Slashdot Log In
SCO Identifies EV1Servers as Linux Licensee
Posted by
simoniker
on Mon Mar 01, 2004 01:21 PM
from the importance-of-being-licensed dept.
from the importance-of-being-licensed dept.
jasonhamilton writes "EV1Servers.net has been identified as a Linux licensee, giving them the dubious title of being the first dedicated hosting company to have a licence agreement with SCO. Rather than 'eliminating uncertainty from our clients' hosting infrastructure', as Robert Marsh (CEO of EV1Servers) claims, some users of EV1 appear to be somewhat upset."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
SCO Identifies EV1Servers as Linux Licensee
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 740 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
|
2
(1)
|
2
Their other accolade: (Score:5, Funny)
(http://evilempire.ath.cx/)
You can pick up your award at
There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Wednesday May 04 2005, @08:36AM)
Warning: mysql_connect(): Too many connections in
There seems to have been a slight problem with the database.
Please try again by pressing the refresh button in your browser.
An E-Mail has been dispatched to our Technical Staff, who you can
also contact if the problem persists.
We apologise for any inconvenience.
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Monday November 26, @06:13PM)
Think they are really getting an e-mail with each failed attempt? Poor bastards.
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
First we take the database server, then we take the mailserver...
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
Dream on geek boy.
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:4, Funny)
(http://www.imperialdispatches.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday July 26 2005, @10:17PM)
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.nightterrors.org/)
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
"I know Art... and thanks for noticing"
(xmas vacation)
Ha!
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://perlmonks.org/?node_id=17227 | Last Journal: Saturday June 04 2005, @10:55AM)
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.iki.fi/wwwwolf/)
Well, that's still better than them displaying a whole lot of PHP mysql command errors. Strictly speaking, that one remaining error should go, also...
At least it shows that whoever coded the thing could at least think a little bit of this "error handling" thing. I wonder why so many PHP coders don't care enough to check if they actually have successfully got the connection and, if they haven't, bail out gracefully...
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Monday March 10 2003, @12:51AM)
Slashdotting tip: Make sure to hold down CTRL while repeatedly clicking refresh so that it REALLY tries to refresh off their server (and in turn throws more gasoline on the fire)
Great Advertising! (Score:5, Funny)
[/sarcasm]
Re:Great Advertising! (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.tanningbeds.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday November 05 2006, @07:23AM)
But as a CUSTOMER of EV1, I am pissed that my box is now a "legally licensed SCO product". How can I possibly live this down???
Re:Great Advertising! (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Sunday October 03 2004, @06:02PM)
Since the company did it without your knowledge or consent its hardly your fault, but it is your fault if you keep giving them money to give to SCO.
Re:Great Advertising! (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.tanningbeds.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday November 05 2006, @07:23AM)
This technically IS a violation of my rights since I pay for the entire box, which I can run any OS I want to on, and yes I run Linux. This means my monthly payment is subsidizing SCO. Wow, I am unwittingly sending money to SCO. I gotta go take a bath now, I just feel dirty.
Re:Great Advertising! (Score:4, Funny)
A good argument for dumping EV1... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Great Advertising! (Score:5, Funny)
It's worse. If the German logic holds, you now can be sued by SCO because you now have a legally licensed SCO product.
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.newmediatwins.net/)
There seems to have been a slight problem with the database.
Please try again by pressing the refresh button in your browser.
i tried that but it didn't seem to help much...
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.dynamicmedical.ca/)
Translation: Since we're already flat on our backs, why not give us a nice hard kick in the nuts to make sure we stay down
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://rhorsman.vox.com/)
Couldn't they take SCO to the cleaners if/when SCO loses and this "license" is proven not to be a requirement? Might be a nice short term investment...
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Thursday December 04 2003, @10:34AM)
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:5, Funny)
The law of supply and demand suggests that since they made very few of them, someone, somewhere may actually pay for copy.
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Monday November 26, @06:13PM)
That's a nice theory and for a minute there I briefly considered buying an SCO license, but in reality I doubt there will be any meat left on them bones by the time IBM is done with them. Of course you could play vulture and hope that IBM gets full and leaves a few scraps for you -- but I suspect there won't be anything left of SCO other then a bloody stain on the ground where they went down. IBM will probably grind up the bones and use them to make soup before it's all said and done ;)
Other pickers after IBM (Score:5, Informative)
Don't forget that SCO has a PIPE deal with BayStar Capital and the Royal Bank of Canada that gives them priority over most claimants in any liquidation deal. Plus, The Canopy Group has a promissory note to SCO which also gives them priority.
So, I don't really know what kind of priority a court judgement gets in a bankrupcy, but I'd almost bet that IBM is third in line after BS/RBC and then Canopy. Even if they end up before them, there will certainly be nothing left for the licensees or the common shareholders.
how can they do that? (Score:5, Interesting)
Boy, this reeks of corruption. You partner up with people who likely know you're crooked, bankroll you, and somehow you manage to set up a deal that when you're finally caught, they get to take all of your stolen loot (except what you've given Daryl in wages and bonuses)? Are the courts really likely to let this go on?
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:4, Funny)
(http://www.jezner.com/)
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.lfdsoundsystem.com/)
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:5, Funny)
You can almost see the first wire transfer or briefcase of cash being flown to Switzerland. I would like my withdrawl in used unmarked bills, please. Could you also make out that cashiers check to Tin Foil Hats, Inc.
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.bigbrother.net/)
Perhaps not. RedHat if, they are smart, have taken out an insurance policy against the potential indeminification. This would make the cost of the potential indeminification a predictable expense. I have to believe that there's an insurance company out there that would happily take large checks for this given the low proability of a SCO victory.
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:5, Informative)
The text of the contract [groklaw.net] says pretty clearly that you don't have much recourse if/when it turns out to be worthless.
Being Not A Lawyer, I can't really comment on how enforceable this clause is.
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://antiwar.com/)
Re:SCO learned their lesson (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://antiwar.com/)
and the next headline is... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://hnsg.net/)
No kidding... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.cyberarmy.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday February 13 2007, @01:10AM)
[From Groklaw]
Sadly, that last link seems to be slashdotted already via Groklaw. The old "too many connections" PHP error. Heh.
I was apparently a bit late in submitting this article, but I have to wonder, would this action not terminate SCO's license to Linux under Section 4 of the GNU GPL [gnu.org]?
Section 4 reads:
Of course, IANAL.
Re:No kidding... (Score:5, Informative)
They offer dedicated servers with no support (beyond basic setup of the machine) in either linux or windows.
That article is just saying that initially they offered ONLY linux b/c it took too long to deploy windows servers, but now they can deploy windows servers even faster than they can deploy linux servers.
Re:No kidding... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://jackmaninov.ca/)
Also the Windows solution is praised as not requiring techs to physically touch the new systems that they're working on. Does this mean Microsoft has some sort of network booting now?
Re:No kidding... (Score:5, Interesting)
Every time they introduce a new hard drive size, they have to remake the image they're going to use. Every time a security patch needs to be applied, they need to update all of the images they're currently supporting, and that usally means a total rebuild. Not to mention, they support multiple control panel products on Linux.
The Windows product line, so far at least has kept itself a lot simpler, so they're likely just working from a single installer program to do that.
Re:No kidding... (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.wyzardry.net/)
Yes, Windows (XP and 2003, possibly 2000 as well) can be installed via PXE using Remote Installation Services. Microsoft even provides a PXE boot floppy for use with systems that don't provide it in the BIOS.
RIS requires a specially-configured NTFS partition (you can't put things other than installation images on it), and uses hard-linking to save space on duplicate files between similar installation images.
Of course, this doesn't address the question of why they don't image the Linux systems. It's certainly not very hard to do.
Re:No kidding... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://slaskpunkt.dll.nu/)
But I was a happy customer (with three servers online, each of them happily pumping out several hundred gigabytes of data per week in many mbps, and planning to adding even more servers) until now. Now we are, of course, pretty pissed off and will consider leaving EV1Servers entirely.
Never heard of?! (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.danhendricks.com/)
> an ISP nobody ever heard of
Nobody ever heard of?! EVERYONE in the hosting industry knows of EV1Servers [ev1servers.net] (aka Rackshack). They are one of the biggest providers of discounted rack servers on the planet. NetCraft [netcraft.com] apparently [netcraft.com] knows about them too, and had an interview with Marsh [netcraft.com]. The host a LOT of boxes.
They are likely the biggest provider of startup web hosting servers around. Although they aren't the cheapest [serverpronto.com] around [server4you.com], they are probably the cheapest that still offers any level of service. I'd say anyone who hasn't heard of them probably isn't in the industry.
OH GOD.. not that article (Score:5, Interesting)
The point of this is, I remember the day when we got that article sent over to us from Microsoft. I saw a hard copy with little graphs showing how much easier and quicker it is to set up our Windows servers compared to Linux servers. It was sent to us so that we could approve it and sign off on all the quotes about how much we love Windows at Ev1Servers. I cant think of a single person who likes the Windows servers except Robert Marsh. Of course he never really knows whats going on and buys into windows being the next big thing. From that moment on I knew NEVER to believe in official opinions made by companies. Most of the articles you see are one big controlled commercial publicity stunt. That article pissed us all off.
By the way, about the deployment of Linux servers vs Windows servers. We were easily able to install a firewall on all of our unsold Linux servers that blocks out everyone but a few ips. When the server is sold, the signup script can automatically log in and disable the firewall with iptables so that the customer can reach his new server.
However, to my knowledge, to this day, Ev1servers has still been unable to do this on Windows servers. I think that says a lot about how usable Windows is as a server.
Re:Not to mention (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.daemonology.net/)
Not so. Look at EV1's MRTG graphs [ev1servers.net] -- there isn't even a blip from the slashdot effect.
All that has been demonstrated here is that the server which runs EV1's forum isn't capable of handling the load... as long as you're not hosting your web site on that server, there is no problem.
Arggh... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.igerard.co.uk/)
Re:Arggh... (Score:5, Interesting)
So you're saying that if I claimed to own the Brooklyn Bridge and tried to collect tolls from the public for using it, that would be legal?
Re:Arggh... (Score:5, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Legal or not, I can see EV1 eating that up:
Boycott EV1Servers (Score:3, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Wednesday November 10 2004, @06:46PM)
slashdotted (Score:5, Funny)
(http://remarque.org/~doug | Last Journal: Saturday December 07 2002, @01:44PM)
That happened well over twelve seconds ago, where have you been???
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. Show that sponsoring the terrorists is not tolerated.
No doubt Darl et. al will bring this up as an example of how the Linux Community (tm) attacks everyone that deals with them, but hey, there's nothing wrong with that.
Show the world that SCO is a disease that infects everyone that touches it.
Bring out the torches!
BTW, I hope nobody is moronic enough to DDOS them. It's a losing strategy. Boycott is much better.
(Obviously these guys could also be out friends, and this might be a scheme to get to SCO, perhaps for selling what they don't own or whatever, but that seems rather far-fetched).
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Informative)
Irritating Hyperbole (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, for crying out loud, does every irritating jackass who uses intimidation tactics have to be called a "terrorist" now?
What a great idea, let's treat being litigious and greedy the same as being insane and murderous.
Re:Irritating Hyperbole (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Saturday April 16 2005, @12:17PM)
Well, hang on a minute here.
Sure, comparing them to 9/11 terrorists, Saddam Hussein, Hitler, or Osama is somewhat overrated, and Certianly within a stones throw of a Godwin's Law [astrian.net] Violation, but there is a stone of truth in there.
SCO has begun an attack on Free Software's way of life. They have done so by inciting fear into the hearts of those who participate, based solely on their desire to milk the Free software out of their rights.
Fear is getting awfully close to terror, but I'll grant the split hair, and say Terror is too far. Still, we need a word for this... "Fearist?" hmm, too pansey...
anyone?
Re:Irritating Hyperbole (Score:5, Funny)
Bully? Extortionist? Liar? Sower of FUD? Marketing executive
We already have plenty of words for this kind of scum.
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:4, Interesting)
No complaints yet, and I have not come across a web site I can't get to on their network. Guess nobody of importance uses them.
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Interesting)
If they're running Linux on anything (desktop, server, game cube, vibrating butt plug - it's been ported, whatever) then spare them the rightous anger and check the revolutionary zeal. Go boycott someone who's actually doing something to merit it (there are plenty of candidates)
They are NOT on "our" side... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.cyberarmy.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday February 13 2007, @01:10AM)
Microsoft claims here [microsoft.com] that they considered Linux, but came back to Microsoft products in the end.
My what curious press releases these folks appear in...
Re:They are NOT on "our" side... (Score:5, Informative)
That's a bad summary of the article. EV1 has a great high-volume system for selling Linux dedicated servers in real time. They knew from their own web boards that some people wanted a hosting place as good as EV1 for Windows servers, but EV1 stalled forever because it just wasn't that easy to work with Windows.
Microsoft came in and gave them a great deal of support in setting up their existing order system to work with deploying Windows servers. They didn't throw any Linux servers out, and in fact they're still setting more up... they just were able to add Windows servers to their product lines and were actually able to make it work. Nobody's been able to match their $89/mo. price point on a true dedicated server that runs Windows yet.
EV1's the best in the business. They're not zealots towards any particular OS... they just have a reputation of keeping a large datacenter humming, and now they're about to have two.
dedicated server price points (Score:5, Informative)
Start with www.servermatrix.com. RHES, Redhat 9, FreeBSD, and, yes, Windows.
And "best in business" is an opinion not shared by many. Go to www.webhostingtalk.com to see comparisons.
Re:They are NOT on "our" side... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.dasmegabyte.org/ | Last Journal: Tuesday June 22 2004, @11:41PM)
Not according to every time I've dealt with those assholes. Not according to colleagues in the industry. And not according to the BBB. 34 complaints in the past 12 months. 136 in the past 36. 17 of these are unresolved, not even in good faith. This is compared to one unresolved complaint for fellow Texan hosting company and slashdot advertiser Rackspace.
It doesn't matter how cheap their servers are...any company that's rude to prospective customers and ambivalent towards current customers with problems just seems sleazy to me.
Re:They are NOT on "our" side... (Score:5, Informative)
(http://matt.megameta.net/blog)
Since my time with them I've found several other much more reputable hosts in a similar to slightly more expensive price range. EV1 (formerly Rackshack) are gutter hosting, and I'd strongly advise all to avoid them.
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Wednesday November 10 2004, @06:46PM)
People complained that tech jobs being outsourced to India will hurt the job market. Nothing was done and jobs were outsoured, causing massive layoffs.
Boycotts never happen on its own.
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Saturday November 29 2003, @03:51AM)
As soon as I get in touch with him, I'm asking him to move his sytem elsewhere. No way in hell is a dime of money from my hosting bills going to SCO.
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:4, Interesting)
If they paid $150,000 for this "site license" (my estimate... considering that there's a "high-volume discount" and name-use rights involved) then we're talking $3 a server... and if your friend has 100 users on his box that's only three cents of your money involved. Not three cents a month, but three cents and it's over with, SCO can never bother with that server again.
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://antiwar.com/)
Regardless of whether your estimate on the money involved is in the ballpark (I tend to think it's high in fact) your final conclusion is wrong. SCO couldn't do anything about the server to begin with. Now they can. The license gives them grounds to sue that were non-existent before. It's made the situation less reliable, not more, and that's the reason that if I were doing business with EV1 (I'm not) I would terminate that relationship ASAP. I don't care if the 'license' was free, or even if SCO paid them $150,000 US to take it for that matter, it's still overpriced. It gives the buyer nothing, and gives SCO a contractual relationship on which a lawsuit could later be based where there was none before. Taking that license at any price indicates severe incompetence on the part of EV1s counsel, or even more severe incompetence on the part of their executives if they did this over the contrary advice of their counsel.
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Insightful)
Boycott? That's easy! (Score:4, Funny)
(http://www.lullabud.com/)
Not again... (Score:5, Funny)
Users definetly upset. (Score:5, Interesting)
So far I have no complaints against EV1, but a measure like this is only going to hurt its customers - we're going to be the ones who end up paying for the SCO license.
I always told my friends that I'd never buy a SCO license - what do I tell them now.
Re:Users definetly upset. (Score:5, Insightful)
This customer: Taking it in stride (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.dixie-chicks.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday July 24, @05:17PM)
I'm not a hosting customer, but I am a dialup customer [ev1.net]. The initial news that they've paid their protection money to SCO annoyed me, but then I remembered why I signed up with them in the first place.
Back in mid-2003, they suffered a transformer explosion and fire [rackshack.net]. Their backup systems kicked in, and they could have easily gotten away with letting the whole thing pass. But they didn't.
They brought in two backup generators -- one to run things, and one as a backup for the backup. That ain't cheap -- it was a 3000 kVa transformer that exploded, and that sounds like an awfully large item to replace (times 2) in 12 hours -- especially since the explosion happened at 7pm local time, when Generators-R-Us is probably closed for the day.
But that's not all -- instead of sweeping the whole mess under the rug, EV1.net's senior technical personnel were on the message boards with up-to-the-minute updates throughout the ordeal. They even posted pictures of the aftermath [rackshack.net]. That takes some guts!
So they paid SCO's mobsters. Disgusting, yes, but I see it as insurance... like having a plan for a second backup generator in case the fail-proof first backup generator fails. The chances of SCO prevailing are slim, but non-zero... just like the chances of the backup generator failing.
Stay with EV1, folks. They're victims, like you... they're just trying to limit the damage.
EV1 has opened themselves up to abuse by SCO (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://jm-smith.com/)
It is not insurance, it is anti-insurance. Now they have a contractual relationship with SCO, a contractual relationship which gives SCO the power to sue EV1, but does not offer EV1 any tangible protection whatsoever. See the groklaw analysis of the SCO licensing terms for specifics.
EV1 is now in a position where it can be sued by SCO and not have the lawsuit thrown out immediately
I'd say EV1 is likely in for a world of hurt, and their customers would be well advised to be looking around for alternatives.
Re:This customer: Taking it in stride (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:This customer: Taking it in stride (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.dixie-chicks.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday July 24, @05:17PM)
Well, the carrot has to be proportional to the stick. In our case, I don't think we'd be able to distinguish your "presents" from those left by the five horses, five dogs plus strays, four cats plus suitors, and the occasional duck.
Though I might pay $1.00 to see you come and try it... those five dogs can get rather testy at times, especially the big one.
Re:Users definetly upset. (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.portagame.com/)
EV1 users upset... (Score:5, Funny)
Something stinks about this (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.perlworks.com/ | Last Journal: Monday January 06 2003, @05:06PM)
In the meantime anybody hosting at this company? time to move away folks. I do not want to host my business at a company who lacks basic judgement.
So (Score:4, Informative)
699x12000=$13,980,000.
So they're paying almost 14 million dollars for nothing. Nice.
Re:So (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh...and the check is payable to Boies, Schiller, & Flexner, LLP.
You want me to Refresh? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You want me to Refresh? (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.macetech.com/ | Last Journal: Monday February 16 2004, @01:44PM)
Re:You want me to Refresh? (Score:5, Informative)
Suggested mottos (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.dragonswest.com/ | Last Journal: Monday November 05, @07:35PM)
"SCO - Playing The Chump Card As Long As We Can"
EV1Servers.net was known as Rackshack.net (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.deltasquared.com/)
goto Rackshack.net [rackshack.net] and you'll get the 'official' word (and a redirect to EV1Servers.net)
For some reason there seems to be a lot of confusion about this.
What does this do for SCO's legal case? (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Friday December 26 2003, @05:06PM)
What does this do for their case? Are they going to come forward and say "See, EV1 bought a license. Now YOU need to buy a license!" or what? Really, what does this do for them legally? Anything. I sure hope not.
Re:What does this do for SCO's legal case? (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday March 21 2003, @12:04AM)
While it might have the effect of making other companies choose to buy a license, legally it has no weight. If I set up a scam and you fall for it, and I get caught, I can't tell the judge "Look, this guy bought one, so it must be legit!" That would simply not fly in a court of law in the US.
Thats good news (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://ghazan.hazara.org/)
In fact they should release all names of companies licensing Linux from SCO. Better yet, the names of their CEOs, their email addresses and business types. It will show the quality of business decisions going on within those places and will decrease certainity of investors who know about the whole SCO fiasco.
Unbelievable (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/~GMontag/journal/ | Last Journal: Friday November 23, @02:49PM)
Even if SCO is right (sofar I doubt it, but I ain't no judge) it is not like they can get mountains of cash from every single user/operator.
Just plod along and ignore SCO, the same way the phone company or electric company does when you think that they owe *you* money. Even when it is time to pay up the damages are rarely cripling.
Does This Mean... (Score:3, Interesting)
Customers Will Pay For It (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.jefferymhunter.com/)
Re:Customers Will Pay For It (Score:4, Informative)
I have the felling they paid closer to $6.99 a server than $699 a server.
EV1Services clients : choose your new provider (Score:4, Informative)
Former hosting company (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://albanach.com/)
Are there any other implications. I.e. they have a license for a binary kernel - does that mean it's okay for Linux et al to keep making the kernel, 'cause SCO are licensing people to use it? Of course they're only allowed to use a binary version - does that mean it's okay for RedHat and others to keep selling Linux, 'cause that's the only way SCO licensees can get hold of the binary kernel they've paid for?
They WERE the first... (Score:5, Funny)
It appears they are no longer a dedicated hosting company...
We can't protect you... (Score:5, Funny)
It'd be a shame to see that happen to a nice little company like yours... (/mobster voice)
Tongue-in-cheek, folks!
My letter to them today (sent a few hours ago) (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Thursday October 24 2002, @10:23AM)
I was considering your service for a customer I was doing consulting for, they have built a small web based data driven application for doing internal CRM. Looks like my final recommendation is going to be racksaver as they are not in corroboration with The SCO Group.
I have read the terms of their license agreement, and I don't see anything of value in that contract. Contrary seem to open yourself up to their crosshairs in the future exposing yourself, and anyone that I would recommend to your service. I also strongly feel that they are weaving nothing but lies and decept in their practices, and I can't help but wonder what your company must have gained by doing business with them.
Unfortunately, I do fear that your going to have a backlash of bad press come from this and will be nothing but harm for your company. (Again, another reason that I would in the future not recomend anyone to do business with EV1Servers.NET, I don't believe you can sustain a business with that kind of bad press).
I suggest reading the following website: www.groklaw.net, as I am sure that it's just a matter of hours before your company is front page to it and will definitely be posed as a sacrificial lamb. Having been a business partner/owner myself, I would strongly suggest that you put a clear stance on the front page of your website regarding the purchase. The community that feeds you business will turn on you if you don't. I personally have been completely turned off by the news.
I hope you don't feel this letter was an attack, nor do I expect a response. I hope that the matter might be resolved before further harm is done to your business. Today you just lost one potential customer. I felt enclined to at least notify you why that would be, as maybe it can be corrected.
Kindest Regards
XXXX XXXX
CTO - XXX Xxxxxxxxx
Re:My letter to them today (sent a few hours ago) (Score:5, Insightful)
Letters like this can help. However, if you're going to send an email purporting to be CTO, can we at least get some decent grammar in a letter written as a professional?
Contrary seem to open yourself up
weaving nothing but lies and decept in
fear that your going to have
Maybe there are something to those college degrees after all...
Re:My letter to them today (sent a few hours ago) (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.petedavis.net/)
Maybe I just think that because I was raised by a mother who majored in English and a father who is a journalist, though. I tend to give less credence to correspondence that's poorly written, for good or for bad.
Sure, Slashdot EV1... they're ready for it! (Score:5, Insightful)
Considering that they didn't pay the "going rate" of $699 per server, and likely got a huge discount for allowing SCO to use their name, I'm pretty sure this one's being written off as an advertising expense. Slashdot and the rest of the tech media is taking the bait hook, line, and sinker.
Netcraft sez... (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.spamgourmet.com/)
The site forums.ev1servers.net is running Apache/1.3.28 (Unix) mod_gzip/1.3.26.1a PHP/4.3.2 on Linux.
hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday September 07 2001, @11:51PM)
Well.... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/)
It sucks to see them feed the beast, but it may have been the smartest thing for them to do. They're an agressive company, growing like hell, and the last thing they need is to be the point defendent in something like this. So I understand the temptation to just pay it off and get it behind you.
I imagine SCO will next turn to smaller hosts, who will in turn make their own decisions.
What would be really nice is to have the darned courts get on with it, and actually decide something in this case. Most folks think SCO will go down in a ball of flames, but until that's determined, their claims are so wide-ranging that nobody can afford to take even a small chance. Until the courts start to give some indication of where they stand, this stuff will continue.
One interesting thing to note (Score:5, Insightful)
Note in all the articles & releases that 1: there is no mention if these licenses were purchased for any amount of money 2: it only covers "SCO Intellectual Property" and 3: it makes it seem like this is a Fortune 1000 company that's involved. The release states "EV1Servers.Net joins other Fortune 1000 companies that have signed up for a SCO IP license". Go take a look at any list of Fortune 1000 companies and check for yourself if EV1Servers.Net is listed. It's not even close.
In reading this press release it looks to me like the SCO FUD Machine is working at high speed.
Re:One interesting thing to note (Score:4, Insightful)
EV1 further announces a new acquisition (Score:5, Funny)
liscense question (Score:4, Funny)
IANA(i am not anything)
Ack... (Score:3, Interesting)
ev1 associated with microsoft? (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/casestudies/
Ev1 customer (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.eth0.us/)
Ummm, slight correction.... (Score:5, Informative)
(Last Journal: Thursday October 02 2003, @03:46PM)
OT: Robert Marsh (CEO of E1servers.net) interview Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:08 PM EST
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/02/03/inter view_ev1servers_ceo_robert_mar
sh.html
Q. You recently made a long-term commitment to Red Hat Enterprise as EV1Servers' standard Linux OS going forward, and have also begun offering FreeBSD. What factors guided your decisions on the "OS road map" for EV1Servers for 2004 and beyond?
A.Our number one consideration was long-term stability. For the majority of our users, web servers are business tools, not unlike phone systems or copy machines. They expect the equipment to work smoothly, and have no interest in devoting significant time and attention to frequent updates. We felt that RHE's 12-18 month release cycle and 5-year support timeframe would best meet their needs.
We also took into account our customers' feedback. While most were strongly supportive of our selection of RHE, we also received a significant number of requests for FreeBSD as an alternative. And that's what we now offer.
Miscellaneous plug (Score:3, Informative)
(Last Journal: Monday October 22, @04:01PM)
They're still up! (Score:3, Funny)
Cheap publicity stunt (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, someone from EV1 said on the (now Slashdotted) forum that they bought a site license, not a per server licence, so they did not pay $700 * 20,000 servers. Hell, for all we know they could have paid zero. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours, right?
Ev1servers opens a new datacenter on 3/3. (Score:5, Interesting)
Glad I skipped them (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://netio.org/)
I found many problem reports about them and decided against using them. This makes me even more glad I decided to bail from the order form.
Until there is a ruling from a judge, upheld by appeals, saying infringement has occurred, I am not willing to have ANY of my $$$ go to SCO for a "license" to use Linux, even indirectly though someone I do business with.
Focus change suggestion... (Score:5, Funny)
[The above is not intended as real advice - I feel compelled to mention this because their company actually did get an SCO license]
Ryan Fenton
ev1-sucks.com (Score:5, Interesting)
http://ev1-sucks.com/nuke/
IBM. Wow. (Score:4, Interesting)
Can anyone else here believe that IB-freaking-M is the hero of the open source movement right now?
To: management@ev1servers.net (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Monday November 08 2004, @10:00AM)
Dear friends,
I am Seth. Just Seth. From god, to Kane, to Seth. I'm his right hand and I've got a business opportunity for you. You see, back in 1972, I have patented RAM memory. Allot of people realized how great my idea was and promptly started ripping me off. I assure you however that I am the logal patent holder for RAM memory but I'm not going to show anyone. From this day forth i would like to use this to claim some minor royalties. I would like $ 499,98 per megabyte of SDRAM, $ 799,98 per megabyte of DDR SDRAM and $ 10 per kilobyte of EEPROM. I will accept these royalties in unmarked 1000 ( one thousand ) dollar bills, left in non-descript paper bags behind the dumpter, next Wednesday.
Thank you, for your time and for respecting my patent.
PS,
I will be in touch in a few days regarding my patents for boolean values, macros, flash memory, DVDs and 19" rackmount cases. I assure you that I am the sole parent holder of all these items but I won't show anyone. Again, thank you for your time.
Sincerily,
Seth
EV1's 800 number... (Score:3, Informative)
(800) 504-7873
Unfortunately I'm a real dedicated server customer. I called and asked them to look into it and threatened to end my relationship with them if the situation is not rectified!!!
Meage a Trois Licensing Scam (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft touts EV1 in Win2003/Linux case study.
Netcraft names EV1 the top Win2003 hosting provider.
EV1 has amazingly low, low pricing for Win2003 servers.
EV1 buys SCO IP license just days before Q1 conference call, and on the day of the PIPE and Boies deals deadline.
Coincidence or Conspiracy? Let the DoJ make the call.
Same idea as Spam (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.certsoft.com/)
EV1specializes in porno hosting (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.animats.com)
-
EV1 Servers provides low-cost dedicated servers for adult Webmasters
...
"Adult customers represent a significant proportion of EV1Servers' user base," he says. "I can't give you exact stats, because we don't review and rate content hosted on our network. But I can tell you that adult users are highly valued members of our community." -- Robert Marsh, EV1 CEO.
Ref: Host4Porn.com [hosts4porn.com]EV1 even links to that article. [ev1servers.net]
Hosting companies easy targets (Score:4, Informative)
(http://freedomink.org/)
1.) They have thousands of servers.
2.) They operate on razor thin margins making money on volumes.
The legal costs of a suit with SCO would for sure shut them down.
EV1 was offered a cheap site license not $699 per server at a cost probably heavily negotiated with a carrot and stick approach by SCO.
Finally it's interesting to note that EV1 advertises Red Hat Enterprise and Windows as their selling point. Infact I don't see any server with SCO Linux on offer at all.
Treat like extortionists anywhere (Score:4, Informative)
(http://augustz.com/)
It is important to remember that extortion succeeds because it often makes good business sense to pay the fee, rather than fighting a huge fight at some risk against the person extorting the money.
This means a company might make what it perceives as a good "business decision" which involves paying the extortionists rather than fighting them. You see this with all these types of rackets (DDOS, old fashioned thugs on the street, kidnappers, SCO etc).
It is important to stop the payments to these guys. If no one paid kidnappers, they would stop finding it lucrative to kidnap. Paying SCO just funds their business model, just as paying a kidnapper funds the kidnappers (in some contries kidnappers dive the fancy cars and have full out well oiled operations based on the revanue they realize).
There should be a two prong attack on these SCO extortionsts.
One is to insure that their claims are shot down clearly in a court of law. This IBM is well suited to accomplish, with armies of lawyers who can slowly grind through the millions of pages of documents a $5 billion case can generate.
The second is to make extortion payments a bad business decision for the companies that make them. That is where the vast majority of users come in.
When a company partners with SCO, and SCO starts issuing their press releases, users MUST indicate to the company (EV1) that the partners they do business with say a lot about the company, and MOVE THEIR BUSINESS elsewhere.
It is as simple as that. These companies have often built an entire business on open source, and are now paying cash money to groups who are claiming the GPL is invalid and that the software is like a toy car.
Let's see business move from EV1.
SCO lies about EV1 Fortune 1000 status! (Score:5, Insightful)
"EV1Servers.Net joins other Fortune 1000 companies"
The word "other" implies that EV1 is also a Fortune 1000 company, and it is not. SCO's ability to write misleading crap remains intact.
Terms of the deal... (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.gnaa.us/)
We don't really know what the deal was. Of course, even if they paid only $1 for a license, it was more than what that license is really worth.
Catch 22-ing EV1Servers.net with GPL Vs SCO (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://itheresies.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday April 28 2004, @12:06AM)
1) Logon to your EV1Servers.net hosted Linux webserver.d BinaryOnDifferentSites [fsf.org]
5) Any such arrangement in (4) would be a violation of the SCO Group's License with EV1Servers.net - Catch 22.2) Download a copy of the Linux kernel binary and all the modules.
3) EV1Servers.net are making use of derived works under the terms of the GPL. They are obligated to provide the source code under the terms of the GPL if they make the binaries available to the customers.
4) Under the terms of the GPL, EV1Servers.net must either make the binaries avilable on the same place, or http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#SourceAn
Kneel before Darl! (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.jefflane.org/)
Yes it DOES look a little shady. Yes, they are listed as one of the top Windows 2003 hosting companies on Netcraft. Yes they do provide dedicated hosting on RHEL and FreeBSD boxen...
Whether or not SCO has a legal leg to stand on is besides the point. So far NO ONE has managed to get a court to set aside litigation pending the outcome of Red Hat v SCO and SCO v IBM. If I were running a company with a clamed 20,000+ (soon to be over 30,000) servers, I would also look to see what I could to do minimize litigation.
On the one hand, yes, they could just tell SCO to piss off, and spend the next few years in expensive litigation. On the other hand, they could pay a bit now, and get a written guarantee from SCO to not sue. From a business stand point, I would take the easier route every time (which is why most companies choose to settle out of court without going through long and protracted legal battles).
Keep in mind, this is all IMHO, as I host through someone else entirely and have no direct experience with EV1/RackShack as a company. Just my opinion which could be made to fit any company that may buy one of SCO's protection racket schemes.
Then again, here is yet another Linux based, not terribly expensive, and decent webhost:
www.webgnostics.com [webgnostics.com]
Cheers
Jeff
GPL conflict? (Score:4, Insightful)
Except what about this SCO license--doesn't it include no-redistribution terms that conflict with the GPL? Is EV1's permission to redistribute Linux now terminated under the GPL as well as under the SCO license? Can they be required to stop offering Linux hosting, by anyone that has GPL'd code compiled into the kernel? That would include quite a few parties like Red Hat and IBM, whose attitude towards SCO is less than favorable and which have the lawyers to back it up.
EV1 may find itself much more screwed by its SCO deal than if it had refused to deal with SCO.
I wonder... (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://darkdust.net/marc/)
How can EV1Server.net make money? (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://mysite.verizon.net/tkrotchko/)
Funny way to run a business...
No Price Mentioned (Score:4, Interesting)
Notice that nowhere in any of the articles is it mentioned just how much money EV1 paid for their site license? I'm guessing it was peanuts. SCO probably made them a really, really good offer, one that cost less than it would have cost them to get the company lawyer to laugh at their cease-and-desist letter, let alone fight a lawsuit.
This way, SCO could announce that a respectable company had bought a license from them, the implication being that somebody was taking them seriously.
I can't really blame EV1 for doing it. They have some 20,000 Linux boxes and if SCO were to win, they'd be in serious trouble. Paying them off for a few bucks is, granted, giving in to extortion, but it's cheap insurance against disaster.
Sickening.. (Score:4, Interesting)
ev1servers (Score:3, Informative)
EV1 admin's response (Score:3, Informative)
--- quote ----
Why? Here's why.
Our primary consideration is the stability of our customers' operations. Many of you rely 100% on your servers to do business. Any risk to your uninterrupted use of Linux could have very serious financial impact.
Instead of waiting to see what develops, we decided to acquire a SCO site license in order to preemptively eliminate this issue from your list of possible worries. Regardless of your position on SCO's claims, we feel it is our responsibility to provide a hosting environment that is not dependent on the outcome of future legal proceedings.
--- end quote ----
I'm beginning to think that EV1 really had no idea what they were doing. Maybe they really are that clueless.
Hello EV1! What are you thinking? (Score:5, Informative)
By buying SCO's licenses (and their FUD), EV1 effectively is providing a hosting environment dependent on the outcome of court proceedings; if SCO wins, they could try to milk EV1 for more money, while if they lose, they could also sue EV1 for money (unless IBM and RedHat grind SCO into asphalt like a good steel-toed boot squishing a cockroach),
Am I missing something, or is EV1 not smart enough to hire good lawyers?
I host there (Score:3, Interesting)
EV1 is a pretty damn cool company. They offer a good product at a fair price. They are clear about what services they provide and which they don't. I'm going to keep doing business with EV1 and hope that as this clears out they can be used as a test case for a suit against SCO for damages from the extortion happening today.
These are the times ... (Score:4, Interesting)
when I am glad I live in a foreign country ... I have a box at EV1Servers and thankfully the people in my town here in Europe have mostly no idea what is going on with SCO (if they did I would have to move up the nearest mountain now knowing that my box has b33n 0wn3d by SCO) ...
... and to all those that reported the Slashdotting of the servers, thankfully mine is still running fine ...
;)
I don't agree with EV1Servers choice to pay the SCO license, but I have to admit that out of all the different hosting providers I have been with it has been the best service
p.s. my mother lives close to their datacenter and I think I will call her and ask her to evacuate to galveston just in case
I don't think they quite get contract law.... (Score:5, Interesting)
They had a minimum six month (or perhaps 1 year) contract at the time. I informed them that given that we could not get the server working in a reasonable amount of time, that I was going to go ahead and go elsewhere. They informed me that I had a contract, and thus I could not do that without paying a fine. I informed them that a contract is an agreement with mutual obligations between in this case two parties, where one party (me) provides money in exchange for the other party (RackShack) providing a service (dedicated hosting). Given that RackShack had failed to provide the services stated in the contract, I was under no obligation to provide money.
This illicited the response of "but sir, you signed a one year contract". Finally I worked my way up through about three levels of management until I got to someone with a bit of authority. At this point I was (seriously) threatening legal action if they didn't refund all money and cancel the account. At first the woman I dealt with upheld the "you're locked in, sorry" argument, right up until the point where she offered to check the situation with her legal dept. The next phone call involved an apology and a check.
email to ev1 and the response (Score:4, Informative)
(http://slashdot.org/)
"I've been trying to decide which hosting company to use for my business. I've been looking long and hard at a few, ev1servers being one of them. Your purchase of licences from SCO has helped me narrow down the pack by eliminating hosting by ev1servers from consideration. Bravo, and thank you."
(my name with-held(sp))
Their response...
"If you do not want to host with the best in the business, that is definitely your choice, but I would not recommend it.
Thank you,
Aaron Conklin
Sales Supervisor
1-800-504-7873
www.ev1servers.net"
The best in the business? My ass, more like the most clueless in the business. More like run by the clueless.
I only deal with smart persons and smart entities, ev1 is not one of them.
What I just did: (Score:4, Interesting)
Dear Sirs,
It is with astonishment that we learn about your agreement with the SCO group regarding their alleged Intellectual Property rights over the Linux Source Code.
These claims by the SCO group have yet to be proven, and, though a final verdict has not been issued by a judge, there is an overwhelming amount of evidence mounting against their claims, or their good faith (or lack thereof) available all over the Internet. I suggest You have a look at www.slashdot.org or at www.groklaw.net
We, as a customer of Yours (id XXXXXX, host XXXXXX) are frankly surprised about how money collected from us is used and cannot accept to be even indirectly financing the SCO group's lawsuits against basically the rest of the world.
Until today we have been a perfectly satisfied customer of yours, with record uptime, not a single connectivity problem and no complaints whatsoever, but, sadly, regardless of this we feel forced to take action and vote with our money.
We are already considering alternative hosting solutions with partners which do not support a company whose lack of ethics and moral standards put Enron to shame.
Please reconsider your actions and issue a public statement about this.
Should You decide not to do so, You've just lost a customer. April will be our last month of hosting with rackshack/EV1 and we will stop directing our customers in need of hosting to your website.
Yours Truly
-----
Gianluca Marcari - Un*x and Networking Xpertise Tel +39 33 55 444 545
netXpertise s.r.l. - http://www.netXpertise.com - Via F.Satolli N.16 - 00165 Roma
Sede Operativa: Via Callegati N.41 - 48023 Ravenna Fax: +39 0544 538 034
Re:I was about to rent.... (Score:5, Informative)
(http://mypuppet.net/ | Last Journal: Monday June 23 2003, @01:58PM)