Alioth's Journal: The SCO endgame

There was an 'Ask Slashdot' on what we've missed regarding SCO -vs- Open Source.

This is what we've missed. We are being blindsided by SCO into thinking it's about copyrights. It's not - the only legal dispute at the moment is about contracts (it would be redundant to mention how valid that is, go to Groklaw). Darl and co. keep whining about copyrights, but as yet, they have not launched any legal actions to do with copyright. It's FUD. Notice how quiet IBM is about the case. Like the ancient Klingon proverb, "if you don't want something to be said, don't say it" - IBM aren't saying anything because they don't want to fuel the FUD machine. The iron fist of their lawyers will say it all in due course.

So how will Darl and co. proceed with the FUD? My prediction is they will take a leaf out of the RIAA's book.

They are trying to build credibility for a copyright case by sending out the silly ABI letters (again, see Groklaw if you missed 'em). They are also distracting the community from the real issues, too. As they build credibility in the PHB's eyes with their continual copyright whining, they will start sueing.

They won't sue the people they sent the 6000 letters to. They won't sue a large company.

They will sue a couple of hundred 19-year old university students, just like the RIAA. People who can't afford to defend themselves and who will basically be forced to settle out of court and cough up their meagre life savings. Then SCO will start crowing about how they beat these nasty university student software pirates, just like the RIAA did. It will lend a HUGE amount of legitimacy to their FUD campaign, because in the eyes of the PHB and members of the public who haven't been following this case, Linux will now be associated with software pirates. After all, these people settled out of court! They must be admitting their guilt! A huge propaganda coup for SCO.

It will deeply impact those involved. It will deeply impact the adoption of Linux. It would be incredibly destructive, because now to the masses, Linux users are just common software pirates.

There are factors that mitigate this doomsday scenario. For starters, SCO have stirred up such a hornet's nest of opposition that if they sue people who can't defend themselves, a defence fund is sure to follow. Since Linux is an important part of IBM's business, maybe IBM will lend some of its lawyers to defend the hapless folks who can't defend themselves from a lawsuit. Unlike the people sued by the RIAA (who were breaking the law and they knew it for the most part), these people will be right and will be worth defending.

On the other hand, all it will take is one or two to settle out of court with SCO to give SCO nuclear FUD ammunition. If I was a conspiracy theorist, I would say that SCO may even pay some of the people it sues to settle to get the FUD ammunition it needs. Of course, if they did that and got found out...

SCO and MUD (yay acronyms)

[Alucard454]

first of all, i think this is creepily possible, and i commend you on helping me lose my lunch this morning :P

secondly, and more importantly, i read your post about MUDs, and i was wondering if you are still actively working on your project. I've got a friend who is working on a new MUD (playtesting begins next week) who may be contacting you (or indeed may already have). i posted a link to your journal entry, and he seemed intrigued.

anyway, just don't be surprised if you get an email about it soo

Re:SCO and MUD (yay acronyms)

[Alioth]

Well, I had to hit Ctrl-Z (suspend) on the MUD because I've got some billable work to do and I need the money. Once that's out the way I'll continue work on it though.

IMHO - a little far fetched

[daveisoverlord]

I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think they could really pull that off.

Disc: IANAL (of course :) & I know you yourself said with the $10M indemnification fund this is more and more a distant reality. Thank goodness.

But oh well - I'll respond anyway.

I think the goals for the RIAA and SCO are very different. RIAA goes after kids because that's the group they're trying to stop using P2P. That's their "bread and butter" group that's causing them the most harm. Or maybe more succinct

Re:IMHO - a little far fetched

[Alioth]

My thesis is that they would attack small users to generate FUD ammunition. Not against existing large users like Google, but to prevent further Linux adoption. PHBs would see a bunch of kids being forced to settle out of court and Linux in their mind would be associated with software pirates. They wouldn't be trying to make money off lawsuits against small users directly - instead they'd be using it to gain publicity and FUD ammo. It assocates Linux with software piracy in the minds of the masses - they ar

Re:IMHO - a little far fetched

[daveisoverlord]

OK - I see where you are coming from now with firing up the FUD machine. And that would be bad. And, I think, not just from the slowing Linux adoption by the PHBs perspective. If SCO starts getting these settlements, it would probably drive their stock price up. And it could also bring in more investors. Those two combined would provide SCO with more much money to feed the lawyers with. Thinking about SCO having even more money to throw at lawyers is when I start getting really scared.

--Dave

Re:IMHO - a little far fetched

[loucura!]

As far as I am aware--keeping in mind that I'm not a lawyer (but I play one on Slashdot)--precedents are only set upon appeal, so if you were to sue me, and I were to lose, it wouldn't be binding on future court cases unless I lost an appeal.

I think that SCO realises that if they were to sue small-time shops and users, they wouldn't get the precedent that they want because the small-time shops and users cannot afford to appeal. So they're kicking the shins of the 800 pound gorilla because they know the Gor