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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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
Caldera OpenLinux X: Joke? Trial Balloon? Set up? Or a Hoax? - UPDATE: A Parody
Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 06:58 PM EDT

There is a supposed press release on a site owned by The SCO Group, located in Germany, purporting to announce that SCO is releasing a new version of OpenLinux, Caldera OpenLinux X, based on the 2.5 Linux kernel. I consider it a fake announcement.

First, that kernel would be implicated in the litigation. SCO's lawyers would never allow an announcement like this right now, let alone such a plan. Second, the GPL makes such a plan impossible to implement, in the way the page claims. Third, the release isn't grammatical English. Fourth, it's too silly to be believed. Fifth, it's copyrighted by The OpenLinux Foundation, not by SCO Group. Sixth, the tech makes no sense. For one thing, the 2.5 kernel is a development kernel and no one would base a distro on anything but a stable kernel. And finally, this isn't the method SCO normally follows when releasing press releases.

On the other hand, it's a web site owned by the SCO Group, although apparently hosted by a German university. So what might it be? It could be a joke, I suppose, to see who believes it. It could also be something worse.

I have noticed some troll comments on the Internet recently predicting that "Linux loonies" will DDOS if they get mad. This is of course one of SCO's favorite memes. Might this apparently phony press release be trying to outrage the community, so that a DDOS can be blamed on them? Don't laugh. That's how we got Yarro's law. Doing it like this provides plausible deniability if the plan doesn't work. SCO could claim they had nothing to do with it. It's conceivable someone hacked the site, I suppose, if we are going to list all the possibilities. I'd have to see the original and complete logs to believe such a story though. Remember the protest against SCO in 2003 that SCO employees themselves reportedly joined, only they drew outrageously offensive signs saying things like "I love software piracy," [large JPG] to discredit the protestors?

So, my advice is, ignore it. If it's real, they'll announce it in the normal channels. If it's a fake-out, there's no harm done by waiting to see what happens next. I'll provide the link that was sent to me, but I don't even recommend visiting the site, as I expect they will be keeping track of visitors: http://www.openlinux.org/releasedetail.cfm?id=21370.

Here's the ownership info from BetterWhois.com on the domain openlinux.org, in case SCO pretends they had nothing to do with it:

Domain Name:OPENLINUX.ORG
Created On:03-Aug-1998 04:00:00 UTC
Last Updated On:10-Nov-2004 04:47:01 UTC
Expiration Date:02-Aug-2006 04:00:00 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:Dotster, Inc. (R34-LROR)
Status:CLIENT UPDATE PROHIBITED
Registrant ID:DOTR-00936995
Registrant Name:Domain Administrator
Registrant Organization:The SCO Group
Registrant Street1:[redacted]
Registrant City:Lindon
Registrant State/Province:UT
Registrant Postal Code:84042
Registrant Country:US
Registrant Phone:[redacted]...
Admin Organization:The SCO Group...
Tech ID:DOTC-03050361
Tech Name:Domain Administrator
Tech Organization:The SCO Group...
Name Server:NS.CALDERASYSTEMS.COM
Name Server:NS2.CALDERASYSTEMS.COM

So you won't be tempted to visit, here's the meat of the "announcement":

SCO Announces Industry Leading Continuation Of OpenLinux Product Series

Caldera OpenLinux X Introduces Higher Levels of Service and Availability

LINDON, Utah, Jun 16, 2006 -- The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") (Nasdaq: SCOX), a leading provider of UNIX(R) software technology for distributed, embedded and network-based systems, today announced plans to release a new version of it's former OpenLinux franchise in early Q4 2006, known under the renowned Caldera label, branded version 10 - or shorter "X". These versions of OpenLinux Workstation and OpenLinux Server feature several technical enhancements and capture the best tools for Linux software development and deployment. In addition to these technical updates, each release features localization in English, German, Japanese, Korean, Chinese Traditional and Chinese Simplified languages. OpenLinux increases the overall availability of applications and critical data by including backup server facilities within its single, high-availability, fail-over operating environment....

To provide extensive reliability and performance features, the Linux Kernel 2.5 codebase has been merged with recently developed additions to SCO's world leading UNIX core operating system. Already contained code owned by SCO is still included benefiting the stability and overall experience opposed to recent Linux kernel releases.

The decision to reanimate the very popular OpenLinux product series was made after it is evident that certain lawsuits regarding UNIX® System intellectual property and contractual rights are to be finished soon. SCO is eager to be the only future provider of Linux Systems for the enterprise market. Customers will again benefit from the high reliable SCO products, with additional XML and JavaBean support, at the low costs of a Linux System. As according to the Yankee Group SCO OpenServer products still outbeat Linux' yearly uptime by about 20 percent, world Leading companies should still consider to upgrade to SCO's UnixWare and OpenServer series. ...

SOURCE The SCO Group

http://www.openlinux.org
Copyright (C) 2006 OpenLinux Foundation. All rights reserved.

Finally, here's a snapshot of the OpenLinux.org website back in 2000, thanks to Internet Archive. And now ask yourself: is there any other company in the world where you'd read a press release like this and believe even for a minute that it might be real?

Update: The page now reads like this:

Recently, on this site a fake anouncement of Caldera Open Linux X was found.

We thought it was obvious enough that it was fake. We had to learn it was not for all people reading it. So we took it down now. Apparently, also the DNS records are changed/deleted, so soon enough you won't get to this site using openlinux.org anyways.

We thought, it would not spread from Slashdot before we stop it (ie, this weekend). It was funny to follow people speculating and finding out about this site. Some people pointed out good reasons why this is hoax/parody, some bad or wrong reasons. Overall, we hope most people concluded it indeed was a parody.

Our submit to Slashdot concluded with "Is this real?" - sadly enough, Slashdot's editor wrote up a new text without any hints about this. We can't blame him, he maby was just in a hurry...

Nothing got hacked, it's just we got a previously used IP for this machine, so why not having some fun content on it? We apologize for any inconviences arised though! We didn't suspect it would be taken so serious. Some hints in the text proving this weren't read (talking about XML on a Server OS?), others were found but still taken serious. Please stop spreading this fake news, and if you know some sites who published it, please inform them to update their content. Thanks.

So, there you are. I've learned on Groklaw that when you do a parody, it's wise to label it clearly, because there are always folks who take it seriously otherwise. I haven't figured out yet why that is, but it is.


  


Caldera OpenLinux X: Joke? Trial Balloon? Set up? Or a Hoax? - UPDATE: A Parody | 226 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections here please
Authored by: tiger99 on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 07:37 PM EDT
If needed, to assist PJ

[ Reply to This | # ]

Caldera OpenLinux X: Trial Balloon? Set up? Or a Hoax?
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 07:38 PM EDT
The strange thing is that though the domain name is absolutely owned by SCO, and
it's using Caldera nameservers, the site itself is hosted on
fsi-server.informatik.uni-erlangen.de. A site hosted by a German university. I
can't imagine why SCO would do that for any reason. If you go to openlinux.org's
IP address 131.188.40.90, the openlinux.org virtual server will fail to trigger
and you will get a page saying only "FSI INF".

Could it be SCO got their DNS servers hacked?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic here please...
Authored by: tiger99 on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 07:38 PM EDT
And please try to make clickable links, where possible. Thanks.

[ Reply to This | # ]

This is a Hoax
Authored by: chrisbrown on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 07:39 PM EDT
It is hosted on a a German univesity server:

fsi-server.informatik.uni-erlangen.de

I suspect SCO's DNS server has been compromised.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Caldera OpenLinux X: Trial Balloon? Set up? Or a Hoax?
Authored by: wvhillbilly on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 07:43 PM EDT
Looks like they're up to their old tricks again...

---
What goes around comes around, and the longer it goes the bigger it grows.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Student prank?
Authored by: wvhillbilly on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 07:54 PM EDT
I notice a somewhat odd discrepancy here. The statistics on openlinux.org say
the last update was in 2004, yet this message is clearly dated 2006 and sent in
2006. And I notice another poster has traced the origin of the message back to a
German university site, which makes me think this could be a prank by some
students who may have hijacked or spoofed the openlinux.org address. And
college students are famous for pulling pranks.

---
What goes around comes around, and the longer it goes the bigger it grows.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Possible Setup
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 07:58 PM EDT
The announcement is copyrighted by OpenLinux.org.
If you have included the 'meat' of the announcement,
could they come after you for infringement as a way
of trying to shut Groklaw down? It would be well
to be very careful. SCOG have proven themselves
untrustworthy in more ways than we ever imagined.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Caldera OpenLinux X: Trial Balloon? Set up? Or a Hoax?
Authored by: jplatt39 on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 08:07 PM EDT
Actually, I'd already been lead to it by Google News. The thought of not
visiting it never occured to me until you talked about a DDOS.

My thought when I was first reading it was vaporware?

Having read your analysis, it could be a provocation but what are the chances of
there being a legal consequence to this?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Caldera OpenLinux X: Joke? Trial Balloon? Set up? Or a Hoax?
Authored by: wolfgang on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 08:33 PM EDT
I'm thinking hoax. If you go to a broken URL
(http://www.openlinux.org/releasedetail.cf) on the openlinux.org site, you get
the following 404 error:

Object not found!

The requested URL was not found on this server. If you entered the URL manually
please check your spelling and try again.

If you think this is a server error, please contact the webmaster.
BOFH
Excuse:

because Bill Gates is a Jehovah's witness and so nothing can work on St.
Swithin's day.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Not grammatical English?
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 08:38 PM EDT
Anybody can explain why using the word "release" in this context is
not grammatical, as PJ claims?

[ Reply to This | # ]

I'm fed up of hearing about Yarro's law - how do we know it is REALLY Yarro's law
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 08:48 PM EDT
I believe Yarro claimed to have sponsored the Utah law on unfair competition.

But I have never seen any independent confirmation or indication that he had
anything to do with the law.

So my question is: Is there any independent confirmation or indication that he
had anything to do with the law????

If there is, what is it? (And even if he did have something to do with the law
- it seems a mighty big leap to the law being labelled "Yarro's Law" -
unless Yarro was really truly fundamental to the creation of this law and not
involved in some vague peripheral sense)

If there is not...


In short, unless there is some independent confirmation that Yarro was (a)
involved in creating the law, and (b) fundamental to the creation process --
I'm sick and tired of seeing the law labelled as "Yarro's law",
particularly since I suspect he gets a little ego boost every time he reads that
phrase on Groklaw (and who wouldn't bet that Yarro is a secret but avid Groklaw
reader?)


(In a similar vein, we don't call the DMCA, "Darl's law", or Eldridge
vs Ashcroft, "Darl's case", just because him and his brother claim
they somehow make the GPL illegal and a crime against humanity or whatever).


Quatermass
IANAL IMHO etc




[ Reply to This | # ]

Another Look
Authored by: The Mad Hatter r on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 09:00 PM EDT


I'll disagree with PJ on going to take a look. The more eyes that see it, the
more likely we are to figure out what is happening.

I dropped in - it doesn't look right. I then attempted to download the entire
site, and found it appears to consist of three pages.

The top page
The 404 page
The announcement page

You can change the page id to anything for the announcement page, and you will
get the same page (at least going to smaller numbers - didn't think of trying
larger numbers).

After seeing the BOFH mention on the 404 page, I'd say it's a joke. If this was
April 1, it would be perfect. Being that it's not April 1, well it falls a bit
flat.

Wayne


---
Wayne

http://urbanterrorist.blogspot.com/

[ Reply to This | # ]

My gut feeling, is it's kind of real
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 09:16 PM EDT
Of course, I don't know

But my gut feeling is that it is genuine (well sort of), but we are seeing it before it was ready.

My personal theory is that this is the press release that they were preparing [say back in 2003 when they were sure they were going to win] for when they settled with IBM, and controlled Linux.

Perhaps it was prepared a long time ago, and somehow it only now leaked into the public area of the site, perhaps even automatically when [what was a long-future] date came up. Notice the press release is dated June 16. What happened in June 16th 2003? They claim that they had cancelled IBM's AIX license, and were making a big press brouhaha. I can well imagine, this was a release they prepared roughly at that time to keep in their back pockets [remember they were preparing their Linux licensing program around this time too, and IBM hadn't even filled any counterclaims back then], and somebody may have thought, I'll just stick the year +3 on this draft, and we can fix it before June 16 2006... and then the person left SCO or forgot or whatever.

Also notice the following quotes, emphasis added:

1. They claim Linux contains their code (although when they drafted it they were wacky enough to think 2.5 would be the latest release version - more on that in a moment)

To provide extensive reliability and performance features, the Linux Kernel 2.5 codebase has been merged with recently developed additions to SCO's world leading UNIX core operating system. Already contained code owned by SCO is still included benefiting the stability and overall experience opposed to recent Linux kernel releases.


2. They seem to be claiming to be the only ones who can do Linux (or maybe they were dreaming of shutting down Red Hat or getting all of IBM's Linux business going thru SCO/Caldera as part of the settlement):

The decision to reanimate the very popular OpenLinux product series was made after it is evident that certain lawsuits regarding UNIX® System intellectual property and contractual rights are to be finished soon. SCO is eager to be the only future provider of Linux Systems for the enterprise market. Customers will again benefit from the high reliable SCO products, with additional XML and JavaBean support, at the low costs of a Linux System. As according to the Yankee Group SCO OpenServer products still outbeat Linux' yearly uptime by about 20 percent, world Leading companies should still consider to upgrade to SCO's UnixWare and OpenServer series.



Here are the reasons, why I think it has some genuine elements:

(i) Calling it "OpenLinux X" (following the format of Mac OS X), just follows Darl's buzzword-bingo marketing strategy to a tee

(ii) If you look at the main page of openlinux.org. They have graphics logos for "Caldera OpenLinuX Workstation" and "Caldera OpenLinuX Server". The X is red, and clearly meant to tie in with the version X naming scheme. These logos have been professionally designed. This does NOT smack of some script-kiddie, or somebody playing a joke.... incidentally the use of "Caldera" in the logos, kind of dates the logos back to 2003 or 2002 tying in with my earlier guess about when parts of this may have been prepared.

(iii) The language/wording is bad, but it is not unimaginably bad - it looks like a rough draft to me

(iv) The reference to Linux 2.5 (as supposedly being latest Linux version) and the Yankee study, also date this back some years... the Linux 2.5, is consistent with the SCOsource team not fully understanding Linux version numbers, which we know is true from many other instances. With the SCOsource team not fully understanding Linux version numbers, we can guess the release may have been prepared when 2.4 was the latest Linux version


Quatermass
IANAL IMHO etc

[ Reply to This | # ]

A Joke
Authored by: elronxenu on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 09:20 PM EDT
Looks like a joke to me. Here's why:

The original URL is http://www.openlinux.org/releasedetail.cfm?id=21370 but that's not the only URL which returns this press release. id=21369, 21368, etc return the same document, in fact the 'id' parameter is not being used at all. You can see the press release by going to: http://www.openlinux.org/releasedetail.cfm

Furthermore the WayBack Machine at www.archive.org shows no changed pages on that website since 2001-11-30. However, the last two site updates show only that site access was blocked by a robots.txt file.

When I request http://www.openlinux.org/robots.txt I get a 404 error with a funny excuse, so the robots.txt file has been deleted, which leads me to believe that the entire site was replaced by another.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The nameservers don't match the whois record
Authored by: Joost P. Vermeer on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 09:32 PM EDT
Here is another piece of evidence for being a fake. The nameservers in the whois record don't match those actually returned by the .com nameservers. See the output of dig:
hecabe:~ jp$ dig @g.gtld-servers.net. openlinux.com.

;
<<>> DiG 9.2.2 <<>> @g.gtld-servers.net.
openlinux.com.
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;;
->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 28042
;; flags: qr
rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2

;; QUESTION
SECTION:
;openlinux.com.                 IN      A

;; AUTHORITY
SECTION:
openlinux.com.          172800  IN      NS     
ns97.worldnic.com.
openlinux.com.          172800  IN      NS     
ns98.worldnic.com.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
ns97.worldnic.com.      172800  IN   
  A       205.178.190.49
ns98.worldnic.com.      172800  IN      A      
205.178.189.49

;; Query time: 221 msec
;; SERVER:
192.42.93.30#53(g.gtld-servers.net.)
;; WHEN: Sun Jun 18 03:30:17 2006
;; MSG
SIZE  rcvd: 110

[ Reply to This | # ]

Why the jump in release numbers?
Authored by: tyche on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 09:46 PM EDT
I find it interesting that, on Google, the next previous release number for
UnitedLinux is 3.1. What happened to 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9? Just on the basis
of that, I would consider the press release to be suspect.

But then, what do I know.

Craig
Tyche

---
"It is a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury....
signifying nothing."
Shakespear, Macbeth (The Scottish Play)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Caldera OpenLinux X: Joke? Trial Balloon? Set up? Or a Hoax?
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 10:13 PM EDT
Errrrr having looked at the source for the page :
http://www.openlinux.org/releasedetail.cfm?id=21370
Which purports to be the "SCO Announces Industry Leading Continuation Of
OpenLinux Product Series" page you will find links out to
http://www.shareholder.com for example :-

document.write("<img
src="http://apps.shareholder.com/track/track.aspx?h=590931BC1F44C406C7CD40
5726B22F9C&a=7&c=CALD&s=37674729&f=198283&r=" +
sh_tmpDate.getTime() + "" style="display:none">n
<img
src="http://apps.shareholder.com/track/trackpage.aspx?c=CALD&p=release
detail%2Ecfm&s=37674729&r=" + sh_tmpDate.getTime() + ""
style="display:none" />");

So whom is blowing smoke up who and why are visits being tracked by
shareholder.com ????????????

[ Reply to This | # ]

Caldera OpenLinux X: Joke? Trial Balloon? Set up? Or a Hoax?
Authored by: ewilts on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 10:20 PM EDT
It's interesting to see what Netcraft says about the site. First, it was seen
back in 1998 and it's been running Linux ever since. Secondly, the web server
was last changed 17-Jun-2006, strangely coincident with a new press release.

It's a hoax. Nothing more and nothing less.

.../Ed

[ Reply to This | # ]

Could it be real?
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 10:56 PM EDT
All the indications are that this is a hoax, however what if they are serious? Could this be SCO attempting to get more parties to sue them, perhaps with the ultimate goal of further delaying the IBM case? The parts about "the Linux Kernel 2.5 codebase has been merged with recently developed additions to SCO's world leading UNIX core operating system" seem tailored to getting a group like the FSF involved, and then the part where it says "The decision to reanimate the very popular OpenLinux product series was made after it is evident that certain lawsuits regarding UNIX® System intellectual property and contractual rights are to be finished soon. SCO is eager to be the only future provider of Linux Systems for the enterprise market." might be an effort to get more Linux vendors to sue them.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Nothing in SCO's Normal PR Channels
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 11:32 PM EDT
This looks like a hoax. There is no copy of this press release on SCO's main web site (www.sco.com). They archive all their press releases there, so why would this one be missing?

All their genuine press releases are distributed through PR Newswire. This new one isn't. The whole point of a press release is to be distributed where the press will see it. The press isn't going to hunt down routine business stories on obscure web servers. You have to wave it in front of their noses before they are going to see it. The last genuine SCO press release on PR Newswire is dated the 8th of June, and is the same as the latest one in SCO's own press release archive.

The geniune press releases from the SCO web site all use the same HTML template. They all say "SOURCE The SCO Group, Inc." ... "Copyright (C) 2006 PR Newswire. All rights reserved". The "OpenLinux" one says "SOURCE The SCO Group" ... "Copyright (C) 2006 OpenLinux Foundation. All rights reserved."

Note the differernce in attribution. The geniune ones say they are copyright by PR Newswire, based on information from SCO. The questionable one states it was copyright by the "OpenLinux Foundation", based on information from SCO. This is a very significant detail. The hoaxsters had to remove the reference to PR Newswire so that people wouldn't check that source and find it wasn't present there.

Others have already noted the poor gramar. This is also a telling point, as these things are cranked out by professional PR writers. The number of mistakes in the release is very suspicious. The writing style is also wrong. Certain parts look like normal PR boilplate, while others seem out of place in a product announcement (note how they damn it with faint praise when comparing it to OpenServer - not something you do about your own products in a product announcement).

A further point is the section on "Forward Looking Statements". This doesn't belong in a product announcement (see SCO's other product announcements for comparison). This is a standard section for press releases on financial results, and there were no financial results or predictions in this release. It is completely out of place, and makes no sense in this context.

This looks like a hoax, and not a particularly clever one. Someone just took a genuine SCO press release, modified some of the text, and linked it from a quickly cobbled up main page. No doubt someone is sitting at home hitting the "refresh" button on their browser to see if they get a melt-down at Slashdot and Groklaw.

[ Reply to This | # ]

just wait a cotton picking second
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 17 2006 @ 11:57 PM EDT
don't i remember PJ saying in one article that Linus never released odd numbered
kernals to the public because they were under development? only even numbered
kernals make it out.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Caldera OpenLinux X: Joke? Trial Balloon? Set up? Or a Hoax?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 12:02 AM EDT
Hmmm... maybe Blepp brought the briefcase home, and it had the press release in
it...

... NAH

...D

[ Reply to This | # ]

Caldera OpenLinux X: Joke? Trial Balloon? Set up? Or a Hoax?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 12:28 AM EDT
I find it hard to believe this isn't a joke. Darl himself, when asked about
distributing linux, said that SCO stopped when they "discovered" their
IP in linux (nevermind that the timetable totally contradicts this). In fact,
they made an "unclean hands" argument that they used to supress the
evidence that they were still distributing linux even after the lawsuit was
started.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Great....
Authored by: rm6990 on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 12:46 AM EDT
Great, Slashdot picked up the story, linking directly to the press release
instead
of the Groklaw entry, and now we have a bunch of Slashmorons talking about
how the EFF is going to sue SCO for copyright infringement....*Hangs heads in
hand* Slashdot should be deleted from the internet...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Naah, just their next truckload
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 01:04 AM EDT
The whole point — the whole point — of all of this, IBM case included, has been to enable MS flaks to sagely note Linux's "legal problems" when schmoozing with PHBs and their superiors. They aren't going to get much more mileage out of the IBM case. So now they dump this pile and we all get to spend as long as they can make it take sorting out the mess. Whether they actually have a plan for it or are taking it as a cheap shot they might follow up on if it goes screamingly well, time might tell.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Excuses on the 404 page
Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 01:22 AM EDT
Link.

Back up a level for more info.

---

You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Definitely a sick joke. Look at the Error page.
Authored by: gfolkert on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 01:46 AM EDT
Completely Static detail Making the th 21370 and arbitrary number.

Now look at the error page:

BOFH excuses...
yeah we got a winner here.

Someone's idea of a joke. H- Sooo funny I forgot to laugh.

[ Reply to This | # ]

If it is real ...
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 02:46 AM EDT
... it might be a defensive strategy for the upcoming arbitration in Switzerland
between Novell and SCO

[ Reply to This | # ]

A completely different set of evidence that this is a hoax.
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 04:07 AM EDT
It's incredibly (and I mean that word literally) poorly written, and some
mistakes are ones that marketers would not make. (I'm quoting just from PJ's
quotes, rather than the original site, by the way, I trust that they were
copy-and-pasted without introducing new errors.)

"new version of it's": That should be "its", no apostrophe.
A half-competent copyeditor would catch that, and I haven't noticed SCO being
quite this bad yet.

"former OpenLinux franchise": If they are releasing a current version,
it's not "former", and a marketer would not want to put this sort of
emphasis on the fact that it wasn't a continuous product line.

"OpenLinux franchise": It's not a franchise.

"branded version 10 - or shorter "X": That's not a brand, it's a
version number. The brand is "SCO", "Caldera", or
"OpenLinux". Furthermore, product names are not nebulous like this --
it would be either "10" or "X", not both. This was not
written by even an approximation of a competent marketer.

"These versions of OpenLinux Workstation": two sentences earlier, it
was "version", singular.

"stability and overall experience opposed to": should be "as
opposed to". Again, a copyeditor would have caught that.

"decision to reanimate": Reanimate? You believe a marketer would
write this? Again, it would be really bad marketing to put this sort of
emphasis on the fact that it's dead, and use a word typically used for zombies
and revivified corpses.

"very popular OpenLinux product series": Earlier, it was
"franchise". One of the basic skills of marketing is getting one's
story straight and figuring out standard names for things -- a marketer wouldn't
call the same thing both a "franchise" and a "product
series".

"after it is evident that certain lawsuits regarding UNIX® System
intellectual property and contractual rights are to be finished soon":
Again, a copyeditor would catch this; it's almost nonsense. This, also, is the
sort of sentence that usually comes from people who are far more competent in a
non-English grammer than they are in English grammar. I doubt OpenLinux press
releases are typically written by people with that skillset.

"SCO is eager to be the only future provider of Linux Systems for the
enterprise market": You're kidding, right? This is beyond believable even
for SCO's level of hubris.

"still outbeat Linux' yearly uptime": And "outbeat" is not
even a word. It's not even close to being a word.

Conclusion: This was not written by marketer with a shred of competence, nor
proofread by a half-decent copyeditor. Put that in your syllogism with the fact
that SCO's marketers and press-release copyeditors seem to have at least some
shreds of basic competence, and I think the conclusion is pretty obvious.

- Brooks

[ Reply to This | # ]

THE IP has been around for 6 years
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 04:10 AM EDT

According to Netcraft, the site has been running on the same IP address since 2000.

So, how can we say that the DNS servers have been hijacked? What difference does a mismatch in the DNS Servers make?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Site is down for me
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 05:20 AM EDT
I could access it yesterday evening from my laptop but the domain
www.openlinux.org does not resolve on my desktop this morning.

It is however still possible to see the site by adding the following line to
your /etc/hosts file::

131.188.40.90 www.openlinux.org


[ Reply to This | # ]

Ok, it's a fake, check the site now
Authored by: LosD on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 07:02 AM EDT
"Recently, on this site a fake anouncement of Caldera Open Linux X was
found.

We thought it was obvious enough that it was fake. We had to learn it was not
for all people reading it. So we took it down now. Apparently, also the DNS
records are changed/deleted, so soon enough you won't get to this site using
openlinux.org anyways.

We thought, it would not spread from Slashdot before we stop it (ie, this
weekend). It was funny to follow people speculating and finding out about this
site. Some people pointed out good reasons why this is hoax/parody, some bad or
wrong reasons. Overall, we hope most people concluded it indeed was a parody.

Our submit to Slashdot concluded with "Is this real?" - sadly enough,
Slashdot's editor wrote up a new text without any hints about this. We can't
blame him, he maby was just in a hurry..

Nothing got hacked, it's just we got a previously used IP for this machine, so
why not having some fun content on it? We apologize for any inconviences arised
though! We didn't suspect it would be taken so serious. Some hints in the text
proving this weren't read (talking about XML on a Server OS?), others were found
but still taken serious. Please stop spreading this fake news, and if you know
some sites who published it, please inform them to update their content.
Thanks."

You got to use the /etc/hosts trick told about above to watch it now, by the
way.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Of course it's a joke
Authored by: Nick_UK on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 09:01 AM EDT
This line gives it away:

"the Linux Kernel 2.5 codebase has been merged with
recently developed additions to SCO's world leading UNIX
core operating system. Already contained code owned by SCO
is still included benefiting the stability and overall
experience opposed to recent Linux kernel releases."

Someone has a good sense of humour, and also can speak (or
write) SCO lingo to a tee.

Nick :-D

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yep - its a joke
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 12:24 PM EDT
The DNS record of www.openlinux.org has been changed in the meantime. But by plugging the former IP into your /etc/hosts you can still visit the site and will find the following text:
Recently, on this site a fake anouncement of Caldera Open Linux X was found.

We thought it was obvious enough that it was fake. We had to learn it was not for all people reading it. So we took it down now. Apparently, also the DNS records are changed/deleted, so soon enough you won't get to this site using openlinux.org anyways.

We thought, it would not spread from Slashdot before we stop it (ie, this weekend). It was funny to follow people speculating and finding out about this site. Some people pointed out good reasons why this is hoax/parody, some bad or wrong reasons. Overall, we hope most people concluded it indeed was a parody.

Our submit to Slashdot concluded with "Is this real?" - sadly enough, Slashdot's editor wrote up a new text without any hints about this. We can't blame him, he maby was just in a hurry..

Nothing got hacked, it's just we got a previously used IP for this machine, so why not having some fun content on it? We apologize for any inconviences arised though! We didn't suspect it would be taken so serious. Some hints in the text proving this weren't read (talking about XML on a Server OS?), others were found but still taken serious. Please stop spreading this fake news, and if you know some sites who published it, please inform them to update their content. Thanks.

The key sentence here is: "we got a previously used IP for this machine".

Regards -- Markus E Leypold

[ Reply to This | # ]

Copyrights & trademarks
Authored by: cmc on Sunday, June 18 2006 @ 01:11 PM EDT
PJ said in this article: "Fifth, it's copyrighted by The OpenLinux
Foundation, not by SCO Group." Can someone please clarify that for me?
What is copyrighted by The OpenLinux Foundation? It can't be the kernel, can it
(because that's copyrighted by the collection of people who contributed code to
it)?

Separately, if OpenLinux (whether the kernel or the O/S in its entirety) is
copyrighted by The OpenLinux Foundation, then what sense does it make for The
SCO Group to hold the trademark on the term "OpenLinux"? Wouldn't
that mean that others wanting to create an OpenLinux O/S wouldn't be able to use
the name?

cmc

[ Reply to This | # ]

Read this About "THE TACTICS" from BSA
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 19 2006 @ 01:53 PM EDT
Sorry but i can't find this in english it's a mexican case about "Piracy" from a totally legal mexican software company CCC .. They were framed, exhibited on national TV as "Pirates" and then imprisoned by doing nothing but Legal Business. Microsoft made false invoices and used them as proof of Piracy. The BSA intimidate with years in Jail to the company owner and his family. That's discasting, i was really upset when i read this...
CCC vs. Microsoft

sorry but the page is just in spanish... CCC now won the suits and was acredited with 90 million dollar. That's the final sentence, i just wonder when MS will pay or if they will try to "Pay" with Windows License.

Now you know, they are the real "Mafia". Threatening people with jail time to sell their bad, unsecure and unreliable software. May the Mexican Manager still in prison but many years because of this. That's the Microsoft "Sell Tactics".

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • typo or lysdexia? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 21 2006 @ 07:29 AM EDT
Has nobody noticed...
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 21 2006 @ 07:27 AM EDT
... where the Caldera developers originally came from?

Again, for those without a historical brain: Linux Support Team Erlangen (LST,
former Uni Erlangen students) were bought by Caldera. LST distribution was
renamed Caldera Linux. Later SCO bought Caldera, albeit without the devel team
(which went to SUSE).

I would have thought that most people here know these facts.

This is not to say that the former Caldera devel team (fine folks, _really_) are
the culprits. But someone at the Erlangen Uni is definitely p*ssed by SCO.

You have been fooled, folks. Everybody has been. ROTFL.

[ 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 )