Prisoner's Dilemma? Faith in Lawyers? [LWN.net]

Prisoner's Dilemma? Faith in Lawyers?

Posted Jul 24, 2003 20:12 UTC (Thu) by AnswerGuy (subscriber, #1256)
Parent article: SCO License Fees Would Hurt Linux Market (ZDNet)

RE:"too much of its faith in IBM's lawyers.

Sadly you aren't even considering expressing any faith in the U.S. justice system and our judges. Could it be that the judiciary has become some politicized that we truly, cynically, believe that the better lawyer prevails regardless of the merits of the case?

As for Gartner's pronouncement. They have to say something "different" to get their name in the news, to maintain their appearance of currency and relevance. They need to say something that will appeal to suits, because that's ultimately where their bread is buttered. Gartner has never been about technology, only about the business trends that emerge from the application technology (IT) among Fortune 1000 and their ilk.

Is there anything to prevent SCO from suing each Linux user one at a time? If SCO loses to IBM (which seems likely) then they could still litigate against as many others as they can afford. In suggesting that companies capitulate to SCO's extortion Gartner says something soothingly sensationalistic to the CEOs of companies outside of the computer and software industry.

However, they also pose a prisoner's dilemma. We are all better off if we all stand fast in opposition of this evident extortion. (Note the word tort is at the root of extortion: thus is would be redundant to say that SCO actions are tortious). Every one who pays in "protects" themselves from immediate litigation (by entering into a licensing contract with SCO) but enthralls themselves to future demands and risks being sued for some alleged breach of their license. (Keeping in mind that SCO started all this nonsense as a suit on contract law).

It is obvious way Microsoft and Sun ponied up to the bar. For Microsoft it's a way to promote FUD by proxy. For Sun it's a slap at IBM (and Linux). Sun has been losing some ground to IBM z-Series; and losing alot of mindshare to IBM's Linux PR.

Anyone else who "licenses" Linux from SCO is filling their coffers for the next offensive. It should be obvious that SCO will chew up its own customers for breakfast any time the bottom line withers. They have no products nor services worth selling so they must leech off of the work of others.

(Log in to post comments)

Prisoner's Dilemma? Faith in Lawyers?

Posted Jul 24, 2003 20:28 UTC (Thu) by ccchips (guest, #3222) [Link]

"They have no products nor services worth selling so they must leech off of the work of others."

QDOS.

That's where it starts. Where does it end?

Prisoner's Dilemma? Faith in Lawyers?

Posted Jul 24, 2003 20:41 UTC (Thu) by cpm (subscriber, #3554) [Link]

Interesting point.

It never even occured to me that the US justice system and judges
would even think about doing something because it is the right
thing to do.

The nearly fantastic mishandling of MicroSoft by the US justice
department pretty much put to bed any thoughts whatsoever that
the courts had any interests at all in doing the right thing when
it comes to issues like this.

Sure, it seems cynical, but it is really just pragmatic.

SCO can sue whomever they wish. As long as they can afford to.
However, in this case, all they need do is threaten and their
stock goes up, they get more press, MicroSoft products look better
and better to the public at large, and the big dogs at SCO get
a few million closer to the big dream retirement.

There appears to be no downside.