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!

SCO Wanted To Gag Torvalds, Moglen

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the can't-say-that dept.

The Courts 168

An anonymous reader passes on word of court documents filed by IBM on Friday. The documents contain a copy of a letter, dated 2004, from SCO to IBM's lawyers stating that they tried to keep Linus Torvalds from making disparaging public statements about SCO, speculating erroneously that IBM was the principal funder of OSDL, where Torvalds worked at the time. Quoting: "The company also tried to silence Eben Moglen, the Columbia University professor who, until this month, was a director of the Free Software Foundation, and Eric Raymond, a controversial open-source advocate, saying they claimed to be IBM consultants."

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

Coincidence? (5, Funny)

plover (150551) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937587)

So Darl wanted to silence Eric Raymond?

Just goes to prove that nobody is 100% evil.

Re:Coincidence? (4, Funny)

davmoo (63521) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937611)

Trying to silence ESR? Isn't that like the proverbial unstopable rock hitting the unmoveable object? Silencing ESR would require the violation of at least 7 laws of physics :-)

Re:Coincidence? (5, Insightful)

mpe (36238) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937893)

Trying to silence ESR? Isn't that like the proverbial unstopable rock hitting the unmoveable object? Silencing ESR would require the violation of at least 7 laws of physics :-)

A pity SCO can't manage to gag themselves. That would keep just about everyone happy!

Re:Coincidence? (0)

gbobeck (926553) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938055)

A pity SCO can't manage to gag themselves. That would keep just about everyone happy!

Hey, It couldn't hurt the price of the toilet paper posing as SCO's stock.

Re:SCO is inconstitutional? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938339)

Silence them!
Reveal the privacy of them!
Publish the private people affairs about the professional jobs!

Re:Coincidence? (3, Funny)

It doesn't come easy (695416) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938805)

On the contrary, SCO has been IBM's best witness...

Re:Coincidence? (1)

jonadab (583620) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939289)

> A pity SCO can't manage to gag themselves. That would keep just about everyone happy!

Eh. SCO's rantings are so transparently inane that they are relatively easy to ignore.

There are a number of people within the open-source community who spend so much time blathering loudly and publicly about stuff that doesn't actually matter, it would be nice if they would just shut up. I'm not going to name any names here, but if you spend more time talking and writing about licensing issues than you spend writing actual software, I'm probably talking about you.

Re:Coincidence? (1)

renegadesx (977007) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938009)

He runs Enegizers baby :P

Re:Coincidence? (-1, Troll)

jhylkema (545853) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938049)

Trying to silence ESR? Isn't that like the proverbial unstopable rock hitting the unmoveable object? Silencing ESR would require the violation of at least 7 laws of physics :-)

Could be dangerous too. He's also a gundamentalist. You know, the type that puts the "gun" before "da mental"?

Obligatory (1)

Zonk (troll) (1026140) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939449)

Eric S. Raymond's GUN/Linux [geekz.co.uk] .

("Everybody Loves Eric S. Raymond" always cracks me up)

Re:Coincidence? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938171)

Anything's worth a try if it'll shut him up. I quote:

"I either founded or re-invented (depending on who you ask, and how some history is interpreted; I prefer 're-invented', myself) the open source movement." - From ESR's own page...the guy is an over-the-hill nerd with a bad combover, and yet he envisions himself as being some sort of hacker "god."

I hope you're reading this, Raymond, because I'd like you to know that, to a great number of us, you are nowhere close to being a "public advocate for the hacker tribe." If anything you're just a washed-up blowhard.

Re:Coincidence? (1, Funny)

Mukunda_NZ (1078231) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937657)

Haha indeed... But they hardly need worry about Eric Raymond... They could just let him talk, after a few minutes no-one want to hear anymore from him.

I can just imagine ESR now... "SCO are the enemy of.... Islamofascist SCO! Screw you and the camel you rode in on SCO!.... Hey why isn't anyone listening to me?"

Re:Coincidence? (1)

tdvaughan (582870) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937991)

Oh dear God no. Seeing how he's responded to something as simple as a request for an interview [ibiblio.org] I think his ego is going to respond to this news by imploding under its own mass.

Re:Coincidence? (2, Insightful)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938381)

Seems like a fair response given their total lack of research.

Re:Coincidence? (0, Troll)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939249)

Are you also a self important gun nut? It might be throwing off your perception of fair.

Exactly - I'd pay $699 for that. (2, Insightful)

aurelian (551052) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938369)

Just read this [catb.org] if you were in any doubt about what a fscking idiot the man is.

Re:Exactly - I'd pay $699 for that. (0)

jmkrtyuio (560488) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938947)

Counter-Example.

Very nearly spot on. Props and Kudos to ESR on this one.

I'd like to gag Linus too (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938567)

With my 9 incher. He has such a sexy face. It'll probably be even more handsome with some spittle all over it.

Re:Coincidence? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938739)

What I love is that on slashdot, bash ESR and it is funny, but don't make fun of the equally (if not more nutty) RMS or you will be modded troll and/or flamebait into oblivion. Congratulations /. for proving once again that common sense doesn't work. Why don't we choose a real and sane OSS leader? I know Bruce Perens has a life (and I commend him, cause god knows RMS could use one), but I think he makes a better spokesperson than either RMS or ESR.

Re:Coincidence? (1)

tji (74570) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939153)

Yes, but it's also a large tactical error. If he was trying to discredit the other side's point of view, nothing could do that like Eric Raymond. He should have been encouraging Raymond to speak at length about his views on the subject. Enough lazy reporters would have quoted him and his batshit ideas to completely discredit the Linux world.

Obligatory (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18937597)

Nothing for you to see here. Move along
how appropriate.

The SCO drama continues... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18937617)

Perhaps some bigwig company is trying to make sure SCO stays at center stage.

As if (3, Interesting)

phalse phace (454635) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937631)

silencing them would make people hate/dislike SCO any less.

Re:As if (5, Funny)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937665)

Well, to be fair, if SCO could get ESR and RMS to sit quietly in a room together for any real length of time I would hate them a little less...

Re:As if (1)

Gazzonyx (982402) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937709)

Well, to be fair, if SCO could get ESR and RMS to sit quietly in a room together for any real length of time I would hate them a little less...
Although I don't particularly agree with ESR I do respect his work; that being said, I nearly fell out of my seat laughing when I read this!

Re:As if (2, Interesting)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938301)

What work's that then ?

Some deprecated pop3 retriever and a book.

Re:As if (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938719)

ESR's contributions have been of the utmost importance! He wrote a lot of Emacs macros... a long time ago. And... hey, do you remember CML2? He did that too.

OK, so he's just a third rate hacker who has propped up his ego by writing a bunch of rambling essays about hackers. Of course RMS wrote a lot of bad essays too, but at least he actually wrote some real software.

Re:As if (1)

Gazzonyx (982402) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939101)

Yeah - I think he has 3 books or so, though. That is to say, I appreciate his research on software.

I'm reading this over and over and I don't think I'm making sense. I need coffee with my RockStar... I'll get back to it this afternoon when I'm awake and on the clock.

Re:As if (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938111)

I don't understand.

they're good friends [catb.org]

Maybe you shouldn't pay so much attention to the show they put on for the geeks.

Re:As if (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938525)

I think the problem is not getting them in the room together, but rather the 'quiet' portion of his statement. Both are known for talking and strong opinions.

Re:As if (1)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938691)

Erm, yeah [geekz.co.uk] ... ;-)

Honestly, I doubt RMS has that much affection for ESR given the degree to which he apparently feels betrayed by what the open source movement (which, as a project, was initially most associated and enthusiastically supported by, ESR) did. But I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

Re:As if (1)

Mr2cents (323101) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938553)

Well, to be fair, if SCO could get ESR and RMS to sit quietly in a room together for any real length of time I would hate them a little less...
It should be easy to organize. I'm sure SCO is willing to host it in their cellars somewhere, after improving the locks. Steve Balmer can throw in a few chairs.

How do gag orders work and is it Constitutional? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18937805)

Now, please forgive my ignorance, I don't know if it is unconstitutional and it probably isn't - but how does it fit in with the Constitution? I looked it up on Wiki but have found limited information.

Re:How do gag orders work and is it Constitutional (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938657)

It's a court order. Just as a judge can order you to appear before a court, a judge can order you not to say things relevant to a case if he or she thinks that you could be disruptive to the case. Violation of a gag order would be considered non-protected speech because gag orders are only used for things like ensuring that a trial is fair (so there has to be something important at stake) and they are only temporary when they are used.

If a judge made an obviously bad gag order you would have a chance to defend yourself at your contempt hearing.

Re:As if (1)

Aliriza (1094599) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939091)

It seems that another use them and throw them case but this time they came to hard rocks.

In case ol' boy doesn't show up (-1, Flamebait)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937637)

I'm here to remind you to pay your your license fees, you toe smaking cack boggers.

er, speed kills.

Re:In case ol' boy doesn't show up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18937649)

Hey! That's MR toe smaking cack bogger to YOU, boy! We have our dignity to consider here.

Re:In case ol' boy doesn't show up (1)

Fordiman (689627) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938069)

Heh. Ok, the license fee is, what, one share of SCO stock? I think I've got that rattling around in my pocket.

Re:In case ol' boy doesn't show up (4, Funny)

gbobeck (926553) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938161)

Heh. Ok, the license fee is, what, one share of SCO stock?

Hey, if you wait long enough you may get the entire company as an added bonus after purchasing one license.

Eben gagged himself (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18937651)

Eben gagged himself, in a way, by retiring from his work on the GPL3

Re:Eben gagged himself (2)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937669)

Oh my God, maybe they got to him!

Re:Eben gagged himself (1)

renegadesx (977007) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938025)

Seems due to the bitching surrounding the GPLv3, sounds like to me he liberated himself

Re:Eben gagged himself (2, Informative)

Adhemar (679794) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939023)

Eben gagged himself, in a way, by retiring from his work on the GPL3

Oh, come on. Eben Moglen's stepping down from the board of directors of the Free Software Foundation [slashdot.org] . That's nothing near "gagging himself". He's still a professor of law and history of law at Columbia University. He's still the Chairman of Software Freedom Law Center. He's still allowed, able, capable, and free to make as much comments on SCO as he wants.

He specifically stated in his blog post announcing his stepping down from the FSF [columbia.edu] that he wants devote more time to writing, teaching, and the Software Freedom Law Center. He considers his years-long FSF work on the GPLv3 as "almost finished", anyway.

Kinky! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18937655)

They say it is for legal reasons, but we all know they suffer from Torvaldo-asphyxiaphilia; the ultimate perversion.

Alternate link to the same story (5, Informative)

psaunders (1069392) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937693)

Here [zdnet.co.uk] .

Re:Alternate link to the same story (2, Informative)

only_human (761334) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938101)

The parent link directly above is much better, although it contains the same text as TFA, much of it is anchored links to supporting information.

No mention of PJ??? (3, Interesting)

rm69990 (885744) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937717)

Why is there no mention of them trying to gag PJ and Groklaw, considering she has covered the SCO case more than the other 3 combined and then multiplied by 100?

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200704281 9571717 [groklaw.net]

Re:No mention of PJ??? (4, Informative)

only_human (761334) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937749)

It is mentioned in the linked article:

SCO also sought to silence Groklaw, a website that follows cases involving open-source software.

Re:No mention of PJ??? (3, Funny)

rm69990 (885744) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937793)

Great, so the fraction of a percent of Slashdot readers who actually RTFA will know about it! :-P At least if it was in the summary the 3 or 4% of Slashdot readers who RTFS would know about it.

Re:No mention of PJ??? (1)

only_human (761334) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937845)

I'm sure that many of the readers follow the ongoing SCOundrelrama so it wouldn't go long without being mentioned; as it didn't

Re:No mention of PJ??? (1)

rm69990 (885744) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937911)

I was joking....hence the ridiculous percentages. You may relax and take your meds now :-)

Re:No mention of PJ??? (1)

only_human (761334) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937953)

Oh good :) Meanwhile I was idly wondering if SCO would be selling their precious IP elsewhere; perhaps reinfecting the Canopy Group again...ya never know, voodoo, zombies, night of the living dead stuff. Taking meds now.

Re:No mention of PJ??? (1)

bladesjester (774793) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938795)

The percentages seemed pretty accurate to me...

Good! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18937843)

She is only important in her own eyes. The rest of the world neither know or care about her. Since she purged all of the thinkers from GL, the place has been an intellectual desert.

Re:No mention of PJ??? (1)

lisaparratt (752068) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938413)

Because she's already had a story on her tribulations with SCO on /., at least twice?

SCO wanted to gag Groklaw too (5, Interesting)

only_human (761334) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937729)

Re:SCO wanted to gag Groklaw too (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938027)

Wow! I coulda swore that happened last week. Does anybody remember when the first shot was fired? This has been going on for a while now, hasn't it?

Beating a Dead Horse (3, Insightful)

AchiIIe (974900) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937755)

Not sure what to tag this, maybe "beatingadeadhorse". How many more stories of SCO being {evil|stupid|malicious} do we need. The company is almost dead now, let them die alright. It'll be a history lesson for future companies.

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (1)

ZombieRoboNinja (905329) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937785)

And surely the best way to make sure that other companies LEARN that lesson is to never talk about it publicly again because you find it boring!

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18937827)

fwiw, I've seen the tag deadhorse before, but not beatingadeadhorse.

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (4, Interesting)

0x0000 (140863) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937837)

The company is almost dead now, let them die alright.

Many of us have thought SCO was dead before - they aren't just Evil, they're The Undead. Regardless of what their losses are, and how many times they are rebuffed by the courts, Microsoft could still dump another couple hundred thousand on them to keep them walking - that's pocket change for Microsoft, and they may well do it just on the outside chance that they will cost someone one or two more Linux jobs.

For my part, I won't be satisfied until the story says that the papers dissolving the corporation have been filed. Fwiw.

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (4, Funny)

mpe (36238) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937873)

Many of us have thought SCO was dead before - they aren't just Evil, they're The Undead.

Presumably there is a headline somewhere along the lines of "SCO attemps to silence Buffy Summers"...

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938577)

I think it's more of an Amityville Horror moment considering at least one of the unprincipled people involved.

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (1)

Fordiman (689627) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938149)

It's worse. They're the Evil Dead. Someone call Bruce Campbell!

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (2, Funny)

gbobeck (926553) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938253)

Someone call Bruce Campbell!


I can only imagine how that will go...

Ash: Ok you Primitive SCOheads, listen up! You see this? This... is my boomstick! The 12-gauge double-barreled Remington. S-Mart's top of the line. You can find this in the sporting goods department. That's right, this sweet baby was made in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Retails for about $109.95. It's got a walnut stock, cobalt blue steel, and a hair trigger. That's right. Shop smart. Shop S-Mart. You got that?

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938155)

Many of us have thought SCO was dead before - they aren't just Evil, they're The Undead.

Does that make them some sort of vampire or zombie or something?

Perhaps we should destroy Darl's brain then bury him at a crossroads with a stake through his heart. Maybe toss a bit of garlic in there as well.

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (1)

ingie (986937) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938457)

For the Horde! ... oh, damnit, does that make Linus a member of The Alliance?

Scombies, in your neighborhood. (1)

DMNT (754837) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938159)

Many of us have thought SCO was dead before - they aren't just Evil, they're The Undead.

So that's why they went after the big brains? Seems like DiDio was - afterall - a victim.

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938473)

For my part, I won't be satisfied until the story says that the papers dissolving the corporation have been filed. Fwiw.

Even that wouldn't be enough, because their supposed IPR would be sold to the highest bidder and the whole thing could continue. Although with any luck their price would be so low by then that we could just pass the hat around on slashdot...

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (5, Insightful)

gbobeck (926553) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938145)

How many more stories of SCO being {evil|stupid|malicious} do we need.

You must be new here.

Ok, more seriously... IMHO, the real reason why SCO stories are covered so often here on /. is because SCO decided to mess with Linux and the GPL, thus pissing off a very large set of communities (including, but by no means limited to the Linux community, Open Source Developers...). Now, since there is a large number of people who care about the SCO case, there is a demand for articles concerning the case as well as anything related to it. Therefore, SCO stuff gets on the front page.

The company is almost dead now, let them die alright

(As of May 1, 2007) They aren't dead yet. Although, the dead collector will be around on Thursday...

Re:Beating a Dead queen (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18939237)

"Lets see what's on the radio..."

"And now on BBC2, the death of SCO, Queen of Shitts."

*crashes, bangs, assorted noise*

"I think she's dead."

"No I'm not!"

*crashes, bangs, assorted noise*

"Anow your radio will explode."

*BANG*

"Well, what's on the telly then?"

"Looks like a penguin to me..."

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (1)

jmv (93421) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938565)

The company is almost dead now, let them die alright. It'll be a history lesson for future companies.

Actually, it's much more effective if we keep reminding people that they're dying. Sort of like the middle ages practice of leaving the body of executed convicts rot on a public place -- just to maximise the impact.

Re:Beating a Dead Horse (1)

permaculture (567540) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938581)

AchiIIe said: "The company is almost dead now, let them die alright. It'll be a history lesson for future companies."

Not if we cease discussing this object lesson. Forget your history and be doomed to repeat it.
Let us continue to beat this dead horse, lest other horses decide to emulate it.

for a GNU dawn! for freedom! (4, Funny)

elmartinos (228710) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937811)

What about Richard Stallman? According to this trustworthy news source [xkcd.com] he was attacked first.

Re:for a GNU dawn! for freedom! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938011)

Awesome that he really got a sword, too...

Apart from that, he sadly has a very whining voice.

Wait.. (3, Funny)

SQLz (564901) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937835)

SCO is accusing Linus of stealing all of their code, making crazy Iraqi information minister like comments to the press, and they tried to gag the people they are accusing from responding? SCO, please just crawl under a rock and die already.

Re:Wait.. (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938333)

thats the first thing that popped into my mind as well - how can anyone have the cheek to make acusations that implicate someone then expect any kind of right to prevent them from responding. it's fairly predictable that if you accused me of something like that i'd respond as well

Re:Wait.. (5, Funny)

goldstein (705041) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938595)

This is a serious insult. I'm sure that the former Iraqi Minister of Information will greatly resent being associated with SCO.

online rights (-1)

kma221 (1093985) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937871)

thats the problem with multinationals they cant stand anybody exposing them or competing them its money and power only

Torvalds reaction (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937881)

They must be smoking crack

Texas Law in Utah? (3, Funny)

FFFish (7567) | more than 7 years ago | (#18937975)

Doesn't Texas Law ("Sir, he was too dumb to let live.") apply in Utah? It really shouldn't be so difficult to get rid of the SCO dipshits, ferchrissake.

Re:Texas Law in Utah? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18937989)

The bar of people being too dumb to let live must be pretty damn low!!

How else can you explain the current inhabitants still being alive - let alone that bush survives trips home...

Re:Texas Law in Utah? (1)

tsalaroth (798327) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939065)

Actually, the law states:

1) That anyone of sufficiently low intelligent is thereby too dumb to let live;
      a) excepting natives if Massachusetts
      b) excepting Vice Presidents

Gag away (3, Funny)

niceone (992278) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938105)

Gagging is ancient history. It's people duct taping my typing fingers I worry about.

Re:Gang four, no away. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938373)

Gagging is ancient history. It's people duct taping my typing fingers I worry about.

No, Gangging four is a sexy history.

I like more, more, more SEX!!!

Thanks to Linuz Torvals for his Linux OS that i'd used to download porn movies and see it gratefully my Gang Four movies.

With SCO, the sex was impossible!

IBM attack? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938125)

It seems SCO always wanted to target IBM since the beginning and not the Free Software movement.

Still, a M$ funded initiative, for sure.

SCO wanted to gag Torvalds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938193)

After watching Pulp Fiction?

In other news... (3, Funny)

Snarkhunter (1056150) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938247)

SCO thinks your mom is fat, ugly and stupid.
Also, it just kicked your dog, got your teenage daughter pregnant, and dumped its leaves in your yard.

Wrong IP Claims, All Along... (2, Funny)

NetRanger (5584) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938599)

Apparently IBM employs half the world of Linux advocates and code writers, according to McBride. They're all out to get him.

SCO should be suing for the IP rights to the tinfoil hat.

Everyone is just copying from Groklaw (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938637)

Groklaw "broke" the news April 28 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200704281 9571717 [groklaw.net]

Since then all these "anonymous sources" just cite from PJ, without properly giving credit. The second paragraph in the groklaw article reads:

      It also wanted Linus Torvalds, Eben Moglen, and Eric Raymond to be prevented from commenting publicly about the litigation.

Re:Everyone is just copying from Groklaw (1)

Aim Here (765712) | more than 7 years ago | (#18938787)

The PACER system was the first place on the net to 'break' this news. Groklaw wasn't even second, in that at least one, and probably more, anti-SCO sites had the filing up on the net before Groklaw.

And I think you're taking the demand for credit a bit too far, eh? It's not as if it's a verbatim quote, or a sizeable paraphrase, or strictly speaking, even a paraphrase at all of the Groklaw sentence. How many ways are there of saying 'SCO tried to make ESR, Eben and Linus STFU' in a neutral and unbiased journalistic tone? It's not even clear (although it is likely) that the ZDnet writers even read Groklaw, let alone pilfered enough of Groklaw's material to warrant a credit.

Re:Everyone is just copying from Groklaw (1)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939287)

The PACER system was the first place on the net to 'break' this news. Groklaw wasn't even second, in that at least one, and probably more, anti-SCO sites had the filing up on the net before Groklaw.


Cite please. Name these anti-SCO sources of which you have so much confidence that they scooped Groklaw.

3mod Up (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18938821)

1. Therefore there in jocks or chaps has significantly MY EEFORTS WERE

McBride had second thoughts... (1)

scharkalvin (72228) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939039)

He wasn't worried about Eric's mouth, his GUN was the problem.

McBride never even had *first* thoughts... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18939315)

So there's no way McBride could be having "second thoughts". And his lawyers are slimier than a month-old banana left in a locked car in the Sahara desert.

Tell me Boies wasn't the best lawyer Al Gore could get in Florida. Please.

SCO stock delisting? (1)

Secrity (742221) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939089)

I noticed that SCOX opened this morning at .94 and it has dropped to .86; about an 8% drop. SCO has until October 22 to get its stock price above $1 for 10 consecutive days or it will be delisted. Stock splits won't count.

Re:SCO stock delisting? (1)

KokorHekkus (986906) | more than 7 years ago | (#18939407)

Stock splits do count.

Does NASDAQ accept reverse stock splits as a method to regain compliance with the minimum bid price requirement?
Yes. NASDAQ views reverse stock splits as an acceptable method to regain compliance.
Source:http://www.nasdaq.com/about/FAQsContinued.s tm [nasdaq.com]

Hypocritical (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18939439)

FTFA:
"We are also concerned about the many litigation-related statements made by Eric Raymond, who claims to be a paid IBM consultant, and by Columbia law professor Eben Moglen, who also claims to be an IBM consultant. Mr Raymond and Professor Moglen have been highly critical of SCO's litigation claims. If paid by IBM it is only fair that they, along with Mr Torvalds, be included in the scope of any stipulation or order regarding litigation-related public statements," wrote McBride.

Well, of course! There is absolutely no way that these people would have anything bad to say about SCO's case unless they were being paid to do it!

Just as there is no way that SCO would be pursuing this case unless they were being paid to do it by Microsoft! C'mon; what's good for the goose is good for the gander. In the interest of full disclosure, 'fess up, SCO; tell us all about who's funding your actions!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?