Comment Re:Great info on AutoZone (Score 2, Informative) 1252
The problem is that in the consolidation of Caldera and SCO into the SCO Group, SCO has forgotten the ideals of the free software movement. They've turned their backs on Linux and open source software and at the same time benefitted by using open source software in their own distribution of Linux.
While they're allowed to come out with their own distribution and charge for the copies of it (as Red Hat, Mandrake, and other distributions can), they fail to realize how Red Hat, Mandrake, et al. stay in business... by adding value to their product in the field of reputation and support services.
This is why Autozone left SCO for Red Hat if I understand the Autozone developer correctly. It had nothing to do with taking SCO developed libraries and files, but more so an upgrade in Autozone's system where Red Hat was willing to offer support along with the 30+ developers at Autozone to migrate their system.
It's also funny to note that SCO is already claiming in print that they own the UNIX copyrights without the judgement in the IBM case. This is noted in their webpage for the Autozone case:
http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1299 78
LAS VEGAS, Mar 3, 2004 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX), the owner of the UNIX(R) operating system and a leading provider of UNIX-based solutions, today announced it has filed suit against AutoZone, Inc., for its alleged violations of SCO's UNIX copyrights through its use of Linux.
I find this claim (to put it in George Bush's terms) to be "troublesome" or "ill-advised" considering that they're claiming they have a copyright that they have not been deemed entitled to carry and as a result Autozone could countersuit and argue that SCO is making claims on a copyright they have not acquired until the IBM case is over.
To me, I think that SCO is now on the warpath of former SCO customers who migrated over from SCO to other Linux distributions. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the new target for their FUD campaign. You have to think that before Autozone left SCO, they had a relationship where SCO knew how many systems Autozone had running Linux.
While they're allowed to come out with their own distribution and charge for the copies of it (as Red Hat, Mandrake, and other distributions can), they fail to realize how Red Hat, Mandrake, et al. stay in business... by adding value to their product in the field of reputation and support services.
This is why Autozone left SCO for Red Hat if I understand the Autozone developer correctly. It had nothing to do with taking SCO developed libraries and files, but more so an upgrade in Autozone's system where Red Hat was willing to offer support along with the 30+ developers at Autozone to migrate their system.
It's also funny to note that SCO is already claiming in print that they own the UNIX copyrights without the judgement in the IBM case. This is noted in their webpage for the Autozone case:
http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=129
LAS VEGAS, Mar 3, 2004
I find this claim (to put it in George Bush's terms) to be "troublesome" or "ill-advised" considering that they're claiming they have a copyright that they have not been deemed entitled to carry and as a result Autozone could countersuit and argue that SCO is making claims on a copyright they have not acquired until the IBM case is over.
To me, I think that SCO is now on the warpath of former SCO customers who migrated over from SCO to other Linux distributions. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the new target for their FUD campaign. You have to think that before Autozone left SCO, they had a relationship where SCO knew how many systems Autozone had running Linux.
