decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:22 PM EST

Despite having missed the declared February 18 deadline, SCO says it may sue an end user in the near future, Blake Stowell saying to "stay tuned", according to Peter Galli's 2-page report in eWeek:

"'We are not stating yet when that may take place or with whom it may take place, but you may see something from us in the near future on this,' he said. . . .

"Speculation about the possible Linux user to be sued took another turn this week following a filing by open source and Linux vendor Red Hat Inc. to supplement the record in its case against SCO. That filing was first reported on the Groklaw Web site.

"In August, Red Hat filed suit in a federal court in Delaware seeking pre-emptive relief against SCO and its claims that the Linux code base has illegally copyrighted Unix code to which SCO now owns the rights. SCO has sought to have that cased dismissed, saying its legal actions are against IBM and not Red Hat or its customers.

"But the latest Red Hat motion disputes that and includes copies of letters that SCO had sent to financial services firm Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. in New York, and Lehman's responses. Lehman is a Red Hat Enterprise Linux customer."

A "source close to Red Hat" is quoted as saying that the mention of Lehman does not imply that they necessarily would be singled out as the eventual target. Stowell's response was this:

"SCO's Stowell also expressed surprise at the mention of Lehman Brothers as a potential target for its legal action. 'This is the very first time I have heard its name brought up by anyone or run by me or anyone at SCO.'"

If you read the second letter sent to Lehman from SCO, it clearly says that if they don't buy a license, their name will be given to their outside counsel for possible legal action. But Stowell says he has never heard of the name Lehman being brought up by him or anyone at SCO as a possible target? Here are the exact words, so you can judge for yourself, from the letter sent on January 16:

"If you fail to respond to our efforts to pursue a licensing arrangement, WE WILL TURN YOUR NAME OVER TO OUR OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR CONSIDERATION OF LEGAL ACTION."

No doubt Lehman Brothers will be glad to know if they were only joshing. Here is what Darl McBride said about the date on February 2 during his appearance at Harvard:

"And so the entire risk on this is on your shoulders. So we have basically said within the next few weeks, by February 18th we are going to be in the courtroom with an end user to go through the copyright-related problems that we are having from an infringement standpoint."

UPDATE: ComputerWire has picked up the story as well.


  


SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future | 298 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: kberrien on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:48 PM EST
Can we not all say we're not suprised.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:49 PM EST
Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire => Stowell

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says THEy May Sue END Users in the NEAR Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:49 PM EST
read between the words

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Ted Powell on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:50 PM EST
What, again?

---
Truth is not determined by majority vote.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Lets make a list!
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:50 PM EST
This has to be the 5th or 6th time SCO has made claims like this to the press,
over the past year.

Suggested project: Let's make a list of all the times they've said this!

It might help make it ultra-obvious to journalists that what SCO says and what
SCO does are...usually not the same thing...

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: nattt on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:52 PM EST
By threatening to sue, then holding off, it just makes it look more like stock
manipulation than SCO actually wanting to go to court to prove their claims. I
think they know their claims will not stand up in court, hence this
"threaten"
tactic. They begin to sound more like the RIAA every day...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Obligatory Monty Python reference
Authored by: OmniGeek on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:53 PM EST
I'm quaking in my boots lest Darl says "Nee!" again...

---
My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on
espresso.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:54 PM EST
"SCO's Stowell also expressed surprise at the mention of Lehman Brothers as a potential target for its legal action. 'This is the very first time I have heard its name brought up by anyone or run by me or anyone at SCO.'"

This is so... pathetic.

It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion. I don't want to watch, but I can't stop myself.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: kberrien on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:55 PM EST
From the article.

"Unix code to which SCO now owns the rights."

Man, details, details, details. What do they say, its all in the details?

I'm at work now, and can't get to my personal accnt, someone click the feedback
button and correct they guys.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO : End-User Lawsuit & Other Wolves
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 01:57 PM EST
Little Darl Hood: A Play

Darl: Wolf!

Townspeople: What!?!?

Darl: Wolf!

Townspeople: Where?

Darl: Wolf!

Townspeople: WTF? I don't see it, do you?

Darl: Wolf!

Townspeople: Oh Jesus, not again.

Darl Wolf!

Townspeople: Did you hear that?

Townspeople: Hear what?

Darl: Wolf!

Townspeople: Oh, that. That's just the town idiot. He's been saying that for
months. Almost a year, in fact. We all sorta tune him out now.

Darl: Wolf!

Darl: Wolf!

Darl: Wolf!

(Enter Stage Right, Wolf. Attacks Darl, mangles corpse, feed on entrails. Gets
sick in corner. Exeunt, Stage Left.)

(Next morning)

Townspeople: Hear that?

Townspeople: What?

Townspeople: Something's missing.

(Pause)

Townspeople: Hear that?

Townspeople: What?

Townspeople: Exactly.

(Sighs of relief all around.)

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: sbungay on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:02 PM EST
Amazing isn't it?
If Linux was the Brooklyn Bridge and SCO was tryiong to charge for it's use they
would be in jail by now for fraud.

---
The best victory is when the opponent surrenders of its own accord before there
are any actual hostilities...It is best to win without fighting.
Sun-tzu, The A

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Not quite - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 05:27 PM EST
OT : What are the implications of bankruptcy ?
Authored by: Thomas An. on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:03 PM EST
This is a general quriocity of mine (not necessarily in context of the current
thread).

What does it *realy* mean to file for bankruptcy ?
Is it just about selling the office furniture and going home ?

Is it just having the credit organizations put the business name on the watch
list ?

Is that all ?

Is there anything actually devastating about bankruptcy ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:04 PM EST
When is some court, *any* court, going to put an end to this circus? Enough
Already! How much damage to the economy must one pipsqueak company do before
some judge gets the lead out, takes charge of the situation, and starts
directing this to some kind of resolution? I simply cannot believe that Boies
and his firm is so incredibly clever that they can manipulate all these
situations like this.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO will do nothing....
Authored by: NicholasDonovan on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:06 PM EST
Try it. Send me a bill guys. I've been asking for months now. Of course I'll
hand it over to the AG's office here and you will most likely find yourselves
guests of the Texas Department of Corrections.


Don't you idiots at SCO realize that McBride has taken you on a one way ego trip
to the poorhouse?


Thank God the SEC is starting... starting to wake up to this BS. Also too bad
McBride & I couldn't settle this in a dojo somewhere. By the way Darl,
Kyojitsu tenkan no myohe, Nihongo no omae. Assuming you understand Kanto dialect
you'll understand.


SCO 10 months ago... Lawsuits are Coming.
SCO 06 months ago... Lawsuits are Coming... Really....
SCO 01 month ago... Really We're Suing....
SCO Today... Lawsuits are Coming... Really....


Yawn,

Nick


PS: Darl, learn about being a real businesman son, then come talk to me.

---
Not an Attorney.
Views expressed are my personal opinions and not necessarily those of my
employer or its affiliates.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Open source group fires in ACCC complaint over SCO
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:07 PM EST
"An open source industry group has filed a new complaint to the Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission against controversial software company the
SCO Group, saying the vendor is attempting to alter previously granted
licenses."

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/0,2000061733,39116222,00.htm

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:14 PM EST
Ahhh they are going to sue someone....

Oh no....

The day in court (in the far distant future in an alternate universe.....):

Plaintif: We are sueing X because they are infringing on our IP.....

Defendant: Erm what ip how about we put this off till the Novell case settles
it's your IP then the IBM case settles that it's actully in the Linux Kernel oh
btw until then i'm using the kernel you provided on your site under the GPL.

Judge: Case postponed till 22XX when the IBM case will finally be over or SCO is
rotting in hell what ever comes first ;)

Okay maybe if i was the judge ;)

sigh i love reading about this stuff but man cant SCO just step upto the plate
for once and either get it over w/ or fold already =).

[ Reply to This | # ]

"Stay tuned..."
Authored by: rand on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:14 PM EST
Don't they usually say that to get us to stay around to watch the closing credits?
"We are not stating yet when that may take place or with whom it may take place, but you may see something from us in the near future on this,"
Ya gotta admire the masters.
All together now: Wea-SEL, wea-SEL, wea-SEL, wea-SEL...

---
carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" (IANAL and so forth and so on)

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: ExcludedMiddle on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:15 PM EST
I believe the term for threatening to sue without following through is called
"Barristry". It's actually illegal. Their letter seems to be carefully
worded, but if they're not careful, SCO can be sued for...not suing. Ironic,
isn't it?

I really want them to sue a customer. Besides wasting yet more of their
resources on lawsuits, they will have to take the copyright portion of their
unproven claims into court finally. Remember, there are no copyright claims in
any case currently related to the Linux code. The only one that SCO brought was
against IBM for using AIX even through it was "revoked".

[ Reply to This | # ]

Racketeering
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:15 PM EST
This is how they're going to try to keep the masses using commercial software:

If there is no compelling technical reason to use it, they will add a new
reason: protection. If you use OSS, "all the burden is on your
shoulders." In other words, they want to make it de-facto illegal not to
run closed software by targeting those who don't with litigation.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw Recognized For the Scoop
Authored by: Weeble on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:15 PM EST
"Speculation about the possible Linux user to be sued took another turn
this week following a filing by open source and Linux vendor Red Hat Inc. to
supplement the record in its case against SCO. That filing was first reported on
the Groklaw Web site."

In case the rest of you missed it, congrats to PJ and to the Groklaw community
for being recognized as the source that scooped the story on RH's supplemental
filing!

---
"Every time I think I've heard it all from SCO, they come
up with a new howler." Steven Vaughan-Nichols, eWeek

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:17 PM EST
"SCO's Stowell also expressed surprise at the mention of Lehman Brothers as a potential target for its legal action. 'This is the very first time I have heard its name brought up by anyone or run by me or anyone at SCO.'"

Blake, do you think we're all stupid? This is a blatant lie. There is no other way to describe it. I'm utterly astonished to see such brazen deceitfulness from an officer of a public company. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Your statement directly contradicts what your division of SCO wrote in letters to Lehman Brothers. Are you trying to say that your company decided to threaten, in writing, to sue Lehman Brothers for crying out loud, and "nobody ran it by you"?

Not credible. Not even remotely credible.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: sef on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:17 PM EST

Isn't it a crime to threaten legal action but not do so? I realize it's hard to prove a lot of the time, but if there's a pattern of behaviour (such as, oh, sending out a thousand letters and then publicly saying you'd not intended to follow through on some of them) it's got to be easier, doesn't it?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Lehman *did* respond.
Authored by: coffee17 on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:19 PM EST

The letter to Lehman said:

If you fail to respond to our efforts to pursue a licensing arrangement, WE WILL ...
However, remember that Lehman did respond. Granted, they didn't respond favorably; instead telling TSG to deal with Redhat, and failing that Lehman's lawyers, but Lehman did respond.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:25 PM EST
So we caught Darl lying.

What else is new?

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: Judges Decision?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:25 PM EST
It has been about two weeks since the last hearing in Utah. Any word from the
Judge? Did I miss it?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:26 PM EST
This combined with all of the other usless drivel that SCO and croonies have
prodeuced makes me want to call the switchboard at SCO and ask if there is any
executive there that is not wearing a canvas evening jacket.

I'm sure anybody that has followed any part of this fiasco questions the sainity
of the people at SCO behind this mess.

The justice system needs to stop sitting on their hands and do something to stop
SCO's damage to the linux based ecomony.

[ Reply to This | # ]

We're in full Yosemite Sam mode
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:27 PM EST
This is just too precious. So SCO pulled the pins on several grenades and lobbed
them over the fence. Never mind that they've all been thrown back into their
yard; with Lehman, the pin is away and the grenade is still clenched between
SCO's teeth.

[ Reply to This | # ]

They won't sue anyone
Authored by: ericl on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:31 PM EST
Remember, this is not about "rights" or "IP" or anything
that high minded--it's about making money. Simple cost benefit shows that hiring
a lawyer at $500+/hr to obtain a $700 license makes no sense, especially knowing
the way lawyers bill. The three licenses they claim to have sold so far, I'm
sure, cost them a lot more than the amount of time and money they put into it.
When hell freezes over, and it looks like they have even a remote chance of
winning anything in this case, then they may reconsider, if they think they can
pull off this extortion scam/spam.

[ Reply to This | # ]

You knew this would happen....
Authored by: pooky on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:32 PM EST
Well now, what a surprise that was. SCO is essentially backing off their front
against end-users of Linux, probably because they know that losing what little
credebility they have is better than walking in to court to be torpedoed on Day
1 because they don't have clear rights to bring a copyright infringement case
over the "ABI Code"?

And elsewhere, what happened to the pool of 6000 UNIX licensees they were
threatening? You would expect that many of them also dabble in or use Linux and
would be unable to comply with the audit request SCO sent out. Perhaps they are
re-thinking their strategy there as well?

Maybe they're evaluating their oh-so-similar sister the RIAA and the suit
brought by one of their targets alledging RICO violations for their tactics. You
know, making lots of threats, suing people with their gigantic nuclear legal
guns to scare the hell out of everyone and frighten the target of the suit into
settling for thousands of dollars rather than fight a seemingly endless army of
lawyers and money in court? Hmmm.....

-pooky

---
Veni, vidi, velcro.
"I came, I saw, I stuck around."

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:36 PM EST
If Martha Stewart can be prosecuted just for saying there is no truth to
allegations made against her on the basis she was lying to prop up her
corporation's stock value, I can't figure out how SCO can contnue to make these
statements without any adverse reactions from the SEC or AG?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SEC Filings
Authored by: star-dot-h on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:36 PM EST
Slightly OT but can anyone tell me whether the constant changes to SCOs SEC
filings are legit? Some of the risks that are appearing there in the most recent
filings have been known about for months - even when share prices rose to the
giddy highs of $20.

So, if those risks were known then, why were investors not informed about them -
if firms can alter filings in such a radical way when information has been
appearent for some time what is the point of that process?

[ Reply to This | # ]

They have to back off Lehman
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:38 PM EST
They have to back off now, as if they go after Lehman then they've shot
themselves in one of their other feet in regards to the Red Hat lawsuit.

What's fascinating is that *if* Lehman was a target, Red Hat may have just
coopted it.

Red Hat's new indemnification program should work like this:

If you use Red Hat Linux and get a letter from The Darl, fax it to Red Hat and
they'll file an amended complaint and mention it. SCO will then be forced to
back off so as not to set themselves up for a Red Hat victory and voila!
Indemnification!

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: cricketjeff on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:38 PM EST
Isn't it about time one of the judges returned and slapped some sort of gagging
order on thse clowns?
The current situation appears to make a mockery of both the IT and Legal
professions. It makes something far worse of managers.
Oh well I'm sure this message is just preaching to the choir, I just hope that
at the end of all this the SCO executives end up personally liable and out of
any position of trust or influence for ever.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Why? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 09:24 PM EST
Hey SCO! S***, or get off the pot!
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:45 PM EST
Sorry, but this is really starting to stink... Published letters to a
"customer" (Lehman), but they have not heard of same letters? SCO
must think the whole world is populated with illiterate fools who are just
begging to give them money for no reason.

This has gone way beyond the Theater of the Absurd.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says May Sue in Near Future
Authored by: lpletch on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:46 PM EST
How many times?
Aint gonna happen.
SCO wanted someone (IBM) to buy them out of their misery. That didn't happen so
now they have fallen into a pit of quicksand. Every move they make is
counterproductive and they keep sinking deeper and deeper. They are squirming
now. The more they squirm the worse off they are. SCO is in the process of a
slow miserable death.
Hey Darl, take a deep breath and lie still, you might stay afloat and SCO May
Sue in Near Future.
Aint gonna happen.


---
lpletch@adelphia.net

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 02:46 PM EST
Here in Germany , when somebody declares that someone has
violated his copyrights and cannot proof it,it is considered as an attempt of
betrayal and the person who does this it is a criminal.

[ Reply to This | # ]

But Lehman RESPONDED!!! Ergo, no suit
Authored by: Tsu Dho Nimh on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:02 PM EST
"If you fail to respond to our efforts to pursue a licensing arrangement,
WE WILL TURN YOUR NAME OVER TO OUR OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR CONSIDERATION OF LEGAL
ACTION."

Lehman Brothers responded ... which lets SCO off the hook. Lehman's response
was "talk to Red Hat", but technically that was a response.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: They keep dumping stock instead
Authored by: Ilssear on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:08 PM EST
For what I know, they have so much confidence on their long term strategy that they keep dumping stock. BTW, nice timing! exactly 2 days before the hearing... how's that for "planned sale"?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:10 PM EST

(/start "really nerdy voice")

Blake Stickswell: "Someone's gonna be in big trouble! Y-ya-you just watch!"

(/end "really nerdy voice")

[ Reply to This | # ]

What did SCO buy--Unix or the Brooklyn Bridge?
Authored by: tcranbrook on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:23 PM EST
This article in ZDNet is one of the most balanced discussions I have seen in the tech press on the SCO mess. The writer, David Berlin, summarizes the set of cases this way.

Right now, the easiest way to get your head around this very complicated case is to frame it with two primary vectors. Both will probably come down to interpretation. It's about whether SCO owns it, to what it extent it owns it and, if it has some or all of the ownership, just what exactly it is entitled to.

In the first vector, SCO must get a judge to agree with four core beliefs: (1) what is Unix, (2) how much of that intellectual property is owned or controlled by SCO, (3) whether by virtue of the answers to 1 and 2, certain Unix licensees must answer to SCO in terms of fulfilling their contractual obligations, and (4) what those obligations are and, by being party to the development of Linux, were certain licensees in breach of those obligations. SCO's claims on all four fronts are being contested.

In the second vector, SCO must again get a judge to agree on what Unix is and how much of it is owned or controlled by SCO. But, whereas the first vector involves Unix licensees and their obligations, this vector involves any party -- licensee or not -- that may have misappropriated what is owned or controlled by SCO and contributed it to Linux.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Stowell May not Be Lying
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:32 PM EST
Now I'm no SCO fan, and while the company does seem to have a habit of being...
shall we say "less than rigorous" with the truth, Stowell may be
honest about this one. SCO's sent out a lot of letters to a lot of people
threatening to sue them, and I find it unlikely that Stowell would have
reviewed, much less rememberd the name of every single one of them. Remember, he
only says that HE hasn't heard about it before.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: bbaston on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:37 PM EST
Hmmmmm. According to my knowledge and belief, no one in the history of law has
been better prepared to be sued than users and developers in the Linux
Community. Never.

Groklawyers are everywhere, with millions of eyes, millions of ears and hands,
listening and turning over every stone. Go ahead TSG. Make my day!

---
Ben
-------------
IMBW, IANAL2, IMHO, IAVO, {;)}
imaybewrong, iamnotalawyertoo, inmyhumbleopinion, iamveryold, hairysmileyface,

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: arch_dude on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:40 PM EST
You are completely miss-interpreting Mr. Stowell.

Darl and Blake ("we") will take a coat and matching pants
("suit") and hold it "against" someone who is smoking the
very last part of a cigarette ("end user".) The will then abrade the
clothes with a metal rasp ("file.")

Thus, "We will file suit against an end user."

What's not to understand?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Several fronts
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 03:45 PM EST
Didn't Hitler start to fight on several fronts at the same time, too?

The question now, SCO must be very sure to get a sizeable amount of cash rather
soon. Otherwise they couldn't or wouldn't dare to start even more costly legal
attacks.

Who will "buy a license" or "invest" now?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 04:06 PM EST
Seems to me that, until this is all settled, it's not too wise to let Linux vendors use your name on their web site: "Customers including Credit Suisse First Boston and Lehman Brothers have seen impressive gains." - How else is SCO going to know who uses Linux unless you'all run around and brag about it?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Where's the unbiased reporting???
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 04:19 PM EST
I quote from the article:
copyrighted Unix code to which SCO now owns the rights.
Shouldn't that be Sco that allegedly owns the rights? After all, Novell is
under the impression that they, not SCO own the copyrights to Unix.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I may never invest in the stock market again.
Authored by: Turing_Machine on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 04:24 PM EST
I've been watching the proceedings here and, I must admit, the sheer volume of
information here can be information overload, if you haven't had time to digest
the documents and statements as they have occurred. That being said, I can
honestly say that I have never really thought about how dis-associated the stock
market is from reality before today. I have always assumed that there was a
reason for valuation of a company, its future, etc., that was privy to a very
select few, and people like myself pay commissions and fund fees to have someone
with that knowledge direct our financial futures.

This could not be further from the truth. There is a mysterious nature to the
stock markets, but it has much less to do with valuable knowledge about the
product than I ever imagined.

Why again do people pay for this?

Darl is truly a master of that mysterious effect that drives stock price. Here
is the proverbial snake oil company, shown to be a fraud and full of nothing but
bluster, yet the stock prices remain at a level that would make Ponzi himself
blush.

</rant>

---
No, I'm not interested in developing a powerful brain. All I'm after is just a
mediocre brain, something like the President of the AT&T --Alan Turing

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 04:31 PM EST
As long as SCO only threatens to sue, their stock will go up - don't know why.
They cannot, however, actually sue because they would then be guilty of fraud.
Because of the other suits, they KNOW their claims are uncertain. To do anything
to actually try to enforce those claims at this time is fraud.

Hawkeye

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 04:50 PM EST
If I was an old SCO licencee, running some strategic piece of software under
that licence, chances are that i am also using Linux elsewere in my
organisation. In this case, I would feel intimidated by present SCO action. I
would also be afraid of loosing support from a vendor who is likely to dissapear
from the market, support being the only reason for me to stick by them anyway,
and start a desperate search for an alternative.

Can anyone confirm wether faithful SCO customers are seeking alternatives
actively, and with accelerating frequency? I would love to see the market react
to a report stating that SCO is loosing bussiness as a reaction to the
lawsuits.

Ulf

[ Reply to This | # ]

A little comment
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 04:58 PM EST
In our country usually there are no work for people who knows about something,
the workplaces usually are occupied by stupid or who know nothing people that
usually speaks so loud or got friends, here the work or knowledge means
nothing, the justice is away, the blah blah blah rules all. So I can´t believe
that the same happen in USA or another countries. They can speak loud and sue
everybody and nobody make them shut up and the most unbelieved is the fact that
every time that Darl or Didio speaks the Nasdaq SOCG grows. In a real world I
need to put my 100 percent effort to stay at top (or at least working) and
usually it's not enough, but for now some company that speaks loud and sue
everything without show some work (I think that SCOG trades with software not
laws) make money.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • A little comment - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 05:52 PM EST
I've said it before....
Authored by: AHGrayLensman on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 05:22 PM EST
...and I'll probably say it again:
"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the kingdom of idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts!" --Londo Mollari, "Ceremonies of Light and Dark", Babylon 5

--Troy

---
"You are finite, Zathras is finite, this... is wrong tool. No, not good, never use this!" --Zathras, "War Without End (pt. 2)", Babylon 5

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 07:02 PM EST
sco can kiss my ass

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 07:03 PM EST
Man... bring it on SCO bring it on :-P

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: gerrynjr on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 07:05 PM EST
Bring it on SCO!

---


"I wasn't brought in to have warm fuzzies with Slashdot. I was brought in to
increase [SCO's] shareholder value."

--Darl Mcbride

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: The SCOG Linux License
Authored by: moogy on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 07:36 PM EST
I was rereading the SCOG license and as IANAL someone
help me out here to understand this. First from section
1 of definitions and then section 2 of rights granted.

1.9 "SCO Product" shall mean the SCO intellectual
property in Object Code format included in any or all of
the following: (i) the Software, (ii) the Updates and (iv)
any copy of the Software or Updates; to the extent made
available to You.

1.10 "Software" shall mean the Linux Operating System
in Object Code format.

2.0 GRANT OF RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS
SCO MAKES NO GRANT OF RIGHTS OF ANY KIND WITH RESPECT TO
ANY SOFTWARE OTHER THAN THE SCO PRODUCT COVERED BY THIS
AGREEMENT.

They never actually define what you are licensing??
"Intellectual Property" has no meaning under law, and
since they do not define the term for the purpose of
licensing, just what are you licensing? Are you licensing
copyrights, patents, trade secrets, what? All of those
things have different requirements as we are seeing in
the cases we've been tracking.

They most clearly are not granting license to all of
these things since they explicitly state that you have
no rights of any kind except for the "SCO PRODUCT"
as defined!? ...but what IS that product?

Isn't it fraud to license something you never even
define?

---
Mike Tuxford - irc.fdfnet.net #Groklaw
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you,
then they fight you, then you win. --Gandhi

[ Reply to This | # ]

promises, promises . . .
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 08:10 PM EST
Friday 8 August 2003
Sontag: "SCO has the right to defend its copyright all the way down to the
end user," said Sontag. "If necessary we will start picking end users
to enforce our rights."
http://www.computerweekly.com/Article124042.htm

August 29, 2003
The SCO Group said today it had never planned to sue any Linux companies, had no
concrete plans to sue anyone and also no current plans to take a commercial
Linux customer to court.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/29/1062050642514.html

September 5, 2003
The SCO Group is supposed to start sending out "thousands" of bills
this month demanding payment of what is effectively a Linux tax, according to
SCO spokesman Blake Stowell.
http://www.linuxworld.com/story/35362_f.htm

November 11, 2003
McBride: "I'd be surprised if we make it to the end of the year without
filing a lawsuit."
http://forbes.com/forbes/2003/1124/096_print.html


November 21, 2003
SCO Threatens to Derail Novell-SUSE Deal & Sue a Fortune 1000 Linux User
According to SCO, it's got a short list of a handful of unidentified brand names
to choose from - companies it's talked to directly, it said - and it will lodge
suit against one or more of them in the next 90 days. The only thing that will
stop a suit is capitulation. McBride said, "It's license or
litigate."
http://www.linuxworld.com/story/37998.htm

[ Reply to This | # ]

Thanks SCO
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 09:16 PM EST
When IBM goes away of his agreement whit Microsoft to develop his own os for the
desktop he release OS2, a real 32 bits operating system. He did not get a great
sucess from it. I remember i received a free copy, and on the pc i use at this
time ( a 486 dx 66 ),all the story was clik and wait and wait and wait.
Then IBM make a deal with Apple to develop the Power PC platform and an OS
dedicated for that. I was to buy one but i wanted full compatibility between the
two. But the deal collapse and Apple further prohib manufacturers to make
clone.
So I choose to stay along whit the *86platform and goes again with Microsoft. At
that time APPLE has a 15% share here in France of the market, he has a full 4%
now. I do not think, they made the good choice.
So IBM has two very bad expériences dealing with proprietary software to get
zero working at the final.
And then they need one and they goes Linux.

By that time Apple was looking for an OS and some says he could look at Linux.

Caldera who was a Linux operator buy SCO to get their Unix business, I supposed
they think they can put some Linux in Unix and vice versa. and made much of a
noise of it. So i found in a revue a cd with a caldera distribution in it and I
give a try to Linux by caldera. The first one was with Corel. I used this to
have a backup solution in case of crash of my windows, no more.

But there was a problem the GPL.
You can GPL some piece of unix or apple code to linux (if you are the very owner
of the rights),but you cannot get some piece of linux into your own proprieatry
software. So APPLE choose BSD derivative, SCO choose going to the court and IBM
choose to go more and more in the Linux business.

Now i have found Mepis that i am going to teach myself because of the Groklaw
affair and the need for free alternative to proprieatry software.
Without the sco action i may never go to Linux so far after all. Thanks SCO
forget my bad english..

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Thanks SCO - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 10:49 AM EST
SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 10:36 PM EST
"'We are not stating yet when that may take place or with whom it may take place, but you may see something from us in the near future on this,' he said. . . .

future?

Blake Stowell must have taken a sip of teflon or swallowed a big lump in his throat to let the word roll off his touge. Does SCO honestly thinks they have a future?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Redhat's standing...
Authored by: Khym Chanur on Thursday, February 19 2004 @ 11:42 PM EST
Doesn't SCO saying that they might sue end users give Redhat automatic standing? After all, one of their customers could have reasonable fear of being sued, right? What exactly does it take for them to get standing in the issue?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 12:13 AM EST

Darl, Darl, Darl: talk is cheap --the world runs on deeds, not words.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO FTP site notice.
Authored by: mobrien_12 on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 01:28 AM EST

Out of curiousity I went to SCO's ftp server. I found this document at ftp://ftp.caldera.com/pub/Legal_No tice

NOTICE: SCO has suspended new sales and distribution of SCO Linux until the intellectual property issues surrounding Linux are resolved. SCO will, however, continue to support existing SCO Linux and Caldera OpenLinux customers consistent with existing contractual obligations. SCO offers at no extra charge to its existing Linux customers a SCO UNIX IP license for their use of prior SCO or Caldera distributions of Linux in binary format. The license also covers binary use of support updates distributed to them by SCO. This SCO license balances SCO's need to enforce its intellectual property rights against the practical needs of existing customers in the marketplace.

Dear SCO customer,

Starting on November 1, 2003, SCO will institute new procedures for you to access binary updates and source rpms. If you own an SCO licensed copy of Linux (such as such as OpenLinux, eDesktop, etc.), it will be necessary for you to register (or re-register) in order to continue to receive support files. During the registration process you will receive instructions on how the new access procedure will work or you can visit:

http://www.sco.com/support/lin ux_info.html

[ Reply to This | # ]

New Software Packge: SCO Sue
Authored by: robert on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 09:42 AM EST
From those delightful chaps at www.b3ta.com (if you're not familiar with it!)

The B3ta challenge today was "software we really need". Along with the
"Pizza Printing" software came this:

http://www.ukdragon.com/b3ta/scosue.png

very nice indeed...

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Says They May Sue End Users in the Near Future
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 20 2004 @ 10:47 AM EST
I'm an end-user as well. How do we get on the sue list? Having a hard time
getting SCOX to sue me.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )