SCO suspends distribution of Linux
[SCO] today warned that Linux is an unauthorized derivative of UNIX and that legal liability for the use of Linux may extend to commercial users. SCO issued this alert based on its findings of illegal inclusions of SCO UNIX intellectual property in Linux." It looks like maybe they finally read the GPL.
Posted May 14, 2003 20:46 UTC (Wed)
by ami (guest, #5280)
[Link] (9 responses)
The real reason for suspending sales is probably that there were no sales anyway.
Posted May 14, 2003 21:10 UTC (Wed)
by tjc (guest, #137)
[Link] (6 responses)
I think the real reason is to spread FUD about the legality of using Linux. As you point out, they probably weren't generating significant revenue from the sales of Linux-based products anyway, so why not try and damage the prospects of Red Hat, or even their own "partners" such as SuSE. For every Linux 100 sales lost, maybe they pick up 1 SCO UNIX sale. I think MSFT may have just lost its long held position as the Master of FUD.
Posted May 14, 2003 22:32 UTC (Wed)
by allesfresser (guest, #216)
[Link] (5 responses)
Ya don't suppose the boys from Redmond have had some hand in this whole SCO fiasco, eh? A few well-placed hints and incentives? Naaaahh... couldn't be. They wouldn't do such a thing.
Posted May 15, 2003 2:50 UTC (Thu)
by comstor (guest, #6887)
[Link]
Posted May 15, 2003 6:11 UTC (Thu)
by pyellman (guest, #4997)
[Link] (2 responses)
(1) It has been widely and repeatedly noted for years now that company to which Linux represents the greatest threat is Sun. (2) Sun clearly had advance notice of the timing and substance of the initial announcement of the lawsuit. Within a few short hours of that announcement Sun was holding a well choreographed press conference highlighting the fact that all of Sun's unix licenses were in order and that such protection extended to their own customers. (3) In the weeks following the lawsuit announcement, Sun has methodically retreated from nearly if not all of its recent and well publicized commitments to Linux, while Scott McNealy and others have engaged in a mindshare campaign against Linux. Ongoing criticism of Sun's Linux strategy has generated serious antagonism that goes above and beyond "just business" towards Linux in that company. Look for more of the same from them.
Posted May 15, 2003 6:27 UTC (Thu)
by mbp (subscriber, #2737)
[Link] (1 responses)
Discrediting Linux won't help Sun. They might have wanted it a year ago but they now realize that if Linux goes away only Microsoft will benefit.
Posted May 15, 2003 10:13 UTC (Thu)
by cpm (guest, #3554)
[Link]
Posted May 19, 2003 22:58 UTC (Mon)
by allesfresser (guest, #216)
[Link]
Posted May 14, 2003 21:53 UTC (Wed)
by Baylink (guest, #755)
[Link]
Posted May 16, 2003 2:10 UTC (Fri)
by neoprene (guest, #8520)
[Link]
It's heavy. Print it, read it, distribute it.
Posted May 14, 2003 20:47 UTC (Wed)
by jbh (guest, #494)
[Link] (1 responses)
http://www.sco.com/scosource/quotes_from_leaders.html For example: "I consider the law prohibiting the sharing of copies with your friend the moral equivalent of Jim Crow. It does not deserve respect." "This is becoming a tradition. I go there and break the law every year in the name of free speech."
Posted May 14, 2003 22:32 UTC (Wed)
by rsidd (subscriber, #2582)
[Link]
Posted May 14, 2003 21:13 UTC (Wed)
by josh_stern (guest, #4868)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted May 14, 2003 21:21 UTC (Wed)
by tjc (guest, #137)
[Link]
As a faithful reader of Byte Magazine from the late 80's through the mid-90's, it's my duty to inform you that UNIX has died five or six times already (once on the cover of the magazine). I don't follow them much anymore, so I don't know how many times it may have died since. Perhaps Linux has died too, who knows? Still, it's a good suggestion, and I would like to attend. :-)
Posted May 14, 2003 21:44 UTC (Wed)
by yalogin (guest, #11191)
[Link] (1 responses)
"GNU is NOT Unix".... GNU/Linux is sounding better to me (ok... only slightly)
Posted May 15, 2003 1:58 UTC (Thu)
by alterself (guest, #1746)
[Link]
Posted May 14, 2003 21:20 UTC (Wed)
by ashley (guest, #11189)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 15, 2003 17:55 UTC (Thu)
by llywrch (guest, #9903)
[Link]
On the other hand, if MS made an offer for the SCO group, IBM -- or another interested party, say Linux International or Red Hat -- could try to get the proposed sale quashed under the anti-trust laws. (It happened when Quicken attempted to sell itself to Microsoft about 10 years ago.) Even getting as injunction against the sale would put pressure on the SCO Group to drop the case. (My guess is that the idea of buying SCO is entirely alien to MS: unless a company has potentially useful employees, intellectual property, or a potential market, they have no interest in it. And while someone like Larry Ellison or Scott MacNealy probably would drop 20-40 million just to acquire a lawsuit they could use to bleed a rival company to death, MS would not do something like that unless they saw a way to get one of those things -- or perhaps make money at the same time.) The only prediction I'm willing to back up with money is that this lawsuit will get more of a convoluted mess before it gets resolved. And unless MacBride & company can attract someone to buy them so they can persue this lawsuit, the SCO Group is destined for the dumpster. Geoff
Posted May 14, 2003 21:28 UTC (Wed)
by Quazatron (guest, #4368)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted May 14, 2003 21:39 UTC (Wed)
by josh_stern (guest, #4868)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted May 15, 2003 3:23 UTC (Thu)
by Russell (guest, #1453)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted May 15, 2003 17:04 UTC (Thu)
by tsg (guest, #4745)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 15, 2003 18:06 UTC (Thu)
by josh_stern (guest, #4868)
[Link]
Posted May 14, 2003 21:42 UTC (Wed)
by cjdewey (guest, #5128)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 16, 2003 3:15 UTC (Fri)
by neoprene (guest, #8520)
[Link]
I don't think they have a single good line of code to point to. If they had a real case they'd be happy to show off reams of code and embarrass IBM. But no, they resort to lying stupid obvious lies. Too bad for them that they have been distributing the GPL'd source-code for 8 years relinquishing any claims to ownership of any code they might have had. Ouch. "How to make money off old obsolete judicially impaired source code with wrinkled teets" ACT 1 ACT 2 Don Darl discovers he's senile and has himself been giving away cheese and butter and other top secret cow-products to the poor. _____ ok, you fill in the blanks yourselves, I think the story has a happy ending for the Advocati and the poor can keep their cheese and butter.
Posted May 14, 2003 23:07 UTC (Wed)
by wcooley (guest, #1233)
[Link] (3 responses)
Given that they've turned into a nasty, nearly universally hated company (in the Linux universe, at least), and that they have said they are no longer a Linux company, I would like to propose that LWN stop providing coverage of the update announcements. At this point, they really shouldn't be shown the courtesy of propagating their announcements and I earnestly doubt LWN will lose any readership for it.
Posted May 14, 2003 23:19 UTC (Wed)
by corbet (editor, #1)
[Link] (2 responses)
Besides, I don't want people wondering what else we might be deciding to suppress...
Posted May 15, 2003 1:58 UTC (Thu)
by jonathanbearak (guest, #8861)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 15, 2003 2:03 UTC (Thu)
by jonathanbearak (guest, #8861)
[Link]
Posted May 14, 2003 23:49 UTC (Wed)
by dwalters (guest, #4207)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted May 15, 2003 1:13 UTC (Thu)
by donwaugaman (subscriber, #4214)
[Link] (1 responses)
SCO's copyrights and patents will not simply go away - someone else will acquire them and potentially use them in future interactions with the Free Software community. The best possible outcome of this would be for IBM to fight this in court and win; however, they'd be putting themselves at great risk to do so - either suspend AIX sales, risk a court order suspending them or worse yet continue selling them and be hit for huge damages in the unlikely event of an SCO win. IBM buying SCO outright would be suboptimal, as if the winds shift in Big Blue's management, some suit might well decide sometime later to "increase shareholder value" by holding Linux for ransom in the same way SCO is doing now - and there'd be one less deep pocket on the Free Software side.
Posted May 15, 2003 19:27 UTC (Thu)
by brown_rm (guest, #11241)
[Link]
Posted May 15, 2003 0:37 UTC (Thu)
by NerdlyMcGeek (guest, #8453)
[Link]
So ya know what that means don't ya Darl? You beef hooked reeeeeal good. Now go back to the shed and start ta hittin yurself widda clue by four. Bad Darl, Bad, Bad, Bad....... .. .. That's gotta hurt
Posted May 15, 2003 21:18 UTC (Thu)
by naughty-artkitekt (guest, #10552)
[Link]
Posted May 16, 2003 5:00 UTC (Fri)
by Photon (guest, #11251)
[Link]
Oh, my god I just violated a copyright!!!! Uh.... UNIX, UNIX, UNIX, UNIX... Uh... FreeBSD UNIX, OpenBSD Unix, NetBSD UNIX. UNIX, UNIX, UNIX... AT&T Unix System V Release 4.... Ouch!! I just violated a copyright owned by the largest megolith in the world... Uh... sorry... Time warp. SCO Unix, (Microsoft owns 20%).... OW!!! Lawyers!!!! Correll Unix... Oh, goddamit!!!! They now have the copyright!!! Shoot!!! Unix is Unix. Linux is Linux. If you don't know the difference, then... You must be Bill Gates? :-)
Any damage they did to their case by distributing Linux themselves is already done. Seems more likely that their Linux sales (which were probably already negligible) dried up after they started their legal action.SCO suspends distribution of Linux
The real reason for suspending sales is probably that there were no sales anyway.SCO suspends distribution of Linux
> I think MSFT may have just lost its long held position as the Master of FUD.SCO suspends distribution of Linux
Seems like I remember Microsoft buying a bunch of SCO stock years ago.Does Microsoft still own part of SCO?
This was before Windows came to dominate the desktop and Microsoft was
hedging their bets. It probably has little relevance now, but its the first
thing I thought of when the whole SCO IP thing started.
I don't think that Microsoft had anything to do with it. I am, however, convinced that there is in this affair a conspiracy between Sun Microsystems & SCO. I would be willing to wager that Sun hatched this plot and brought it to the the attention of SCO senior executives. Consider the following:SCO suspends distribution of Linux
Yesterday's Economist (at least in Australia) has a full-page Linux hardware ad from Sun. I don't think that counts as (completely) backing away from it. Yes, there is a lead time on the ad, but this complain has been in train for more than 2 months now and I'm sure Sun could have pulled if they'd been planning to ditch Linux.SCO suspends distribution of Linux
What has Sun to do with SCO?
SCO suspends distribution of Linux
Well, maybe I am more psychic than I thought... now that MS has decided to very kindly buy a Unix source licence, it becomes more apparent that they've had a hand in this all along maybe... big shocker...
SCO suspends distribution of Linux
On the Linux side of the house... and the capital with which Caldera SCO suspends distribution of Linux
bought out SCO, in the first place, was a result of the Linux stock
bubble.
Therefore, ISTM, SCO should promptly vanish in a puff of logic.
---
The letters are on their site:
http://www.sco.com/scosource/letter_to_partners.html
is to their "partners" and the much more sinister sounding:
http://www.sco.com/scosource/letter_to_linux_customers.html
is to people who bought Linux from someone other than them.
http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.htmlSCO suspends distribution of Linux
This is funny: SCO has collected quotes to show how lawless and subversive (and communist, I'd wager) the linux community is.SCO suspends distribution of Linux
Richard Stallman, Free as in Freedom, Richard Stallman's Crusade for Free Software: O'Reilly (2002) at p. 72
Bruce Perens, explaining his plan to demonstrate how to modify DVD technology to attendees of an Open Source convention.
"Linux is a copy of Unix" was said by Larry McVoy and then quoted by Stallman in a reply.
The very first quote on that page is wrong
It will be interesting to see how long it takes for RedHat and other SCO suspends distribution of Linux
companies with a commercial interest in Linux to respond to SCO's
new tactics. SCO is clearly trying to sway corporate users and
potential users away from Linux by spreading extreme FUD regarding
nebulous "legal issues" they might be peripherally involved in, and
just by generally tarnishing the all around reputation of Linux. A
countersuit wouldn't be well-founded because they are just name
calling and taunting, not breaking laws with their free speech.
However, they have gone far enough with their act that some reverse
P.R. is in order. My suggestion: stage a well publicized funeral for
UN*X. Speakers could be invited to eulogize about how UN*X was
once great but eventually fell into the hands of clueless businessmen
and legal hacks. Now it seems to be suspended in some kind of
vampire state, where it has no life its own and only survives by
leeching.
My suggestion: stage a well publicized funeral for UN*X.SCO suspends distribution of Linux
the not always visionary Richard Stallman sure picked this one right :SCO suspends distribution of Linux
Hehe... (I dont think linus ment this.. but =)) LINUX: Linux is not UniX =)SCO suspends distribution of Linux
So, we finally have something that can stop the otherwise inevitable rise of Linux. Perhaps Microsoft will notice this, and buy them up. I'm buying SCO shares just in case!
SCO suspends distribution of Linux
You're not the only one to wonder if the SCO Group will sell itself to MS. If MacBride's strategy truly is to get IBM to buy the executives & VC out & furnish all of them with golden parachutes, then getting MS interested in making an offer for the corporation might force IBM to make a counter-offer. (After all, MS has the deep pockets to afford the long, expensive legal war that this suit will turn into, & might then be able to force IBM to accept an unfavorable settlement.)SCO suspends distribution of Linux
It seems to me Caldera/SCO/whatever-they-are-called-this-week is just heading to financial disaster by trying to sue a company with deep pockets like IBM.SCO suspends distribution of Linux
Also I think they will be forced to swallow all the FUD they are spreading now, choke on it, and die an ugly death. :-)
There is too many people betting everything on Linux to just let SCO get away with this. Even if they win in court, and have chunks of code removed from Linux, there are many brilliant mind out there that can code around SCO's patents and IP.
The current market capitalization of their company is only $40 million, SCO suspends distribution of Linux
and that represents a doubling since they started this business. I'm
sorry to say that from a purely financial point of view, I think their
strategy to emphasize legal damages, payoffs to shut up, and
licensing fees is a reasonable one, given their position.
$40 Million? There is an easy solution. 1 Million open source users each buy $20 worth of SCO stock, get control of the board, and fire the people responsible for this rubbish.
SCO suspends distribution of Linux
Except that in the process of buying all the stock in the company, you will cause the share price to go up significantly, thus handing the people responsible for this rubbish the nice fat payout they are looking for.
SCO suspends distribution of Linux
That's true, but even beyond that, the float is is well less than half the shares, so SCO suspends distribution of Linux
you wouldn't be able to buy a controlling interest on the open market.
Or are they still saving it for trial?
Have SCO bothered to tell us *which* code is infringing?
No, they're just FUD'ding around to get the share price up so they can all dump their insider stock and move on to a new life with hijacked millions.Have SCO bothered to tell us *which* code is infringing?
A new spectacle is playing at the Utah Opera house:
Don Darl makes a grand entrance singing his heart out how his rich old Uncle has been milking the tits on his dried up cow he bought at the flea market for 3 Ducati's and now wants Uncle to pay him millions of Ducats for his losses.
http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html#id2854091
Should LWN stop covering SCO updates?
People are running SCO/Caldera systems. They need security updates. Pretending that SCO no longer exists and censoring the updates doesn't help those users or anybody else. Publishing the updates does not help SCO's cause. Our opinion on SCO is, I believe, pretty clear, but we'll continue to pass their updates through with the rest.
Should LWN stop covering SCO updates?
if sco is no longer selling linux, but they are continuing to provide updates, then aren't they still acting against their own lawsuit by continuing to provide updates to linux?
by providing updates, aren't they still violating the gpl/their own lawsuit?
and if they stopped provide updates, wouldn't they then be violating contracts they have with their consumers?
one more thing....
I'm not an expert in this area, so I'm curious if anyone knows what happens to SCO's UNIX intellectual property if, as many people predict, they do go about of business in the not too distant future.What happens to SCO's IP if they go under?
IANAL, but if SCO goes into liquidation bankruptcy, their assets (including copyrights and patents) will most likely go to the highest bidder. I think that the court appoints a "receiver" who is commissioned to dispense with the assets of the bankrupt corporation; said receiver is working for the firm's creditors to get the best return on the liquidation (and often is a creditor itself.)What happens to SCO's IP if they go under?
The money to be made from these claims is pennies to IBM and would only hurt their bottom line in the end. If IBM were to buy out SCO, I'm almost certain that they would officially release this code to ease IP fears on the Linux front. IBM has a significant investment in Linux and really just wants to sell hardware and consulting services (where the real money is).
RE: What happens to SCO's IP if they go under?
Somebody should beat Darl and his other brother Darl to death with a clue by four. Somebody else on another site mentioned setting up a hot line for disgruntled SCObies who've pirated GNU/Linux or BSD code for SCO/ATT/or whoever. They've violated their own "IP claims" and supposedly distributed their own IP under the GPL.SCO suspends distribution of Linux
LinuxOpers!! LinuxOpers!!! LinuxOpers!!! SCO should abSCOnd...
(think: Developers!!(3) ad nauseum...
See:
http://newsvac.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=03/05/03/0339241&tid=11
(disclaimer, I am not too kind to microsoft, but looks like SCO is vying to or
someone is urging them to become the SCOurge of under the microSCOpe,
heheh. Too much latte & SCOnes? Got no more bugs you could be out
diSCOvering? Can't find a diSCOteque anywhere? Confused the word "bomb
IBM with "BONG IBM"? Sheesh! SF must have had some Stealth Sewage sneak
into SCO's water supply...) Where's the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)
when Santa Cruz needs them?
So, when, now, did AT&T give over the rights to SCO, & when did SCO fail to
realize they could learn more about this Linus/Linux guy? Obviously, if SCO had a
clue, they would have "bought out" Linus/Linux (or would have tried to) maybe
around 1997 or 1996. Apparently, they back THEN didn't belive or conceive they
had a chance. Now, the jerks (on the board, at least) are simply trying to mine
(dig) or mine (blast) Linux because their atrociously expensive,
under-market-capped company is in the lagging end of the banner string,
obscured by colors and choices and less pricing. If SCO didn't have all the code
rights until AFTER 1992 or 1993, or if Linux used other universities' flavors of
non-SCO UNIX, then SCO has no grounds. If the judge finds SCO is screwing
around, then sco should be eXCOoriated and the board put into JAIL for wasting
public resources (particularly in these bad times), the boards corp and personal
assets siezed to cover court costs, and IBM or GNU/GPL/ LGPL/OSDN handed
over ALL of SCOs properties to settle this BULLSHIT ("we gotta find money from
SOMEWHERE! Let's try to squeeze Linux AND IBM. SO what we hurt Dirk
Hondel and SuSE. They're small fry in THIS game. (OTOH, again, what if SuSE
is involved? Who knows. I doubt it, but thought DID cross my mind...) See what
happens when so-called smart presidents and cabinets interfere with lawsuits or
let themselves be bought off to support one segment of business against another
or against consumers? Seeee?
Seems SCO is blow-harding to cast FUD or shadows over Linux, riding on Linux's
& GNU's inroads. If they can succeed in that, they'll deter ms-escapees and drive
them toward SCO. (I remember using a SCO program they sold to Ultra Express
and other couriers. The thing was horridly expensive, took a lot of my ex-bosses
time on the phone to reconcile billing modules and such and I now wonder if
SCO's pricing didn't run off customers... I know that after 1995 or so, Ultra
Express switched its dispatching and orders program over to then-Borland's
Paradox in an effort to cut costs and have more control over the modules and
code, as well as get timely modifications in place...)
Now, Linux being "free" means anyone trying to pull a "BT" (?) or a "we own the
HTTP" or "We created the concept of framed HTML/Web pages" and get rich for
free.. well just go away...
Sad thing for SCO is they had since 1992 to address this, to assert
incurstion/infringement, and even if non occurred until 1999, they waited TOO
DAMN LONG. Obviously this is a tactic to reinvigorate their shares, position, and
"power" and such. They could have hired Linus away back in 1993 when he
started getting attention. But NO! The whining blow-hards only NOW want to
stake out territory in the growing Linux space because Linus' brainchild and
OS/GNU/Stallman/Raymond/et al created something that is threatening, by
evolution rather than maliciousness, to topple SGI, UNIX, SUN, and even ms.
Now, SCO, lest YOU want to become the "ms of Linux" and steal the baton from
Red Hat... (supposedly RH has the baton...)
Clean up your CODE, your act, and just ride in the herd rather than lead the
buffaloes to a precipice. You want to tank your business model & stock get stuck
in a chimney. But LEAVE Linus' kernel, and Stallman's & Raymond' et als nice,
evolutionary, fair-minded, escape-ms-witch-mountain-opportunity ALONE.
If SCO dies, it damn dies. Linux is on track to take the mantle from ms, unless
the web takes it from both. All we need is more and better GUIs and for
somebody to mimic Lotus SmartSuite and other fine apps that some bonehead
licensors or ms-up-the-butt board members are too afraid to port to Linux, or are
to cheap or lazy to invest themselves in the porting, opting to cheaply wait for
someone else to make the inroads tnen clobber them for infringement and legally
heist the fruits of their work.
SCO SCO SCO, gotta go, gotta go, gotta deliver these toys, you know...
Please Santa...
IBM, time to wind the clock back and get SincSCO de Mayo in play,
unless SCO shapes up.
What say yee? (all you readers...)
David Syes
http://newsvac.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=03/05/03/0339241&tid=11
UnixSCO suspends distribution of Linux
Sorry, this was just meant as a little opaque humor.