What's going one here: SCO's Suit: A Match Made in Redmond?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I haven't been following this, but it sounds like it's getting interesting. I know SCO has some kind of suit going, but I don't know what their complaint is. http://lwn.net/Articles/75296/ Anybody know about this? What's the gist in 100 or so words? STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUSf9wX61+IL0QsMRAlfuAJ9CmBihiELOkWa1Wcp99zTNUTYgLwCghncg W+wqFPOeuVJIzBBa7nh6zUc= =GfLU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
I haven't been following this, but it sounds like it's getting interesting. I know SCO has some kind of suit going, but I don't know what their complaint is. http://lwn.net/Articles/75296/
Anybody know about this? What's the gist in 100 or so words?
STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAUSf9wX61+IL0QsMRAlfuAJ9CmBihiELOkWa1Wcp99zTNUTYgLwCghncg W+wqFPOeuVJIzBBa7nh6zUc= =GfLU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Don't know where you have been hiding, but that is old news. If you want all of the info, go to www.groklaw.net Art
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 11 March 2004 10:42 pm, Art Fore wrote:
Don't know where you have been hiding, but that is old news. If you want all of the info, go to www.groklaw.net
I've just been very busy, and haven't been keeping up with anything but the releases of the KDE, and the CVS of a few things such as KDevelop.
Art
I /was/ kind of hoping for the 'executive summery'. I guess I'll try to look into it when I find time. STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUTMHwX61+IL0QsMRAh6FAKDuKVnw+530EliGaXyv/EQ2v8muvQCg51gF zCSNZxatEPWiG5Ml2/MaHyE= =voA9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 11 March 2004 10:42 pm, Art Fore wrote:
Don't know where you have been hiding, but that is old news. If you want all of the info, go to www.groklaw.net
I've just been very busy, and haven't been keeping up with anything but the releases of the KDE, and the CVS of a few things such as KDevelop.
Art
I /was/ kind of hoping for the 'executive summery'. I guess I'll try to look into it when I find time.
STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAUTMHwX61+IL0QsMRAh6FAKDuKVnw+530EliGaXyv/EQ2v8muvQCg51gF zCSNZxatEPWiG5Ml2/MaHyE= =voA9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
There are 5 lawsuits going on, SCO-IBM, SCO-Novell(who owns SuSE), SCO-Autozone, SCO-Daimler-CDDhrysler, Redhat-SCO, all related to Unix and Linux. Now Microsoft is in the picture because the supposedly recommend Baystar ito invest $50 million in SCO for them to finance all the law suits. www.groklaw.net has summaries of everything and all of the court documents plus anything else associated with the case that is public. Art
***********************some stuff cut**********************>>
I /was/ kind of hoping for the 'executive summery'. I guess I'll try to look
into it when I find time.
************some more stuff cut*************
There are 5 lawsuits going on, SCO-IBM, SCO-Novell(who owns SuSE), SCO-Autozone, SCO-Daimler-CDDhrysler, Redhat-SCO, all related to Unix and Linux. Now Microsoft is in the picture because the supposedly recommend Baystar ito invest $50 million in SCO for them to finance all the law suits. http://www.groklaw.net/www.groklaw.net has summaries of everything and all of the court documents plus anything else associated with the case that is public.
Art
I went to the Groklaw site. I didn't follow all the links. I don't want to become a lawyer. Please somebody, summerize this whole business, as the fellow above suggests. (Yes, I know that Sun and MS would like to put Linux out of business. Details please.) --doug
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 12 March 2004 12:03 am, Doug McGarrett wrote:
I went to the Groklaw site. I didn't follow all the links. I don't want to become a lawyer. Please somebody, summerize this whole business, as the fellow above suggests. (Yes, I know that Sun and MS would like to put Linux out of business. Details please.)
--doug
Sun? I don't think sun are out to get linux. I sure use a lot of sun freeware for Linux every day. STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUUuYwX61+IL0QsMRAmJkAJ9YUPifUla8nN1pbZ5TF/N0I+UoKgCg744t qdCDxXWGIlzqITQ07fxQocc= =8tH7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Friday 12 March 2004 12:03 am, Doug McGarrett wrote:
I went to the Groklaw site. I didn't follow all the links. I don't want to become a lawyer. Please somebody, summerize this whole business, as the fellow above suggests. (Yes, I know that Sun and MS would like to put Linux out of business. Details please.)
--doug
Sun? I don't think sun are out to get linux. I sure use a lot of sun freeware for Linux every day.
Yes, but! Sun would love to see Linux marginalised or disappear so that Solaris could come back into its own. They have always displayed an ambivalent attitude towards Linux and do only as much as they deem necessary while they think out a strategy. Remember they don't support Linux on any SPARC box and anyone running Linux on SPARC are very much on their own when it comes to support, even hardware support. They were one of the first companies to join Linux International, saying their people liked doing development under Linux. Then in a Sun World article, they reviewed Linux, "It's OK, runs on older Sun hardware, but it is not Solaris" etc., etc. They don't want to be caught totally napping, but they don't have a "Linux Strategy" as came from the mouth of Sun's people when asked what their Linux strategy is. "Linux has no place in the Datacenter", "Solaris is a better Linux than Linux" and copious other quotes over the last few years. I would have no quarrel with Groklaw on their analysis, it's based on Sun's public utterances. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer Linux Only Shop.
* Sid Boyce
Yes, but! Sun would love to see Linux marginalised or disappear so that Solaris could come back into its own.
That might be partially true. On the other hand, Sun is now marketing their own linux version (the Java Desktop System.
Currently listening to: ptree021112 106 Gravity Eyelids Gerhard, [faliquid@xs4all.nl] == The Acoustic Motorbiker == -- __O The tusks that clashed in mighty brawls, =`\<, Of mastodons, are billiard balls. (=)/(=) The grizzly bear whose potent hug, was feared by all, is know a rug.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 12 March 2004 07:28 am, Sid Boyce wrote:
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
Sun? I don't think sun are out to get linux. I sure use a lot of sun freeware for Linux every day.
Yes, but! Sun would love to see Linux marginalised or disappear so that Solaris could come back into its own. They have always displayed an ambivalent attitude towards Linux and do only as much as they deem necessary while they think out a strategy.
The only advantage I can see for their desire to hold onto Solaris is because they perceive it, rightly or wrongly, as a leverage for selling their hardware. If they thought they could put their boxes out on the shelf and put a label that said 'Insert Linux here' on the CD bay, they'd do it. I've never had a chance to give Linux a head to head with Solaris on a sparc. Solaris does have a decent track record. Their reasons for not supporting Linux may simply be pragmatic. The economics may not support the cost of keeping a well trained Linux support staff. This is what they have to say on their web page: http://wwws.sun.com/software/linux/
I would have no quarrel with Groklaw on their analysis, it's based on Sun's public utterances.
People talk, corporations issue statements. sun is a big company with thousands of employees to quote. Sun Microsystems has given a lot to me personally through open source software. And other than a few twits here and there, have always been very pleasant to do business with. They are not like that other company. I don't believe it's in the best interest of Linux to put them on the defensive.
Regards Sid.
STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUbM1wX61+IL0QsMRAniYAJ9Q7Cm9wBhNtcZU0N2/MaHCmFEYogCg2ani gduUF65Ed9fMTP6RxGG2yCE= =ZYoa -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Friday 12 March 2004 07:28 am, Sid Boyce wrote:
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
Sun? I don't think sun are out to get linux. I sure use a lot of sun freeware for Linux every day.
Yes, but! Sun would love to see Linux marginalised or disappear so that Solaris could come back into its own. They have always displayed an ambivalent attitude towards Linux and do only as much as they deem necessary while they think out a strategy.
The only advantage I can see for their desire to hold onto Solaris is because they perceive it, rightly or wrongly, as a leverage for selling their hardware. If they thought they could put their boxes out on the shelf and put a label that said 'Insert Linux here' on the CD bay, they'd do it.
Why not? They could certainly do that. The largest Sun server I've installed Linux on is an E3500, but others have done so on E10K's going back years.
I've never had a chance to give Linux a head to head with Solaris on a sparc. Solaris does have a decent track record. Their reasons for not supporting Linux may simply be pragmatic. The economics may not support the cost of keeping a well trained Linux support staff.
This is what they have to say on their web page: http://wwws.sun.com/software/linux/
Anyone who knows Linux finds Solaris easy-ish as it's an annoying system to admin if you've worked with Linux beforehand and lacks quite a number of nice touches that Linux has, "find / -name xxx -print" is a pretty poor substitute for "locate" and I know many admins who shun bash, prefering to use "ksh -o vi" and using vi commands to edit a command line, YEUK!. I've been using Unix for the last 23 years and find vi a necessary evil, so I use the bare minimum functions edit files. Anyone who knows Solaris finds Linux very easy. Some time after doing a Sun networking class, I was looking at my notes and wondering, then I used them to set up NIS on my home Linux boxes. Linux taught me much about Solaris and Solaris taught me much about Linux also. I use skills gained on one to good effect on the other, but Linux is by far less onerous to admin. A Sun box that runs Solaris like a race in treacle, flies under Linux.
I would have no quarrel with Groklaw on their analysis, it's based on Sun's public utterances.
People talk, corporations issue statements. sun is a big company with thousands of employees to quote.
Sun Microsystems has given a lot to me personally through open source software. And other than a few twits here and there, have always been very pleasant to do business with. They are not like that other company. I don't believe it's in the best interest of Linux to put them on the defensive.
I agree with you, but I'd say to Sun, come in, the Linux water is fine. I know there are people at Sun who wanted to opensource Solaris and also to wholly embrace Linux and others prepared to go down fighting it. One of our customers with an E10K, E6500 and other Sun equipment we maintain, is moving to Linux (RedHat ES) and Oracle 9i on Intel later this year, HP made the sale, Sun is OUT-of-there. As an aside, I've read many interviews where Scott McNealy rubbished IBM's "ancient" mainframe technology and I was prompted to reply asking the interviewer why he didn't ask him to explain further. The Sun gear is back where the mainframe was in the early 1980's, give me an E10K to install or fix and I know I'm working on old technology, give me a Z900 and I know I'm working on modern hardware, especially the new Z990's, boy, this a slick box, pity I'm retiring before I'll have the pleasure, though I know I could handle one without training. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer Linux Only Shop.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 12 March 2004 05:52 pm, Sid Boyce wrote:
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
The only advantage I can see for their desire to hold onto Solaris is because they perceive it, rightly or wrongly, as a leverage for selling their hardware. If they thought they could put their boxes out on the shelf and put a label that said 'Insert Linux here' on the CD bay, they'd do it.
Why not? They could certainly do that. The largest Sun server I've installed Linux on is an E3500, but others have done so on E10K's going back years.
That's you. There are still a lot of people who aren't ready to "risk" using Linux. They think of it as some kind of hobbyist project lacking "professionals". I really don't know what Sun have in Solaris which might be advantageous in comparison to Linux. Solaris does instill me with considerable confidence.
Anyone who knows Linux finds Solaris easy-ish as it's an annoying system to admin if you've worked with Linux beforehand and lacks quite a number of nice touches that Linux has, "find / -name xxx -print" is a pretty poor substitute for "locate" and I know many admins who shun bash, prefering to use "ksh -o vi" and using vi commands to edit a command line, YEUK!.
It used to be smc.vnet.net SMC is the same guy who runs the Mathematica mailing list. http://www.sunfreeware.com/ You can get all the same tools compiled for solaris. Yes pkg tends to take eons to run. I will NEVER understand how a patch kit can take several hours to run. Yes it is harder to get the KDE up and running on solaris, and it isn't nearly as well integrated as it is on a generic. Gnome on Solaris, last I looked, wasn't there either. The CDE? I think I'm gonna be ill!
A Sun box that runs Solaris like a race in treacle, flies under Linux.
I'd love to see the benchmarks. What about specialized sun hardware such as raid controllers, etc.?
I agree with you, but I'd say to Sun, come in, the Linux water is fine. I know there are people at Sun who wanted to opensource Solaris and also to wholly embrace Linux and others prepared to go down fighting it.
It's understandable from both a personal and business perspective. solaris is somebody's baby. There are people at sun who no doubt have given the better part of their adult life to creating and improving the OS. Those people probably have considerable clout.
One of our customers with an E10K, E6500 and other Sun equipment we maintain, is moving to Linux (RedHat ES) and Oracle 9i on Intel later this year, HP made the sale, Sun is OUT-of-there.
Yup, I've seen it happen with Compaq, which I guess is now HP. I suspect V3 is going to up the anti for secure and trusted systems, but for now, solaris may have some tangible advantages.
As an aside, I've read many interviews where Scott McNealy rubbished IBM's "ancient" mainframe technology and I was prompted to reply asking the interviewer why he didn't ask him to explain further. The Sun gear is back where the mainframe was in the early 1980's, give me an E10K to install or fix and I know I'm working on old technology, give me a Z900 and I know I'm working on modern hardware, especially the new Z990's, boy, this a slick box, pity I'm retiring before I'll have the pleasure, though I know I could handle one without training. Regards Sid.
I say, let sun do as they will. They aren't going to shutout the big blue penguin completely, so Linux will have the entire range of deployed platforms from the writswatch to the supercomputer to exercise. If sun can compete with solaris, let them. If not, they'll come around.
Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer
STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUqFSwX61+IL0QsMRAnjkAJ45xgaD83WUYgZ2P3fUqK5JjJmnRACfTAQc 18T1jmu+8kOfDL7779Pfqmk= =/gl/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Doug McGarrett wrote:
***********************some stuff cut**********************>>
I /was/ kind of hoping for the 'executive summery'. I guess I'll try to
look
into it when I find time.
************some more stuff cut*************
There are 5 lawsuits going on, SCO-IBM, SCO-Novell(who owns SuSE), SCO-Autozone, SCO-Daimler-CDDhrysler, Redhat-SCO, all related to Unix and Linux. Now Microsoft is in the picture because the supposedly recommend Baystar ito invest $50 million in SCO for them to finance all the law suits. http://www.groklaw.net/www.groklaw.net has summaries of
everything and all of
the court documents plus anything else associated with the case that is public.
Art
I went to the Groklaw site. I didn't follow all the links. I don't want to become a lawyer. Please somebody, summerize this whole business, as the fellow above suggests. (Yes, I know that Sun and MS would like to put Linux out of business. Details please.)
--doug
Basically, SCO is saying IBM put Unix IP into linux which SCO owns and they are trying to get all commercil users of linux to pay a $699 /CPU license fee to use their IP in Linux. Novell says they still own the copyrights to the Unix source code though and told IBM to ignore SCO's order to no longer ship AIX. SCFO sued Novell for slander of title. Redhat sued SCO saying their FUD was harming their business and customers under the Lanham act. SCO is suring Daimler-Chrysler because they did not answer a demand to account for unix licenses they have to did have and that they are not using any Linux. SCO sued Autozone because autozone ported their software to linux from Unix very fast so they had to use unix libraries which they are no longer kallowed to do. As Linux put it, SCO is like a cornered rat and maybe rabid at that, so he does not want to get around them. Art
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 12 March 2004 12:33 am, Art Fore wrote:
Basically, SCO is saying IBM put Unix IP into linux which SCO owns and they are trying to get all commercil users of linux to pay a $699 /CPU license fee to use their IP in Linux. Novell says they still own the copyrights to the Unix source code though and told IBM to ignore SCO's order to no longer ship AIX. SCFO sued Novell for slander of title. Redhat sued SCO saying their FUD was harming their business and customers under the Lanham act. SCO is suring Daimler-Chrysler because they did not answer a demand to account for unix licenses they have to did have and that they are not using any Linux. SCO sued Autozone because autozone ported their software to linux from Unix very fast so they had to use unix libraries which they are no longer kallowed to do.
As Linux put it, SCO is like a cornered rat and maybe rabid at that, so he does not want to get around them.
Art
Holy sh!t! Is Monica Lewinsky involved? <lol> STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUU9TwX61+IL0QsMRAkJuAJwJrLdDFFxLJrMW2Nqa3vZSUWCt/QCfWCbC vYpKYOQAIRZ86BxDbLsTkyw= =y0q7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
FAQ: Q2. What is appropriate content for the list? A2. Questions about configuration, maintenance, and implementation of SuSE Linux. The emphasis is on the x86 platform since we have separate lists for AXP, Sparc, IA64, and PPC. Q3. What is not appropriate content for the list? A3. Commercial postings of any kind, job postings, non-computer/Linux related material. Because of the large size of the list (1500 subscribers and ~200 messages per day), flame wars and off-topic posting can sometimes result in you being unsubscribed and, in extreme cases, banned from the list. Also, please unsubscribe now if you planning on posting advocacy-type things. We have a list specifically devoted to these sorts of discussion, suse-ot. Email suse-ot-subscribe@suse.com to subscribe.
fredag 12 mars 2004 06:49 skrev Steven T. Hatton:
gpgkeys: WARNING: this is an *experimental* HKP interface! gpgkeys: requesting key 0xC17EB5F882F442C3 from hkp://belgium.keyserver.net gpgkeys: key C17EB5F882F442C3 not found on keyserver
^^ note above
As Linux put it, SCO is like a cornered rat and maybe rabid at that, so he does not want to get around them.
Holy sh!t! Is Monica Lewinsky involved? <lol>
Is it the same rabbit, that Sir Arthur encountered in Monty Pyton's Holy Grail? Gentlemen, don't assume your enemy to be dumb ... rather, turn this upside down, then sideways a few times and try and see who will benefit from this, in the end. Not temporarily, but eventually ... then you have a motive, etc. Of course, you don't have to ... you can always just read the papers and believe what it says, like the rest of the population ... but if you do, what makes you so special?
On Friday 12 March 2004 16:03, Doug McGarrett wrote:
I went to the Groklaw site. I didn't follow all the links. I don't want to become a lawyer. Please somebody, summerize this whole business, as the fellow above suggests. (Yes, I know that Sun and MS would like to put Linux out of business. Details please.)
The whole story is here in 3 hilarious screenfulls, only the names have been changed to protect the guilty: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/30/36116.html -- Michael James michael.james@csiro.au System Administrator voice: 02 6246 5040 CSIRO Bioinformatics Facility fax: 02 6246 5166
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 11 March 2004 11:25 pm, Art Fore wrote:
There are 5 lawsuits going on, SCO-IBM, SCO-Novell(who owns SuSE), SCO-Autozone, SCO-Daimler-CDDhrysler, Redhat-SCO, all related to Unix and Linux. Now Microsoft is in the picture because the supposedly recommend Baystar ito invest $50 million in SCO for them to finance all the law suits. www.groklaw.net has summaries of everything and all of the court documents plus anything else associated with the case that is public.
Art
Is this anything to do with SCO owning UnixWare, and thereby owning the Bell Labs Unix name? I've lost track of all that over the years. I assume SCO is claiming someone 'stole' something from them, or is violating one of their trademarks, copyrights, pattens, etc. Everytime I try to get to a description of the actual charges, I find myself reading about details that don't interest me. STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUUsPwX61+IL0QsMRAqtxAJ43qc8Rcy7Nstge1Zn7gng/zD0vWwCgqMB3 GgF13avdFclFsclMr9ffmIM= =HW7u -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 11 March 2004 10:42 pm, Art Fore wrote:
Don't know where you have been hiding, but that is old news. If you want all of the info, go to www.groklaw.net
I've just been very busy, and haven't been keeping up with anything but the releases of the KDE, and the CVS of a few things such as KDevelop.
Art
I /was/ kind of hoping for the 'executive summery'. I guess I'll try to look into it when I find time.
Here's a "summary". SCO is failing. They get the bright idea that they own anything that's connected to Unix. You wrote it? Tough, it's theirs. They've even laid claim to IBM's JFS, which was originally developed for OS/2! However, since it was later ported to Unix (AIX) they own it. This is despite the fact that AT&T specifically excluded software written by others from the derivative rights. They also cancelled IBM's licence to include Unix in AIX, because of misuse of "trade secrets", which really weren't secret, because SCO (Caldera) previously released them. They're also claiming the GNU licence is invalid, but use stuff licenced under it. They're also sueing Dailmer Chrysler and another company for licence violations. Claim Computer Associates bought a licence, but CA says they didn't etc. They're also apparently being bankrolled, directly or indirectly by MS.
On Friday 12 March 2004 03:01, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
I haven't been following this, but it sounds like it's getting interesting. I know SCO has some kind of suit going, but I don't know what their complaint is. http://lwn.net/Articles/75296/
Anybody know about this? What's the gist in 100 or so words?
There was once a Unix company that seems to have had nice people in it known as the Santa Cruz Operation (SCO). Then some evil scum took over and got into bed with a well-known crew of closed-source inferior OS builders whose lawyers are at the centre of their company. The evil scum were not much good at computers or business and couldn't make a bean selling an honest product. So they are trying to extort money out of Linux users on the grounds that they hold intellectual property rights in parts of it. Not that the scum did any inventing, creative thinking, or decent coding, no no, they merely say they've bought the work of people who did all that years ago. Now they want to wreck free software that could really help the wider world so they can make a quick buck. 'Intellectual property' means owning ideas - it's a direct insult to all natural justice and all natural human evolution and is a clever mechanism to keep the rich rich and the poor poor. It is in itself a scam. It makes money only for lawyers and a few speculators - if it genuinely protected inventors we might sympathise a bit more. So SCO is, in summary, a synonym for FUD. I gather their legal case is weak, but since I know less about US law than I do about deep sea diving don't rely on this. IBM and various other big hitters are trying to crush them and let us all drink to their success in so doing. HTH, but I think your project of trying to understand the case without reading a lot of detail may be difficult to see through.
STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAUSf9wX61+IL0QsMRAlfuAJ9CmBihiELOkWa1Wcp99zTNUTYgLwCghncg W+wqFPOeuVJIzBBa7nh6zUc= =GfLU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- Fergus Wilde Chetham's Library Long Millgate Manchester M3 1SB Tel: +44 161 834 7961 Fax: +44 161 839 5797 http://www.chethams.org.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 12 March 2004 04:29 am, Fergus Wilde wrote:
There was once a Unix company that seems to have had nice people in it known as the Santa Cruz Operation (SCO).
I used to build boxes with SCO Unix installed for NASA a few jobs back.
'Intellectual property' means owning ideas - it's a direct insult to all natural justice and all natural human evolution and is a clever mechanism to keep the rich rich and the poor poor. It is in itself a scam. It makes money only for lawyers and a few speculators - if it genuinely protected inventors we might sympathise a bit more.
I have to say I can't fully agree with you here. People do have a right to keep their copyrights, etc. There are some real challenges for the computing industry in this area, and software pattens are something I have a mixed opinion on.
HTH, but I think your project of trying to understand the case without reading a lot of detail may be difficult to see through.
I think Art did a good enough job summarizing it. The real question seems to hinge on whether Novell are recognized by the courts as having rightful control of the contested items. The fact MS have now entered the fray, or so it would seem, makes me wonder if there may be some legal reprocussions heading their direction. If what seems to have happened really did, it probably amounts to criminal conduct. Part of the problem with MS vs. the US Legal system is not that their lawyers are so good, but that the DoJ understand the potential consequences of MS stock drastically falling in price over a short period. It's kind of ironic SuSE are involved by virtue of their new parent company.
Fergus Wilde
STH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAUYr+wX61+IL0QsMRAnoYAKCGqJjmZoqV+nkBOqefRaZKk2tIWQCgltM/ 1MbFIveLVXXN1Bghu8yBdjg= =Lkdm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Friday 12 March 2004 04:29 am, Fergus Wilde wrote:
There was once a Unix company that seems to have had nice people in it known as the Santa Cruz Operation (SCO).
I used to build boxes with SCO Unix installed for NASA a few jobs back.
'Intellectual property' means owning ideas - it's a direct insult to all natural justice and all natural human evolution and is a clever mechanism to keep the rich rich and the poor poor. It is in itself a scam. It makes money only for lawyers and a few speculators - if it genuinely protected inventors we might sympathise a bit more.
I have to say I can't fully agree with you here. People do have a right to keep their copyrights, etc. There are some real challenges for the computing industry in this area, and software pattens are something I have a mixed opinion on.
I agree people have a right to their copyrights, even the GPL acknowledges that, but SCO is making bogus claims. SCO has dropped their Copyright claims against IBM. There is evidence that AT&T, Novell and Caldera (SCO) placed many things into the public domain and that AT&T made it abundantly clear that they laid no claim to code developed by licensees, only to the code they licensed, for a good all round article that squares with what I've read and followed throughout this nonsense, see http://east.perens.com/SCO/March2004.html. An ex-employee of Autozone has said that they have not used any SCO libraries in Linux. Also someone in the SEC says they are investigating the MS-SCO funding issue after many complaints by phone and on their website. The SCO management believes anything they say is the law and the law is anything they say. They say they have not put any code into Linux, but the judge has asked them to say just what code they have put into Linux, Caldera (SCO) employees contributed code with the knowledge of their managers and Caldera (SCO) made many statements on contributions to Linux code. They told the Judge that HP doesn't contribute code to Linux, IBM showed the evidence that that statement was false. Then there is the leaked (by a SCO employee) email from their funding Consultants that refers to funding from MS and further talks to seek funding from other parts of MS, "genuine email, but a misunderstanding by the consultant", says SCO. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer Linux Only Shop.
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Friday 12 March 2004 04:29 am, Fergus Wilde wrote:
There was once a Unix company that seems to have had nice people in it known as the Santa Cruz Operation (SCO).
I used to build boxes with SCO Unix installed for NASA a few jobs back.
'Intellectual property' means owning ideas - it's a direct insult to all natural justice and all natural human evolution and is a clever mechanism to keep the rich rich and the poor poor. It is in itself a scam. It makes money only for lawyers and a few speculators - if it genuinely protected inventors we might sympathise a bit more.
I have to say I can't fully agree with you here. People do have a right to keep their copyrights, etc. There are some real challenges for the computing industry in this area, and software pattens are something I have a mixed opinion on.
HTH, but I think your project of trying to understand the case without reading a lot of detail may be difficult to see through.
I think Art did a good enough job summarizing it. The real question seems to hinge on whether Novell are recognized by the courts as having rightful control of the contested items. The fact MS have now entered the fray, or so it would seem, makes me wonder if there may be some legal reprocussions heading their direction. If what seems to have happened really did, it probably amounts to criminal conduct.
Another big part of it, is the relevance of AT&T's statement, back in 1985, that software written by others is not considered derivative works. They only claim rights to actual AT&T code included by others. Now SCO is trying to claim *EVERYTHING* involved with Unix is theirs.
On Friday 12 March 2004 04.01, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
I haven't been following this, but it sounds like it's getting interesting. I know SCO has some kind of suit going, but I don't know what their complaint is. http://lwn.net/Articles/75296/
Anybody know about this? What's the gist in 100 or so words?
Why did you do this? You've been on this list for ages. You *know* that the place for this is suse-ot@suse.com send a mail to suse-ot-subscribe@suse.com to subscribe to it. That is the place for off topic discussion
Anders Johansson wrote:
On Friday 12 March 2004 04.01, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
I haven't been following this, but it sounds like it's getting interesting. I know SCO has some kind of suit going, but I don't know what their complaint is. http://lwn.net/Articles/75296/
Anybody know about this? What's the gist in 100 or so words?
Why did you do this? You've been on this list for ages. You *know* that the place for this is suse-ot@suse.com
send a mail to suse-ot-subscribe@suse.com to subscribe to it. That is the place for off topic discussion
Or go read slashdot.org. Being covered extensively there. Chris...
participants (12)
-
Anders Johansson -
Art Fore -
Chris Trown -
Doug McGarrett -
Fergus Wilde -
Gerhard den Hollander -
James Knott -
Joe Sullivan -
Michael James -
Sid Boyce -
Steven T. Hatton -
Örn Hansen