked at Tetris' code, can the copyright holder of Tetris sue even if the implementation is completely different?

Now what about older games like Chess or Go? Does the first programmer who writes an implementation of the game get the copyright, and thus the ability to stop everyone else from writing an implementation of said same?

Is it content or implementation that can be copywritten or patented?

Follow the money (5, Informative)

erick99 (743982) | about 10 years ago | (#8752184)

I went to Ameritrade and did some research on SCO. At the end of last year they had $64M in cash which is not very much money. They are a very small company (comparatively) in the IT world with not even 100M a year in revenues. They have three insiders that sold stock or excercised stock options to the tune of almost $300M in Feb/Mar of this year. I don't understand what would keep them afloat for more than a year. They have negative earnings-per-share and they have a estimated share price of $5 at the end of this year (currently at $9.50). SCO would be better served by having someone at the helm that had a real interest in technology. McBride is inarticulate, mean-spirited, and an opportunist. I wonder if SCO can stay in business long enough to see their various law suits to a conclusion.

Happy Trails!

Erick

Re:Follow the money (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#8752203)

That's stupid.

The only question you have to ask yourself about SCO's share price is how long Microsoft is going to keep letting them suck on it's teat.

days without a SCO story (1)

beni1207 (603012) | about 10 years ago | (#8752187)

boy...and I was just thinking - "hey, it's been awhile since I've seen a SCO story on /. - I wonder what's up". Guess it's time to reset the counter.

(and yes, I know I could ignore the stories if I wanted).

eWeek clarifies - Linus replies re: "tainting" (5, Informative)

gsfprez (27403) | about 10 years ago | (#8752202)

Linus says clearly [eweek.com]

"In other words," Torvalds said, "there is no code taint that I'd be afraid of, since no such tainted code exists in the kernel. There is only the issue of SCO's NDA. And, at least back then, Darl was aware of the issue, so this is not a question of misunderstanding. It's a question of Darl knowingly misrepresenting the truth."

like his code, his words are to the point and clear.

Fuck Darl, he's a kockbite.

Does Sun/Microsoft deal help eliminate SCO threat? (1)

eggboard (315140) | about 10 years ago | (#8752206)

Since Microsoft has been partially funding SCO (through fees or licenses or other alleged funding activities), does their deal with Sun (which has some relatively significant Linux/open source interests, but not as much as IBM and HP) mean that Microsoft backs off from SCO's defense?

It seems like some footnote in the $1.7 billion cash deal and partnership announcement should be that Sun has Microsoft's contractual assurance that they won't threaten Sun's Linux business through supporting SCO.

The press (1)

ErichTheWebGuy (745925) | about 10 years ago | (#8752247)

is finally starting to get it. I see more and more articles that are critical of SCO (therefore tell the truth, less SCO's FUD). It only goes to show that once you peel away the layers of bullshit, there can only be one outcome.

The statement about the IBM v. Microsoft "war by proxy" I beleive is accurate. It has been a long time coming. Unfortunately, I don't think it will go as far as it should (IBM buying/crushing Microsoft). One can still hope, though ;-)

Remember to think 5 minutes ahead.... (1)

DangerSteel (749051) | about 10 years ago | (#8752249)

IANAL but Darl runs SCO, and he can do with the company whatever the board and stockholders let him get away with, if he wants to throw it at the lawyers, so be it.

But don't think just because lawyers get the money that it stops there. People... real people, have to build those cars lawyers buy, and fix them and gas them up. Someone has to build and sell them those nice homes, and those waterfalls and pools, and whatever else those lawyers buy. A lot of people have a bias against those who are well off. It's not like rich people sit on thier money. The money goes around. If you don't think you get your fair share, then go get it.

Ridiculous statement (1)

lazy_arabica (750133) | about 10 years ago | (#8752265)

What about the argument that, given the nature of the language and the design goals, that of course you'd end up with similar structures. I mean, how many efficient ways are there to write 'hello world' [the canonical beginner's program]?
[...]
Sontag: Sure, there may be some of that, but look at dynamic shared libraries; different operating systems implement these very differently. But in Linux and System V, they're implemented in exactly the same way. They could have been done very differently and still accomplish the same thing.


Of course, there are many ways to program the same thing. But very often, only one is both elegant and efficient. Unix is has been programmed by very talented hackers, and so has been Linux ; so, it's not surprising at all if Linux hackers find the same solutions that Unix hackers did decades ago.

Go away, SCO. You obviously don't have the point.
----

Flame me but... (1)

dnoyeb (547705) | about 10 years ago | (#8752286)

Once again, as one who followed scox stock for a long time, the SCO CFO is correct, and Eben Moglen is wrong.

This stock *never* had a reason to be high. So its lowness is clearly a function of its manipulators, err investors, laying low. Not a function of sudden wisdom.

I have never met anyone investing in SCOX that did not understand exactly what the nature of SCOX was. Have you?

What I have been saying ever since SCOX burned a hole in my pocket is that SCO is a very bad software company but a very good marketing company. Ask yourself what the major supporters of SCO (Microsoft, Sun) receive in return. It ain't software.
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...