|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

[Posted November 7, 2003 by corbet]

Here's a Forbes article (via Yahoo, since Forbes.com requires registration now) stating that SCO is planning to target film studios which are using Linux. "So what if the studios tell SCO to take a hike? `We're going to force people down a path,' McBride says. `They can choose licensing or litigation. If someone says they want to see a court ruling before they pay, we'll say, Fine, you're the lucky winner. We'll take you first. I'd be surprised if we make it to the end of the year without filing a lawsuit.'"
to post comments

SCO thinks they can take on *Studio Lawyers*???

Posted Nov 7, 2003 20:40 UTC (Fri) by JohnBell (guest, #12625) [Link] (3 responses)

OK, this I gotta see.

SCO thinks they can take on *Studio Lawyers*???

Posted Nov 7, 2003 23:40 UTC (Fri) by djabsolut (guest, #12799) [Link] (1 responses)

I was wondering what SCOugh was gonna come up with next. This is interesting enough. Somebody should tell Darl + co that in many respects Linux and *BSD kernels are interchangeable... oops, Darl, did the real target (open-source) just get fuzzy?

SCO thinks they can take on *Studio Lawyers*???

Posted Nov 10, 2003 18:21 UTC (Mon) by emkey (guest, #144) [Link]

In fact given its origins it would very much surprise me if the BSD kernel doesn't have at least as many or more potential problems then Linux. (Assuming Linux has any problems at all).

Yes, I am aware of the whole BSD 4.4lite legal battles. That was a lot of years ago in coding time though.

SCO thinks they can take on *Studio Lawyers*???

Posted Nov 7, 2003 23:53 UTC (Fri) by rankincj (guest, #4865) [Link]

Why not? They were dumb enough to sue IBM...

This might work for SCO

Posted Nov 7, 2003 20:48 UTC (Fri) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link] (4 responses)

Ugh....
Beier, who runs a 30-server render farm, says he hasn't heard from SCO, but the idea of being asked to pay for Linux makes him furious. "That just sends me right up. If I had explosives, I'd be in Salt Lake City," he says, adding that if SCO presses him, he may drop Linux and switch to a free version of Unix.
I hope Red Hat's suit can do something about this, or one of the first studios they approach files an extortion claim.

This might work for SCO

Posted Nov 7, 2003 21:07 UTC (Fri) by frazier (guest, #3060) [Link]

"That just sends me right up. If I had explosives, I'd be in Salt Lake City," he says, adding that if SCO presses him, he may drop Linux and switch to a free version of Unix.
SCO isn't as dumb as some people think. After all, they aren't going after the pyrotechnic special effects guys!

(though I bet some of the computer special effects guys know some of the pyrotechnic special effects guys)

This might work for SCO

Posted Nov 7, 2003 21:14 UTC (Fri) by vblum (guest, #1151) [Link] (1 responses)

Just wait till they actually file a suit. I'd like to see that first. SCO has issued a lot of bogus threats in the past, and then retracted.

If they do file suit, they would hopefully be sujected to an extortion suit indeed - it would be quite bold even for SCO to actually go ahead and sue someone with whom they have no contracts, and whom they never sold a product (unless maybe Linux?), and expect to get away with not producing evidence.

extortion quote

Posted Nov 7, 2003 22:25 UTC (Fri) by frazier (guest, #3060) [Link]

It certainly does sound like they're asking for 'protection money':
So what if the studios tell SCO to take a hike? "We're going to force people down a path," McBride says. "They can choose licensing or litigation."

In otherwords, "Give us you money or you might find yourself in a, oh, let's just say, unfortunate situation."

This might work for SCO

Posted Nov 15, 2003 6:42 UTC (Sat) by wolfrider (guest, #3105) [Link]

SCO == Agent Smith. They're goin' DOWN...

The Natives Are Getting Restless

Posted Nov 7, 2003 21:04 UTC (Fri) by sreed (guest, #4006) [Link]

My favorite quote from the Forbes.com (via Yahoo!) article:

'McBride's assault on the "peace and love" Linux movement already has made SCO the most hated villain in the computer industry. Now he wants to shake down the people who make cartoons for kids.'

But I'm sure Blake Stowell can spin that to be a PR blessing of SCO and their actions. I can't wait for SCO's BS on this one.

BTW: Compare and contrast this article with the write-up of Linus talking with a group of fans and cohorts on the Geek Cruise. Who is having more fun?

The question is...

Posted Nov 7, 2003 21:13 UTC (Fri) by emkey (guest, #144) [Link] (1 responses)

How long will SCO be able to continue to make a mockery of the US Legal system? Because its becoming more and more obvious that this is what they are doing. This whole offensive on their part is looking more and more like a quasi legal attempt at extortion and nothing else. The precedence that this case is establishing is more then a little disturbing frankly.

The question is...

Posted Nov 8, 2003 23:53 UTC (Sat) by thompsot (guest, #12368) [Link]

Why should we be suprised? Look at the Microsoft settlement: "Yes, you are a monopoly. Yes, you got the way illegally. Your penalty is... well... nothing really. Have a good day."

Em, using ILM et al like the belly of a tan-tan

Posted Nov 7, 2003 21:45 UTC (Fri) by snitm (guest, #4031) [Link]

Scary thing is I overheard two SCO clowns (employees) talking about this very issue of targeting the major movie houses while waiting in line at a restaurant in Draper, Utah. SCO is very twisted if they think they can play Jedi mind tricks on the judge of the IBM vs SCO suite by suing ILM et al.

Good luck with that SCO; that judge will throw the IBM case out quicker than SCO can pretend to "use the force".

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 7, 2003 21:55 UTC (Fri) by ccchips (subscriber, #3222) [Link]

Hey....just like in the movies!

Not only is the MPAA harrassing us for developing DVD software for LInux, now SCO is suing one of them for using Linux.

There's a song around called "Taking the Idiot Trail." I really know what that means now......

Go ahead! Make my day, Punk!

Posted Nov 7, 2003 22:58 UTC (Fri) by freeio (guest, #9622) [Link]

You have heard it said that you should never call out someone who buys their ink by the barrel. That takes care of publishers, but what we are seeing here is more like calling out someone who can memorialize you as a permanent Bozo in every high tech flick unto eternity.

Hey SCO! Take on Hollywood. Please! Do you know how many politicians Hollywood owns, lock stock and barrel? Do you know just who it is who asked for and got the copyright extensions just so Mickey and friends can be company property forever, and never fall into the public domain? Hollywood has more political clout than one can imagine.

Yeah. Call out the Don himself.

Go Ahead! Make my day!

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 7, 2003 23:38 UTC (Fri) by fandom (subscriber, #4028) [Link] (2 responses)

So SCO's lawyers are telling the judge in the Red Hat case 'No your honor, we had no
intention to sue anyone, Red Hat is overreacting', and the next thing you know Mr
McBride is at it again.

I can almost feel pity for the poor lawyers.

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 8, 2003 0:12 UTC (Sat) by Ross (guest, #4065) [Link]

I think Red Hat has perfect evidence of SCO's intent to sue everyone. They can't hide behind the IBM lawsuit anymore.

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 8, 2003 15:19 UTC (Sat) by arcticwolf (guest, #8341) [Link]

Why? No matter how it turns out, the lawyers get a lot of money out of it.

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 8, 2003 4:58 UTC (Sat) by wartstew (guest, #9819) [Link]

What I don't understand is why there aren't piles of law suits heading to Utah by now. Not just to SCO, since there probably won't be much left of it after IBM get through with its counter suits, but suits against Darl himself for his slanderous statements, and against Canopy for profitting from the whole thing. After SCO gets destroyed, Darl, Canopy, etc, are going to walk away rich, which I'm sure is their plan.

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 8, 2003 11:30 UTC (Sat) by stenad (guest, #4562) [Link] (1 responses)

The details of the SEC filing (ie that the lawyers get 20% of anything plus US$1 milion and 400000 shares) and this new "venture" makes things more obvious.

SCO's new business strategy:
+ We have no product but we need money, NOW!!
+ Since the Mafia is illegal, hire the next best thing, lawyers.
+ The "hit men" are going to cost us an arm and a leg, but if the
executives gets a ton of money everything is fine.
+ Now let-loose the hit men on a rampage all over the world
+ Wait for someone to get really tired of us and buy our company...

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 9, 2003 0:38 UTC (Sun) by thompsot (guest, #12368) [Link]

I think you've hit the nail on the head.

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 9, 2003 13:35 UTC (Sun) by davidl (guest, #12156) [Link] (1 responses)

This is a stupid idea. Linux and free software are deeply entrenched in production studios like Pixar. They also customize software themselves, which is pretty essential in the business. Although some suits may get slightly worried the people in the know will tell them to take a hike. It seems as though Microsoft have got worried about all those design studios not using Windows and Windows Media and they've got on to SCO to FUD them out of free software. SCO, through a massive web of investment groups (not just Canopy), are just Microsoft's dirty marketing arm, for when Microsoft don't want to be seen.

OK. The end of the year without a lawsuite? You're on Darl, and we'll hold you to it. If people choose litigation (which hasn't happened anywhere so far) all you have to do is say "Show me the money". Litigation will never get off the ground.

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 9, 2003 17:37 UTC (Sun) by vblum (guest, #1151) [Link]

The strategy of targeting execs of BIG conglomerates first is a good one, though; these
people will not know the technical details of their production - but the WILL know that being
accused of something akin to copyright violations might make them look bad. Likely, their
technical staff will face an uphill battle in pointing out the truth.

A battle that can be won; let's hope that their execs are actually smart people, too, and
know a sleazy used car salesman (DMcB) when they see one.

Disclaimer: I know there are a lot of honest used car salespeople out there ... no intent to
offend any of them by comparing them to DMcB ...

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 10, 2003 12:51 UTC (Mon) by the_JinX (guest, #3953) [Link]

"They can choose licensing or litigation. If someone says they want to see a court ruling before they pay, we'll say, Fine, you're the lucky winner. We'll take you first.' I'd be surprised if we make it to the end of the year without filing a lawsuit."

I'd be surprised if they make it to the end of the year.

Holding Up Hollywood (Forbes)

Posted Nov 10, 2003 15:06 UTC (Mon) by AAP (guest, #721) [Link]

SCO has done what I swore was impossible. They've turned Hollywood into the GOOD guys!


Copyright © 2003, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds