|
|
| Novell's Chris Stone Will Not Speak at Harvard Feb. 23 - Moglen Will |
 |
|
Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 11:10 PM EST
|
I received the following from Harvard's Journal of Law & Technology's Editor:
"Due to concerns regarding litigation filed by SCO after our invitation for Mr. Stone to speak was issued, Novell's General Counsel has informed us that Novell Vice Chairman Chris Stone will be unable to come speak to JOLT on Feb 23rd.
"Instead, the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology is pleased to welcome our third speaker of the year: Eben Moglen, Professor of Law and Legal History at Columbia Law School in New York. Professor Moglen is General Counsel of the Free Software Foundation, and a leading spokesperson for open source and free software."
It starts at 6:30 PM, at Harvard Law School, Room TBD. As of now, they are still planning to have it available live over the web. Meanwhile, here is their page on Professor Moglen What it means is very likely they noticed that a page of a transcript of McBride's speech there ended up being handed to the judge last Friday as Exhibit 5, and very effectively too, by IBM. It's not unreasonable to keep your mouth shut when you are in the middle of a lawsuit, which Novell is now. You might also be interested in another event at Harvard on March 19-20, a JOLT Symposium 2004 on "Evolving Media: Emerging Distribution Technologies, and the Legal Response", described like this:
"The Symposium will explore how technological innovation and the digitization of print and broadcast media are impacting media production, the ownership and control of media distribution channels, and consumer access and choice."
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: OK on Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 11:18 PM EST |
| What does it mean? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Nick Bridge on Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 11:35 PM EST |
I would love to be there and hear Moglen speak.
He is a true hero of free software, along with RMS.
Where would we be without them? No one to balance against Sir Bill? What a
ghastly thought!
I doubt I will be able to get the broadcast :([ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rand on Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 11:41 PM EST |
| Ok, sleepless-heads, you just thought you were going to get a good
night's sleep tonight. Novell's Motion to Dismiss and 6 more new
documents are up at TuxRocks
http://sco.tuxrocks.com/?Case=Novell
.
Frank rocks best, if you ask me.
---
The Wright brothers were
not the first to fly an aircraft...they were the first to LAND an aircraft.
(IANAL and whatever) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: George_Wa_State on Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 11:50 PM EST |
"...a page of a transcript of McBride's speech there ended up being handed
to the judge last Friday as Exhibit 5. ..."
Do you suppose that someone at SCO went ... OOPS!
And that this the reason for no press conferrance
after leaving the Court House? Why no one from SCO
was out spewing FUD about the proceeding?
Makes one go ...
Hmm.
George
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 12:03 AM EST |
I find this statement ridiculous, and I find the using of it by the media to be
even more offensive:
>>"With the open source community, there are a large percentage of
tinkers and 'ankle biters' who are trying their hand at hacking. Some are even
communicating with each other. So it only takes one or two of these groups
sharing information to be able to pull something off. When you have this type of
passion, it's hard to fight because these people are like virtual suicide car
bombers."<<
http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/3312451[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 12:16 AM EST |
Available here as PDFs
http://sco.tuxrocks.com/?Case=Novell
Comments?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Xenographic on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 12:21 AM EST |
Perhaps that is why the judge took them into chambers? In any event, it is
abundantly clear: SCO has been gagged.
This is quite a pity, too. They were doing a remarkably good job of
undercutting themselves at the time...
They will just have to spread their FUD by proxy now. DiDio, Lyons... they have
already made their contacts. What a pity we cannot see the press releases they
seem to get from SCO.
IBM was wise from the start: I do not think they have ever discussed the
litigation with the media at any length.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- So it's true... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 01:56 AM EST
- So it's true... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 02:01 AM EST
- So it's true... - Authored by: Jude on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 05:26 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: Debrihmi on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 12:24 AM EST |
It appears that a portion of Windows code has been stolen..
What I find funny is this quote by an ex-MS security person:
"Howard Schmidt, former head of security at Microsoft, said he was less
concerned about the security implications of the leak than its potential threat
to Microsoft's intellectual property."
This tends to be the general attitude that MS seems to take..
What scares me is this part:
"..Frankly, I'd be more worried that someone was going to use this as a
base for developing software or another operating system based on Microsoft's
proprietary code."
We all know that now-a-days you really don't need a credible claim as SCO has
clearly shown - and yes I do know that UNIX type coding is different from
Windows.
:|
---
~
People want to be free..[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 01:26 AM EST |
Please add this one
SCO on Novell's waiver:
SCO disputed Novell's right to act on its behalf. "It is SCO's strongly
held legal position that Novell has no rights to step in and change or alter the
source code license agreements that SCO owns and holds with its Unix
licensees," the company said in a statement. "SCO has no intention of
waiving any of its rights against Sequent or IBM. We will deal with Novell on
all of these issues in court." [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: blacklight on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 01:46 AM EST |
Novell's cancellation is understandable under the circumstance. I hope that JOLT
will give both IBM and Novell a standing invitation to speak even though I don't
expect either of them to accept until the matter is resolved: Harvard's students
and faculty will benefit from directly hearing the controversy from the point of
view of every major participant. In the meantime, I will volunteer PJ and SGI as
stop gaps. Actually, a re-invite to the SCO Group might not be a bad idea
although the re-invite is akin to asking a chicken about how it feels both
before and after rotisserie.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: mikeca on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 01:48 AM EST |
I just saw a link to this on Yahoo board:
http://ir.sco.com/EdgarDetail.cfm?CompanyID=CALD&CIK=1102542&FID=1047469
-04-4069&SID=04-00#A2124450ZS-3A_HTM_DG2785_SELLING_STOCKHOLDERS
Does this mean SCO is doing a public offering of 3 million shares to buy out
Baystar and Royal Bank?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 02:55 AM EST |
Wasn't the judge to come out with a decision on what to do next with regards
to IBM vs SCO. Is this still underway? It's friday afternoon now and I haven't
heard anything from any sources on what's happening, who has to show who
what, and which lawyers are eating which other ones for breakfast.
Any news anywhere? even that it may be delayed?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: newbee on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 03:08 AM EST |
It's more like a guy coming to a cattle market with a heard of cattle with mad
cow disease.
JAN[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- uhm - Authored by: newbee on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 03:11 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: Greebo on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 07:03 AM EST |
| This might have been posted elsewhere, but i just found it on Slashdot :
Open Source Is Fertile
Ground for Foul Play
The guy is basically saying that because anyone can
get at the source code, it is possible that someone will code in back doors etc
thereby making it easier to hack the system later on.
He obviously doesn't
get the idea that this is exactly what Commercial software has been doing for a
long time! ---
-----------------------------------------
Recent Linux Convert and Scared Cat Owner [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Greebo on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 07:10 AM EST |
| and the stock is....
Slightly
down...
But i'm very interested to see what happens when the judge makes
her announcement
(today?)
Cheers,
Greebo ---
---------------------------------------
--
Recent Linux Convert and Scared Cat Owner [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 13 2004 @ 01:39 PM EST |
SCO will spin it again with something like : Novell's refusal to appear at JOLT
indicates that they do not have a case and we will prevail in our "slander
of title" lawsuit. SCO will once again show in court that we have title.
<damn> I'm beginning to sound like SCO the more I read about them. Yikes!
</damn>[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jbn on Sunday, February 15 2004 @ 09:03 PM EST |
Professor Moglen is General Counsel of the Free Software
Foundation, and a leading spokesperson for open source and free
software.
I find this to be highly
unlikely--Prof. Moglen has not spoken for "open source" software to my
knowledge. Is there some evidence of this somewhere? As far as I know, he has
always spoken in favor of and plainly represented free software and the Free
Software Foundation (which does not represent the open source movement either).
Please don't
confuse the two movements or come away thinking they are the same thing
because they are not and they never have been. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
