SCO Group Lawsuit Q&A 253
althalus writes "PLUG, the Provo Linux Users Group, of Utah recently requested representatives from SCO to answer the questions of the local *nix users regarding their lawsuit. Since this topic has been the point of a bit of discussion here on slashdot (
1,
2,
3,
4) We figured it might be nice to get some of the questions from here. SCO has agreed to allow us to submit a list of questions ahead of time, and we will contain some of the highest moderated slashdot questions. SCO has warned us, that since this is an active lawsuit, there are some questions that obviously cannot be answered at this time, but overall, feel free to ask. Notes/Answers will be submitted to slashdot afterwards." Think of this as a third party Ask SCO almost anything.
What do we really have to ask those turkeys? (Score:4, Insightful)
SCO also gets tremenous points for being vindictive - a failed Linux business doing its best to sink the ship on their way out. It's fortunate for us that their best isn't enough.
Re:What do we really have to ask those turkeys? (Score:2, Funny)
Admit it Bruce--you're a fanatical fr1st p05t AC troll!! You've been reloading Slashdot obsessively all day!
Re:What do we really have to ask those turkeys? (Score:4, Funny)
"I would like to know if you are on crack. If so, that would explain a lot."
It fits so nicely.....
Oh, Lord (Score:2)
Why and what (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you think you are doing?!
Sure, they won't give an honest answer, if they respond at all. That too is information useful to those still invested or working for them.
It's amazing that they can't or won't turn around and do something useful. Why is it that they can't act more like Red Hat?
Re:What do we really have to ask those turkeys? (Score:2)
Re:What do we really have to ask those turkeys? (Score:3, Funny)
If we all boycotted SCO
Oh, wait...
Re:What do we really have to ask those turkeys? (Score:3, Informative)
Is this a plan to.... (Score:3, Funny)
(b) Get bought by IBM
(c) Simply go out of business
(d) Beat Microsoft in the "most hated company of all time poll on CNN"
Re:Is this a plan to.... (Score:5, Funny)
What??? No CowboyNeal option?
I think I know what SCO is doing (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously, when was the last time that *every* post on an interview was outraged or disgusted? Even Microsoft doesn't manage to build up that much animosity.
Re:I think I know what SCO is doing (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft builds a real competitor to Linux. No matter how much FUD and general crap (from both sides) gets thrown, people have to admit that Windows is a viable platform with some strengths over Linux. I consistently hear stories of people switching from SCO to Linux 10 years ago, despite Linux's infancy, because SCO sucked that bad. And nothing I hear gives me any evidence that they've improved. Then they make a lie filled lawsuit claiming that without IBM ripping them off, Linux would be nowhere? The only place I see SCO engineers contributing to open source is GCC, and that's just to keep it running on SCO.
They get no respect for their code, no respect for their contributions, and no respect for blantly lying about Linux.
Re:Is this a plan to.... (Score:2)
Re:Is this a plan to.... (Score:2)
(f) PROFIT!
(e) Plans? (Score:2)
an alliance with my organization (Score:5, Funny)
Our organization proposes an alliance for this lawsuit. We have already opened defense fund. the BUTT-PLUG alliance should have no problem getting out of this sticky situation.
loss of community goodwill (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:loss of community goodwill (Score:5, Interesting)
Bruce
Re:loss of community goodwill (Score:4, Interesting)
By obsequiously showing their solidarity with the unwashed slashdot masses, graciously granting us the opportunity to ask them questions.
Here's my question: Companies are just collections of individuals. Name the individuals hiding behind the SCO moniker who are directly reponsible for prosecuting this idiotic lawsuit.
Of course, this is the stupidest Ask Slashdot ever, as SCO will of course only deign to answer questions with the potential to cast them in a favorable light. Regardless, I will find out the answer to my question without any help from SCO. And I will be sure to never do business with any organization with whom those people are affiliated ever again.
SCO: (Score:5, Interesting)
my question (Score:5, Funny)
Re:my question (Score:2)
SCO: (Score:3, Funny)
S-C-O
S-C-O
Dying all the way,
Oh what fun it is to sue before going down, HEY
S-C-O
S-C-O
Dying all the way,
Oh what fun it is to sue before going down.
Cheating shareholders
With lawyers on our side
Luxurious we are
Laughing all the way
HAHAHA
Making major cash
What is there to lose?
Oh what fun it is to sue IBM tonight!
Could you ask... (Score:4, Interesting)
Even though you (SCO) have a large base in the commercial industry, wouldn't you agree that the general opinion of your company will greatly sink if this goes through?
Re:Could you ask... (Score:2)
Folks at SCO: do you ever intend to use computers again, and if so, how do you intend to avoid the crippling waves of DDoS attacks?
Re:Could you ask... (Score:5, Interesting)
How has your customer base responded to this lawsuit? I have to expect that some of them can't help but see this move as desperate and end up questioning your future viability, but others might consider this a chance to get in on a "lawsuit-safe" GNU/Linux provider or be drawn in by the publicity.
Re:Could you ask... (Score:2)
Re:Could you use common sense? (Score:2)
Especially since there wasn't much of that to start with. I had the misfortune to admin SCO systems in the mid 90's. Their formal for-money tech support sucked. Their product was mediocre, though, properly patched, it was fairly reliable.
Then there's Caldera, who's main Linux innovation (besides an installer that left critical functions like atd non-functional) was per-seat licensing. One main reason to go to Linux is to get away from crap like t
Why exactly... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why exactly... (Score:2)
Now, now. Let's give SCO some credit. They *can't* be so stupid as to think that someone would consider them worth buying.
Re:Why exactly... (Score:2)
Here [ibm.com]
Hey why are you looking at me like that? It's their plan! Serious!!
Linux w/out your IP (Score:5, Insightful)
Read their complaint (Score:2)
They think it is impossible for linux to be scaled to "enterprise-level" stuff, like multiple processors and stuff. Yeah, it's bullshit, but let's ask them questions for which we might get original bullshit answers.
LIkely to win? (Score:5, Interesting)
In some of the articles that I've read, Mr. Sontag specifically stated that none of the code you believe was stolen from Project Monterey has shown up in any of IBM's developed code. The only "evidence" of foul play is that IBM's code you claim comes from Unix System V/AIX was developed too quickly to have been anything but a derivative of your intellectual property.
Obviously, the best way to demonstrate that this is the case is to prove that IBM was not working on this code prior to having joined into Project Monterey. In other words, if they began working on this prior to gaining access to your IP, then it is conceivable that they found an independant solution and the timing was just coincidental.
Do you have any way of combating this or is your only evidence of foul play the coincidence of timing?
Re:LIkely to win? (Score:2)
IOW, they just have to show that IBM didn't know how to program scalable (unix) operating systems before 199x. Seems to be easy.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
They can't do that.
They are a publicly held corporation. As such, they have a duty to their shareholders (could be you and me) to get the maximum value of their assets. They would HAVE to sell the trademark if it would bring $$, and it would. If they did otherwise, their shareholders would sue them into the ground.
It SOUNDS nice that they could, but the reality is that they can't. Now, IBM could BUY the Unix mark and then IBM could release it into the public domain / gpl / bsd license / or leave it proprietary. IBM could justify it since they have invested 1 billion in Linux lately, and the price of the code (current value of sco $35mil) would be a bargain for the code gained, thus justifiable to the stockholders. Also, the goodwill earned would be worth it.
Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
I mean, at $100K/developer/year (which is pretty liberal pay), that's a good 350 man-years of work on open-source software that could be done that would essentially go down the drain.
SCO isn't worth it. SCO stock isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
Re:Well... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
It seems likely that everything they own has been reimplemented by at least two or three different groups by now. Most of it was reimplemented better than the original. The whole situation strikes of sour grapes---they're bitter that open source projects written by a bunch of people they'd never heard of came and wiped
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
redhat is publically held and they can give away Linux.
Um, Redhat doesn't own Linux - they can't exactly give it away.
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Thank you. I was about to say the same thing to the guy who obviously doesnt understand how Redhat and GNU in general works. I am one of those customers that PAYS Redhat for its "free" software anyway
Stakeholders (Score:3, Insightful)
where stakeholders include:
-- employees
-- the wider community
-- bond holders / bank
etc... There really is no law which requires companies to act as unethical money grubbing machines.
Re:Stakeholders (Score:2)
SCO trying to sell the unix code they have doesn't make them unethical money grubbing machines.
Ok, sueing IBM trying to get them to buy you out, yea, that does.
Its not about 'the law' anyway. Its about corporate accountability. The CEO can legally open the source for SCO, it wouldn't be a violation of law. But then the shareholders would freak out and fire him. It has nothing to do with ANY legal matte
Re:Well... (Score:2)
A few questions.... (Score:5, Interesting)
2. Has this lawsuit affected the public perception of SCO? If it has, is this the result you anticipated? Is this something you want for your company?
3. Should SCO lose the lawsuit, what would be the future prospects for the company? Why would anyone want to buy SCO stock at this time?
4. Who made the decision to file this lawsuit? Was it approved by SCO's Board of Directors? Was there a vote among shareholders, or were any consulted in making this decision?
I don't expect these to get answered, but I'd sure like to know.
Re:A few questions.... (Score:2)
6. Does SCO differ at all from Dilbert's world, and if so, how?
UNIX Certification and Linux (Score:2, Insightful)
I would like to know when I will be able claim that Linux is UNIX. I know all about the crazy UNIX certification requirements...
If the evolution of Linux means the death of UNIX (since nearly no Linux meets UNIX certification and Linux prospers most at the expense of commercial UNIX), then isn't it in your best interest to change the certification rules so that Linux becomes UNIX? Once UNIX is irrelevant, where is SCO? Only you can change this.
UNIX is Dead
Linux isn't UNIX
Long live Linux
Good luc
Vision... (Score:2, Funny)
I need advice... (Score:5, Funny)
I was going to start my own Evil Corporation(TM) and I was trying to gauge the level of effort required. Also, you didn't happen to aquire the IP rights on Evil(TM) as well, did you? If so, what are your licencing fees for that one? I don't want to get sued over here.
Re:I need advice... (Score:2)
Re:I need advice... (Score:2)
I'm assuming you didn't know about Microsoft's purchase of evil [bbspot.com]. I highly doubt they would sell it to SCO, but they might license.
Ooh, something just occured to me. What would MS Evil (TM) after Microsoft "embraced and extended" it?
Revenue source! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Revenue source! (Score:2)
Plan Omega (Score:2, Funny)
Do you blame Bond for the failure of Plan Omega,
or was it due to a break-down in organisational
process?
Wait a minute, I'm thinking of SPECTRE, not SCO
... sorry.
Were you the guys in that movie... (Score:2)
Come on slashdot (Score:2)
*rolls eyes at the notion that SCO cares what I think*
Given that companies are made up of people (Score:2)
Do the people of SCO, when out of their cubby holes and over a glass of suds with friends hail your graspingly false principles or feel a touch of shame?
How do you, the person answering these questions feel explaining what you are doing to your children? What exactly do you say? Daddy is a scumlord? Don't forget, they'll be growing up and re
Lack of Innovation (Score:5, Interesting)
About five years ago, Linux was starting to get known by most people in the computer field, but was still not catching on big. It was at a point where you could run it on decent hardware and have a machine that was every bit as nice, and then some, as an Intel box running OpenServer 5.0.x. I told my bosses then that this was going to be the up and coming thing. Two of them agreed and said SCO would get their ass kicked, and one of them said it wasn't going to catch on. I love being right.
The vast majority of our UNIX customers ran OpenServer, not UnixWare. We could hardly get UnixWare out the door, because legacy applications vendors stuck with OpenServer. UnixWare was a non-seller.
My questions are as follows:
- Why wasn't SCO able to get the software vendors on-board to switch to UnixWare so that the VARs could follow through and have a new revenue stream? Without that, the OpenServer sales died off after Y2K.
- Why didn't SCO watch Linux more closely and get their ass in gear when everyone in the industry realized more than five years ago that Linux was going to cook SCO's goose.
- OpenServer 5's X windows is just plain fugly. Five years ago, RedHat 5.0 was fast, easy to install, and had a beautiful interface compared to OpenServer 5. Why didn't SCO realize they had a chance to do something with their user interface and target the desktop market, even before Windows 95 came along?
- Why does SCO, after having dropped the ball over and over and over again, and after having failed miserably at keeping up with technology (meaning not even trying), think that they are entitled to win a lawsuit, especially since their lack of keeping up with the rest of the world has rendered them obsolete?
- Does SCO expect what's left of their reseller base to remain loyal to their following, especially since most of their resellers probably use and love Linux?
Re:Lack of Innovation (Score:2)
Re:Lack of Innovation (Score:2)
Wow are you ever a slow adopter...
This was apparent back in 1995, even to the SCO folks in biz.sco.general.
How does? (Score:3, Interesting)
Weapons at SCO's disposal (Score:2)
GF.
Is it true? (Score:2)
Shame (Score:2)
Questions for SCO if they dare to answer them (Score:3, Insightful)
We have SCO stating that they own ip rights to Unix but only specific companies are being sued with other ones absent from the lawsuit..
For example Xenix vendors have not been charged, why since their version of unix has more potential to have infringed than the current candidates of the lawsuit..for those of us who don't remember Xenix is a Microsoft product.
Why is the lawsuit based on no code comparisons and rather on conjecture of someone's marketing prose? Would not comparison of code have to be done in order to have factual evidence in order to proceed with the lawsuit in the first place ie what is Frivious?
While I don;t expect any SCO employee to answer these questions..we the developers and users of unix in all its forms wil remember SCO's acts and respond in kind!
The only real question (Score:2)
Witnesses (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you the least bit worried that IBM will tap this considerable "witness base" and demolish your case?
Reverse question better (Score:5, Interesting)
Are you willing to let the OSS community examine the UnixWare code, so as to make sure that no part of the Linux / GPL code found it way into your software. SCO engineers has worked on Linux so by your own reasoning there is a fair chance code was "borrowed" and reused in Unixware.
A small insignificant company like SCO can not possible have the engineering expertise to make enterprise ready SW, therefore they must have stolen from someone.
I couldn't agree with SCO more (Score:2)
I mean who has heard of a sco unix machine dieing? I never had.
I just wish copycats such as Solaris or AIX could scale
Why give them a soapbox? (Score:2)
Re:Why give them a soapbox? (Score:2, Insightful)
I would hardly count it as letting SCO "spin" us as if we didnt' know anything
What's it like... (Score:5, Interesting)
to be the Worst Linux distribution [google.com]?
to have filed the worst linux lawsuit [google.com]?
to be the worst enemy of open source [google.com]?
to have such a low sense of ethics that you would sue anyone and everyone in desperation just to keep above the red line?
to realize that your repeated buyouts, mergers, lay-offs, etc. have left you without anything worth buying and that extortion is your only chance of making a profit?
Sure, you have some software that was cool once---a long time ago. What have you done lately?
a real question... (Score:2)
What do you hope to accomplish? (Score:2)
Monetary rewards?
Admission of guilt?
The source code rights to the alleged IP infringement?
Asuming they win, what's next? (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's assume SCO wins a monetary judgement from IBM. What are SCO's plans thereafter? Where will they be putting that money? Will they be updating and improving SCO, will they concentrate on Linux, or will they be going into a new direction?
Who's next? (Score:4, Interesting)
We started to hear rumblings from SCO about Linux earlier this year (and, typically, ignored them). Specifically, the possibility of SCO charging users of Linux [com.com] for using what SCO claimed was its IP. Therefore, my question is: does SCO plan to attack other companies or *users* at any point, regardless of what happens with IBM? For instance, would SCO bill Google $96 for each installation of Linux on that massive server farm? Or do you plan to seek licensing from actual Linux vendors like RedHat? The IBM lawsuit seems to simply cover damages.
Second question: on that note, what is the point to suing IBM? If you seriously believe that Linux infringes on SCO's IP in some way, how is suing the largest and wealthiest company working with Linux fundamental to your strategy? This seems like an uphill route to take, and not necessarily the best way to establish a basis for future settlements with other Linux vendors. (Unless, of course, SCO is so fucked already that you're hoping for some quick money from a buyout or one-in-a-million surprise win.)
Third question: aside from the obvious fact that you've crippled SCO's ability to ever compete in the Linux (-compatible) market and have ensured that no open-/free-software developers will ever work with you, WHAT WERE YOU THINKING? This is IBM. Who once shook down Sun [forbes.com], just for the hell of it. Who made $1bn profit on $22bn revenues [yahoo.com] just last quarter, and whose revenues have gone up by more than 20% just this year when we're in an economic downturn. Oh, and they've got $96bn in assets. I bet they employ more lawyers than SCO has total employees. Do you expect SCO to have any cash reserves left by the time IBM's lawyers are done with you?'
Fourth question: if you're unable to secure a full injunction against IBM on Unix sales, will you continue the lawsuit? The way I see it, the only way you have any chance is if the judge grants the injunction, in which case IBM might panic and settle.
Question for SCO (Score:5, Interesting)
Then I discovered FLEX-ES from FSI. This emulator comes with a legal s390 license from IBM and seemed like a great solution to our problem. Except that it runs on SCO Unix. They also have a Linux version, but it might not support some of our hardware requirements.
Because of the lawsuit your company has filed against IBM, we have decided not to purchase this software, or the underlining SCO Unix OS license.
Now I'm sure my company's small purchase wouldn't help out a company expecting a billion dollar settlement that much. But if my company is not willing to purchase your flagship OS for fear of the reprocussions, how many other companies out there will also not purchase SCO based products or licenses...
If SCO is to continue in the future, come what may from the lawsuit, how do you expect companies to purchase products from you without fear of a future lawsuit against another company for IP infringement?
I have a Question (Score:5, Insightful)
MOD PARENT UP! (Score:2)
Re:I have a Question (Score:2)
Re:I have a Question (Score:2)
Re:I have a Question (Score:2)
Investor Liability (Score:5, Interesting)
Why does SCO now believe it can suddenly succeed as an IP speculator, when the majority of its fixed company assets (funded by investors and creditors under the pretense that it would be specifically used for a certain type of business) are not intended to be used in the IP speculating business? How does SCO intend to compete with firms that specialize in the IP industry and has SCO received proper permission from its investors to drastically change its industry and business model?
SCO Group's future... (Score:2)
Who is dilutting who's value (Score:5, Insightful)
If this is true then it means the only reason Caldera managed to build a business, and do a hugely successfull IPO, the same IPO that gave Caldera the financial muscle to buy SCO, is because of IBM's actions.
In other words you are making a lawsuit against IBM for making it possible for your business to become successful enough to buy SCO?
Or in other words, you are taking IBM to court for dilluting the value of property you would never have owned in the first place if it where not for IBM's actions?
You don't find this a tad weird?
Personal exit strategies (Score:5, Funny)
If you manage to get a ruling that seriously harms Linux, it will negatively impact tens of thousands of people worldwide. What effect do you think this will have on your personal life, and how will you cope with it?
How are you planning to benefit long term? (Score:5, Insightful)
It seams that SCO decided to hold out like Microsoft and try to compete from the kernel level up. What are you plans to make this approach succeed when even IBM, with more money to pay for development, is trying to hedge its bets on AIX.
It seams to me that a better strategy for SCO would be to take advantage of existing SCO binary compatibility Linux offers and release a professional quality Linux workstation and a low-end server using SCO applications, administation tools and so on.
But in this case, the lawsuit makes no sense. Sure, there is a chance of one-time payout from IBM. But nobody except law firms builds a successful business on lawsuits alone. If applications is what matters, you guys might as well release whatever "corporate secrets" you think will further increase Linux scalability, stability and so on and let the enormous number of willing hobbyists integrate them into the kernel.
There are a lot of things going for this approach. For one thing, nobody buys an OS itself. Customers buy an OS to be able to run certain programs. Nothing prevents SCO from selling those proprietary, closed-source programs under Linux. Just look at MacOS X.
On the other hands, lots of people are obviously willing to write, optimize and improve OS code just for the fun of it. SCO could just use their work to get a performance boost for both UI and server applications with no investment. Also, writting device drivers is a thankless work but thousands already exist on Linux, free for the taking. Is there an optimized NVIDIA or ATI 3D driver for SCO?? How about adding some rendering applications and shipping a serious alternative to SGI based on Linux?
I don't know if IBM used any knowlege of AT&T UNIX to make improvements in Linux. But I am pretty sure that trying to guard yesterday's technologies is not in the long-term interest of SCO and its shareholders. Spend effort where the new markets are today.
Is that a Mickey Mouse Globe? (Score:2)
OK maybe this is a little offtopic, but I'm really curious whether others see that too.
SCO stands for.. (Score:2, Funny)
Stupid CEO Oxymorrons
The real questions... (Score:2)
A) Choose to develop software on a SCO platform?
B) Choose to implement a third party software solution on SCO?
c) Choose to resell SCO products?
In light of the lawsuit, how do you expect my company to change our position on Linux?
Just one, quick question.for SCO (Score:4, Insightful)
Now my question is this: Can you prove it? Note, this is not rhetorical. This is an honest and sincere question. The implications to the answer to this question are staggering, so I am eager to hear your response, as it would have implications on all open source projects everywhere.
Re:Question (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Dear SCO, (Score:2)
Yes. Gore may have his failings, but comparing him to SCO is a low blow, even for Slashdot.
Re:Dear SCO, (Score:2)
Re:What are you thinking? (Score:2)
Furthermore, SCO, what contingency plans do you have if the girl is not, in fact, a girl?
Re:Question about security (Score:2)
Re:Another Question (Score:2)
No, DOJ did not lose the initial case. They found an appeals court to overrule the punishment phase on totaly bogus grounds, and the Bush DOJ, unlike the Clinton DOJ, netotiated the most bogus settlement imaginable, and then, in effect, became Microsoft's law firm when it was challenged.
John Kerry is right - we need a regime change in Washington.