S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge) [LWN.net]

NewsForge has published a statement by Mike Anderer, CEO of S2 and author of the Halloween X memo. "I think one real issue, that people are skirting, is who will be the ultimate guarantor of IP-related issues in a world that is governed by the GPL and GPL-like licenses. I could easily see IBM, HP, Sun, and many of the other large hardware players solving this problem tomorrow by settling the dispute with SCO and maybe even taking the entire code base and donating it into the public domain. I know this is what I originally thought would happen, at least the settlement part. I am not certain what people who paid tens of millions for licenses would say if what they paid for was now free, but that is a different issue."

(Log in to post comments)

S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge)

Posted Mar 12, 2004 22:23 UTC (Fri) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link]

Many people including Anderer, have been essentially confused
by a long and dubious marketing tradition in which Novell,
Santa Cruz Operation, and then Caldera/SCO have claimed to
"own UNIX". What they owned was a)that part of the copyrights
on first the SysV code base and later the Unixware and OpenServer
that wasn't previously given away by first AT&T and later Caldera,
b) the licensing agreements associated with those codebases
that they purchases (that were not modified by later AT&T changes),
and the set of trade secrets remaining in those codebases (this
set might actually be zero). As that code ages, it's worth,
like most software, declines over time.

The trademark UNIX is currently owned by the Open Group and the
APIs for UNIX are basically in the public domain.

Anderer apparently thinks that by developing Unix-like software
that uses the same APIs, free software developers have subverted
the IP rights of SCO. He ruminates that this sort of thing
is a problem posed by open source. The problem, apparently,
is that SCO/Caldera, Anderer, and others, are running around
spouting elementary confusions about both software and intellectual
property law, embarassing themselves and creating numerous
nuisance lawsuits in the process.

S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge)

Posted Mar 12, 2004 22:53 UTC (Fri) by jstomel (guest, #14271) [Link]

I don't know. I think that what he's basically saying is that we have this model called 'propriatary' that's been around for a long time and we've worked the bugs out. Maybe it's not a great model, but it is well established. Now we've got this competing model called 'open source' and it's new and interesting, but it's a little buggy and the corperate world hasn't quite figured out how to best exploit it. I didn't see anything in there about SCO's ownership of UNIX or API files or anything like that. He did't seem to be defending SCO, or attacking them for that matter. He just seemd to be saying 'We should probably be giving some thought to IP issues and open source and it's probably a good thing that it's being worked out in the courts now.'

S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge)

Posted Mar 12, 2004 23:38 UTC (Fri) by gomadtroll (guest, #11239) [Link]

You are to kind to thieves. When someone talks about 'open source' and 'public domain' they have no clue as to what Free software, GPL or copyrighted software is about.

The statement about 'public domain' ignores the IP rights, copyrights, of all the contributions to Linux. Linux is copyrighted material. Same IP rights apply to Linux as to i.e. SCO.

greg

S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge)

Posted Mar 12, 2004 23:45 UTC (Fri) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link]

Anderer clearly states that he thought SCO would receive
a monetary settlement for their claims regarding the use
of their IP in Linux. Taken in context, his idea was not
that SCO would just get 'shutup money' but that they
really have a valid claim to IP in Linux. He spends a
large portion of his note talking about the stuff other
people have licensed from SCO and its universality.

This guy is an example of what investors call "not doing
due diligence". He poked around, but without a clue stick,
and came to incorrect conclusions about what SCO had
available to license in the first place, and the relation
of that stuff to Linux.

It's not that SCO doesn't own anything, it's just that
they don't own what they and Anderer think they do
(and that's true even if they are right and Novell is
wrong about the copyrights).

S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge)

Posted Mar 13, 2004 0:32 UTC (Sat) by sandy_pond (guest, #9734) [Link]

I tend to think you maybe right. Is is as simple as clueless lawyers carrying big sticks and poking around in the dark?

S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge)

Posted Mar 13, 2004 2:20 UTC (Sat) by error27 (subscriber, #8346) [Link]

>> It presumes that SCO's wild claims have any standing at all

Actually I think that's irrelevant to him. He seems to be saying something like this:

"Microsoft cooked up this lawsuit and they have 50 more lawsuits waiting. IBM should have bought SCO when the company was only worth $10 million.

These kind of scams are just a part of doing business and people should move on. I was just doing my job it's not personal. In the old days we used to budget for R&D, scam lawsuits and bribing the cops. With open source we haven't figured out how to budget for stuff."

Down by the old stream of consciousness ...

Posted Mar 13, 2004 1:17 UTC (Sat) by duck (subscriber, #4444) [Link]

Nice one....

I would like to help but I am afraid it would drive me nuts. Just reading
this article was, uhm, nearly too much dada for me.

Cheers

Down by the old stream of consciousness ...

Posted Mar 13, 2004 7:28 UTC (Sat) by jtc (guest, #6246) [Link]

I didn't read the article, but from the quote on LWN, I'd bet there's
a good chance that someone can up with a script with output that will
make a lot more sense than what I just read. Even Lewis Carroll's
nonsense stories make more sense than this quote did.

S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge)

Posted Mar 13, 2004 1:16 UTC (Sat) by mongre26 (guest, #4224) [Link]

He makes a claim that the GPL puts the onus on users. Not sure where he gets that but aparently his knowledge of IP is not what it is all cracked up to be. Certainly if he had anything to do with SCO's moving in its current direction that does not leave much to say about his knowledge in IP space.

He also makes a case for, although he perhaps does not realize it, removing software patents from the control of the USPTO.

If as a result of software patents the only companies in the US that can survive are a few massive monopolists then there is a much bigger problem.

Patents were supposed to be about innovation, however if only the companies than can afford an army of lawyers can even exist in the software industry, and since almost all innovation comes from small companies (organizations) what does that say about the state of software innovation? Can we even innovate in such an environment?

There is both nothing to read and also a very dark view of a future with no innovation in software and only lawyers getting rich and high license fees and no choice for everyone else.

What he does not understand is that the GPL and Free Software is what is trying to prevent that from happening and preserve innovation and progress for the future.

S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge)

Posted Mar 13, 2004 16:22 UTC (Sat) by dkite (guest, #4577) [Link]

I agree with you. He is essentially describing a regime where the US
software producing industry will disappear, in spite of it's seeming
advantage now. If lawsuit after lawsuit becomes the norm, it all will
move offshore.

This industry cannot exist without openness. This is nonsense where code
loses value once people see it.

The patent laws and current implementation in software have built a
system of MAD (mutually assured destruction). There are few lawsuits,
because everyone knows that they all would die if anyone started on that
course. Think Lotus and Borland and spreadsheets.

I find these industry consultants funny. They think 'intellectual
property' has an inherent value. It's only value is when someone wants to
buy it. Now there is an alternative, and bang, fewer want to buy. Lawyers
suck as salesmen.

Derek

S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge)

Posted Mar 13, 2004 16:14 UTC (Sat) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

" I am not certain what people who paid tens of millions for licenses would say if what they paid for was now free,... "

That's not a different issue !... that would be the end of Linux(Open Source) as we know it...
... that is what SCO try's to achieve wit all this affair, in behalf of its Ma$ter...

I mean, the great appealing for commercial parts, of Open Source, is the thousand of free developers contributing for the code,..., if that goes away, then is pretty much like proprietary code.

Perhaps some of them get $$$ in their eyes, but that definitely would make M$ smile.

S2 'mystery man' Anderer speaks on MS, SCO, and licensing (NewsForge)

Posted Mar 13, 2004 16:59 UTC (Sat) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

a better one !

" I do think things will work out, and the sooner the better... "

And an exercise of free speech (aka SCO); the beauty of Open Source, is for any "Very Small" local ISV to say:- scew you, billou... and you can shove your richest man $$$ up trough your a???, and can throw in your glasses too...

That's defenitily not very polite,... and not appealling to the S2 author, since is more concerned about $$$, than the legality of the code, of which he thinks cannot be "patent and proprietary free" altogheter....

HE IS WRONG.

Unless Open source is defenitely illegalized by puppet politicians , he better start looking for a job in Open source support business.