tyme Posted May 29, 2003 Report Share Posted May 29, 2003 they'll go down fighting it seems, but i have the feeling they'll go down one way or another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JaseP Posted May 29, 2003 Report Share Posted May 29, 2003 They won't be able to handle the avalanche of litigation they are trying to release. I predict a loss to IBM on a motion for summary judgement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMage Posted May 29, 2003 Report Share Posted May 29, 2003 Simply put, in SCO's mind, they have nothing to lose and tons to gain by doing this lawsuit. Even if the chance of winning is very remote, it's better than a slow rotting certain death for them. I actually kind of pity the people who work at SCO.. it seems that they are dragged into this by the upper management (McBride) and their lawyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JaseP Posted May 29, 2003 Report Share Posted May 29, 2003 I'd bet that a lot of their seasoned people are already shopping around for new jobs, and just collecting their checks until the oppurtunity presents itself. Even rats leave a sinking ship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyme Posted May 29, 2003 Report Share Posted May 29, 2003 Even rats leave a sinking ship. arrr, me matey (insert pirate emoticon that i couldn't find) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyme Posted May 29, 2003 Report Share Posted May 29, 2003 http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopic...ml?nas=AM-81613 and it goes on. of interest: How is it that Microsoft can get a license, and essentially get rid of its worry, and the other users cannot? Microsoft is not using Linux. So the scope of any issues they may have are not as related to the specific Unix intellectual property they were using in their product or wanted to be able to use in their product in the future. It's a very well-defined set of intellectual property they were interested in licensing *double take* wah wah whhaaaat? Why didn't you act earlier? This move seems to arise with SCO's declining fortunes. We just announced our second quarter, and our financials are in very good position. The company is profitable. It is the first time in the history of the company, in almost seven years of existence, that it has been profitable. The point is we're really only recently seeing significant moves by many players, specifically IBM, to come out and state that they are moving wholesale to Linux. ok, so you decided to do something about it simply because people were going to stop licensing Unix from you, eh? is that what this says? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramfree17 Posted May 30, 2003 Report Share Posted May 30, 2003 :shock: they are profitable when their stocks went down by more than 30%*? :shock: pretty amazing company, or dumb officers. :#: one more things How many lines of code in the Linux kernel are a direct copyright violation? It's very extensive. It is many different sections of code ranging from five to 10 to 15 lines of code in multiple places that are of issue, up to large blocks of code that have been inappropriately copied into Linux in violation of our source-code licensing contract. That's in the kernel itself, so it is significant. It is not a line or two here or there. It was quite a surprise for us. i dont claim to be a good programmer (which i aint) but im sure i have written code that is similar to what could be found in some professional code offered somewhere. it is true that there are many ways you can code logic to solve a problem but they are not limitless and your logic is influenced by your programming background and your experience. maybe the authors of both code have read richard steven's excellent unix programming book. ciao! *figure might be inaccurate as i have only read it from the local linux mailing list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramfree17 Posted May 30, 2003 Report Share Posted May 30, 2003 http://www.ofb.biz/modules.php?name=News&f...article&sid=236 got the link from PCLO. :#: ciao! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyme Posted May 30, 2003 Report Share Posted May 30, 2003 this really isn't looking good for SCO. those poor, poor bastards.... oh wait, what am I saying...screw SCO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyme Posted May 30, 2003 Report Share Posted May 30, 2003 here's an interesting read: http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030529.html I find this comment at the end humorous: I'd call it "Windex." Or do you think some other company has already trademarked that name? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JaseP Posted May 30, 2003 Report Share Posted May 30, 2003 Well, from what I have read, a German court has issued an injunction against SCO's German unit, mandating that they refrain from spreading FUD about Linux. The price for violating that injunction is 250,000 Euros (roughly equivalent to a quarter of a million $$$ US). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowator Posted June 2, 2003 Report Share Posted June 2, 2003 In all seriousness, which part is it that is meant to offend. SCO don't see fit to disclose ?? When you look at this from a outsoide the industry standpoint it seems like Ford sueing GM for copying the car. Hey look, it has 4 wheels, pedals and runs on gas. Thats just like our model 'T' .. The GM says hey but the Model T was just the first production car. Ford replies saying that GM has copied the process .... dah dah dah. The whole thing just gets ridiculous, UNIX itself has copied several of the good parts of other OS's just like the first car was a steam contraption based on a railway engine which was itself based on a horse drawn carriage. I really can't think of anything to add so Ill just paste in gragonMage and hope he doesn't sue me :-) _________________________________________________________ DragonMage Posted: Thu May 29, 2003 6:10 am Post subject: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Simply put, in SCO's mind, they have nothing to lose and tons to gain by doing this lawsuit. Even if the chance of winning is very remote, it's better than a slow rotting certain death for them. I actually kind of pity the people who work at SCO.. it seems that they are dragged into this by the upper management (McBride) and their lawyers. _______________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramfree17 Posted June 2, 2003 Report Share Posted June 2, 2003 from what i heard sco has already gained from this venture. my facts might be false but from what i can remember this is why SCO has alrady benefited 1. SCO stopped selling linux (because it also cant compare with the other distros) and created a department to collect royalties from their UNIX business. The department has already collected from the license that ms bought. The department is therefore gaining money for SCO. 2. SCO's lawyer (or lawyers) made a deal that they will collect a percentage of whatever settlement they can *negotiate*. That means no money is going out of SCO for this legal battle, or else its just minimal. ramfree here, spreading more FUD because i cant give a source to what i have said. ciao! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zero0w Posted June 2, 2003 Report Share Posted June 2, 2003 ramfree here, spreading more FUD because i cant give a source to what i have said. Stop spreading FUD, ramfree17 :P . Time to get a mod around here :P . As for SCO, I hardly think its case can stand in the court, but as others have suggested, SCO already benefited from this spread of FUD and collection of royalties from Microsoft. In essence, it is doing the dirty work for Microsoft without using Microsoft's name. I guess it no longer deserves the media coverage it already has, and neither for my posting in this forum on topic about it. 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyme Posted June 2, 2003 Report Share Posted June 2, 2003 http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopic...1,81709,00.html discuss :-) personally, I think this analogy is bad: "It's sort of like somebody stealing your car, and you hunt them down and you find them, and they say you can have your car back, but there's no penalty for that," McBride said. "If there's no penalty for stealing property, then where are we?" it's more like, if someone stole something from you, went and sold it to someone else who had no clue it was stolen, to the best of my knowledge you can't take any action against the person who bought it if they weren't aware that it was stolen (and of course you have proof of who did steal it). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.