Increased Linux Use With SCO's Defeat Predicted

twitter writes "The defeat of SCO's infamous copyright attack has Forbes wondering if a GNU/Linux boom is upon us. They discuss how this will benefit Novel, IBM, Chrysler, AutoZone and Red Hat. 'The SCO Group frightened potential business users away from Linux with lawsuits demanding billions in royalties. But the litigious company's claims were shot down in a ruling that will likely boost uptake of the operating system.'"

lol

*Companies formerly threatened by SCO peek out from their spider holes*

"Is it safe to use Linux now?", they say timidly.

Re:lol

Does this mean 2008 will be the year of the Linux desktop? ;-)

Let's all not forget who bankrolled SCO

A little company with a lot to protect in the PC market. 20 Mil is such a paltry sum though, they probably don't even remember making the donation.

Re:Let's all not forget who bankrolled SCO

A little company with a lot to protect in the PC market. 20 Mil is such a paltry sum though, they probably don't even remember making the donation.

Ding! That 'lil company in Washington has already abandoned SCO. It got what it wanted: FUD. Now its out making more FUD, claiming that Linux infringes 235 patents. They've used their FUD tactics and kickbacks and by planting their operatives to kill ODF in the standards community with OOXML.

SCO may have lost the battle, but it was already a victory for Microsoft no matter what happened. The war is far from over, but we'll win it by keeping on churning out our best software and leaving the FUD battles to the evangelists like Perens, ESR, RMS and others.

Here's the fact: Microsoft's actions prove that Linux and Free/Open Source Software scares it shitless!

Re:Let's all not forget who bankrolled SCO

Now its out making more FUD, claiming that Linux infringes 235 patents.

If 235 legitinate patents were being infringed, Microsoft would be revealing specifically which ones are being infringed and how they are being infringed, if they were truly interested in protecting their "IP" rather than spinning FUD. It is obvious to all watching that all they care about is scare tactics and saber rattling.

Won't change a thing

Nobody believed them anyway.

Did they?

Re:Won't change a thing

Nobody believed them anyway.

There's a sucker born every minute. And right this very moment, some of those suckers are sitting in their offices, making decisions on purchasing software.

Meanwhile Off In The Real World

Microsoft is killing off open document format legislation all over the US.

Microsoft is establishing themselves in China where all open source crowd assumed was going to easily go to Linux.

Apache has a year or so left before it is overtaken by Microsoft.

Even though it took an embarrassingly long time Microsoft has finally gotten a handle on viruses/spyware etc. to the point where no one is running screaming from their platform anymore.

So, yeah, high five open source community!

And as to SCO, they did their part and have long been forgotten by Microsoft as they move on to bigger and better weapons against Linux and open source software.

Linux chain reaction

"Even though it took an embarrassingly long time Microsoft has finally gotten a handle on viruses/spyware etc. to the point where no one is running screaming from their platform anymore."

When did this happen? Viruses/spyware was one of the largest stimuli for me to finally suck it up and emigrate for good (I was under no circumstances going to reinstall XP or buy Vista). And I'm not alone. Now I've found that Ubuntu does everything I want it to do, my friends will be getting a taste too.

It would not surprise me in the slightest if we were to see Linux achieve double digit market penetration (i.e. 10%) within 2 years. It's kind of like being one of the first kids to play multiplayer Doom and then Quake. You think to yourself "Damn! This is fun! I wonder why everyone else isn't doing this?" And soon enough (given several years), everyone IS doing it. It spreads from person to person virally.

The phenomenon itself parallels atomic physics; as soon as you have on average every split atom triggering another atom to split, you get a chain reaction. This is the same with people and ideas, software (or human diseases). It's just that the chain reaction aspect seems less obvious to us because of the time scale. It might be 2 months before I get around to install Ubuntu on a friend's machine, whereas a neutron emitted from a nucleus will strike another atom on the other side of the bomb in much, much less than a second.

Ubuntu is mostly there. It is there enough that I believe if I installed it myself on a poweruser friend's computer, helped sort out some driver issues, he'd be able to take it from there with the occasional internet search. And it is better than MS in a lot of important areas: stability, security, efficiency (in Watts), ease of installing new software (Synaptic). Not having to worry about spyware or viruses is HUGE. And it's free, by emigrating you've permanently opted out of the eternal upgrade for $$$ cycle, along with acquiring a mental Unix toolkit that will enable further migrations if necessary (e.g. to BSD or other free ixes).

And it is the power users who are critical to this chain reaction. It's not grandma using mail and web who will be installing it on friend's computers. It is the power user. So by all means, get your grandma and girlfriend using it, but if you really care about adoption rates, find another power user and guide them through an installation. Note that something like Ubuntu is gold to a power user (someone who is doing free tech support for friends and family) because it has the potential of being much lower in maintenance. No finding new spyware removers, reinstalling, or any of that. Convert, done.

After that, it's just a matter of time before you have hardware manufacturers and gaming companies coming over too. Then it's over. Within a year you'll get everything of note imported or created. Be it photoshop or office, the bugs will be ironed out extremely quickly. Word will become like Wordperfect used to be. There will still be a few people whining "But word used to work so much better!", but they will be ignored.

Re:Linux chain reaction

Sorry guys, Linux is good no doubt but I am telling you now, it will NEVER compete with Microsoft. I, as a Sysadmin for a Fortune 500 Company, can tell you that no SysAdmin wants to deal with recompiling kernels, writing scripts for hours on end when I can just install Microsoft, lock it down and forget about it.

...

BTW, here is the report on how linux has THREE times as many security holes as Microsoft:

http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/bulletins/SB2005.html [us-cert.gov]

I work for a major US Government organization. We also have a lot of Windows servers. We also have a lot of Unix systems. And as we deploy additional systems, it isn't uncommon for them to be Linux based. We're constantly asking vendors if they have Linux support. Most either do or are working on it.

We can take a Linux system, lock it down, and forget about it just like a Windows system. That is... if we want crappy infrastructure. Both systems require care and feeding. Both require more than a vendor is going to admit.

We have Unix / Linux folks who spend a good amount of time writing scripts and figuring out configurations for everyone else to follow. The same goes for the Windows side. I'm biased - I'm much more impressed with the extent of what we do on the Unix / Linux side of the house. But I am also occasionally surprised and impressed with what knowledgeable Windows admins come up with.

Of course, we also have aspects of our IT environment that are Windows-only who would never even dream of looking at anything that didn't come from Microsoft (or at least have Microsoft approval). But that doesn't mean Linux isn't making headway in our environment. And it doesn't mean that just because you're a Windows shop that others aren't.

By the way... I'd look a little closer at that report you're quoting. It's a much more complex story than those numbers would make it seem. There's the issue of how severe a flaw is. But even more basic is numbers that don't add up and flaws that are double-counted.

houston's ev1.net

Didn't Houston's EV1.net decide early on to bend over and take it from SCO? I wonder if they can sue SCO for fraud now, or at least what they paid for "a SCO linux I.P. license". If everyone who paid for a Linux license would file suit against SCO, it may help shoot the dying beast in the head and put it out of its misery. (and provide amusement for the rest of us)

Finally.

The year of the Linux Desktop.

FTA

The SCO Group did not return a call seeking comment on Monday.

Maybe their phones were disconnected for non-payment?

I missed the boat

I read about the ruling over the weekend. It never occured to me to short SCOX on Monday even though I thought about it on past occasions. OTOH, if I did think of it I probably would have seen how low it was already and not done it.

Dumb Dumb Dumb. It was like free money.

Grrrr

Please. The name of the company that makes things like Netware and did a deal with Microsoft is Novell, not Novel. It's not that hard to get right!

Re:Grrrr

Apparently [wikipedia.org] it was hard to get right:

The name for the company Novell was suggested by George Canova's wife who mistakenly thought that "Novell" meant "new" in French. (In fact, the feminine singular of "new" in French is "nouvelle").

Reports of a Linux Boom

Reports of a Linux boom have been greatly exaggerated... it's been slowly picking up market share over time and will continue to do so... nothing sensational is going to happen... it's a good OS... it's getting better every day... as the OS is made "idiot-proof" all of the idiots will adopt. A great strategy would be to get linux in the elementary and middle schools, get 'em young.... keep 'em for life. It's an ellipses heavy tuesday.

Re:Reports of a Linux Boom

>The problem with Linux right now is software support. Pure and simple.

and what software for K-12 is not supported on Linux?

BTW, Apple did a pretty good job getting school kids familiar with its product. What happened was about a billion dollars in Microsoft marketing of FUD that Apple Mac was dead because Windows 95 made it obsolete. I was there and I had school teachers asking me about Windows PC's "because Apple was going out of business". There were no exploding Macs or anything like it, just millions and millions of Microsofts money going out to the press to spread the FUD. Apple survived by the skin of their teeth and even had to take money from Microsoft and agree to drop Netscape for a Mac version of MS Internet Explorer.

Linux and OSS are a perfect match for K-12. It's inexpensive, completely open for their learning experiences if that is what they want to do, it works. Atleast here in the US, school systems are constantly fighting for their budgets and floundering with expensive support of Microsoft Windows software and their hardware requirements.

LoB
 

SCO's products enough reason to use Linux

I think that the writing was on the wall for SCO long, long before this lawsuit got under way. The company I was working at back in 2000 had a number of boxes running SCO, presumably because they needed a *nix that ran on Intel x86 hardware. I remember looking through the godawful tangle of symlinks that was SCO's /etc directory and wondering why anybody would pay for it when the Debian build on my desktop seemed a lot more robust and did a better job of meeting my needs, for free. Seems I wasn't the only person thinking this.

Official response from SCO

The company is obviously disappointed with the ruling issued last Friday. However, the court clearly determined that SCO owns the copyrights to the technology developed or derived by SCO after Novell transferred the assets to SCO in 1995. This includes the new development in all subsequent versions of UnixWare up through the most current release of UnixWare and substantial portions of SCO UnixWare Gemini 64. Also, SCO owns the exclusive, worldwide license to use the UnixWare trademark, now owned by The Open Group. SCO's ownership of OpenServer and its Mobile Server platforms were not challenged and remain intact. These SCO platforms continue to drive enterprises large and small and our rapidly developing mobile business is being well received in the marketplace.

What's more, the court did not dismiss our claims against Novell regarding the non compete provisions of the 1995 Technology License Agreement relating to Novell's distribution of Linux to the extent implicated by the technology developed by SCO after 1995. Those issues remain to be litigated.

Although the district judge ruled in Novell's favor on important issues, the case has not yet been fully vetted by the legal system and we will continue to explore our options with respect to how we move forward from here.

http://www.sco.com/company/news/statement.html [sco.com]

The rise of the commodty software

I wonder if the rise in popularity of such community-developed software will almost make software into a commodity, generally available for all. Perhaps Marx was not wrong in his assertion that a group dynamic can be as productive as any other, but it took a truely equalizing force, such as the internet, to put it to the true test.

Joe User's association

1. SCO doesn't own Unix
2. Novell does
3. Microsoft has an agreement with Novell
4. Therefore...
5. ...

Insert at #5 any meaningful answer that will prevent users from thinking that MS owns, or could claim to own, even the minimal part of Unix.

SCO continues to thrash around.

Statement from SCO Regarding Recent Court Ruling

The company is obviously disappointed with the ruling issued last Friday. However, the court clearly determined that SCO owns the copyrights to the technology developed or derived by SCO after Novell transferred the assets to SCO in 1995. This includes the new development in all subsequent versions of UnixWare up through the most current release of UnixWare and substantial portions of SCO UnixWare Gemini 64. Also, SCO owns the exclusive, worldwide license to use the UnixWare trademark, now owned by The Open Group. SCO's ownership of OpenServer and its Mobile Server platforms were not challenged and remain intact. These SCO platforms continue to drive enterprises large and small and our rapidly developing mobile business is being well received in the marketplace.

What's more, the court did not dismiss our claims against Novell regarding the non compete provisions of the 1995 Technology License Agreement relating to Novell's distribution of Linux to the extent implicated by the technology developed by SCO after 1995. Those issues remain to be litigated.

Although the district judge ruled in Novell's favor on important issues, the case has not yet been fully vetted by the legal system and we will continue to explore our options with respect to how we move forward from here.

http://www.sco.com/company/news/statement.html

No more sock puppets....

It seems Microsoft will have to either sue or shut up.

They can't continue making public claims and not mitigate "damages" by pointing to a culprit and specifying THE EXACT lines of their code which they believe is in Linux. That will lead, of course, to the issue of the validity of their IP claims since most suffer severely from prior art.

Not so fast my friend

So this is what was keeping Linux market share from increasing? I thought it was that most people were too used to windows and not willing to learn a new operating system. Thanks for clearing that up. Can we please get a bit of perspective on this. Linux is doomed to a fringe market share unless something extremely bad happens from Microsoft... yes even worse than Vista. This suit was not hindering all that many people from installing Linux. I know here at work we were running it on our servers, with nothing but mild amusement every time one of these stories came down. Linux will primarily be run in the server space with fringe desktop user space for the foreseeable future. Those who's management is in bed with Microsoft for what ever reason will continue to run Windows Server in their servers. Those who hate M$ and don't have any problems with some of the unsupported functionality will run Linux. This suit changes nothing.

Re:Not so fast my friend

So this is what was keeping Linux market share from increasing? I thought it was that most people were too used to windows and not willing to learn a new operating system.

Well, such things are rarely due to a single issue. The fact that most people are comfortable with MS Windows (and generally dislike change or learning new things) is a huge roadblock to widespread acceptance of Linux, to be sure. However, in addition to this, the trepidation of many companies regarding the legal status of Linux kept them from considering Linux as a viable business option. (Like it or not, the FUD works on some companies.) Now that Linux has been shown to be: (a) non-infringing, and (b) backed by stable, powerful companies (Novell, IBM, etc.), this makes it a much more reasonable option for businesses. So while this court case may not quadruple Linux usage overnight, it is certainly a powerful step in that direction.

This suit was not hindering all that many people from installing Linux. I know here at work we were running it on our servers, with nothing but mild amusement every time one of these stories came down.

I'm glad that your company did not buy into the FUD. Not all companies are as knowledgeable about Linux, FOSS, and the associated legalities.

This suit changes nothing.

So you say. Yet, Forbes at least appears to be of the opinion that this does make a difference, so to the extent that Forbes is able to correctly analyze the business sector, or to the extent that businesses value Forbes' opinion, this will make a difference. Now, you or I may not care what Forbes has to say about technology: we already have well-formed opinions. However a vast number of companies (or managers, rather) do not care about such details. For some of them, an article in Forbes will make them take notice far more than the recommendation of their own IT department.

My point is: like it or not, public perceptions do alter the adoption of technology. This means that lawsuits (even if baseless) and media attention (even if belated) can and do affect adoption.

An injured animal

An injured animal might bite back even though it is doomed. Time to put it out of its misery.

Forbes right on top of last week

The mouthpiece of conventional wisdom. I'm been seeing more interest in Linux stemming from the progress in Ubuntu development than anything.

I never got the impression that anyone choosing Windows over Linux was doing so because of the SCO case. It may have been just one more excuse but I can't think of a time it was the primary reason a customer picked .NET over a LAMP stack. YMMV, of course.

I believe we will see more interest in Linux, mainly because interest was already picking up, not because of this ruling. And that includes Linux on the desktop. Again, mainly because it makes a nice desktop, not because of this case.

If Microsoft loses share in the server or desktop market they've got no one to blame but themselves. Vista was a giant FUM-BLE at a time they really needed to hit one out of the park. If you don't mind me mixing sports metaphors. ;) But the big problems aren't related to Vista. Byzantine license requirements, ever escalating fees, product activation, DRM, back-stabbing EULA's...those problems will continue to haunt Microsoft.

Re:Forbes right on top of last week

If Microsoft loses share in the server or desktop market they've got no one to blame but themselves. Vista was a giant FUM-BLE at a time they really needed to hit one out of the park. If you don't mind me mixing sports metaphors. ;) But the big problems aren't related to Vista. Byzantine license requirements, ever escalating fees, product activation, DRM, back-stabbing EULA's...those problems will continue to haunt Microsoft.

This is one of my big problems with the Linux community: You guys keep waiting for MS to fuck up.

Give me a reason to get rid of them first! Where is the software support, for one?

It actually makes me feel stand-offish about doing anything more with Linux knowing that they (as in the community) are waiting for someone else to fail enough to drive business their way instead of succeeding enough in their own right to give me a reason to look their way. Basing the value of your product on a competitors failures doesn't make me feel too confident. Endless stories of a new Linux revolution while the marketshare hardly creeps up doesn't make me feel too confident. The fact that major apps and games publishers are still taking a wait-and-see attitude towards Linux doesn't make me feel to confident.

For as much trash talk I hear about Vista around here I'm not seeing too much of it on the streets. The handful of Vista adopters I know don't seem to be having such a hard time with it and it seems that the situation is only getting better for Vista. And these guys aren't geeks, mostly. It's the fabled Joe Sixpacks I know who are adopting Vista. The geeks I know are sticking to XP. Even the biggest Linux advocate I know (whom I also respect his opinion) is running XP on his laptop and his main home desktop. As far as Linux goes he's still little more then a hobbyist. After talks with him I don't think he's going to switch to Linux as his main any time soon.

Give us a reason to switch. Don't wait for MS to file for Chapter 11. It's not going to happen anytime soon. As long as the Linux community and software publishers don't step up to the plate I don't think I'm going to see a time where I am forced to switch out of desperation.

So if the big plan in the community is to wait for the old guard to be weak, sick and feeble before they make their attack I'm afraid you guys are going to be hanging out in the bushes for a long long time. And no, talk of another wooden rabbit isn't going to do much to sway me. But I'll keep an eye open because it is mildly amusing.

Not Dan Lyons

Imagine that, Danny boy isn't too keen to comment. Still it is a bit depressing to realise how much of the article is only approximately accurate.

For example the court did not rule that Novell owns copyrights to Unix - rather, the court ruled that no copyrights were transfered to (old) SCO in the Asset Purchase Agreement.

Similarly the article says "Santa Cruz Operation, which later became SCO" with the implication that the SCO in that sentence is the same SCO as in the headline. It is not. It is hard to blame the writer because SCOX has encouraged this exact confusion. Still, even Dan Lyons would have got THAT right.

Also the article stated "IBM, which failed in its attempt to market a proprietary operating system of its own ...". We techies know this refers specifically to OS/2. but it is hardly accurate to say that IBM has been unsuccessful in marketing its own operating systems. I could forgive this in a tech publication, but the typical Forbes reader would probably think that IBM had no successful operating systems.

Microsoft Wins

Notice how the article talks about RedHat and Novell. Nowhere does it mention Debian or Slackware.

The result of this lawsuit is that Novell now holds the intellectual property that SCO claimed has been integrated into Linux. I wonder what it would take for them to use it for something?

Secondly all this does is solidify the idea that "If you're going to use Linux, you need legal protection from this sort of thing" It kind of legitimizes the type of deal that Novell has made with Microsoft.

Thanks, SCO, for the riposte!

To anyone claiming 'this changes nothing', you're overlooking a great opportunity. Practice this phrase with me:

"Yeah because that worked out GREAT for SCO!"

Now, prepare to use this move to any and all of the following objections:

A) Linux is full of stolen code, and using it means you'll get sued.

B) Linux suffers from tons of IP problems, and using it means you'll get sued.

C) Microsoft is going to sue you for using Linux.

The thing that SCO did for us was dismiss the 'forgone conclusion' that the ability to sue is equivilent to the ability to WIN said suit.

Having survived this beast makes for a stronger FOSS community, so long as we don't forget it. Of course with all the noise SCO and Darl made when they thought they were certain to win, that isn't too likely...

Thank you sirs!

Did any business take SCO seriously?

At first, some companies back in 2003 may have been scared of Linux because of the lawsuit, but later polls seem to suggest that the SCO lawsuit has done little to affect Linux adoption. Any company concerned about Linux would have had to do a little research to see the SCO scam for what it was. After all they sued Daimer Chrysler (one of their former customers) for doing little more than switching to Linux 7 years before the suit. And when they sued them, it was shown that SCO really had no reason, and it was summarily dismissed.

Right now Linux adoption on the desktop is probably more affected by three factors: 1) The ease of use of Ubuntu, 2) The lackluster offerings of Vista, 3) The buzz/hype surrounding Mac OS X. On the server side, the adoption of Linux is still governed by TCO, hardware, and reliability concerns.

Re:Did any business take SCO seriously?

Autozone got sued for switching because SCO alleges that there was a point during the transition when Linux applications are linking to unix libraries. Daimler/Chrysler got sued because they didn't respond within 30 days to a letter sent to the wrong address and, eventually, SCO alleged that when DC said "we are not using Unix" they didn't answer the question "which servers are running Unix" and SCO claimed that they had audit rights to Linux usage. For the latter two points, the Michigan state court sent SCO packing with another expensive goose egg.

Too late

I was really surprised how many upper level folks at my rather large organization at the time paid attention to SCO. It hit at just the right time when Linux was being seriously considered by timid managers, the lawsuit threat scared them and they didn't want to get stuck. It was sad, all the tech guys would say it was crap, but the idea of a lawsuit is scary to some. (myself included). The last year or two the case was known to almost everyone to be without merit, but it's the opposite of shock and awe, it came about so slowly that there was never a great "Linux is ok again" moment.

The Forbes view of the world

Which has little to do with those who work in IT and much to do with those who pay for IT. It may have made some US CEOs think twice but it wouldn't have affected the workers on the ground. Next week Forbes will tell its readers that mauve has the most RAM.

sure

'The SCO Group frightened potential business users away from Linux with lawsuits demanding billions in royalties. But the litigious company's claims were shot down in a ruling that will likely boost uptake of the operating system.'

So what's the excuse for the non-adoption of Linux for all those years before the SCO mess?

Year of the Desktop? LOL!

The year of the desktop has come and past. The desktop is dying.

Richard Stallman, your phone's ringing

From TFA:

Unix was developed by the old American Telephone & Telegraph. The company allowed the system to be copied, leading to multiple versions, some of which effectively leaked into the public domain. In the early 1990s, Linus Torvalds, then a college student in Helsinki, wrote a version of the program from scratch that he called Linux. Torvalds posted Linux on the Internet, allowing others to copy and improve upon it. The sytem became popular for use on servers as an alternative to Microsoft's Windows.

Yup, that's right, ol' Linus just sat down and cloned the entire Unix operating system from scratch. On his own. With no antecedents.

Why...

SCO v. World: Why I decided to go to law school.

linux mentioned on forbes?

on the heels of an article about defcon [forbes.com] that was almost fair. is it just me or does this seem like one of the horsemen of the apocalypse?

Confirmation

SCO is dead, Netcraft confirms it.

autozone and chrysler

hmm, there were lots of names i expected to see up on the title line. RedHat, Novell and IBM were obviously expected. Autozone and chrysler? that seems a little odd to me. The article just notes that they were companies who got sued by SCO for using linux, they arent linux produces or developers, heck some might say chrysler isnt much of a car developer lately :-p. If you are going to name them you might as well name anyone selling or using linux too...

plus isnt this technically good news for mac-land as they move closer to being unix based? i remember somewhere reading they were edging closer to that.

A note to SCO employees

In response to today's Daily Herald article [heraldextra.com] (and I quote) SCO, which had also spent millions of dollars in its four-and-a-half year legal campaign, is, as one worker puts it, "sticking it out to the end. The floor may be gone, but we're still hanging on to the pipes."

My advice to SCO employees: put down those crack pipes and look for another job if you can.

Pointless speculation from Forbes - as usual

Everybody knows from previous IT industry articles that pretty much nobody cared about the SCO suit once it was clear that it was going nowhere. Almost no companies said it had any impact on their Linux provisioning considerations.

This is highly unlikely to have any effect on anybody - even Novell, much less IBM or Red Hat.

Linux On The Desktop

Maybe what should happen in 2008 is that the major distro makers should get together and get Linux on the desktop by bringing out a game that just runs on Linux. I have a perfect game to go with LOTD and that is Duke Nukem Forever. I mean they could probably make a port of the game faster than it will ever make it on a Windows desktop and you have the one game that everyone will want to play since it will be so advanced and will be just available on Linux. Well we might have to wait a while for that to happen ;).

Yes, because they are Forbes.

Is this the same company you have repeatedly accused of being "paid M$ shills"? And now they're right on the money?

They are hardly, "right on the money", but at least one reporter there has woken up and it's better late than never. My hope is that this represents yet another company that's defecting from the M$ monopoly. Their defection would be remarkable when there is so much M$ advertising money at stake. The stock prices reported are accurate facts, their predictions are interesting because they have their head in the big dumb company world, and their defection could be a sign of shifting alliances.

A gnu/linux boom because the SCO threat is gone would be a double win. Any boom is a win, but one that proves the SCO attack succeeded will be fuel for the next M$ anti-trust case. Delayed justice is not very good, but it's better than none.

Re:What's the opposite of FUD?

The stupid as court let them drag their feet

The general feeling on Groklaw seemed to be that, while SCO and BSF undoubtedly dragged their feet as long as they could, Judge Kimball (and to a lesser extend IBM) were happy to give them enough rope, simply to stop SCO from finding grounds for an appeal, and kicking the whole sordid mess off afresh again in size months time.

As it is, because SCO were given every possible chance to make their case, they are going to find it very difficult to go running to a higher court wailing "it's not fa-a-air!"

And that, I think, has to be a good thing.

Re:What's the opposite of FUD?

Justice and efficiency are mutually exclusive.

Think about the extreme opposite: a judge being able to rule within 5 minutes on complete bias.

The same goes with our governmental system- totalitarianism vs democracy. Yeah, the totalitarian government may be more efficient... but definitely less just.

And yes, it has to be that way to some extent. Could they put in provisions to help these crazy court cases? Perhaps, but there would still be a level of inefficiency in order to make room for justice.

Re:What's the opposite of FUD?

It wasn't a matter of "intuitively" obvious. OS experts said right from the beginning that SCO's claims were rubbish.

Yes, they did. And other experts, let us not forget, testified the opposite. Now to an industry insider, it's fairly obvious that Brian Kernighan's opinion is going to carry more weight than Jeffery Leitzinger's does (at least when it comes to computing). The trouble is that the courts don't know that, and cannot assume that one side's witness is better than that of the other.

Look, I really don't want to fight with you about this. If you're arguing that the US legal system is broken because it allowed BSF to file a gazillion timewasting motions and counter motions, then I think you may well be right. If you're arguing that Judge Kimball is broken, having allowed things to drag on so long, than I think you're probably not.

In any case, I don't have any great emotional investment in the issue. I'm not a US citizen, whatever problems may exist, they're not mine to solve. I'm just reporting what I've gleaned by lurking on Groklaw for the duration.

Who's "You"?

Is this the same company you have repeatedly accused of being "paid M$ shills"? And now they're right on the money?

Who has accused Forbes, twitter? Or are you calling out Slashdot? Slashdot publishes all kinds of stories from all kinds of people who walk up and post. They're often contradictory, depending on the perspective of the submitter. Slashdot isn't a newspaper with an editorial board that decides it knows what the world is like, what's happening. It's a public printing press staffed by its readers. It doesn't have an Op-Ed page or an official position on any subject. Except maybe that "Nerds Matter".

Yeah, its quality kind of sucks, its news is fairly unreliable. But Slashdot isn't a basis for making decisions, it's a conversation piece. Like a fake unicorn horn in a 400 year old glass case: not authentic, but fun to talk about. With the benefit of links to the stories elsewhere on the Web, for you to check for corroboration. But with the downside of snipey discussions like these, peopled by the mis/uninformed, the inarticulate and even saboteurs.

The pickin's are slim, but there's plenty of 'em. If you need to get 'em at Slashdot, take what you can get.

Re:Forbes? Today, yes.

Dan Lyons was pretty damn close to a paid SCO shill at times.

I suspect he'll start talking about the 235 patents soon.

All that's changed is the venue - the same people are pushing the same FUD - "Linux is a legal minefield". Just look at the shill posts around any discussion of ODF or GPL3.

That's Microsoft's best direction of attack. they can't win on price or quality, so they need to scare people away.

Re:NEWS FLASH!!! Microsoft buys NOVELL!!

sorry for spelling.. i have my speelcheck turned off

Re:Who's afraid of the Big Bad SCO?

Many financial instutions have anti gnu rules about using free software thanks to the sco ruling due to potential liability. If the company is sued then the person who chose linux job is on the line. Its just so much easier to pick ms.

Yes it hurt linux and forbes help spread alot of fud to many CIOs who now wont touch it. It worked.