SUSE Requests Arbitration with SCO 155
rm69990 writes "In response to SCO's amended complaint against Novell alleging copyright infringement, Novell subsidiary SUSE has requested from the International Chamber of Commerce that SCO be barred from asserting copyright over SUSE Linux due to the UnitedLinux agreement between Caldera, SUSE, Connectiva and Turbolinux. This agreement requires that SCO arbitrate with SUSE instead of filing claims, removes the copyright from any work SCO produced while in UnitedLinux, gives SUSE sublicensing rights to SCO's copyrights, and constitutes an SCO commitment that any code released under an OSS license in UnitedLinux remain Open Source. Novell has filed a motion to stay SCO's claims against Novell until the outcome of this arbitration. So now it looks like Linux users are protected both through the APA between Novell and SCO, but the UnitedLinux agreement as well."
Where's that.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Where's that.... (Score:5, Funny)
it's sco's intellectual property. cowboy neal is working on a reverse engineer of it, though.
Where are the editors? (Score:3, Informative)
More and more frequently, I'm thinking that slashdot is becoming a mad magazine parody of itself.
Arbitration in Paris (Score:4, Informative)
PJ, with a spot-on comment (my bold):
If you were given a choice between having a GPL-related case heard in Europe in a fast-track arbitration based on clear contracts or let it drag out for year after painful year in Utah, what would you choose? Anyway, someone on Novell's team at some point noticed that the UnitedLinux agreements, which Caldera signed, require such arbitration of certain types of claims, likely even designating the jurisdiction, and once SCO filed its 2nd Amended Complaint alleging that distribution of SUSE Linux was copyright infringement, it opened up the door to this request for arbitration in France.
Re:Where are the editors? (Score:2)
The original link does describe SCO requesting arbitration (among other things) The article that you link to was posted early this morning and gives the details of the arbitration filed in europe. I'm guessing that the second article was posted after this was submitted to slashdot.
It's good to have the second article, but there's no need to insult the slashdot editors (this time).
Re:Where are the editors? (Score:2)
Seriously, look at the summary and then the articles. Which article is a better match for the summary? Look at the time stamps on the articles. (Yes, I know there is a possible lead time for submission, but I'm talking about the publishing, not the submission.)
Re:Where are the editors? (Score:2)
It's a good thing you're posting as a coward, since you cannot even use the proper word in your sentence. I believe the one you were looking for is "you're". HTH, HAND.
Re:Where are the editors? (Score:2)
Also that should be it's, not its.
Re:Where are the editors? (Score:2)
Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:5, Insightful)
From TFA: Methinks this gives the Novell lawyers a bit too much credit...after all, all they're doing is patiently assertiing that the sky is in fact blue and that water is, and has always been, wet.
The real geniuses here are the SCO lawyers, for keeping this ridiculous dog & pony show going for as long as they have, although I admit that the admiration I experience witnessing their work is generously laced with nausea and trepidation. When SCO's house of cards finally falls, it will be with a deafening crash amid roars of appreciation from the OSS crowd, but in the meantime, hats off to the talented lawyers that have managed to keep it standing this long. They deserve respect, grudging though it my be.
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:3, Funny)
Yes.
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:5, Insightful)
That is a good question. (Score:2)
I think I'd rather have someone with a sense of right and wrong, and a brain. Heshe can pick up the technical stuff on the job.
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:5, Insightful)
Mu.
In the context of this litigation, I would rather have the one that says "look, you have no case. Find another way to solve your financial problem." Rather than "hey, it doesn't matter if you have no case, just sue them anyway - they'll just settle."
In other words, I would rather have the nice guy who plays fair even though he knows every little legal loophole.
What if you case was funded by msft? (Score:2)
If scox had not filed the lawsuit, then msft would have had no reason to arrange scox's funding.
The lawsuit is not meant to be won, it's an end in itself. The lawsuit isn't costing scox anything - just the opposite.
Re:What if you case was funded by msft? (Score:2)
What is paramount to being "professional"? (Score:3, Insightful)
Depends; did the "smart" hacker get caught flagrantly violating federal law? Perhaps doing something mindbogglingly stupid, like trying to social engineer his way into the FBI's systems? Then I'll take the nice one, because the "smart" one
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:2)
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:4, Insightful)
When they are in court making you money, they are geniuses...
When they are in court taking your money, they are scum...
Sort of like how defense attorneys are thought of scum sometimes, yet if you were charged with something, you would want the bottomest feeding scumiest one you could find...
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:2)
Ok, I think all of these comments expressing admiration and respect for lawyers who are capable of dragging out a litigation is missing the point.
If you're emp
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:2)
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:2)
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:5, Interesting)
Here we have Linux, the accumulation of many volunteer hackers, and the only ones earning big, BIG money are... the lawyers.
The GPL didn't mention anything about THAT!
I know what GPL means (Score:3, Funny)
GPL v4.0 (Score:3, Funny)
"...Furthermore, since software wants to be completely free and unfettered, it should not be subject to the legal process. Any disputes concerning software licensed under this agreeement shall be decided by a CodeWars competition. Best 2 of 3. And it must be a GPL'd implementation of CodeWars..."
No Respect (Score:3, Insightful)
Frauds deserve nothing more than jail.
Re:No Respect (Score:2)
I freely admit that in a perfect world, no case as obviously devoid of merit would be taken on by any lawyer, but this is hardly a perfect world...
Re:No Respect (Score:2)
Both. The "I was only following orders" defense was invalidated at Nuremberg trials.
This world might be a lot less imperfect if its imperfection wouldn't be used as an excuse to justify corruption.
Re:No Respect (Score:2)
And there in lies the rub - refuse and you're shot for insubordination in a time of war. Comply and your side loses and you're executed for war crimes. Still, no-one ever said that life was fair, did they?
This world might be a lot less imperfect if its imperfection wouldn't be used as an excuse to justify corruption.
Indeed. It's just such a pity that there's nothing I can do about it. Frankly, I have enough other things to worry a
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:2)
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:5, Informative)
You don't know much about law, do you? Delaying is as easy as pushing pawns around. What's "plumb pleasin'" for PJ is that in this particular instance, SCO may have pushed up the wrong pawn in their 2nd Amended Complaint, opening themselves up to not fewer than 17 affirmative defenses deftly outlined by Novell's lawyers that they could have avoided had they been a little more on the ball. Hardly geniuses...
mod parent up (Score:3, Insightful)
If PJ can ever rein in here over the top partisan P.O.V., I'd love for her to interview all the participants and then write the definitive history. As I don't think she'll ever lose that P.O.
Re:mod parent up (Score:2)
Re:mod parent up (Score:2)
I don't think PJ has a chance in hell of getting a candid interview from some parties.
I don't think *anyone* has a chance in hell of getting a candid interview from some parties... not without a written guarantee of immunity from both state and federal prosecutors.
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:3, Interesting)
Don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes.
It's a tradition, all right. (Score:2)
Re:Who are the REAL pros here? (Score:2)
I'm betting SCO is dead (that's a no brainer) and tha
Not too much credit. (Score:2)
By forcing arbitration, this ensures that the suit will be settled, one way or another, in six months. Period. No discovery period, no trial, no judge, no legal delays. Come October, this issue is settled.
That prevents SCO from dragging it out any further with Novell, and it was a great move.
I dont see it (Score:1, Funny)
Not quite. (Score:4, Informative)
No, it looks like Linux users are protected through both the APA and UnitedLinix depending on the outsome of this motion. You can file motions all you'd like. That doesn't mean they'll be carried out.
Re:Not quite. (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Not quite. (Score:5, Informative)
One other thing in that motion is that Novell asked for the money from the Microsoft and Sun deals to be placed in trust. This because the apa contract says that sco isn't supposed to be able to grant Unix licensees without Novells approval. If this happens, good bye SCO.
Re:Not quite. (Score:2)
Re:Not quite. (Score:2)
This explains why Novell bought SuSE and why IBM helped Novell to pay for it...
Re:Not quite. (Score:2)
Re:Not quite. (Score:2)
This just struck me as funny. "Yes, your Honor, he was dissing me prior to our agreement."
Re:Not quite. (Score:2)
Technically true (Score:2)
However, arbitration clauses are, for all practical purposes, automatically upheld by courts. It's not just the law, it's a well-established way to reduce the workload of horribly overworked judges.
SCOX hosed either way... (Score:5, Interesting)
Rock, hard place, SCOX.
Re:SCOX hosed either way... (Score:2)
Methinks you meant it more like:
Rock, SCOX, hard place.
Re:SCOX hosed either way... (Score:2)
Santa Cruz still existed afterwards - they changed their name to Tarantella and were later bought up by Sun.
UL (Score:5, Funny)
Yahoo! It's Darl... (Score:5, Funny)
Disclaimer: Yahoo! is a registered trademark of Yahoo!
Re:Yahoo! It's Darl... (Score:2)
No Cattle.
--
BMO
Contracts :o\ (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have to fall back to pointing at the contract and saying "but you agreed," it means the business relationship is fuxxored... and not only are you going to have to win a contract lawsuit, you're going to have to reasses the relationship between the companies.
Obviously, SCO is an anomaly, but the effect is the same. Relationships were broken and contracts aren't going to stop the damage, merely mitigate it.
Re:Contracts :o\ (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I prefer to deal on a handshake basis with people I know, respect, and trust. I like to have a personal relationship with clients. For the times this is not possible, I know I need a contract or a deal memo
Re:Contracts :o\ (Score:2)
Chris Sontag of SCOX.
Re:Contracts :o\ (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Contracts :o\ (Score:2)
Isn't that like saying "It's somewhere between zero and zero?"
(to you Debian fans out there: I'm KIDDING.)
What phase is this in? (Score:1)
Re:What phase is this in? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060405
IBM says to the Judge
Wrong case (Score:3, Informative)
I can't wait to see SCO get handed its head in any case [sic], but these are two separate complaints from SCO.
Re:Wrong case (Score:2)
Yes I know; I was too. At the time I posted, yours was the only reply and I replied to yours rather than the parent, as I thought yours would become the "dominant" post in the thread. I'm sorry if this caused any misunderstanding.
Re:What phase is this in? (Score:1)
Other fun details about these filings (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Other fun details about these filings (Score:1)
Microsoft did bad things to you? (Score:2, Funny)
A Shining Light, not! (Score:1)
$CO are perhaps *THE* definitive example of how not to run a company and just how much of a Judas an institution can be. Enjoy spending your diminis
Re:A Shining Light, not! (Score:2)
I'm no friend of SCO, but I don't see the "Judas" metaphor. They haven't really betrayed anyone as much as they've tried to re-write history, driven by avarice and desperation.
Re:A Shining Light, not! (Score:2)
Considering that SCO used to be Caldera Linux and SCO is now doing everything in their power to destroy Linux (and any company using it), I think I can see the "Judas" reference as being valid
When will it all end? (Score:1)
Re:When will it all end? (Score:2)
Haven't gotten anywhere? YMMV (Score:2, Interesting)
When Darl took over as CEO it was estimated that the company would be bankrupt within 7 months. Since then they have received $60 million in PIPE funding. They did have to pay back $13 million to Baystar, but that's still a pretty good payday for making a bunch of claims that so far haven't been substantiated.
It gets much, much worse (Score:5, Interesting)
Then there's the SEC disclosure requirements -- the fact that SCOX' stock runup happened while the Management sat on a contract that gutted the basis of the whole lawsuit lottery makes them personally liable. Even the SEC might wake up for that one, but the NYAG's office must be smelling blood in the water.
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:2, Informative)
Not quite.
This "new" contract revelation only applies to the updated/new claim brought by SCO - it doesnt spoil their ongoing IBM case with regard to their other (bogus) claims.
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:2)
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:2)
Now, if you could unearth the equivalent of the Halloween Documents, that's a different matter, but you would
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:2)
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, it does. A finding against them is in effect a judicial finding since Judge Kimball will effectively read the arbitration ruling into his Court's record.
"So?" you say. However, the UL agreement included sublicensing rights. Which means that any IP Caldera had that appeared in the UL distribution was sublicensed under the GPL
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:2)
It is indeed bogus. An official SCO site still offers Linux: http://www.darlmcbride.com/ [darlmcbride.com]
It is an official SCO site. Check out the whois on the domain, and the legal notice on the site!
Look carefully at the details (Score:3, Informative)
The "new" contract revelation doesn't actually change the details of the suit any. What it does change is the venue. As a result of the "new" contract clauses being brought into play, a small part of the entire SCO-Novell-IBM-Redhat rigamarole, specifically an old contract between Caldera and SUSE, now gets kicked entirely out of the court system and dumped into arbitration. This is important because the rules
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:2, Informative)
The only things on that page that is clearly a basis for a lawsuit (to me) are #7 and #8 where the coffee was dropped or spilled onto someone by an employee.
She had the coffee. She knew it was hot. She decided that despite the temperature of th
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:3, Informative)
Not only did she put something very hot between her legs (don't quibble about the temperature - hot coffee is hot coffee, right up to boiling hot coffee), she did so in the confines of a car seat. Then she pried off the lid while squeezing the cup with her thighs. The cup collapsed. If you want to do acrobatics with hot coffee, don't sue when you get burned.
It was a stupid lawsuit. And most people know it.
Re:It gets much, much worse (Score:2)
Not only did she put something very hot between her legs (don't quibble about the temperature - hot coffee is hot coffee, right up to boiling hot coffee),
If I gave you the choice of "50 degree Centigr
novell lawyers (Score:1, Informative)
Novell hired the APA? (Score:2, Funny)
I.T.Y.S.:2003 - origin,ownership,copyright + GPL (Score:2)
SCO's case is dead in the water and Darl is possibly facing criminal charges of false claims to the copyright office and SEC.
"An SCO"? (Score:2)
"An SCO"? Have I been wrong all this time in not reading SCO as three letters ("ess-see-oh") and instead as the monosyllabic "skoh"?
Re:Befuddled (Score:2, Informative)
Becuase they have been, and are being, paid for it. Microsoft donated very generously to SCO's cause in order to create an anticompetitive slander generator, and SCO is just delivering on what has been paid for.
And, of course, as long as SCO keeps up the charade, not only does SCO continue to get manna from heaven in the form of random mystery investment, but SCO also gets to sustain their business by constantly pumping their stock up and down-- whereas as s
Re:Befuddled (Score:2)
Two reasons (Score:5, Informative)
Primary reason is that it's a ploy by Microsoft [eweek.com] to discredit open source (Google for "Baystar" to learn more). Even though the case has no merit, they want to plant a bug in the ear of every PHB out there. "Doesn't Linux have some kinda legal trouble?" In that light, they have been successful somewhat.
Secondary reason, it's a stock [zdnet.com] scam [linuxtoday.com]. The longer they keep the company going, the longer they can bilk the shareholders for more cash. It's probably one of the most blatant examples of insider trading ever, but since it's small potatoes it has somehow flown under the radar. Here's hoping that changes soon.
Re:Two reasons (Score:2)
Under Darl SCO has almost doubled the number of available shares. It's the only reason their market value has crashed yet. Of course i your one of the 4 million shorters who bought in above $10 a share you stand to make a lot of money. This is well documented by those watching.
Re:Two reasons (Score:2)
Of course i your one of the 4 million shorters who bought in above $10 a share you stand to make a lot of money. This is well documented by those watching.
I certainly hope so. But the government has always been soft on white collar crime. It's my concern that you have to be as famous as Martha Stewart or as high profile as Enron to get into any real trouble these days. I'll bet the jerk gets away with it. The government simply doesn't care about this kind of thing - unless the press makes it so high
Re:Befuddled (Score:1)
Why? SCO is the expendable pit bull that Microsoft hired to do its dirty work. Microsoft realized that it could not win the war directly, so they invested in this company. I'm sure one of the unofficial requirements for getting this investiment was that they (SCO) run the company into the ground going after Linux. It wouldn't surprise me if BillyG has a swiss bank account with Daryl's name on it to as congradulations for a job well done.
Re:Now all we need is the youtube video (Score:2)
Re:Maybe... (Score:2)
1. You're one of those elitists who think "command line or bust"
2. You have no concept of user friendliness
3. You don't grasp the fact that the computer is just a tool used to solve problems, and not a religion
4. As far as distributions go, SuSE is one of the best for out-of-the-box, install, and get right to work experience (I'd say Ubuntu is neck-to-neck with SuSE on that though)
Oh, and nice use of the AC feature. Trolling is not why the AC feature is kept here, you know that don't you?
Re:International Chamber of Commerce? (Score:2)