AutoZone sued over use of Linux - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Daval · 03-03-2004, 11:16 AM

AutoZone sued over use of Linux
Associated Press

Published March 3, 2004
Last updated: March 3, 2004 at 8:08 AM
LIN04

NEW YORK -- The SCO Group Inc. today said it has filed a copyright suit against auto-parts company AutoZone Inc., alleging the chain runs versions of the freely distributed Linux operating system that contain code belonging to SCO.

Over the last several months, Lindon-based SCO has sent letters to about 1,500 companies demanding they pay licensing fees of about $700 for each server running Linux or face legal action.

SCO holds the rights to key elements of the 30-year-old Unix operating system from which Linux was inspired, and claims parts of it have been incorporated in Linux. Those claims are disputed by, among others, IBM Corp. and Novell Inc. IBM and SCO have traded lawsuits over the matter.

A spokesman for AutoZone, which is based in Memphis, Tenn., was not immediately available to comment.

Unlike Unix or Microsoft Corp.'s Windows, Linux is developed by a worldwide community of programmers and is free to copy or download, making it attractive to many corporations.

IBM, Intel Corp. and other have contributed to a legal fund that will help companies running Linux defray the cost of defending themselves against lawsuits.

In a statement, SCO Chief Executive Darl McBride vowed to continue suing Linux users.

Also today, SCO said that after paying dividends on preferred shares, it lost $2.25 million, or 16 cents a share, in its fiscal first quarter ended Jan. 31.

It lost $724,000, or 6 cents a share, in the same quarter last year.

Revenue fell 16 percent to $11.4 million from $13.5 million.

------------------------

I hope the SCO group get their asses handed to them in court. What a pure and pathetic cash grab attempt by this company.

SaltPork · 03-03-2004, 11:41 AM

SCO is reaching a little bit. Why don't they go after the German government. They just signed an agreement to use Linux on all of their servers and desktops.

laconic1 · 03-03-2004, 11:49 AM

SCO will also sue DaimlerChrysler for the same reasons. Stupid, but I guess it's their only hope of staying afloat since they don't turn a profit doing legitimate business.

ARTelevision · 03-03-2004, 11:55 AM

I do think it's OK to have this heard by courts of law.

User Name · 03-03-2004, 11:56 AM

It's awfully nice of Intel and IBM to contribute to the legal fund to help companies who get sued. Of course we all know that they're just doing it out of the goodness of their corporate hearts, not because there's some sort of long term financial advantage.

But anyway, I doubt that SCO will be succesful in the long term if it continues pulling this shit, nor will it get a lot of new customers this way.

erion · 03-03-2004, 12:39 PM

Not only is this bad news for SCO, it's bad news for linux. Companies will refrain from using anything that's supposedly open-source if there's a snowball's chance in July that they're going to get sued for it.

I'm with ART on this, though. let the courts hear it. The worst that can happen is that if code belonging to SCO is found in the distribution, it will have to be removed and replaced by true open-source code. The best that can happen is that SCO will have been found to violate the open source terms of usage for Linux by including open-source code in it's so-called copyrighted segments, and they'll be forced to pay some ridiculous sum of money to Linux users everywhere.

Disclaimer: I do not now, nor have I ever, used Linux as a primary operating system on a computer personally owned by me. I am, however, tired of corporate legal fuckery.

arch13 · 03-03-2004, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by erion
The worst that can happen is that if code belonging to SCO is found in the distribution, it will have to be removed and replaced by true open-source code.

Very,very wrong
SCO is suing both IBM and Intel for use of code that IBM placed in the public domain before selling the unix code to SCO. Basicly it's IBM saying "we sold you the portions of the code we hadn't put in the public domain"
and SCO saying "You sold it all to us and never mentioned you placed any in the public domain"
An issue for the courts to be sure.
However, SCO's lawsuit is asking a federal judge to ban the distribution of Linux for five years on the basis that SCO has lost five years of market by the public use of their code. Essentially, SCO want's a judge to give them a five year chance to get ahead in the market before linux development can continue. That's called an unfair market advantage if granted.
Think about it for a moment,
No Redhat, no Apache, No MySql, no mandrake. None of it.
It's also worth pointing out that Microsoft is picking up all of SCO's legal bills, as was disclosed in MS tax fillings this past year.

Crack · 03-03-2004, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by arch13
It's also worth pointing out that Microsoft is picking up all of SCO's legal bills, as was disclosed in MS tax fillings this past year.

Behind every great Fuck-up, there is some asshole egging them on, saying "Seriously, do it, it'll be cool as hell"

Silvy · 03-03-2004, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by arch13

No Redhat, no Apache, No MySql, no mandrake. None of it.

I don't see where Apache and MySql come in...
Both are in no way connected to the supposedly infringing code.

As I understand it, it is the Linux Kernel itself that is the point of debate. Every tool built around it is not in any danger of prosecution. Plus the mentioned programs are both available for other platforms and demand and development will continue on those.

However, it will mean that for many of us, an insecure, overpriced, bloated, choice-limiting, gorilla of an OS is the only option left.

Btw, I never knew IBM sold Unix to SCO, I thought Novell did, and it was sub-licensed to IBM. (during that license period the alleged code transfer has supposedly taken place.)

In the end, I believe free software wil prevail and for as long as the hardware base doesn't change (read: they don't force Palladium/'trusted computing' on us), we as users will have control over our own systems. But this FUD-spreading is seriously damaging Linux' reputation.

grumpyolddude · 03-03-2004, 03:31 PM

The computer system that my company uses is SCO-Unix based. The licensing fees are outrageous, with separate monthly fees for each work station and printer. SCO's private parts should rot and fall off!

sailor · 03-03-2004, 04:37 PM

Ah, SCO. Gotta love the sue-everyone extortion business model...

SecretMethod70 · 03-03-2004, 05:52 PM

I'm to disgusted by SCO to even bother commenting on the actual issue at hand. Suffice it to say, I signed my name on a letter to be sent to SCO of private Linux users.

sprocket · 03-03-2004, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wrkime
SCO is reaching a little bit. Why don't they go after the German government. They just signed an agreement to use Linux on all of their servers and desktops.

Because Germany already stopped SCO in its tracks. The German courts basically told SCO they cant make any more their outrageous claims about Linux containing SCO code. They've restricted SCO to only suing their customers who they suspect of violating contracts with SCO (as I understand it: IANAL).

Quote:

Originally posted by User Name

But anyway, I doubt that SCO will be succesful in the long term if it continues pulling this shit, nor will it get a lot of new customers this way.

Without the possibility of winning its cases in the long term, SCO is fucked anyways. No one buys SCO Unix. This is what a company does on its deathbed.

Read up on the SCO case at:

http://www.groklaw.net

And you just have to love this one:

http://www.linuxworld.com/story/38138.htm

Church · 03-03-2004, 11:18 PM

Two words: Open source.

Jam · 03-04-2004, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by crazybill5280
SCO will also sue DaimlerChrysler for the same reasons. Stupid, but I guess it's their only hope of staying afloat since they don't turn a profit doing legitimate business.

thats what the riaa is doing to... thier just following the trend

billege · 03-05-2004, 12:46 AM

Well, who knew AutoZone & DaimlerChrysler were in SCO's bullseye?

SCO in it's continuing move to make money without actually doing anything, has decided to sue AutoZone and DaimlerChrysler for using Linux.

The Bloomberg full text.

BTW, screw the Fark link, they make one register to view the article more than once.

Quote:

March 3 (Bloomberg) -- SCO Group Inc., which says it owns some of the code behind the increasingly popular Linux software, is suing DaimlerChrysler and AutoZone Inc. for using Linux, escalating a yearlong legal fight.

SCO Chief Executive Officer Darl McBride, who had targeted International Business Machines Corp. and software makers that sell Linux, on a conference call today said he's widened the battlefield to include companies that simply buy the programs.

He said Linux, touted as a low-cost alternative to Microsoft Corp.'s Windows, contains code stolen from SCO's Unix operating system and that Lindon, Utah-based SCO should get billions of dollars in royalties. SCO sued IBM last year for as much as $50 billion, and today McBride compared his company's case to the music industry's fight against illegal downloading of music from the Internet. That may be hard to prove, experts said.

``I don't know of any case in which an end user of mass- distributed software has been sued simply for obtaining or possessing it,'' said Jonathan Zittrain, an assistant professor at Harvard Law School in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

SCO also said its first-quarter loss widened on litigation costs and declining sales, sending the shares down.

Shares of SCO, which rose more than 10-fold last year, fell $1.56 to $11.86 at 11:54 a.m. in Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading and earlier declined to $11.65. AutoZone dropped $4.35 to $84.05 on the New York Stock Exchange. DaimlerChrysler fell 83 cents to $44.08.

Growing Interest

The DaimlerChrysler suit will be filed in Oakland County Circuit Court in Michigan, and the AutoZone suit was filed late yesterday in U.S. District Court in Nevada. They seek cash compensation and a court order blocking the use of SCO code.

IBM has denied SCO's claims and has filed a countersuit. Mike Aberlich, a spokesman for DaimlerChrysler, didn't immediately respond to an e-mail requesting comment. AutoZone CEO Steve Odland declined to comment on the claims.

``We've not seen the lawsuit and really therefore can't comment on it,'' Odland said in an interview. SCO has requested payments from ``hundreds'' of companies, he said. ``AutoZone is not unique.''

The suits come amid growing interest in Linux. Shipments of Linux-powered server computers, fast machines used to run Web sites, rose 53 percent in the fourth quarter -- more than double the rate of Windows servers, market researcher IDC said Friday.

Long Fight

McBride has tried since last year to convince companies that use Linux to purchases licenses. Google Inc., the most widely used Internet search engine, was among companies in discussions with SCO, McBride has said. Mountain View, California-based Google, which has 10,000 Linux servers, hasn't bought a license.

SCO has held talks with Memphis, Tennessee-based AutoZone about Linux since May, spokesman Blake Stowell said. DaimlerCrysler failed to ``respond appropriately'' to SCO's demands, McBride said on a conference call. He declined to elaborate.

The company also is involved in separate legal actions with Linux software makers Red Hat Inc. and Novell Inc.

``We have taken a significant next step in enforcing our contract rights,'' McBride said on the call. He said he also plans to target companies in Asia and Europe.

SCO said separately that its first-quarter net loss widened to $2.25 million, or 16 cents a share, from $724,000, or 6 cents, a year earlier. Sales fell 16 percent to $11.4 million in the period ended Jan. 31 from $13.5 million.

SCO said second-quarter sales will decline to $10 million to $14 million from $21.4 million a year earlier.

AutoZone, the largest U.S. auto-parts retailer, also reported results today, saying its second-quarter earnings rose 16 percent as sales increased.

(SCO began a conference call at 11 a.m. New York time to discuss the suit and the first-quarter results. Dial (1)(800) 818-5264 or (1)(913) 981-4910 to listen.)

I don't see how they plan on running a business based on suing people.

1) This type of activity, even if they're right, generates so much negative attention it's not worth it.

2) Even if they are right, there's obviously no way that the entire open source community is going to say, "Oh shit, someone did illegally use some code? Gee, we'll all stop using Linux right this moment."

Somehow, I don't see that happening.

3) Posession is 9/10ths of the law. There are millions? of Linux distros in use all over the world. Business/personall/whole server farms...these people all have legally aquired copies of software they depend on. The law will NOT find them liable for the code, even assuming that SCO is correct that parts of it are stolen. These users had no intent or desire to use stolen software. It's kida hard to do that with Linux anyway...so, there is no REASON AT ALL to fork $$ over to SCO.

4) This case is not winnable on it's face. Whoever at SCO is persuing it is hugely stupid. The only thing SCO has a shot at is proving IBM knowingly misused SCO code. If they could prove that, they have a solid case for some damages.

5) It's too bad SCO is waaay past the point of being reasonable. At this point they've lost all credability with the end user. SCO has joined RIAA in minds accross America as a sue happy bunch of assholes.

__________________
Unapologetic American

Last edited by billege on 03-03-2004 at 02:55 PM

I suppose I should have put the thread where more people could see it, but I put it here instead.

Astrocloud · 03-05-2004, 07:48 AM

Ha, Ha

Quote:

SCO Confronting Its Creation

-Company's CEO is taking precautions as the head of the 'most despised' tech firm.

Darl McBride, chief executive of SCO Group Inc., says he sometimes carries a gun because his enemies are out to kill him. He checks into hotels under assumed names. An armed bodyguard protected him when he gave a speech last month at Harvard Law School.

Linus Torvalds, creator of the Linux operating system, calls SCO "the most despised company in technology."

The reason: SCO Group is claiming rights to the Linux open source software code that thousands of users and supporters say should have no owner. SCO filed a $50-billion suit against IBM Corp. last year and on Wednesday turned on Linux users DaimlerChrysler and AutoZone Inc., seeking an injunction and unspecified damages.

"We are fighting the big battle," McBride said in a telephone interview from his office at SCO headquarters in Lindon, Utah, 40 miles south of Salt Lake City.

McBride, 44, is pitting SCO against an industry it once helped develop. Less than two years ago SCO, formerly Caldera International Inc., was helping to form a standard version of Linux to compete with Microsoft Corp.'s Windows. Once McBride took the helm in June 2002, SCO changed tack, hired attorney David Boies — who won the government's antitrust suit against Microsoft — and began claiming that Linux users infringed SCO's intellectual property.

Linux has attracted thousands of individuals and firms, some of whom see it as the only credible threat to Windows. Others use it because it's cheaper.

The software is now being used by companies ranging from DaimlerChrysler, the world's largest maker of luxury cars, to Lehman Bros. Inc., the fourth-largest U.S. securities firm by capital, to Google Inc., the world's most widely used Internet search engine. Lockheed Martin Corp., the world's largest defense contractor, also has servers that run on Linux as part of its computer network.

IBM pushes computers that run on the Linux operating system. Shipments of Linux-powered server computers, fast machines used to run websites, rose 53% in the fourth quarter, more than double the rate of Windows servers, according to market researcher IDC.

McBride and SCO are more hated than Microsoft, the world's largest software maker, and its Chairman Bill Gates, according to some Linux backers. That's because SCO, once a backer of Linux, has turned around and attacked the essence of the system: its free source code.

"SCO are just complete hypocrites," said Jeremy Allison, co-author of Samba, an open source software that runs a file and print service that SCO sells.

SCO says it owns the copyright to the Unix system and that parts of the Unix code have been copied into Linux. SCO is demanding payment from each user of Linux. Novell Inc. separately is disputing SCO's claim to Unix.

SCO claims IBM is distributing the Linux software containing its copyrighted Unix code. It claims companies such as Red Hat Inc. are building products using the same code.

DaimlerChrysler spokesman Han Tjan said he had no comment on SCO's lawsuit. AutoZone CEO Steve Odland declined to comment on the claims. IBM spokeswoman Trink Guarino said the lawsuit is groundless and the company will contest it.

"The real reason why people don't like SCO, and Darl McBride in particular, is that he is so dishonest," Torvalds, 34, said in an e-mail.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...lines-business

feelgood · 03-05-2004, 09:34 AM

Linux may be open-source but they still used components from an operating systems that isn't open-source. How would you tell if somebody took money from you and put it toward to stock. And that person's stock gains a million bucks after a week. Would you want your money back? Plus some interest rate and some of the million buck?

Probably.

Now you see how SCO feels.

billege · 03-05-2004, 10:00 AM

Allow me to say it again...

Business/personall/whole server farms...these people all have legally aquired copies of software they depend on. The law will NOT find them liable for the code, even assuming that SCO is correct that parts of it are stolen. These users had no intent or desire to use stolen software. There is no REASON AT ALL, especially for users, to fork $$ over to SCO.

This case is not winnable on it's face. Whoever at SCO is persuing it is hugely stupid. The only thing SCO has a shot at is proving IBM knowingly misused SCO code. If they could prove that, they have a solid case for some damages.

While were at it, there are internal emails leaking from SCO that clearly show the company is most certainly using the legal system as a means to extort money from other companies. Apparently this is a better plan than making money by providing goods and services.

Your sympathy for SCO is misplaced. They are not the wronged party just tying for justice, they are extorsionists.

feelgood · 03-05-2004, 10:16 AM

Oh well, who cares anyways, just tell SCO to fuck off and find something else better to do...like actually work on bettering their products in order to make profits...

Ya gotta love them corpo mofos...

Silvy · 03-05-2004, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by billege
This case is not winnable on it's face. Whoever at SCO is persuing it is hugely stupid. The only thing SCO has a shot at is proving IBM knowingly misused SCO code. If they could prove that, they have a solid case for some damages.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, but it is even worse for SCO. As I understand it, SCO does not even have the copyright of the infringing code, only the right to sublicense it. Novell claims to still own the code, and they have no interest whatsoever at suing anybody. That said, it is even quiestionable that the license agreement which is supposedly violated here exists. The company that IBM agreed a license with, is not the SCO as we know it, but the parent company that split off.
This last piece of info is unclear to me, and details are sketchy, but it is another possible legal pitfall for SCO.

I'm all for the little guy winning from the big guy, as the little guy is usually the victim. But the way SCO is handling the case it's obvious that they are in the bully role here, and they are deservedly losing public support.

boatguy234 · 03-05-2004, 12:39 PM

Astrocloud · 03-06-2004, 07:44 AM

Here's an article on SCO's leaked memos

Quote:

Leaked Memo Revives SCO-Microsoft Connection Furor
By Mary Jo Foley and Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
March 4, 2004

Is there always fire where there's smoke?

In the open-source community, the rumor that just won't die claims that Microsoft Corp. is funding The SCO Group's legal actions against Linux. On Thursday, those allegations rose again with reports of a memo that links Microsoft with a financial backer of SCO.

The rumors center around a $50 million investment in SCO by the Larkspur, Calif.-based BayStar Capital investment fund last October. At the time, online reports suggested that BayStar, which invests money from a variety of companies, had taken money from Microsoft for the SCO funding. However, in an interview last fall with eWEEK, BayStar officials denied that Microsoft was an investor in this transaction.

The latest twist surfaced Wednesday on the Web with a document that brings into question Microsoft's claim that it had nothing to do with the BayStar Capital funding of SCO—and, by association, of SCO's lawsuits against Linux vendors and users.

The new memo was published to the Web on late Wednesday by open-source advocate Eric Raymond. The memo was picked up by the Slashdot Web site on Thursday morning.

Blake Stowell, SCO's director of communications, acknowledged that the leaked memo is real.

But, Stowell claimed, pundits had mischaracterized the memo's context. "We believe the e-mail was simply a misunderstanding of the facts by an outside consultant who was working on a specific unrelated project to the BayStar transaction and he was told at the time of his misunderstanding. Contrary to the speculation of Eric Raymond, Microsoft did not orchestrate or participate in the BayStar transaction."

Responding to the allegations, a Microsoft spokesman said: "The allegations in the posting are not accurate. Microsoft has purchased a license to SCO's intellectual property, to ensure interoperability and legal indemnification for our customers. The details of this agreement have been widely reported and this is the only financial relationship Microsoft has with SCO. In addition, Microsoft has no direct or indirect financial relationship with BayStar."

The alleged memo, to which Raymond referred as the "Halloween X" memo, is dated October 12, 2003 and penned by Mike Anderer, whom Raymond identifies as a consultant with a company called S2 Strategic Consulting, which has ties to SCO.

S2 had been hired, according to the contract to help "with the formulation and implementation of various options for Intellectual property management." In essence, S2 was to help SCO make money from its IP.

Four days after the alleged memo was distributed, on October 16, 2003, SCO received the $50 million cash infusion from BayStar Capital and other funders.

A number of industry watchers at that time questioned whether Microsoft had any involvement in the $50 million BayStar financing deal. Some pundits noted that by providing SCO with funding, Microsoft and/or other parties would be helping to fuel SCO's lawsuits against Linux vendors and customers, thereby benefiting Windows. Microsoft and BayStar officials both denied that Microsoft was involved in the funding deal in any way.

The Halloween X memo appears to link Microsoft to BayStar.

"I realize the last negotiations are not as much fun, but Microsoft will have brough(sic) in $86 million for us including BayStar," said S2 Consulting's Anderer in the memo.

"Microsoft also indicated there was a lot more money out there and they would clearly rather use BayStar 'like' entities to help us get signifigantly(sic) more money if we want to grow further or do acquisitions," Anders continued in the alleged internal memo.

Meanwhile, Microsoft is known to have made at least two lump sump payments to SCO in order to license Unix. Microsoft executives said in May that the company wanted to be on the right side of intellectual-property law. (Microsoft makes available a number of Unix utilities in the form of its Services for Unix product.) One of these payments was for $8 million, according to Securities and Exchange documents; the amount of the other is not known.

Raymond has published a number of alleged internal memos from a variety of companies, including several from inside Microsoft. Raymond referred to all of the leaked memos he posted to the Web as the "Halloween memos," since he published the first of them on November 1, 1998, the day after Halloween.

Microsoft has verified the accuracy of several of the early Halloween documents that outlined the company's strategy to compete with Linux.

BayStar Capital spokesman Bob McGrath said "we have no way of knowing where it (the memo) comes from or anything about it." He added that BayStar is standing by its statement from last fall that "Microsoft was not a participant in BayStar's fund" that went to backing SCO.

(Editor's Note: This story has been updated since its original posting to include Microsoft's comments concerning the allegations.)

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1542915,00.asp

etla · 03-12-2004, 12:14 PM

Oh, its SCO.

Move along, nothing to see here.

03-12-2004, 01:24 PM

The only thing I have to say is there is a new AutoZone store going in down the street from us.

nash · 03-12-2004, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by feelgood
Linux may be open-source but they still used components from an operating systems that isn't open-source. How would you tell if somebody took money from you and put it toward to stock. And that person's stock gains a million bucks after a week. Would you want your money back? Plus some interest rate and some of the million buck?

Probably.

Now you see how SCO feels.

I think that the difference is that in this case, SCO also had a chance to "win a million bucks" too by bettering their product and making it appealing to the consumers. Of course there's a little more to the story and it's not quite the same but I'm not rooting for SCO.

SecretMethod70 · 03-12-2004, 11:08 PM

Actually, the difference here is that Linux DIDN'T use any code that SCO owns so the comparison is irrelevant.

As Linus Torvalds pointed out at one point or another, SCO is basically playing it like the Raelians. If you don't remember, that was the group that said they cloned a baby and wouldn't provide the proof at all and when they did it was by their own panel of "experts." Likewise, SCO files lawsuit after lawsuit based on this alleged code that Linux contains, yet over and over when the courts ask to see this code they won't show it, and the courts by the way are getting pretty pissed off about this by now. Furthermore, the little bits of this alleged code that have been exposed were debunked in a matter of a couple days if that.

Astrocloud · 03-13-2004, 05:25 PM

SCO is just Microsofts puppet. Their sole purpose of existence is to cause trouble for MSwindows competitors.

-My opinion anyways.

03-03-2004, 11:16 AM	#1 (permalink)
Daval Junkie Location: The True North Strong and Free!	AutoZone sued over use of Linux AutoZone sued over use of Linux Associated Press Published March 3, 2004 Last updated: March 3, 2004 at 8:08 AM LIN04 NEW YORK -- The SCO Group Inc. today said it has filed a copyright suit against auto-parts company AutoZone Inc., alleging the chain runs versions of the freely distributed Linux operating system that contain code belonging to SCO. Over the last several months, Lindon-based SCO has sent letters to about 1,500 companies demanding they pay licensing fees of about $700 for each server running Linux or face legal action. SCO holds the rights to key elements of the 30-year-old Unix operating system from which Linux was inspired, and claims parts of it have been incorporated in Linux. Those claims are disputed by, among others, IBM Corp. and Novell Inc. IBM and SCO have traded lawsuits over the matter. A spokesman for AutoZone, which is based in Memphis, Tenn., was not immediately available to comment. Unlike Unix or Microsoft Corp.'s Windows, Linux is developed by a worldwide community of programmers and is free to copy or download, making it attractive to many corporations. IBM, Intel Corp. and other have contributed to a legal fund that will help companies running Linux defray the cost of defending themselves against lawsuits. In a statement, SCO Chief Executive Darl McBride vowed to continue suing Linux users. Also today, SCO said that after paying dividends on preferred shares, it lost $2.25 million, or 16 cents a share, in its fiscal first quarter ended Jan. 31. It lost $724,000, or 6 cents a share, in the same quarter last year. Revenue fell 16 percent to $11.4 million from $13.5 million. ------------------------ I hope the SCO group get their asses handed to them in court. What a pure and pathetic cash grab attempt by this company. __________________ "It is impossible to obtain a conviction for sodomy from an English jury. Half of them don't believe that it can physically be done, and the other half are doing it." Winston Churchill

03-03-2004, 11:41 AM	#2 (permalink)
SaltPork Everything's better with bacon Location: In your local grocer's freezer.	SCO is reaching a little bit. Why don't they go after the German government. They just signed an agreement to use Linux on all of their servers and desktops. __________________ It was like that when I got here....I swear.

03-03-2004, 11:55 AM	#4 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	I do think it's OK to have this heard by courts of law. __________________ create evolution

03-03-2004, 03:31 PM	#10 (permalink)
grumpyolddude Deliberately unfocused Location: Amazon.com and CDBaby	The computer system that my company uses is SCO-Unix based. The licensing fees are outrageous, with separate monthly fees for each work station and printer. SCO's private parts should rot and fall off! __________________ "Regret can be a harder pill to swallow than failure .With failure you at least know you gave it a chance..." David Howard

03-03-2004, 04:37 PM	#11 (permalink)
sailor beauty in the breakdown Location: Chapel Hill, NC	Ah, SCO. Gotta love the sue-everyone extortion business model... __________________ "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." --Plato

03-03-2004, 11:49 AM	#3 (permalink)
laconic1 Junkie	SCO will also sue DaimlerChrysler for the same reasons. Stupid, but I guess it's their only hope of staying afloat since they don't turn a profit doing legitimate business.

03-03-2004, 11:56 AM	#5 (permalink)
User Name Banned Location: Urf	It's awfully nice of Intel and IBM to contribute to the legal fund to help companies who get sued. Of course we all know that they're just doing it out of the goodness of their corporate hearts, not because there's some sort of long term financial advantage. But anyway, I doubt that SCO will be succesful in the long term if it continues pulling this shit, nor will it get a lot of new customers this way.

03-03-2004, 12:39 PM	#6 (permalink)
erion Psycho	Not only is this bad news for SCO, it's bad news for linux. Companies will refrain from using anything that's supposedly open-source if there's a snowball's chance in July that they're going to get sued for it. I'm with ART on this, though. let the courts hear it. The worst that can happen is that if code belonging to SCO is found in the distribution, it will have to be removed and replaced by true open-source code. The best that can happen is that SCO will have been found to violate the open source terms of usage for Linux by including open-source code in it's so-called copyrighted segments, and they'll be forced to pay some ridiculous sum of money to Linux users everywhere. Disclaimer: I do not now, nor have I ever, used Linux as a primary operating system on a computer personally owned by me. I am, however, tired of corporate legal fuckery.

03-03-2004, 05:52 PM	#12 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	I'm to disgusted by SCO to even bother commenting on the actual issue at hand. Suffice it to say, I signed my name on a letter to be sent to SCO of private Linux users. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

03-03-2004, 11:18 PM	#14 (permalink)
Church Tilted F*ckhead Location: New Jersey	Two words: Open source. __________________ Through counter-intelligence, it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble makers, and neutralize them.

03-05-2004, 09:34 AM	#18 (permalink)
feelgood Free Mars! Location: I dunno, there's white people around me saying "eh" all the time	Linux may be open-source but they still used components from an operating systems that isn't open-source. How would you tell if somebody took money from you and put it toward to stock. And that person's stock gains a million bucks after a week. Would you want your money back? Plus some interest rate and some of the million buck? Probably. Now you see how SCO feels. __________________ Looking out the window, that's an act of war. Staring at my shoes, that's an act of war. Committing an act of war? Oh you better believe that's an act of war

03-05-2004, 10:00 AM	#19 (permalink)
billege Watcher Location: Ohio	Allow me to say it again... Business/personall/whole server farms...these people all have legally aquired copies of software they depend on. The law will NOT find them liable for the code, even assuming that SCO is correct that parts of it are stolen. These users had no intent or desire to use stolen software. There is no REASON AT ALL, especially for users, to fork $$ over to SCO. This case is not winnable on it's face. Whoever at SCO is persuing it is hugely stupid. The only thing SCO has a shot at is proving IBM knowingly misused SCO code. If they could prove that, they have a solid case for some damages. While were at it, there are internal emails leaking from SCO that clearly show the company is most certainly using the legal system as a means to extort money from other companies. Apparently this is a better plan than making money by providing goods and services. Your sympathy for SCO is misplaced. They are not the wronged party just tying for justice, they are extorsionists. __________________ I can sum up the clash of religion in one sentence: "My Invisible Friend is better than your Invisible Friend." Last edited by billege; 03-05-2004 at 10:03 AM..

03-05-2004, 10:16 AM	#20 (permalink)
feelgood Free Mars! Location: I dunno, there's white people around me saying "eh" all the time	Oh well, who cares anyways, just tell SCO to fuck off and find something else better to do...like actually work on bettering their products in order to make profits... Ya gotta love them corpo mofos... __________________ Looking out the window, that's an act of war. Staring at my shoes, that's an act of war. Committing an act of war? Oh you better believe that's an act of war

03-05-2004, 12:39 PM	#22 (permalink)
boatguy234 Crazy	00 Last edited by boatguy234; 11-09-2009 at 08:21 AM..

03-12-2004, 12:14 PM	#24 (permalink)
etla Junkie Location: Canada eh?	Oh, its SCO. Move along, nothing to see here. __________________ Subvert the Dominant Paradigm

03-12-2004, 01:24 PM	#25 (permalink)
:::OshnSoul::: Guest	The only thing I have to say is there is a new AutoZone store going in down the street from us.

03-12-2004, 11:08 PM	#27 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	Actually, the difference here is that Linux DIDN'T use any code that SCO owns so the comparison is irrelevant. As Linus Torvalds pointed out at one point or another, SCO is basically playing it like the Raelians. If you don't remember, that was the group that said they cloned a baby and wouldn't provide the proof at all and when they did it was by their own panel of "experts." Likewise, SCO files lawsuit after lawsuit based on this alleged code that Linux contains, yet over and over when the courts ask to see this code they won't show it, and the courts by the way are getting pretty pissed off about this by now. Furthermore, the little bits of this alleged code that have been exposed were debunked in a matter of a couple days if that. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling Last edited by SecretMethod70; 03-13-2004 at 09:42 PM..

03-13-2004, 05:25 PM	#28 (permalink)
Astrocloud Apocalypse Nerd	SCO is just Microsofts puppet. Their sole purpose of existence is to cause trouble for MSwindows competitors. -My opinion anyways.