let's talk about SCO

***ewdi*** · #1 2nd March 2004, 07:06 PM

I did not care so much about SCO vs IBM and etc stuff, but today our faculty has been sent a letter by SCO regarding licensing on our servers and network deplyment in campus.

The content is really rubbish and pisses me off, how could they expect us to pay and threatened us while the procedding is pending?

anyone else have the same rage as i am right now ?

serpico · #2 2nd March 2004, 08:54 PM

I've read about SCO for months and still don't understand everything. It sounds crazy and everyday it grows as SCO sues everyone. Today was supposed to be a big day for them to announce another big company that they were sueing. Any word yet who?

Ug · #3 2nd March 2004, 09:32 PM

SCO vs IBM, could someone remind me?

Lindy · #4 3rd March 2004, 01:45 AM

Visit http://www.groklaw.net P.J has latest and greatest lowdown on SCO v IBM. And as for what I think about SCO? My mom always told me if I couldn't say anything nice about someone then I should'nt say it.
I stepped in some SCO today. I wish the dog could find a better place to do that.

Jman · #5 3rd March 2004, 04:44 AM

What really upsets me is how they want to profit off of others generosity. Maybe SCO owns some Unix IP, but Linux is Unix-like. SCO hasn't stepped forward and identified what exactly in the Linux kernel infringes on their IP. That says something about their good faith. I just get the feeling that they want to hold Linux development back to the days when their IP was the latest and greatest. That's not what open source is about; open source is about continual open improvement without some propietary license holding it back. Then again, I realize that SCO no longer is a software company, SCO is a litigation company. Let's just say I have my differences with CEO Darl McBride.

crackers · #6 3rd March 2004, 05:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jman
SCO hasn't stepped forward and identified what exactly in the Linux kernel infringes on their IP.

Actually, they have. They claim ownership of Dynix (sp?) code, which became the property of IBM on acquisition. They're trying to stretch their alleged "ownership" of the SysV code to cover all "derivative" works. Said argument also has a lot of legal holes in it.

As was stated above, the Groklaw site has all the dirty details - and usually explained to us code-pounders in something approaching English instead of legal-speak.

Anyone see the latest spew from SCO's pet mouthpiece about the apparent collusion between PJ and IBM? What a load of fertilizer...

Bison · #7 3rd March 2004, 02:49 PM

SCO is now sueing Autozone.

http://news.com.com/2100-1014_3-5168921.html

Lindy · #8 3rd March 2004, 02:53 PM

SCO names Auto Zone as their next target. Looks like I'm going to have to do more business with the local Auto Zone store. I hope that they don't cave in to SCO, or make any quick motions to dismiss, and make SCO expend more of their shrinking resources than they really wanted to.

***ewdi*** · #9 3rd March 2004, 04:23 PM

gosh, those morons at sco should concentrate in improving unixware instead of tossing around their resources in the court

mike · #10 3rd March 2004, 05:59 PM

Looks like SCO's second target is DaimlerChrysler. Begining to think all McBride wants is a new car

.

http://linuxtoday.com/it_management/2004030302526NWCD

Lindy · #11 4th March 2004, 01:19 AM

I love it! For them to take a swing at DaimlerChrysler is like hunting grizzly bear with a BB gun. Its all fun and games until the grizzly gets pissed and rips you to shreads!

I wonder when we'll see Darl's office furniture for sale on ebay?

serpico · #12 5th March 2004, 04:12 AM

I can't believe that guy, I watched the video on news.com and he's such a smuck. CEO? Please. He dresses like a used car salesman. Does he even know what he's talking about? DaimlerChrysler, do you think they even know what he's talking about?

Time for the lawyers to come out...

Lindy · #13 5th March 2004, 05:29 AM

Just when you think it can't get any stranger it does! But now all of SCO's weirdness makes sense with the news that Microsoft is behind it all to the tune of an $86 million dollar indecient proposal! I'd like to see the SEC ,and the FBI do a joint investigation into this mess if for any reason just to get the facts stright, and proper.

Jolly · #14 5th March 2004, 10:54 AM

if u look at the share holding company's
work backwards from sco

u will find that MS has a greater stake then 86 mil

and that these funds where available 12 months before sco started the action

but they were still selling/installing linux till 9 months ago

all the code therefore "is" GPL

serpico · #15 5th March 2004, 02:09 PM

I joked with my wife about Bill Gates having some part in this and then this email leaked. Who knows the real truth, but I wouldn't put it past him. If he feels threatened by Linux, what best way to try and create some fear in customers. LOL.