SCO Caught Copying 351
linuxwrangler writes "While accusing everyone else of copying "their" code, SCO has meanwhile been caught copying documentation. In fact they copied several chapters of the Book of Webmin directly into their online documentation. While the book is available online, it is not licensed for redistribution. Details are sparse but it appears that SCO had to pay the publisher for using the material."
Oi, reminds me... (Score:5, Insightful)
Things are awfully silent around SCO lately...Cat got Darl's tongue?
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:3, Funny)
Can't be true. He doesn't have it.
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:5, Informative)
Perhaps the plummeting stock [yahoo.com] has something to do with it...
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:3, Interesting)
If he did, that might also ensure a trip to Club Fed.
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:2)
A manager at my previous job was caught redhanded embezzeling money, commiting identity fraud, and a host of other charges more than 2 years ago. He is just oging to trial now. Keep in mind all the crap Ken Lay pulled he pulled (or rather we suspect he pulled) under the watchful eye of Janet Reno and
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:2, Funny)
Tom
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:4, Insightful)
The Department of Environment and Heritage [deh.gov.au] doesn't even have the term "Ayers" anywhere on the Uluru - Kata Tjuta National Park [deh.gov.au] website.
If you're worried that Uluru is too confusing, probably use "Uluru/Ayers Rock" instead of "Ayers Rock Uluru" which I've been seeing some people use.
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:5, Funny)
It looks a perfect fit [ox.ac.uk]
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:2)
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:3, Insightful)
On Yahoo's finance boards, you could count on an almost daily press release from them or their lackeys. The last news listed is from May 7 and it's about Royal Bank pulling out.
All this takeover business must be keeping them busy. Well, that and the fact that Groklaw keeps track of all verbiage over time.
I'm certain that Darl now wishes he'd s
Re:Oi, reminds me... (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, we haven't heard from Darl and the boys for a while. No ludicrous statements. No bold and cunning plans. No 'all your code are belong to us! Muahahahaha!'
Baystar publicly told SCO to shut Darl up or replace him or pay back all the money. Why is the silence surprising?
No one was expecting that. (Score:4, Funny)
Hypocrits? (Score:4, Funny)
Hypocrits? ONLINE? My gosh... what is this world coming to?
Irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Irony (Score:5, Funny)
All Commercial SW vendors should be audited. (Score:4, Interesting)
How else would a customer know that their business wasn't using some illegal components that they couldn't depend on in the future because their vendor might have to remove them.
Just think if SCO or some other OS you might be using might be dependant on an illegally-copied component. Your business would be SOL if they had to remove it and couldn't find a replacement. Yipes. I think we should be insisting on audits of the commmercial packages we buy.
Re:All Commercial SW vendors should be audited. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:That's not irony! (OT) (Score:4, Interesting)
Alanis Morisette's stupid song has created a generation of wannabe language Nazis who jump on any perceived misuse of the word, and often embarrass themselves in the process. They're not language Nazis at all; they're not competent enough to be Nazis. They're language Italian Fascists!
SCO Lied/Stole.... (Score:5, Funny)
Bad Darl, bad, go to your office with no stock options...
gotta say it (Score:4, Funny)
BWAAAAA HAAAAA HAAAA HAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
thanks, I feel better now.
Re:gotta say it (Score:2, Funny)
That is very dependent ... (Score:2)
Phantom of Krankor: I am the Phantom of Krankor. Ha ha ha ha.
Phantom of Krankor: I will arrive tomorrow night at precisely eight o'clock. At that time I shall make my wishes known to you. You will obey them... or die! Have a pleasant night's sleep... HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA!
Phantom Of Krankor: Come now, Professor. What a silly question. I can't be bothered to keep track of your worthless servants. We blasted him out of an airlock, so by now he's probably fallen into a star! HA, HA, H
Re:gotta say it (Score:3, Funny)
Haaah hah!
Stop COPYING yourself! Stop COPYING yourself!
[/nelson]
sue SCO (Score:5, Funny)
i know what you're thinking. well it doesn't matter that i don't hold the copyright, isn't that right SCO?
Just like a politician (Score:5, Interesting)
Are we really shocked that SCO was stealing someone elses IP?
Re:Just like a politician (Score:5, Funny)
I thought the first signs were zest for life and lack of sexual frustration.
SCO Response (Score:5, Funny)
Copyrighs on books published on the web is unconstitutional
Re:SCO Response (Score:3, Funny)
Credibility (Score:2, Interesting)
What was that phrase again "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones"? This story may not be news, but it's important to note how SCO is no better than everyone else next time Darl gets on his soapbox.
Re:Credibility (Score:3, Funny)
No, no, no, it's "People in grass houses shouldn't stow thrones."
Obligatory Simpsons Quote (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Obligatory Simpsons Quote (Score:3, Funny)
D'Oh!
sco? (Score:2, Interesting)
if there was one smart person left in that company, they will remain quit, stop their court activities and die a peacefull death. i do not care about the harm sco may do to the gnu and linux community (because they do no harm), but i care about the harm they do to computer business in general. it is hard enough to raise vc nowadays, don't destroy the image of software companies any longer.
Re:sco? (Score:5, Insightful)
If SCO gives up, they have lost and will go out of business rather quickly. They are not going to be able to settle so easily with IBM because IBM's out for blood.
If SCO plods on, they are most likely to lose. But there's some chance for them to win.
It's also the case that, even if they aren't doing a pump-n-dump on the stock, they are still getting paid huge amounts of money and will continue to do so as long as the company is a operating concern. If they give up, that happens relatively quickly. If they plod along, as long as they can avoid a ruling, they can still get paid.
Re:sco? (Score:5, Insightful)
If IBM wanted this over, they'd have paid off SCO at the start and never let this hit the public media.
No, IBM's business at this point relies upon their ability to ship commercially-supported army-of-consultants software on free operating systems (i.e. Linux). This, more than anything else, is why IBM has helped out Linux. Good feeling among geeks doesn't pay the bills, but competitive advantages do.
If IBM wins, they won't have to worry about anybody else trying to pull a similar stunt in the future. If IBM were to have settled, others might try to do the same sort of racket with them down the road. It also wouldn't prevent SCO from suing other Linux vendors, which also hurts IBM's chances in the Linux market.
ownership (Score:5, Funny)
Re:ownership (Score:5, Funny)
SCO: There are 10,000 pages copied from our materials
FOSS Crowd: But the book is only 400 pages?
SCO: Nevermind, there are still 10,000 pages taken.
FC: OK, which pages, exactly, and what content?
SCO: Look on the title pages and subsequent pages. The words "Copyright" and "Table of Contents" appear exactly as in our materials. Later on appears "Index". Page numbers also have a similar ordering algorithm.
FC: Uhhhh
SCO: This is uncontestable fact and proof!!!!11!!
SCO: Oh, and, All Your Base Are Belong To Us.
Thorough SCO SEC complaint. (Score:5, Interesting)
Quite interesting [rcn.com].
MOD PARENT UP (Score:2)
Bob
Re:Thorough SCO SEC complaint. (Score:4, Insightful)
Short on cash for shorting :( (Score:5, Interesting)
As to this infringement, I demand RIAA-style copyright sentencing. For each possible infringement SCO should have to pay the maximum fine, multiplied by the total possible number of people who had access to the material. Given that it's posted online on a public site, and not in a limited user base network (ala p2p) this means the entire world population had access and SCO should be fined roughly the total value of all money produced in the world from 1972 to present.
If our justice system is going to let all these companies warp the law as they do it seems only fair they should fall prey to their own tactics.
Re:Short on cash for shorting :( (Score:2)
Re:Unsolicited advice on shorting (Score:3, Insightful)
I never short stocks. Bought stocks can go to zero and all you loose is the entire principal. If on a fluke you shorted SCO and by another fluke they won in court, you can loose many times your investment. You could owe your entire future. The sky is the limit on your potential losses. I'd rather diversify than have the potential for unlimited losses. The potential of unlimited growth is why I'm in the market. The thought of unlimited loss is pretty scarry.
This is standard anti-shorting FUD. You can (an
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
this reminds me of a verse from the bible (Score:4, Funny)
Re:this reminds me of a verse from the bible (Score:3, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The Real Point (Score:3, Insightful)
Parent is a troll. (Score:3, Informative)
This post [slashdot.org] is a troll. Check his link for "GPL." (Not safe for work). I thought it was odd that it went to about.com, instead of something more obvious like the Free Software Foundation's site. He's using about.com to redirect to a disgusting picture of what appears to be feces on a woman's face. Check his posting history [slashdot.org], lots of trolling.
I know a lot of people feel that there is some sort of hypocracy from Slashdot because some people are pro-GPL while some (not necessarily the same) people are anti
Re:The Real Point (Score:3, Insightful)
The mods messed up, other mods caught it... check and balances and all that shit.
Now, there is something to be said for checking a poster's history before responding (to avoid said trolls), but even that it tough to trust, given that any number of valid opinions (against the quasi-groupthink around here) can get you moderated tr
New Software announcement from SCUM (Score:5, Funny)
The new version has a simpler user interface than previous versions. The user answers a series of simple questions. Many questions are multiple choice.
For instance: "Do you want to sue a [x] current or [_] former [x] customer or [_] business partner? Do you have an existing contract to use against them?
You can specify a defendant, or the software can randomly assign a defendant. Administrivia such as filing the documents with the court, sending copies to the defendant's lawyers, and generating the certificate of service is handled automatically. The Professional Edition will generate motions and memorandums in support of those motions.
New modules in the updated package include the Affirmative Defense generator which automatically answers each of the defendant's counterclaims. For particularly unfavorable counterclaims, a motion to dismiss is automatically generated. In the Professional Edition, a new Case Law History module has been added. This module can find marginally relevant case law and then selectively quote favorable sounding portions using the selective quoting tool.
Industry rumors have been circulating that a new add on module is in the works and was expected to be released last quarter. Lack of this module has apparently been a significant setback to the company. Company officials have been unusually quiet about this. Sources suggest that the rumored package is a Lie Management add on, which can also run stand alone. It has been rumored that the core engine was licensed from Microshaft. Company officials declined to comment.
Anonymous sources told us on condition of remaining unprosecuted, that the Lie Management module can manage competing bundles of lies that are told to multiple parties. The lie consistency checker helps keep stories straight, preventing a runaway lie cascade of escalating magnitude. A bit of truth, from a large predefined gallery, can be mixed in to give documents a professional sense of credibility.
"This is a perfect example of how corporations can benefit from proprietary software over open source software" said analyst Lorra DiDdlings.
Also updated is the Case Scheduling module which generates motions to unnecessarily delay the case. If multiple cases are concurrently in progress, the software is now able to coordinate the motions into a deadlock such that each case depends upon the outcome of the other cases.
Company officials confirmed the development of a companion product, the SEC Filing wizard. This separate package will fully integrate with the Lawsuit Ganerator if both are installed together. Pricing and the expected release date were not available.
Analyst Robber Pretenderle said "I give SCUM a 99% chance of winning their lawsuits based on their statements alone." The company's stock rose quickly on the news. (symbol: SCUM)
About SCUM.
SCUM, the owner of all software operating systems, is the leading provider of business lawsuits worldwide. Suing and threatening customers and business partners in over 86 countries, SCUM provides a full range of litigation fiascos. The recognized leader worldwide in providing lawsuit protection licenses, SCUM has been in business for over 25 years.
SCUM, Lie, and Lawsuit are trademarks of The SCUM Grope. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
This story contains forward looking statements. Investors are advised that some forward looking statements may look further out than the expected life of the company.
Any similarity to the truth is unintentional and purely coincidental.
At least they ripped off GOOD documentation (Score:5, Interesting)
Perfect! (Score:5, Funny)
This should prefix ALL slashdot stories.
Stated 15 minutes before this article was posted: (Score:5, Funny)
Ash Sez: (Score:5, Funny)
From the full title of the book... (Score:2, Interesting)
on hindsight of cease and desist letters:
"Based on the findings of the report, my conclusion was that this idea was not a practical deterrent for reasons which at this moment must be all too obvious. "
on Free information:
"Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world?"
Help on Copyright Law for Poor SCOX (Score:5, Funny)
SCOX at $5.30 today and dropping (Score:5, Interesting)
Two more points down, and SCOX will be back where it was before all the lawsuits, down around 3. That level looks likely within a month.
a popular saying in brasil... (Score:4, Funny)
marginally OT: New Groklaw article (Score:5, Interesting)
For those who don't know, this is yet another case where Canopy (parent company of SCO) says that what is written in the contract isn't as important as the oral agreements they made, and that what the parties agreed to is the opposite of what the written contract says they agreed to.
I disagree with most of you (Score:4, Insightful)
The test of respecting the copyright, however, isn't *never* violating one, but fixing it when you realize you have. SCO did exactly what it should have, here, and both parties are perfectly satisfied with the result, I should think. SCO's quick action shows that they are eager to demonstrate how much they respect copyrights of others.
Does any of this mean SCO's suit is more or less merited? No, of course not. Does this infringement make them hypocrites? Not unless those filing the lawsuits sanctioned this infringment.
Now, the one point that someone made which has some validity is that SCO is hypcritical to suggest that Linux's review process is tainted, when they themselves are unable to review sufficiently to avoid infringement. SCO has no business complaining about the review process of any software if they cannot guarantee their products are 100% clean (and no one can, of course). SCO has made that argument to make Linux sound out of control and "scary," but it is not really a legal argument, just a tactic.
Like SCO's documentation, Linux is open for review at any time by anyone. Like SCO's documentation, if something infringing is in Linux, it is likely to be noticed by the copyright holder. SCO is saying that they have noticed such a thing, but unfortunately isn't able to point it out. That is what makes this documentation case so cut-and-dry, and the Linux one so out of control.
Personally, I think SCO should put up or shut up...but the fact that they were caught infringing, and made amends doesn't do anything to the validity of their suit. From their point of view (assuming they actually believe there is infringement), they are just asking for the same treatment they offered here.
-Dan
adipostity? (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason SCO acted so quickly wasn't because they respect other peoples copyrights, since they obviously didn't check before ripping this material off.
It's simply that to do otherwise given their current legal shenanigans would have been foolish.
There's no honour involved, just cold calculation of the lawyer variety.
Do as they did... (Score:4, Funny)
SCO says farewell (Score:4, Informative)
I just went there and kinda appreciated their way to wave good bye. Apparently being fired gave some of the crew the freedom to finally say what they think about their ex-boss.
Go look yourself:
http://www.sco.pl/ [www.sco.pl]
Re:Uh (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Uh (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)
In the SCO vs World case, the ownership issue is still one that will need to be settled before most of the cases can go anywhere. Expect that if the courts rule that SCO does in fact own the code that they claim to, that plenty of companies with little prompting will pay up.
My first thought (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Uh (Score:4, Funny)
I've got nothing against Microsoft Users... it's just their Overlord I can't stand.
= 9J =
Re:Uh (Score:4, Interesting)
They copied text, waited for someone to notice, then paid up without a court order.
I love that logic. It's okay for SCO to knowingly infringe on others' IP as long as they pony up when they get caught.
That's pretty much the way most businesses work.
What company do you work for? The company I work for would be very upset about unknowingly infringing someone's copyright. If it wasn't an accident, the person responsible would be fired -- well, as long as it wasn't one of the CxOs, of course (then they'd find ten real workers to blame and fire).
Re:End of court case. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Uh (Score:5, Funny)
Because the were stealing, and like... not respecting the inviolable rights of someone else to not have their stuff pinched. They're terrorists like Linux Torvols.
Re:Uh (Score:4, Insightful)
Because the were stealing, and like... not respecting the inviolable rights of someone else to not have their stuff pinched.
If they paid, then in exchange for the money they got a non-public license to redistribute the content.
If they didn't pay and get a proper deal, then they stole.
That's a huge difference that isn't clear in the
Re:Uh (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)
Good person:
1) Pay for content
2) Get content.
Bad person:
1) Get content.
2) if (Gets_Caught())
Pay_For_Content();
else
Never_Pay();
The point is, they likely wouldn't have paid if they didn't get caught, and they still broke the law. Do you say everything's ok and you're just like a normal, honest citizen after you've served your 4 years in jail for auto theft, or do you have a GTA record?
Re:Uh (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Uh (Score:5, Insightful)
Sheesh (Score:5, Insightful)
That'll teach me to be baited in such a blatant way by a question that is so clearly not intended to be replied to.
Just so that I don't come off sounding rediculous or offtopic, let me say something that is original.
SCO as an organization didn't do this. One lazy person or group which was supposed to write documentation decided not to write their own. It may be that we can take this as a compliment to the Book of Webmin. It was so well written that SCO couldn't even improve upon it... wait... is that a compliment?
Re:Sheesh (Score:3, Funny)
So, this is what happens when lawyers write the documentation then? Cos we all know that there are only lawyers working at SCO these days...
Re:Sheesh (Score:2, Funny)
Sorry, you're too late.
Re:Sheesh (Score:4, Insightful)
It could also be that because SCO sponsored Webmin at some point that said person assumed (incorrectly) that the Book was ok to use.
I doubt that evil was involved here...
Re:Sheesh (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me disagree. SCO, as an organisation, and as the publisher of the documentation, did this. They failled to implement the IP safeguards they pretend are missing in Linux developement. Even if the fault can be tracked back to an employee, the organisation didn't implement what it preach (for OSS).
Re:Sheesh (Score:3, Funny)
(American schools... I dunno...)
Copyright infringement (Score:4, Interesting)
But when a pirate does it, gets sued, and settles, somehow it's evil that the RIAA sued in the first place and the pirate is the good guy martyr.
Re:Copyright infringement (Score:3, Insightful)
First of all, I could care less whether people get their free music. I think it's a bad business decision to not make it available in some form, because so many of us won't buy a new CD until we have heard all of it since we are tired of getting burned buying CDs with a solitary good song.
But downloading music is a bad comparison. People aren't downloading MP3s
Re:Copyright infringement (Score:3, Informative)
"Of course many of the music downloaders could be argued to have a legitimate fair use right"
You're correct; many music pirates argue "fair use." Those of us who have a basic understanding of fair use stand by and laugh at them.
You won't win this war against copyright holders with ignorance as a weapon in your arsenal. Google on "fair use music" if you'd like to educate yourself. Here's an EFF guide to understanding fair use rights [eff.org] to get you started.
Re:Uh (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Uh (Score:2, Interesting)
And, of course the major difference
Re:Uh (Score:2, Redundant)
What does this really mean, not much, maybe they're hypocritical but that's about it. Although, they'd probably say they actually pay for borrowed works unlike Linux users and this was a mistake.
RTFA? (Score:2, Funny)
I almost forgot for a sec that this is slashdot and that no one reads the articles.
Re:Ahh, too easy... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Ha (Score:2)
Controversial UNIX vendor The SCO Group apparently has paid to settle a copyright infringement complaint from San Francisco publisher No Starch Press.