“If SCO has its way, the Linux community will suffer a setback, but longer term will prevail. A good way to avoid the SCO scenario is for the open source community to take more responsibility for ensuring that its code doesn’t violate established patents and copyrights. In an interview with News.com, Linux founder Linus Torvalds said it’s not the responsibility of engineers to look up patent information. He’s right, but someone other than the engineering crew supporting the open source community will need to provide some oversight. It’s part of the maturing of Linux and open source: We have our copyright and patent lawyers, they have theirs.” Read Farber’s editorial at ZDNet.
Is this the End of Free Linux?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
(Sent to ZDNet by the way)
You know,
I don’t know what makes more angry. The recent run of positively “dead beat” corporate management in the tech industry in the past 2 years, that has basically set the capital markets back by 10 years in any new product development in our industry, or the fact that the legal framework in this country allows McBride to sit there with a straight face and litigate everyone a license of SCO’s antiquated UNIX.
European courts had the good sense to toss SCO’s claims out the window with a gag order, and cessation of all claims against IBM….without proof. Our good European friends have an ethical posting in thier legal system to protect IP, why don’t we have one?
McBride, and his cohorts have such a weak performance history, is it no wonder they do not understand technology, do not understand business and further more couldn’t sell thier way out of a paper bag to save mama the time to unpack her groceries.
So on they go with thier litigation “business plan” where they sit back, do no work at all, and allow the lawyers to try and come up with a solution to a failed UNIX product, and avoid the blame for thier failure.
It makes me sick, disgusted with this industry and sometimes, just sometimes I wish I was packin bags at the local super market for a living instead of having to read this BULL SH*T.
SCO follows RIAA lead by paying off senators to pass laws against the usage of linux. Don’t think they won’t try.
SCO is acting as the Microsoft hitman. After SCO destroys its customer base, Microsoft will ensure the bright financial future for the SCO executives, and Microsoft will not have any dirt on them. Later Microsoft will incorporate the linux kernel into the next version of Windows and proclaim it innovation!
It makes me sick, disgusted with this industry and sometimes, just sometimes I wish I was packin bags at the local super market for a living instead of having to read this BULL SH*T.
You’re keeping too much bottled up. Open up, tell how you really feel?
Actually I concur!!!
Due to the availability of source code, Linux will only go away when people lose interest in it.
Now for a moment, let’s assume that SCO does win. Let’s assume that you MUST purchase a license from SCO to run every single copy of Linux.
Now I’d LOVE to see SCO enforce this ruling. I can run a Linux server…and change all of its “fingerprints” to make it look like its running on something “legal” like one of the BSDs. (People do this all the time, it’s an excellent security practice.)
And that’s the openly accessible Linux servers, how about internal corporate networks. Is SCO going to come and personally inspect every single office and laboratory cluster in the United States, Canada, and anywhere else they have a legal foothold? That’s just plain impractical.
As for the Linux source itself, lets see them take down the Germany mirrors…the German legal system has been very hostile to SCO so far.
If the source is available from an offshore source…let’s see SCO keep that from getting into the US.
Anyway, this is just going to end up like the BSDi vs. USL lawsuit, which will give Linux a well-needed clean bill of health. How ironic it’s going to be when SCO’s lawsuit has the exact oposite side effect of what they had intended.
Let’s see: I’m McBride, I’ve signed on to be the CEO of a floundering OS/software company. In the marketplace, I’ve been outgunned, out maneuvered, and outclassed by almost everyone. The only other Linux firm that’s worse off than we are is TurboLinux.
But, I’ve got the rights to some ancient UNIX code, which I might just be able to capitalize on, and I have Dubois as a attorney.
Basically, SCO is headed for disolution without this. They have to shoot for the moon, threaten to sue everyone, if they want to survive. They aren’t getting revenue anywhere else, and they have to do something, since they are a public firm. They can’t risk shareholder suits….
Of course, their big mistep was suing IBM, when other, more attractive targets were available. If I were them, I would have gone after SGI first, set the precedent, then gone after the big guys. That would have been a better strategy overall.
As it stands, IBM seems willing to call SCO’s bluff, and their sharks haven’t been fed in a while. Should be an interesting battle.
This morning I read that two of the problems that SCO has with Linux (JFS and SMP) were worked on by a Caldera employee. Even when he saw that the Linux code for these wasn’t up to par, he would send in updates to fix the problems. This employee’s name came up a few times during the research into what has happened. Also, Caldera supported the Linux Kernel by supplying team members with PCs to work on.
Linux will always be free, and there is no end in sight. If the courts find that Linux is using faulty code, the courts will probably demand to have it removed, in which case, I believe that code is already being changed. Kernel 2.6.1 will probably be SCO free code, and then we can all put stickers on our servers that read, “SCO Free Code.”
Well, don’t you just love these guys? People spends tons of hours and sleepless nights coding for Free Software, and SCO executives step in to reap the rewards. Was there ever a clearer case of Free Launch? Wonders just never cease.
Love or hate him, but he was right all along.
cuba for cigars …
thailand for underage sex …
netherlands for drugs …
and, canada for linux …
’cause they are all soooo illegal in the states now!!!!
LOL…that was great!!!
Sad but true (well other than the underage sex and drugs parts…good riddance to them)
It is clear that SCO has no case and it will fall apart if it gets to trial. So the question is what is McBride’s endgame. As long as a no major company pays SCO protection money and he does not get big bucks from a IBM takeover. He will have to fall back on the stock scam. But if he does that and cashes in his stocks and options at the overinflated current scox price he invites the attention of the SEC.
My guess is is has plans for a trip to somewhere in the caribean where he can’t be extradited from. He will probably hang of untill he has got the stock as high as he thinks he can get it and there still remains no hope of a buyout – then he’ll take the money and run.
With a bit of luck David Boies will be disbarred for this. But I guess a bottom feeder like McBride will be sunning it in luxury – but at least he will be gone.
With a bit of luck David Boies will be disbarred for this.
There is nothing I would rather see!!! Let’s just hope he loses this case like he’s lost all his other recent high-profile cases (MS vs. DOJ and Florida, anyone?) and maybe people will stop hiring him to represent them in their frivolous cases.
As I wrote in another thread, I picked up this link from PCLinuxOnline:
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/auto/epaper/editions…..
It seems that David Boies is being accused of ethics violations in Florida…this could result in him being suspended (and therefore unable to keep on with the SCO trial).
It’s useless to even look at them. The patent lawyers and specialized business people at a company look at the technology produced by the engineers and then file patents where they think appropriate. Then the company enters into cross-licensing deals with other companies that have patent portfolios. Somebody with a one-off patent is a joke.
…not worth the pixels this article gets rasterised onto. Not worth the keyboard it was typed on. Not worth the electronics needed to display it.
What a load of FUD.
Even IF SCO does succeed, the MASSIVE Linux development community will replace those ‘copyrighted’ parts in a matter of days.
And SCO won’t. It’s a scam and the SCO shareholders are making millions off of it. What. didn’t you know that SCO is part of a larger group of companies that the SCO shareholders all happen to have stakes in? And that the companies cross invest in eachother and the respective directors happen to specialise in fluctuating the share prices of their investments in order to make money off of them? Literally!
Exactly. This is why I don’t buy the argument that Linus is right for staying out of this stuff. The community is _LUCKY_ that IBM has a reason to help them. They’re not fighting SCO because it’s right, they are for their own money. (I’m not criticizing IBM, just stating fact). What RMS has been fighting for since before ’84 is to have a community that can protect itself. How much stronger is the case because of the GPL. Numerous people have brought up the point that SCO released the code under the GPL. What if we were dealing with the BSD license? SCO would have much more of a leg to stand on.
People can complain, and troll all day about RMS, but the fact remains that this case is exactly the kind of thing the FSF is trying to prevent.
Maybe now, people are also seeing the reason/importance of the name GNU’s NOT UNIX. And look how much easier it is for SCO to scare people by using the word Linux to refer to the entire operating system, when all the offending code is presumed to be in the kernel.
Also, consider the following. Linus, and much of the Linux movement has been no friend to the FSF. The FSF’s goals would likely be furthered by Linux losing this case. They could swap out the kernel, and start calling the system GNU. Awareness would increase. However, despite having little good reason to assist the Linux community that has not lifted a finger for them, the FSF has spoken out against SCO’s tactics.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/sco-statement.html
But go ahead, trollers. Let’s see the ‘RMS is crazy’ posts. They’re about as original as a First Post on /.
-b
I didn’t even read this posting.
Linux will be free, simple. Linux hackers will remove any code in question IF a court of law sides with SCO.
Really people, do we have to hear the same propaganda again and again??
SCO IP in the Linux kernel = Storm in a tea cup.
So what else was in the news??
So let SCo destroy linux. Even if all the code in the linux kernel was copied from sco. Why bother. There is still *BSD. So if Linux realy violates ip, i will just install FreeBSD.
And even if *BSD went down, there are enough other free operating systems. The comunity will not fade to the viod just because their most loved toy is gone. They will move on to the next one.
Unix is a concept from the 1970s. Even in the 1970s it was called inferior to other operating systems. Should this realy be the solution for the next millenium?
/bla
Check this out at the register. Looks like IBM is pretty secure they’ll win.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/31889.html
….would be marginally more than the cost of a good hitman.
Obvious solution there, I think.
Do the shareholders know if SCO has a business plan for the future that does not involve solvency via litigation? They really don’t care, once the joyride appears to be over they will jump ship and SCO will see it’s stock drop from the dollars to the cents. In the meantime they will have done a lot of work for Microsoft that MS could not do itself.
The upside is this: If this goes to trial and SCO does not try to settle out of court, the issue will be laid to rest once and for all. Since Linux is only affected by “2.4 and higher” either a higher version that is “SCO free” will/is(?) be rolled out or there is a rollback to pre-2.4 – which I imagine would be unlikely. What I find amazing is that SCO hired such a loser of an attourney.
In either case – there is no case – unless teh judge is a total liberal weenie.
GNU software. SCO’s statements already lump GNU software with the Linux Kernel. So if they go after GNU software its bye bye *BSD and OS X!
It’s about freedom, brotherhood and justice. *BSD is not an option, it ia a dead horse, stop flogging it
Even if McBride and Co. insists that IBM case and licensing of UnixWare for Linux users is “to protect our IP,” it is undeniable that their real motivation is to maximize their profit rather than protection of their IP rights.
1. Not revealing the alleged code: by hiding the code, no one can be sure if their allegation is valid or otherwise. Uncertainty allows Linux users to continue using Linux with risk, hence SCO’s “damage” will be increased.
2. Permanent injunction against IBM instead of preliminary injunction: SCO’s allegation will be examined rather quickly in prelims. SCO does not have a strong case, and it rather want to prolong the uncertain state of Linux code so that it can promote UnixWare licensing.
3. Pursuing remedy from endusers rather than distributors: if SCO’s goal is to protect its IP, it is completely illogical to go after endusers before stopping distribution of a product that allegedly violates SCO’s IP. This again is a sign that SCO wants alleged code to remain distributed so that it can promote the UnixWare licensing plan.
4. Demanding Linux users to pay up BEFORE IBM case comes to conclusion: SCO need to sell the UnixWare license before the IBM case comes to conclusion (dismissal) or the alleged code is replaced with clean code because after the alleged code in violation is properly removed, SCO no longer has a product to sell.
How pathetic their strategy is. SCO can’t even sell its IPs, if any, in a straightforward manner.
And to think this is a country based on freedom.
No! This is a country based on capitalism. I think its about time we acknowledged that fact and stopped being hypocritical with the mainstream media, “you’re either with us or against us”, war on terrorism, drugs, sex, and just about anything the ATF/DEA stand for.
Perhaps we should rename the ATF to the American Task Force to go along with our Total Information Awareness, PATRIOT act and other freedom-protecting organizations.</sarcasm>
Pathetic hypocrites. Hardly any US corporation upholds the founding principals of this country better than every GNU/Linux company in existence, including Red Flag Linux.
What does freedom mean to you? StarBucks or Open Source? Money or community? Work or education? Conformity or diversity?
You know what it means to me? Nothing. Anymore.
This is why I don’t buy the argument that Linus is right for staying out of this stuff.
But Linus has been making statements about the SCO case all the time, just like RMS, hasn’t he? Isn’t he on the same side witn RMS on this?
despite having little good reason to assist the Linux community that has not lifted a finger for them, the FSF has spoken out against SCO’s tactics.
Sigh… Why to see the Linux community and the FSF as adversaries? Just because all of the Linux community cannot follow RMS in a crusade against all proprietary software doesn’t mean that those people of the Linux community were bad guys. Software may be just ones and zeros but the real world isn’t so black & white.
I support GPL, I basically support many FSF ideals and goals too, but I cannot see that all proprietary software in the world is a work of devil or something like that. People may have very legitimate uses for proprietary software too, and they may often have no choice in that respect. Why not just try to make good enough free softeware alternatives for them to use? Instead of demanding that everyone should quit using any proprietary software?
Because GNU is so strogly ideological thing, I also see it very contradictory that RMS insists that everyone should use the term GNU/Linux even though they couldn’t agree on the ideology at all, and what’s more, even if their (GNU/)Linux contained proprieatry software.
Also the concept “free software” suggested by RMS is not a very good one because it confuses the two main meanings of the word free (or is it intentional?).
RMS is not crazy, he may be a fine person, and working for the cause of free/open source software, but so are many more people not totally agreeing on the GNU/FSF ideals, like Linus, people of the OSI etc. People may just think differently about certain things.
I understand that people, even engineers need ideals and something to believe in, but some people make this Free Software philosophy almost like a fundamentalist religion where all others not totally agreeing on the official “truth” are seen as blasphemous heretics.
Blessings & peace…
No.
It’s about freedom, brotherhood and justice. *BSD is not an option, it ia a dead horse, stop flogging it
Only FreeBSD exists on more than 2 million computers…. AND growing… is that a dead horse?
not to mention the other BSD’s.
Rather stick to something which doesn’t include all the risks of thievery which obviously nobody in the Linux world seems to have a problem with.
Besides… Linux isn’t free, it’s GPL
Now for a moment, let’s assume that SCO does win…I can run a Linux server…and change all of its “fingerprints” to make it look like its running on something “legal” like one of the BSDs. (People do this all the time, it’s an excellent security practice.)
And that’s the openly accessible Linux servers, how about internal corporate networks. Is SCO going to come and personally inspect every single office and laboratory cluster in the United States, Canada, and anywhere else they have a legal foothold?
Are we supposed to be impressed with your complete lack of respect of the law, your ability to perpetuate pirateware, or both? It’s comments like those that rightfully brand the linux crowd as a buch of hackers and pirates. Even if SCO code was stolen, you will still refuse to accept this and pay for its fair use.
their big mistep was suing IBM, when other, more attractive targets were available. If I were them, I would have gone after SGI first, set the precedent, then gone after the big guys. That would have been a better strategy overall.
Why would you think that, this strategy seems to be working perfectly. IBM hasn’t lifted a finger to defend themselves (much less unindemnified Linux users), and instead of being your “white knight” looks more like an elephant with its head stuck in the sand than anything else.
cuba for cigars …
thailand for underage sex …
netherlands for drugs …
and, canada for linux …
Better solution Bob, why don’t you just MOVE there, so us lowly Americans don’t cramp your style.
It is clear that SCO has no case and it will fall apart if it gets to trial…
Not based on what I’m seeing, especially since that SCO stock just keeps shooting up. You should try getting your news from professional analysts, like Business Week magazine, intead of hacker hangouts like slashdot and weblogs:
http://search.businessweek.com/search97cgi/s97_cgi?action=FilterSea…
Sco is full of FUD, they have no evidence and were taken to task in Germany and were made to shut the hell up.
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/10792_2217231
the cost of buying out SCO for good would be marginally more than the cost of a good hitman. Obvious solution there, I think.
And to think I had a tinge of guilt for abrassively answering some of you fools.
…were taken to task in Germany…
If things are so much better over in socialist Germany, why don’t do you just move there then, or maybe to Finland where your hero is from? Probably would be a good move, since America has by far the greatest moral integrity of any nation on earth you are naturally going to have a hard time cutting it here.
I would like to remind everyone that copyright infringement is not theft/stealing/piracy, intellectual property is not real property, and that the founders of the USA never intended for people to own ideas for longer than 28 years before releasing them to the world.
Hardly any US corporation upholds the founding principals of this country better than every GNU/Linux company in existence, including Red Flag Linux.
You’re one sick puppy if you want to claim the official operating system of a totalitarian regime upholds America’s founding principles.
Why haven’t they released their code back to GPL since they ‘raised the red flag of linux’? Shouldn’t you idealites be attacking them full time for completely violating the GPL?
Oh, I forgot, they’re commies. You only attack capitalists.
I knew he couldn’t bear to be gone! I imagine one can get addicted to the kind of attention one gets when trolling in such an outrageous manner…but even it might be tempting, I advise all reasonable souls to refrain from feeding the troll, otherwise we’ll never get rid of him and his paper-thin lies.
BTW, Germany is SCO’s second market. When ask by the courts there to put up (i.e. reveal the alleged infringing code) or shut up, they decided to shut up. This should be an indication to the trolls as to the fact that even SCO, nor their ethically-challenged star lawyer don’t really believe they can win this suit.
since America has by far the greatest moral integrity of any nation on earth
Sure. The troll should keep smoking that crack: he’s the worst enemy to his own credibility.
Trolls are funny for a while, but then they just become annoying.
Think about it for more than half a second! Even if sco did win, any offending code will be yanked and replaced with new code and Linux will go on being as free as always. This is how bsd resolved it’s problems. A headline such as this is just pure stupidity on the part of the poster! plain and simple! Oh, and any company that actually makes a payment to sco for linux before any kind of settelment of the cort case is a just as stupid as sco themselves! Morons All!!!!!!
Hey Archie, can you maybe shed some light on something you may know about, this new Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into the practices of game software manufacturers. Does this mean us consumers might finally get some relief from their extortive practices of overpricing and rigging games so they only work on certain consoles made in certain parts of the world? Just thought it may be something you actually know something about.
From the FSF statement mentioned earlier:
“But even if SCO could show that some portions of its UNIX source code were copied into the kernel, the claim of copyright infringement would fail, because SCO has itself distributed the kernel under GPL. By doing so, SCO licensed everyone everywhere to copy, modify, and redistribute that code. SCO cannot now turn around and argue that it sold people code under GPL, guaranteeing their right to copy, modify and redistribute anything included, but that it somehow did not license the copying and redistribution of any copyrighted material of their own which that code contained.”
Thats all there is to it. They realesed the kernel code under the GPL, they cant just decide to pull it back now. Even if there is “SCO code” in linux, if it was GPL’d then theres nothing thay can do about it, it’s in the public domain, can bee freely copied, modified and distributed.
There is no case.
you have not posted a single comment that makes me pause…not even for one second. Do you think you can post some real information backing your stance?
I’m an MCSE, and a sysadmin running freebsd, redhat, os x & win 2k domains. Most of my consulting work deals with windows….which is not a surprise to me.
anyway,
Your postings absolutely are the worst. You spend 99% of your time posting in the “my daddy is bigger then your daddy” style.
You will sit there and exchange barbs with others.
You have nothing interesting or informational to contribute to this thread.
You are clearly not objective. Let’s see…the last time one of your postings remotely resembled something from a mature individual….ahhh..NEVER!
Your Business Week link is real cute. Basically you are saying “I have nothing intelligent to post, so go *here*(business week link)…for colorful speculation”
There’s a stack of business weak about 20 yards from me.
I find them entertaining. But they are no excuse to turn off the brain.
If Business Weak was so goddamn great, we could all subscribe , and we’d all be weathly. Just read the magazine. They have all the answers.
right?
right?
yea, that’s what i thought.
Your just a sheep. Admitting it is the first step. Denial is your enemy.
…why SCO, after announcing with great fanfare that they had revoked IBM’s AIX license, has yet to seek a court injunction to support that announcement.
Trolls mistake IBM’s methodical response to SCO’s theatrics for an admission of defeat – in fact, they should realize that SCO’s dramatic antics betray their desperation. They know they can only win if they scare someone enough to buy them out. Obviously this didn’t happen in Japan, from where McBride quietly return without so much as a hint that the CELF members were interested by what he had to say.
This explains why SCO shareholders are selling their stock – after all, if they thought they were to win, they’d be much better off holding on to it, as a victory would propel it even higher!
…when they are confronted with their lies, often with more lies and innuendo, as the fact that the SEC is looking at some practices in the video game industry – which is completely off-topic. It’s because trolls cannot actually challenge arguments that they try to deviate the debate and attack the character of those who challenge their views by somehow trying to associate them with wrongdoing. Never mind that the companies interviewed by the SEC are publishers, not developers (I work for the latter – they’re quite different, a fact the troll would know if he had any idea what he’s talking about), nor that there’s any indication of wrongdoing – after all, how many times has the SEC probed Microsoft?
A troll grasping at straws is a troll that knows he can’t win a rational debate. Sad.
…so perhaps the troll can do something about it, seeing that he holds and Electrical Engineering degree?
Hmmm’s problem is that he seems to thank that US originated Multinational corperations like Microsoft, SCO and the record industry are loyal the Amrican capitalistic system. Nothing can be further from the truth. Multinationational Corporations and the paid prostitute politicians that support them are exactly THAT. Multinational in scope and ONE WORLD in their political outlook. They hold no loyalty to ANYTHING but their Illuminati DEVIL “god” which they worship in their Bohemian club in California as a giant owl statue, Their 13 ruling families and their other secret clubs such as the TriLateral Commission and the Bilderburg Alliance. These people don’t even have the loyalty to MONEY that most posters both here and at slahdot think they have. Money is just a means to the end of ruling us all for them.
In fact I would say right now th the GNU/Linux communities.
DON’T PUT YOUR TRUST IN IBM. They are simply another ONE WORLD IILLUMINATI CORPERATION and may well have done exactly what SCO accuses them of FOR THE SPACIFIC PURPOSE OF KILLING LINUX while pretending to support it!!!
Before knocking this as just another “conspiracy nut” post
just imagine for a moment that such a Conspiracy actually
exists. If such a Conspiracy wanted to re centralize computing power back in the hands of an International Corperate/Government cabal and take it away from the home user (through Multinationals like Microsoft by such devices as Palladium, .NET, PassPort, DRM and “product Activations) don’t you think they would aim some type of trap at the only thing cuttently threatening that re centralization
which just happens to be GNU/Linux, Free and Open source software?
What seems to be happening here is that the new management at SCO are trying to profit off of the contributions that the old management of SCO made back when Caldera was a real company working to produce a product, instead of a money making scheme based on nothing but showmanship and lies. SCO’s internal records on the matter of thier work on the kernel have probably been destroyed, and its likely that former employees will be accused of acting without the knowledge of the company.
..the only protection GNU/Linux can rely on is the GPL. But that is a very secure thing to rely on. It dosent matter whether it’s SCO, IBM or whoever if the code is released under the GPL then it isnt controled by anyone, and you certainly cant sue people over it.
LMAO at your whiney claim of mistreatment.
If you have a problem with something I say, tell me what it is and back up your argument, or shut the hell up.
I have posted at least twice as much corroboration than any linux zombie, or have you failed to notice they don’t link anything unless it’s to some open source group or weblog?
Some guy on here last night talked me into a 12 hour sabitical, but after reading comments on here earlier today and not posting, I realized I have nothing to feel guilty about.
I am simply fighting fire WITH fire, except that mine seems to be really burning some people up. Move to Germany with your friends if you can’t take the heat, or spend 100% of your time at slashdot.
Archie Steel said:
why SCO, after announcing with great fanfare that they had revoked IBM’s AIX license, has yet to seek a court injunction to support that announcement?
“SCO Slaps IBM With Injunction”
http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,59266,00.html
‘Trolls’ are these fools that obviously do not know what they are talking about, obviously only puppets to Torvalds scheme.
DON’T PUT YOUR TRUST IN IBM. They are simply another ONE WORLD IILLUMINATI CORPERATION and may well have done exactly what SCO accuses them of FOR THE SPACIFIC PURPOSE OF KILLING LINUX while pretending to support it!!!
SHHHH. They might actually catch on since you finally said this instead of me (what I have been saying for days, check my titles on other threads like ‘IBM is not your friend’).
It is all an conspiracy, David Boies has ties to IBM and SCO will soon again be their ‘partner’. You didn’t think IBM et al was going to allow a bunch of nerdy commnunists keep this all to themselves, did you? HA, probably did.
They realesed the kernel code under the GPL, they cant just decide to pull it back now. Even if there is “SCO code” in linux, if it was GPL’d then theres nothing thay can do about it, it’s in the public domain, can bee freely copied, modified and distributed.
Actually, since IBM put the code in the kernel, SCO is not liable for it being there. Your argument equates to going into US Federal Court and saying before the judge “SCO no longer owns the code, because our sneaky license stole it from them (insert sinister foreign laugh).”
No SCO is not liable for it being there, so they did not knowingly “GPL it”.
Classic sign of a troll. You can’t argue the facts so you attack the poster. The facts are there, Sco in Germany had their chance to present their case and instead backed down. This clearly shows that they have no case whatsoever. They could of easily presented the facts to the judge there and proven their point. Yet they had nothing to bring foward and thus were told to shut the hell up. So yeah go ahead and attack me because you have no facts to back up your statements in the end.
So yeah go ahead and attack me because you have no facts to back up your statements in the end.
So which ‘anonymous’ poster are you? Get a name and say something worthwhile and I might remember.
…a good dozen of posts need to be moderated down..
lol …psyche!
no one has to call you out.
you do a great job of putting it all(except for the facts) out there.
the only reason i check out the SCO section on OS News anyway is to read your latest ramblings. You amuse in ways you can’t even imagine (i’ve had to clean coke off my keyboard several times)
the imagined “heat in the kitchen”…is all in your head.
enjoy your 15 minutes a fame.
not to worry, i’ll be reading your rants long after others have grown tired of them.
Troll tactic number 199 # When cornered, play dumb and claim ignorance.
Apparently this troll does not know or is pretending to not know how to look at or read ‘RE:’ and ‘IP’ information posted in OS news. Do us all a favor and go back to infesting Slashdot instead. Osnews does not need people like you trolling.
I consistently post the previous comment in italics, linux defendents do maybe half the time, the rest are nothing more than ‘flybys’.
I regularly post corroboration from independent professional analysts from respected trade journals. Have we seen one link from a linux hack from a business magazine of ANY sort? No, but yesterday we did get a link from some website that said “we pray for Linux”.
Got one post of mine you think you can beat? Let’s see it, cause we haven’t yet. You better be respectful, you better list all pertinent previous comments, and you better have corroboration from more than a blog.
You start treating me better I may treat you better than I already do.
…a good dozen of posts need to be moderated down…
Hope you’re not refering to mine, which are excellent. I just got this compliment from one guy:
[i]the only reason i check out the SCO section on OS News anyway is to read your latest ramblings. You amuse in ways you can’t even imagine (i’ve had to clean coke off my keyboard several times) i’ll be reading your rants long after others have grown tired of them.
Troll tactic #144 – When people start noticing you have no argument make sure you ignore their arguments.Also make sure to ask them to point out the flaws in your non-existing arguments.
What is the (S)cumbag (C)riminal (O)rganization up to now? Those lowlife bottom feeding dirt bags are forcing IT jobs to be ousourced to Asia. I just read an article which said that IBM is outsourcing 400,000 jobs to India. Maybe that has just a little bit to do with the unstable situation in America?
That was ‘bringing it on’? You came strong, let me tell you. Some little worthless passage humorous to no one but yourself.
Here’s why.
As everyone says, Linux will simply route around the damaged code that SCO identifies.
Then, Linux will move on as if this never happened.
This was evidenced back in the BSD case. While certainly the AT&T/BSD case hurt the BSD community, and the SCO case will demonstrably hurt the Linux community, the cases are only bumps in the road.
This is the first, and possibly the great IP attack that Linux has faced. But note to whom it is against. Not Linux, not Linus, not Red Hat, SuSE, Mandrake, Slackware, etc. etc. etc. It’s against IBM. It’s a civil contract case.
Should SCO win, then regardless of the outcome, the result will enumerate what’s “Good” Linux vs. what’s “Bad” Linux. The Bad Linux will be excised and a new Good Linux will emerge. The entire path of the offending source code will be scrutinized to see how and where it was “tainted”. Then THAT issue will be dealt with.
Isn’t there already a policy of assigning the GPL to software? Perhaps the Kernel Team will need an affadavit of eligibility to participate (i.e. a statement simply saying that the coders take responsibility for their code, that the coders will perform “due diligence” for IP, Patents and other issues).
So, say that SCO identifies tainted code. The source tree will then identify who checked it in. Then we should find some kind of document from that person, or their employer, asserting IP rights on that code, and transferring them to the GPL.
This leaves the paper trail for any future offending code. It sets up the good faith relationship at the beginning. “We, Linux Kernel Folks, only want what we are allowed to have, and you as the submitter have authority to grant this code to us.”.
Look at version control, see that Frank checked in the code, ask Frank about it, he says Sam, his boss said “It was OK”, talk to Sam, etc. etc. etc.
The whole point is that it establishes a culture of accountability and responsibility. It helps indemnify the users of the code, because of the supposition that the code is clean and contributed in good faith. Next time someone find their code in the kernel (or whatever), then when the code is identified, the buck should stop at the submitter.
While users may find they have to remove the code from their machines, they should not be liable for its existence as they had it on good faith that the code was not “stolen property”.
Once that culture is in place, then all of a sudden IP violations within the Linux kernel are no longer deep pocket concepts because, ideally, only the submitter is actually liable, not the users. Folks like Red Hat are more off the hook than they are now.
So, either way, this SCO bit will be a good thing for Linux and large OSS projects in general as it better codifies the legal environment under which they must operate.
…it is now suing IBM over:
http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/07/18.html
This looks like a story with legs.
I would like to thank you Mr. Top Speed for being one of the few who seem to see what is going on in the world even if you are a “Microsoftie troll” as most posters on this site claim. However I would dissagree with you that Linux is
Communist except for Red Flag of course ;-). To me Communism
Like Fascism means THE STATE(In the case of Communism) or a CORPERATION/STATE ALLIANCE(in the case of fascism)forces you to accept its ideology with the threat of death or torture. Except for the afore mentioned Red Flag brand Linux seems to be pretty much a voluntary non state project and not a State Enforced one. As for my own development practices you might refer to them as a “Mixed Economy” as I develop for both Open Source/Free Software (mainly libraries) and proprietary (mainly games and recreational applications) software So Needless to say I do not support RMS’s Anti Proprietary psudo religious crusade either.
You seem to have correctly siezed upon the stated conclusion of Mr. Farber’s article that was the basis of this thread.
Certainly intellectual property should be protected. It may be that SCO can prove some of its claims legitimate beyond doubt. But if the technology industry becomes further consumed by copyright and patent litigation, innovation and the value the open source software brings will be greatly compromised. A good way to avoid the SCO scenario is for the open source community to take more responsibility for ensuring that its code doesn’t violate established patents and copyrights.
Mr. Farber correctly states that Linux will easily survive this fiasco, but that serious modifications to their model need to be made to prevent future roller coaster events that could actually kill it.
Your proposals such as “the Kernel Team will need an affadavit of eligibility to participate (i.e. a statement simply saying that the coders take responsibility for their code, that the coders will perform “due diligence” for IP, Patents and other issues)” are well thought out and needed modifications to their current processes.
The problem is there is currently no ‘tightly-knit’ (verses the self described ‘loosely-knit’ description of kernel.org) organization already in place to do this.
ODSL is materializing as the likely place for it (and likely why Torvalds is already there), but expect that SCO. MS, etc will want some representatives of theirs to eventually work there as well (code verification).
However your final solution of placing entire responsibility of uninformed user encroachment of IP on the programmer (who may have made an innocent mistake) ignores the indemnity needed for any widescale deployed operating system, as well as limits the likelihood of said programmer being able to sufficient restitute the damages (which exponentate quickly with the current www distribution capability).
Therefore IMO the final solution will require that Torvalds forfeit his ‘control’ of the kernel to a consortium of businesses or professional group such as IEEE, who will manage this extremely complex process to an efficient leverl that any group will finally be willing to accept legal liability for it’s distribution and indemnify the end users of the product.
Even that may not happen, however, as there is already so much code that is in there, but these types of changes are essential if this trial keeps up it’s current pace (seemingly all one sided for SCO), or should SCO actually win the case outright.
communism means of/by/for the community, to me. Perhaps a twisted form of communism was allowed to show its ugly face within some dictatorial states, but a democratic communist state based on freedom has never existed as far as I know. And I’m not saying that would be a good form of communism, but perhaps a combination of these ideas could result in a more fair and efficient society, assuming that they put modern technology to use, of course.
But we’re too ignorant to get past the question of whether communism is bad or not. Well, then, think about this. Divide and Conquer. We are a conquered people, letting what remains of our culture slowly fade away.
Coral Snake you do seem to have a lot of interesting insights to what is going on in the world as well. Hopefully we will get further opportunity to discuss at length.
However if you are an OSS programmer, I would prefer you specialize your open source talents in creating better freeware games for us, and using you paid for skills to build better proprietary software.
Main reasons are thus: Game costs are the most expensive software products that have the greatest licensing restrictions and need OSS involvement to takle these issues, whereas OSS software does not provide the security needed for operating systems that are potentially used for government, military, or corporate confidential environments.
I’d be interested if you disagree with this assesment:
Open Source: Edutainment, where costs are outrageous and security is not an issue
Proprietary: Operating Systems, which provide any system’s basic security protection and source code needs to remain confidential
I stand corrected (unlike the troll, I am capable of admitting when I’ve made a factual error – see below), I did not know that SCO had filed an injunction. It will be interesting to see if the courts will allow it.
However…
No SCO is not liable for it being there, so they did not knowingly “GPL it”.
The fact is that SCO continues to distribute it to this day on their FTP site. If they did not want to GPL it, they should have stopped distributing it – then maybe, maybe they would have some credibility in this.
But SCO has continued to distribute Linux under the GPL. Whoever put the code there is irrelevant now. Because SCO is as we speak (or at least as of yesterday) still distributing the code, they have ipso facto GPLed it. This is not a matter of opinion, but of fact. The troll has been told this repeatedly and has avoided adressing this fact, which completely destroys his whole argument. In other words, the troll is incapable of admitting that he may be wrong even when presented with proof, which is as compelling as the proof he himself has presented (though much more far-reaching): SCO is still distributing Linux under the GPL, therefore any of their code in there is GPLed.
Main reasons are thus: Game costs are the most expensive software products that have the greatest licensing restrictions and need OSS involvement to takle these issues, whereas OSS software does not provide the security needed for operating systems that are potentially used for government, military, or corporate confidential environments.
You sir are delusional. You obviously understand nothing about the computer game market. How are games more expensive? How are there liscences more restrictive? Please explain.
I stand corrected
Finally. One person! Hope for you maybe.
Because SCO is as we speak (or at least as of yesterday) still distributing the code
How do you know? Do you have their explicit permission to download it? Their website says they are no longer distributing it. Just because you found some backdoor does not mean this is authorized.
Also, since the alleged code is secret, how do you know it’s actually in the files you are downloading?
MS, etc will want some representatives of theirs to eventually work there as well (code verification).
Of course, that would also mean that MS and SCO would have to open up their own code for verification that it does not contain stolen code. After all, what proof do we have that there is no stolen code in Windows or UnixWare? Actually, a very good case has been made by sources inside SCO that UnixWare actually contains stolen Linux code, in the Linux Kernel Personality. In fact, for anyone who knows anything about software development (that is, unlike the trolls), it would be very difficult for SCO to have implemented LKP without using Linux code.
Therefore, I think their should be a probe of SCO’s code so that independent experts can determine for sure whether SCO has stolen code or not – otherwise, all that we have is their word, and seeing how they change what they say three times a week, that word isn’t worth much.
You will hear the FUD whispers of “Can you really trust Linux?” Then again, SCO really has no case.
Sure, stock prices may rise, but stock prices only mean that people think they can make money. Do recall that the Tech industry of the ’90s burst like a soap bubble because of people’s over-inflated expectations. People invested without serious investigation into many companies’ claims. SCO does not appear to have a long lasting strategy other than legal threats. That is not how a company survives and I think those investing in SCO know it. They are there for the ride and at the hint of blood letting they will abandon SCO. SCO’s stock will collapse and we’ll see if they can get their act together with a REAL business strategy.
In addition, SCO is not chasing after the kernal or anybody else (at this time). If they win, they most likely will try, but they have yet to publish anything of substance and the trial has yet to begin. Also, even if the “offending code” were removed, IBM is still a legal target since it has “profited” off of SCO’s work and the case would not fold unless SCO accepts it as a settlement package (they want the $$$ – but you knew that).
In the meantime, if you happen to be scared enough to drop them a check, they will be more than happy to cash it.
How are games more expensive? How are there liscences more restrictive? Please explain.
Like I already told Steel (ANOTHER game programmer on OSNEWS touting free software, except for his), why is there Madden 1999, Madden 2000, Madden 2001, Madden 2002, etc etc etc. Then I have the problem of having a PSX, a PS2, a dreamcast and nintendo, (no xbox here, you trolls) plus I can’t run any games from overseas on here either.
All I need is the new freaking rosters, but I have to pay $50 dollars for every freaking year for a whole new game?
What about fantasy games, like Everquest? Can’t you build a MMOG for us without anything required but TCP/IP and a local disk? Those subscription costs for games like that are unreal.
This is where we really could use some ‘free’ software, we’re getting raped by these game guys.
All – gotta run, a friend and his wife invited me over for dinner. see you.
Just because you found some backdoor does not mean this is authorized.
Backdoor? Try “Public FTP site”
ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/updates/OpenLinux/3.1.1/Server/current/RPMS/
Troll proven wrong, once.
Also, since the alleged code is secret, how do you know it’s actually in the files you are downloading?
The alleged code is in Linux Kernels 2.4.X. The kernel is supposed to be virtually unusable without the code, which SCO has claimed represents 1 line in 3. Yet there is no performance or size difference between the SCO 2.4.13 kernel downloaded from that site and a similar Mandrake 2.4.13 kernel.
Troll proven wrong, twice.
I think the troll should save face and admit that he’s wrong, that SCO has indeed distributed the code under the GPL.
Oh, and by the way, the Troll has no idea how much it costs to make a console game (an average of 2-4 million US$), so the troll should shut up about this, an area of software development he clearly knows nothing about.
Pos eso ke esto ya se pasa
I would agree with you Top Speed except for one thing. I belive that the current lack of competition in the proprietary OS field leaves it too open to TRUELY Fascist/Communist style takeover by a single Corperate/Government allience like the one I outlined in my first post. As a forinstance you site linux as “communist” because of the GPL. And Bill Gates as “capitalist” because Windows is Proprietary. I would like then to ask this one question. If Bill Gates is such a “capitalist” then why was he always such a loyal attendee of the “State of the World” forums sponsored by SWORN COMMIE Michiel Gorbachev?” Also why does he through his foundation give money to the United Nations to support the forced abortion policies of the “People’s” Republic of China and not only that but EVEN OPEN THE “CLOSED” WINDOWS SOURCE CODE TO THEM?”
Like you I am a good American and as far as I’m concerned THE LOWEST of non murderer criminals are TRAITORS and Bill Gates and Microsoft smell of week old fish where that crime is concerned. Therefore I feel that I most continue to support Open OSs until their is either “rigime change” at Microsoft or someone comes up with another BeOS or other alternative proprietary system that can effectively compete with it.
You will hear the FUD whispers of “Can you really trust Linux?”
This is not a new question, and it’s always been an important question to ask. Specifically to keep things like the SCO lawsuit from happening.
Then again, SCO really has no case.
SCO has a case until the Judge throws it out. Nothing I have seen compels me to believe that SCO has no case at all. There is enough gray area to cover all bases, leaving the mess to a Judge to decide, should it get that far. I still haven’t seen any motions from IBM to throw the case out, but it’s may be too early for that.
SCO does not appear to have a long lasting strategy other than legal threats.
Really? You think there is no strategy in offering a stable x86 platform and services to support that platform? Huh. Everybody else seems to think so. (Red Hat, SuSE, Mandrake, …)
In addition, SCO is not chasing after the kernal or anybody else (at this time). If they win, they most likely will try, but they have yet to publish anything of substance and the trial has yet to begin.
If they win, they have a good solid foundation for making those demands on users.
And as you said, the trial has yet to begin, so they’re not really obligated to publish anything. Just like IBM holding close all of the details it may have in defense. How about that!
Also, even if the “offending code” were removed, IBM is still a legal target since it has “profited” off of SCO’s work and the case would not fold unless SCO accepts it as a settlement package (they want the $$$ – but you knew that).
Of course they want the $$$. And this is…bad? If I took your code and sold it in my product, would you be happy if I signed a document that said I’d never do it again? What if I were Microsoft? Heck, would you even prosecute me for using your code?
In the meantime, if you happen to be scared enough to drop them a check, they will be more than happy to cash it.
In the meantime if the fee schedule that SCO publishes shows that you can get out of this potential mess of demands, litigation, wasted worker time, and possibly tearing your computers et al apart at a Bad Time, for less than taking that all that upon yourself multiplied by the risk of SCO winning, then you’ll pay it. If that cost is too high, then you’ll consider the cost of converting off of Linux to something else and see how much THAT costs. Low cost wins, and gets paid. Cost of doing business. Write it off at the end of the year.
If you think SCO has no chance, and the risk of it winning is near zero, then doing nothing is the low cost option. It’s a dollars, cents, math thing.
Since probably quite a lot of people here make their living on writing code one way or the other I find it pretty odd not more support has been given to SCO.
How many can it be? 95% of all software developers develop proprietary software code when they get money for it.
But who would wanna develop proprietary code now that people can steal it, GPL it and then you loose your investment.
Keep on digging your own grave…..
Yeah, ’cause it’s so easy to steel your proprietary code. I just have keep looking at your binary and oeps! … suddenly i see the code, clear and open. Just a quick copy and paste and GPL’it! Great!
Like I already told Steel (ANOTHER game programmer on OSNEWS touting free software, except for his), why is there Madden 1999, Madden 2000, Madden 2001, Madden 2002, etc etc etc. Then I have the problem of having a PSX, a PS2, a dreamcast and nintendo, (no xbox here, you trolls) plus I can’t run any games from overseas on here either.
Consoles are a different kettle of fish compared to PC games. Consoles are closed platforms, PC’s are not. You cannot restrict the running of games on PC’s like you can consoles.
Free software writers cannot normally afford the cost of developing for a platform like the console. As the dev kits cost too much. Also distribution is different for these systems. How do you download to the PS2?
All I need is the new freaking rosters, but I have to pay $50 dollars for every freaking year for a whole new game?
Thats like saying all I need is the label off the bottle but why do I have to pay for the whiskey inside? They are not selling a product you really want.
What about fantasy games, like Everquest? Can’t you build a MMOG for us without anything required but TCP/IP and a local disk? Those subscription costs for games like that are unreal.
You have obviously no conception of what it takes to create and then keep running a game of such epic proportion. Maybe you should try running your own mud.
This is where we really could use some ‘free’ software, we’re getting raped by these game guys.
Free software will not stop his ever. Games require heaps of content. Also games are short lived. People buy an new OS how often compared to a new game. Also note that most games cost around a million dollars (US) to make.
Alos there are many more programmers working creating commercial games than there are creating free games. That is why there are so many titles in the shops and yet so few free games.
There is money in games and free software will never take that away.
Hey, they’re using SMP as key evidence of infrigement. I don’t have multiple processors therefor why do I need it!
BRING ON THE CHAINSAW!
I just read an article which said that IBM is outsourcing 400,000 jobs to India. Maybe that has just a little bit to do with the unstable situation in America?
No, that has a lot to do with economics. I don’t know exact figures, but I’m guessing they pay their Indian employees about one-eighth to one-fourth that of each comprable American employee. Same reason American/Japanese/British/German (etc) corporations use South American and Pacific employees for manufacturing electronics, garments, etc.
Additionally, I know Wil already said this (quite well–good job, Wil!), but it bears repeating because so many people seem to forget it: should SCO prove their case (which seems more and more unlikely), the code can just be replaced, as in the BSD case of a decade ago. All right, that might be a fair amount of work, depending on how much it is, but it’s doable. And, I’d guess, worth it. However, I’m not so sure about SCO’s claim. Why sign an NDA when the code is already floating around out there? It’s not a secret any more, so it can’t really even be argued that they want to protect which lines are theirs and which lines aren’t. They’re just fishing to be bought out, and maybe to shake down some scared companies in the meantime.
One last comment regarding freedom: a couple of people seem to be suggesting that making money and protecting what you own is not participating in freedom, and that circulating software (and who knows what else) for free is the only way to practice freedom. Wrong. I’m not saying that crooked CEO’s–or crooked street thugs–fit into anybody’s ideal of freedom, but having the ability to protect what is legally and ethically yours is.
In fact, these people seem (to me, at least) to imply that freedom is only observed under the circumstances that they proscribe, and anything else is not free. Wrong again. The fact that these posters can express their opinions without anything but verbal retribution, and the fact that I can do the same, is freedom. And by extension, the fact that SCO can go through due process with its claims, no matter how tenuous, is also freedom. We do, of course, have certain penalties such as countersuits for bringing frivilous lawsuits should it come to that. (Naturally, they might pay the price of exercising their freedom…but that’s the stupid risk they run.)
We do not always have to like something in order for it to be free. That would be Utopia, and there ain’t no such critter.
This was inevitable. It was only a matter of time until MS and its cronies bogged companies using Linux down in baseless litigation. This happens all the time in the Tech industry. Is there a competitor in your neighborhood? Why not just pointlessly sue the $%&* of them and take a nice bite out of their profits. Don’t expect stupid stuff like this to change anytime soon. It keeps US patent lawers in buisness. In fact I think being a patent lawyer is one of the few areas where you can still actually make a nice living here in America.
BTW: When are our beloved politicians and MBAs going to ship that job overseas as well?
If Bill Gates is such a “capitalist” then why was he always such a loyal attendee of the “State of the World” forums sponsored by SWORN COMMIE Michiel Gorbachev?” Also why does he through his foundation give money to the United Nations to support the forced abortion policies of the “People’s” Republic of China and not only that but EVEN OPEN THE “CLOSED” WINDOWS SOURCE CODE TO THEM?”
Good point Snake, Bill Gates does undoubtedly have some liberal leans, but those are his personal choices that he is free to make with the money he has made. I do not agree with many of them, but mostly the Bill Gates foundation helps a lot more needy people here in the US than it does force abortions in China.
As chairman of M$ however, he is a very shrewd businessman and delivers performance for his stock back to his shareholders. His company also markets a fine business software solution, as well as having allowed the US government to deeply imbed themselves in the interworkings of M$ products to verify they are safe to host some of our nation’s secrets on them.
Enjoyed talking with you, hope to again sometime.
Went to your link, a message popped up that said “Welcome to SCO’s FTP site for Unix software…”
Nowhere did it say Linux was authorized for download. They probably have your IP address now and will be issuing a subpeona for your computer soon.
I saw nothing indicating why you open source proponents can’t contribute something to the game commnunity and lower these game prices for us some.
Too complex, changes too much, etc etc
BS, go look at the top ten games, they are ALL sequels.
If you are going to try to argue that rehashed games are more expensive and complex than operating systems, I suggest you try a different forum than OSNEWS.COM.
top speed sez…
Are we supposed to be impressed with your complete lack of respect of the law, your ability to perpetuate pirateware, or both? It’s comments like those that rightfully brand the linux crowd as a buch of hackers and pirates. Even if SCO code was stolen, you will still refuse to accept this and pay for its fair use.
Hmmmm…
who is respecting the law??? the company who does this wonderful little dance changing the accusations as each claim is exposed as baseless? this legal action is in bad faith and therefore fraudulent.
pirateware??? i missed the announcement that the courts kissed sco’s ass and proclaimed linux illegal.
buch of hackers??? spelling error due to using the wrong hand to type because the other was busy yanking your own chain?
pirates??? you have publicly slandered linux users – how is that for respect of the law
fair use??? i don’t have 32 cpus in my machine as would be the case with the majority of users – i don’t receive any benefit from the alleged code – what is fair about that?
conclusion: i think Top Speed’s parents should apply parental lockout on his PC, since 10 years are so bloody annoying in discussion forums… witness the “why don’t you just MOVE there” infantile comments.
This was inevitable.
Absolutely 100% correct, many of us expected this lawsuit way before now, SCO just waited until the fish completely swallowed the worm before setting the hook.
The RIAA success in litigating copyright infringement made this more likely as well. SCO’s tactic of also attacking the end users directly with lawsuits is right out of RIAA handbook as well.
This will probably have a similar end as well. Did you catch McNealy’s comments today comparing Linux with Napster? The Linux crybabies threw a fit but he was dead on with that take.
Will: “Really? You think there is no strategy in offering a stable x86 platform and services to support that platform? Huh. Everybody else seems to think so. (Red Hat, SuSE, Mandrake, …)”
The strategic choice is not between x86 and other processors. Even Intel is moving beyond IA32.
The strategic move is moving from closed systems to open systems. That’s the key feature of Linux and the BSDs. Control is shifting from vendors to users. Today, x86 offers commodity pricing. It may be some other architecture tomorrow. Closed systems will be stuck on yesterday’s hardware, while open system users will buy whatever offers the best value and recompile.
Suppose that SCO succeeds in stopping Linux. OK, that’s a stretch, but pretend that it could happen. Will Unixware sales take off? NO! At best, they might catch up to Solaris x86 sales. Not much to celebrate, is it?
Neither SCO, Microsoft, Sun nor anyone else can stop the shift of power from the vendors to the purchasers. Buyers don’t like vendor lock-in. The days of explosive growth of computer sales are over. The market is saturated. The seller’s market is long gone, and it’s now a buyer’s market.
Far more programmers work for computer buyers than computer sellers. Free and open source development makes more sense for buyers. Any hardware vendor who gets in the way of their customer’s best software development approach is going to get run over as those former customers stampede to more rational vendors. Software companies that manage to shift from selling licenses to selling services will survive. Software companies that act like no one else can write code will dry up and blow away. The higher you price your software, the more incentive there is for customers to band together and write a free replacement.
SCO cannot come out of this debacle with more customers. They’ve already shown that signing a contract with SCO poses substantial legal risk. If SCO wins, their remaining customers will migrate to more open solutions quickly. If they lose, that migration will take longer.
The better SCO does in court, the more it will hurt them. Their best strategy, the one that they are using now, is to stay out of court as long as possible and make loud public threats.
Well said, but I’ve already explained all of that to him…it’s not use, he’s into a delusional, obsessive state. For the record, I am not a game programmer but a game designer.
I missed the announcement that the courts kissed sco’s ass and proclaimed linux illegal.
No but you COMPLETELY missed where the guy made those comments based on the assumption SCO would win.
My take from your comments are you won’t care if Linux is illegal either. International crime will be you guys next ticket I guess.
BS, go look at the top ten games, they are ALL sequels.
A sequel with a different engine is not saving you much money. In any case, even for sequel, there’s new art, animation, modeling, dialogue, sfx, etc.
Trolls can’t imagine how much work goes into a video game – but then again, when all you play is Madden one can understand why game seems to be all the same.
I am not a game programmer but a game designer
We are in such a desperate state we need all kinds of people with any game creation skills to start donating their work to our community!
$50 dollars for a game that only runs on one type of pc or console is thievery, especially if it’s the same exact title.
For $50 we should get every version for every platform. It’s just a silly game, don’t forget.
But it will never happen so long as you game designers corner off the market and charge us ridiculous rates for your product instead of GPL’ing your software. At least GPL your tools for us, so we can go create some open source games for ourself.
But no, you hog those tools and rape us as customers instead, while telling us OUR software should be free. Freaking hypocrites, GO BACK TO YOUR GAME SITES, THIS OSNEWS, and the O-S is for Operating Systems!
Nowhere did it say Linux was authorized for download. They probably have your IP address now and will be issuing a subpeona for your computer soon.
Nowhere did it say Linux was unauthorized for download. If you leave stuff on your public FTP site and do not require a login and password, you are de facto permitting others to download it. Otherwise, this might be considered fraud or extorsion if SCO was to come out and sue me.
But then it’s obvious that the troll knows nothing of law – after all, he’s convinced that SCO actually has a case. But the proof is that SCO’s Linux is still being distributed – if it wasn’t, it wouldn’t be downloadable from a public ftp site that grants anonymous access.
As I have said, SCO has distributed Linux under the GPL, therefore the offending code is now open (wherever it is – if it even exists, of which there is still no proof).
But who would wanna develop proprietary code now that people can steal it, GPL it and then you loose your investment.
Who has stolen code? SCO? As far as I know, there is no proof of any stolen code, just allegations.
Are we now seeing an unholy alliance by Windows and BSD trolls?
this might be considered fraud or extorsion if SCO was to come out and sue me.
Take your own chances with SCO, as for me, I spoofed an address and took a quick look, but NO WAY am I downloading ANYTHING from those freaks. If you don’t yet see what SCO is capable of doing to others they don’t like, you aren’t watching this very close. Except in your case you are obviously watching it very close, but still can’t make heads or tails of it.
GO BACK TO YOUR GAMEWORLD, TROLL!!! OR GPL SOME GAMES FOR OUR KIDS!!!
Are we now seeing an unholy alliance by Windows and BSD trolls?
No, just capitalists verses communists.
GO BACK TO DESIGNING GAMES YOU TROLL! OR GPL SOME GAMES FOR OUR KIDS!
It’s just a silly game, don’t forget.
Silly trolls. They do not understand what it takes to make a game: a 6 people team for six months, then a 30-people team for a year. At $40,000 average, that’s 1.3 million $ right there just in salaries – forget the overhead, equipment, and so on. I’m not including the engine team, here, for people who use in-house game engines (buying an engine isn’t cheap either, unless you get an old or open-source one). And that’s for a small console game. Some can require twice as many people, and for longer.
I don’t feel I’m overpaid for my work. It’s hard work (interactive entertainment is the most complex of art forms), but it’s fun work. I like what I do and the market is there to support, whatever Trolls may think. Trolls act like capitalists but then whine like babies when the market goes against their wishes.
Trolls, meanwhile, are often unemployed because their poor social skills often makes them poor co-workers, or are stuck in dead-end jobs.
Take your own chances with SCO, as for me, I spoofed an address and took a quick look, but NO WAY am I downloading ANYTHING from those freaks. If you don’t yet see what SCO is capable of doing to others they don’t like, you aren’t watching this very close. Except in your case you are obviously watching it very close, but still can’t make heads or tails of it.
Actually I know a thing or two about law (while the troll obviously has no clue). I would welcome a SCO subpoena, as I could then get in touch with IBM and act as a witness (perhaps I’d get some inside scoop!). I did nothing illegal and therefore have nothing to worry about.
In fact, I might send SCO an e-mail to inform them of what I did. Yes, that’s a good idea.