Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Software Government Linux Your Rights Online News

LinuxTag To SCO: Detail Code Theft Or Retract Claims 531

RoLi writes "Heise has a story (The babelfish translation sounds like a speech from Yoda, but the important facts are translated correctly.) about LinuxTag taking legal action against SCO. SCO will either have to retract their claims, disclose their "proof" (if it exists) or be fined. That's certainly good news." Update: 05/26 17:25 GMT by T : Reader Fizz points to the more understandable LinuxTag press release (in English and German), and adds: "The notice, dated Friday, May 23, maintains that SCO Group is sowing uncertainty among the community of GNU/Linux users, developers and suppliers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

LinuxTag To SCO: Detail Code Theft Or Retract Claims

Comments Filter:
  • The english translation of the english translated version (just a sensible cleaning up of babel fish translating. I assume warned means file some kind of legal document. I didn't want to push the interpertation that far though.)

    LinuxTag [linuxtag.de] warned SCO that it is engaging in anti-competitive behavior. SCO has stated that Linux contains patented Unix source code whose patents are owned by SCO. SCO has also warned end users and companies that they could be held liable "for the use of Linux." SCO has not explained which parts of Linux are believed to contain the patented code.

    The warning by Linuxtag now forces SCO to submit proof that Linux contains patented code, or to retract the statements. The unproven statements by SCO are causing economic damage to competitors that use GNU/Linux and are tarnishing its reputation.

    Hans's Bavarian of SCO Germany has confirmed that the warnings have been recieved. SCO's attourneys are examining them. SCO however only wants to respond with a small statement clarifying its position. It does not want to divulge the proof until the trial against IBM. SCO sued IBM at the beginning of march for $1,000,000,000.

    The expresso version:

    LinuxTag is mad because SCO is saying to its customers that you could be sued because we might own some of the linux IP and you haven't paid us. LinuxTag called SCO out saying that is anticompetitive and either prove or retract your statements. SCO now caught between a lie and a legal brief doesn't want to until the trial with IBM. LinuxTag will probably tell SCO 'tough cookies' and possibly blacken the sky with paratrooping attourneys... maybe with some air support from IBM.
  • by aepervius ( 535155 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @01:28PM (#6040951)
    It is a writing (or a writ) given by a lawyer to somebody. I think you call it "cease and decist" letters.
  • by Crashmarik ( 635988 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @01:30PM (#6040966)
    Not in the good old USA.

    Under our system they can make the allegation threaten people, file suit, delay forever causing pain and suffering for all involved and never actually prove anything.

    Note in federal court civil and criminal cases share the same pool of judges. Because the constitution mandates a speedy trial for criminal cases, there is a minimum 2 year wait for civil cases to come to trial in federal court So SCO theoretically could be crapping on everyones day for the next 2 years or longer before ever having to put up or shut up.
  • Re:questions (Score:4, Informative)

    by Patersmith ( 512340 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @01:32PM (#6040977)

    from the English index page...

    A Good Idea Needs a Good Platform
    LinuxTag is the largest Linux and Open Source fair in Europe. Our concept unites technical expertise and the special charm of the world of free software. This mixture has made LinuxTag the most successful event of its kind.

    The Open Source culture finds its expression in the organization of the event: everyone is invited to play an active part in the preparation of the fair. At LinuxTag, innovative technologies are not only planned out in theory, but also made a reality.

    Concepts. Information. Orientation.
    The LinuxTag concept is tried and true. As a convention for professionals and a fair for a broader public, LinuxTag has something to offer every visitor. Users learn about the latest in applications; developers display their current products and inform one another about their work. Decision-makers and IT specialists gather information on the professional use of free software.

    For young entrepreneurs, LinuxTag offers the chance to address specialists in the field face to face. This is the stepping-stone to turn new business ideas into successful strategies. LinuxTag sets the standards for the development of innovative concepts and powerful synergies.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 26, 2003 @01:45PM (#6041030)
    These are quotes -- that you spoke/wrote the truth is an absolute defense to slander/libel.
  • Human translation (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 26, 2003 @01:47PM (#6041039)

    Here's a human translation:

    LinuxTag e.V. sent an "Abmahnung" [a legal document somehwat similar to a cease-and-desist letter, I think, but IANAL] to SCO because of anti-competitive behavior. SCO is claiming that Linux violates the company's intellectual property because Unix source code has been copied into the Linux sources, and they're warning Linux users that they might be liable when using Linux. However the company has not yet disclosed, which parts of Linux are actually affected.

    The cease-and-desist forces SCO to either prove their claims or to take them back. "We cannot accept that SCO trys to use unproved claims to harm competitors by intimidating their customers and to damage the reputation of GNU/Linux as an open platform", said Michael Kleinhenz, LinuxTag e.V.'s spokesperson.

    Hans Bayer, director of SCO Germany, confirmed having received three ceases-and-desist letters. They are currenlty examined by a lawyer. He could understand that the current uncertain legal situation is problematic for Linux companies. SCO would also aim for a quick resolution, however they will not present their proof until the court case against IBM. In early march, SCO had sued IBM for one billion dollars damages.

  • by Otter ( 3800 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @01:49PM (#6041052) Journal
    I'd be interested to know if this kind of thing constitutes libel.

    Under US law, truth is an absolute defence against libel. (Although I seem to recall reading that one of the Stallman quotes is misattributed, but he'd still have to demonstrate that they knew that.)

    No, reminding others of embarassing things someone once said is entirely legal. Again, in the US -- other legal systems undoubtedly vary, just as German law is being used against SCO's German arm here.

  • by j7953 ( 457666 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @02:04PM (#6041135)

    They organize a yearly Linux exhibition, called "LinuxTag" (which means "Linux day"), which according to them is Europe's biggest Linux exhibition. They're not direct competitors to SCO, however if SCO causes less people to visit the trade show or causes exhibitors to shy away from actually displaying Linux products, that will harm LinuxTag e.V., so that's why they can take legal action.

    I don't know what they can do other than writing letters. In fact, I have to say that I'm quite surprised to see this move. I don't expect SCO to simply accept their demands, so unless all they wanted is some free press coverage, they'll have to sue SCO.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 26, 2003 @02:06PM (#6041145)
    Suppose Stallman said:

    "I think it's disgusting that some people believe that cannibalism is good"

    or

    "I believe that that cannibalism is good but only when referring to salvaging some parts from some machines to use it in another. Human cannibalism is disgusting."

    Quoting him as saying "I...believe that cannibalism is good" or "I believe that cannibalism is good" is libelous even though Stallman may have actually said those words.

    Context is everything.
  • by Farang ( 552254 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @02:08PM (#6041156)
    Yes, "Tag" does mean "day," but then we have words like "Bundestag" and "Reichstag," where it does not. Not sure exactly what the Germans had in mind here, but I suspect this "Tag" in "Linux-Tag" is related to "Tagung," which means something like meeting, congress, convocation. That's why "Bundestag" can be translated as "Federal Parliament" instead of "Federal Day." So for "Linux-Tag" we might say "Linux Forum," maybe. CMIIAW. As for "Mahnung," this noun means warning only in the sense of admonition, reminder, exhortation; you don't use in expressions like, "Warning! Minefield!" It's more for, "I warned you once already, so this time you get sent off."
  • Tell her that 'daemon' actually means something closer to "guardian angel" than "demon".

    From the Merriam-Webster Online dictionary entry for demon:

    1 a : an evil spirit b : a source or agent of evil, harm, distress, or ruin
    2 usually daemon : an attendant power or spirit : GENIUS
    3 usually daemon : a supernatural being of Greek mythology intermediate between gods and men

    All of those daemons running in the background on your machine are attendant spirits. The name has been rationalized by calling it an acronym for Disk And Execution MONitors, but acording to the Jargon File it was originaly based on the second or third meaning quoted above.
  • by tijnbraun ( 226978 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @02:22PM (#6041218)
    Well I missed this one today on slashdot:

    Advise from Gartner:

    The lawsuits against IBM and Linux users could take a year or more. Minimize Linux in complex, mission-critical systems until the merits of SCO's claims or any resulting judgments become clear.

    SCOs Threat to Sue Linux Users Serious butRemote [gartner.com]
  • Re:Only connect (Score:5, Informative)

    by Watts Martin ( 3616 ) <layotl@gmail3.1415926.com minus pi> on Monday May 26, 2003 @02:22PM (#6041219) Homepage

    This keeps coming up. The answer is "no."

    1. SCO actually developed Xenix with Microsoft. Microsoft sold their part of the rights back to SCO years ago.
    2. "SCO Unix" and "SCO Xenix" are different products.
    3. UnixWare was bought from Novell, and it is a different product from the other two.
    4. The current "SCO" was formed when Caldera bought all of SCO's Unix assets so SCO could focus on Tarantella, an enterprise remote computing system. SCO then changed their name to Tarantella, and later Caldera changed their name to SCO.
    5. In other words, the current "SCO" is not the SCO that worked on Xenix with Microsoft in the first place. That company is Tarantella, which isn't in the Unix business anymore.
    6. Furthermore, while Caldera-now-SCO has nothing in common with the original SCO, Caldera-now-SCO has almost nothing in common with the original Caldera. The shift toward "survival by litigation" comes shortly after an entirely new management team was put in place.
    7. Microsoft recently licensed rights to use Unix from Caldera-now-SCO. This is clearly an attempt to hop onto the "Linux = Copyright Infringement" bandwagon that Caldera-now-SCO started, but there's no evidence to suggest a larger conspiracy.
  • by ncc74656 ( 45571 ) <scott@alfter.us> on Monday May 26, 2003 @02:25PM (#6041235) Homepage Journal
    Attacking minor figures inevitably makes you look small. Whether justified or not, Bush made a major error calling for a boycott of the Dixie Chicks, it made him look like a small minded bully. He should have laughed it off. A President with real class would have called them up and talked to them in person.

    (Responding to trolls is usually a Bad Idea, but I can't allow this assertion to remain unchallenged.)

    Get back under your bridge. Bush never called for a boycott of anybody. There are some talk-radio hosts (Sean Hannity [hannity.com] comes to mind as an example) who have suggested that the Dixie Chicks' treachery ought not be rewarded in the marketplace, but the administration hasn't said much one way or the other about the subject. If you're going to mindlessly bash people, at least get your facts straight.

  • The problem with this is that forcing SCO to disclose evidence in a civil trial before the appropriate time will harm their ability to make their case against IBM in court.
    Actually no.

    If their trade secret claim had any merit, disclosing the evidence of it now would not void or reduce their claims for the misappropriated code in the first place. Although they are not obligated to dislose this information now, by failing to do so they are actually furthering damage to their own company because of the presence of code that was never intended to be in Linux being distributed by third parties. They certainly are not making themselves eligible for more damages because of this, and are setting themselves up for a substantially reduced settlement judgement. One may suppose perhaps this is why they asked for one billion... so even reduced, it's still pretty good, but a judge is almost certainly going to discard that figure anyways because no trade secret infringement claim is supposed to be that many times more than your entire company's net worth.

  • Re:SCO FUD Attack (Score:2, Informative)

    by corz ( 409850 ) * on Monday May 26, 2003 @02:47PM (#6041337) Homepage
    Was it this letter [sco.com]?

  • by rjh ( 40933 ) <rjh@sixdemonbag.org> on Monday May 26, 2003 @03:00PM (#6041397)
    It's been a few years since I took my college German classes, but if I recall correctly from that class, Germany has some very strong laws meant to protect the good names of people, companies and organizations. If I go about talking trash about you, your company, firm or organization, you have the right to present me with an Abmahnung. It's not a "cease and desist" letter, it's a "put up or shut up" letter.

    What the Abmahnung does is creates a legal obligation for me to present evidence to prove my claims--or else I'm legally enjoined from continuing my trash-talking, under penalty of a very hefty fine.

    So no, LinuxTag hasn't just sent SCO a nastygram. They've sent SCO a nastygram with teeth. From here on out in Germany, SCO has three choices: they can either prove it and keep talking, they can keep talking and pay a huge fine, or they can shut up.

    ObWarning: it's been a while since I took my college German studies, and even longer since I was a foreign exchange student in Germany (where my host father was a German prosecutor). This is all based on my best recollection.
  • by baxterux ( 575852 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @03:05PM (#6041412) Homepage
    it a community and i am proud to be part of it. i am part of the translation team and we translated the website to english http://www.linuxtag.org/2003/en/index.html linuxtag EV is an association registered in germany and linuxtag is a congress and expo they organize every year and its the biggest open source event in europe. so its not like comdex sueing motorola for abusing ericsson. we are part of teh open source community and we feel concerned and an association is the best way to defend our interest. i am neither german nor do i live in germany, but i have to say the guys are organized and at least someone is doing something about this!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 26, 2003 @03:19PM (#6041474)
    LinuxTag is a Linux fair organisation company.

    there are several Linux or OSS magazines in Germany
    - LinuxUser http://www.linuxuser.de
    -LinuxMagazin http://www.linuxmagazin.de/
    -EasyLinux
    -RedHatMa gazin
    -LinuxEnterprise http://www.linuxenterprise.de/
    - PHP magazine et al.

    Heise.de is an important IT newsticker which prints some high profile magazines.

    German IT interest groups are well organised, just to name a few:

    FSF Europe

    http://www.fsfeurope.org

    LUG - Linux user groups in every town

    Live - Linux-verband - commercial lobby organisation
    http://www.linux-verband.de/start.ht ml

    Bundestux - small media campaign for public use of Linux
    old campaign:
    http://www2.bundestux.de/bundestux_alt/ english.htm l
    new campaign:
    http://www.bundestux.de

    Netzwerk Neue Medien

    FFII - leads the forces in the EU battle against software patents :-) Organises Conferences, lobby work.
    http://swpat.ffii.org [multilingual]

    CCC chaos computer Club - Hacker org, important congress

    www.ccc.de

    www.ODEM.org Alvar Freude against free speech restrictions

    and many more

    there is still no EFF Europe, EDRi.org somehow takes the part.

    They have different approaches and target groups. But they all work for a free information society.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 26, 2003 @03:20PM (#6041483)
    Unfortunately under the law (US) they have every right to hold back evidence until sometime just before the trial. Their close lipped nature, given that this (the copyfight infringement) could be so easily proven, is what is fueling the speculation that their evidence is weak and they are just doing this to be bought out.

    In the U.S., SCO cannot withhold the evidence from IBM, as that must be turned over during the discovery process. SCO is under no legal obligation, however, to disclose their alleged trade secrets to the world at large. Indeed, given that SCO is making a trade secret claim, they may well file a motion requesting that the discovery documents be kept under court seal (and out of public scrutiny). That is well within their legal rights.

    Also, a reminder ... SCO is not suing IBM for a copyright violation. They are suing for the torts of misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, and tortuous interference (with business), and for a contract claim (breach of contract). Neither copyrights, patents nor trademarks have anything to do with this suit.

  • by cowmix ( 10566 ) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <hcramm>> on Monday May 26, 2003 @03:26PM (#6041506) Homepage
    > "I'd like to see a date put on this."
    >
    > A quick search on google resolved this.

    You are looking at a link that formatted the email wrong.. check out this link:

    http://lists.insecure.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/ Jan/1184.html

    As you can see.. Stallman was *quoting* an email. He did not make that statement. If you look at the email it was in reply to, you would be able to figure that out..
  • Re:Insanity? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Tom ( 822 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @03:58PM (#6041651) Homepage Journal
    *bzzt*, wrong.

    Linuxtag is a trade fair, but Linuxtag e.V., the legal body behind the fair, is an "eingetragener Verein", which is essentially german for tax-exempt non-profit organisation.

    All german "e.V."s have a "common good" purpose in their charta. That of Linuxtag e.V. almost certainly reads something like "to advance Linux in the business world". Certainly, stopping harm against the community falls flat within that purpose.

    Also, german Wettbewerbsrecht (law about fair competition) allows almost everyone to bring a lawsuit against someone violating it. This was done to make sure that consumers, even would-be consumers (e.g. I'd love to buy that X, but company Y has driven them out of business using unfair means, so I'm not a customer of either, legally) have a standing.

    I know Till (the lawyer here) in person. He's a good guy, and he certainly knows what he's doing.
  • by tim_maroney ( 239442 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @04:02PM (#6041664) Homepage
    Based on this useful reference [insecure.org] from cowmix (10566) [slashdot.org] I must retract and correct my statement that SCO was only quoting RMS. Cowmix is correct and SCO's page does misattribute the quote, which does not contain the words of RMS. Instead, it is a quote from Larry McVoy [insecure.org].
  • by pjrc ( 134994 ) <paul@pjrc.com> on Monday May 26, 2003 @04:06PM (#6041676) Homepage Journal
    The angry rant that slashdot carried a while ago, from one of the BSD developers, was regarding great similarity between a couple of header (.h) files consisting mostly of constants and codes relating to that particular piece of hardware, not actual executable code he had written. Maybe this is the same incident you're remembering?

    Perhaps it was copied and the names of things altered? Perhaps the same basic information was obtained separately?

    At least as I recall, the files in question were primarily raw information such as contants and declarations, and not actual executable code. (IANAL, but...) it is a well established that raw information is not copyrightable. Only specific expression and derived works can be the subject of copyright.

    Of course, that doesn't mean you can't try to sue. It only means your case will be without merit if the copying is limited to basic information (not misappropriated trade secrets). Maybe SCO's claims are as groundless, maybe they really do have a case. Maybe LinuxTag will force them to disclose the evidence (or lack thereof) sooner, or maybe we'll all just have to wait for the public disclosure by the court.

    But that episode where one of the BSD developers got slashdot to post his troll/flame didn't appear to go anywhere, and the overwhelming majority of (highly moderated) comments at the time were noting that the claimed copying was only header files consisting primarily of raw information that probably isn't protected by copyright.... and that the polite thing to do would have been to give credit in the comments, if it were copied (which still wasn't clear).

  • by mark-t ( 151149 ) <markt AT nerdflat DOT com> on Monday May 26, 2003 @04:37PM (#6041793) Journal
    When they get to court, SCO will be legally required to provide any evidence or proof of wrongdoing on IBM's part. Until then, and release of evidence could destroy their case.
    This is false.

    If SCO's trade secrets were misappropriated and inserted into Linux, the loss of those trade secrets is an utterly irrevocable event that would not be affected in the slightest if they were to announce where they were (since the code to Linux was already in the public). The premise that they would be hastening their loss if they announced where it was is also false because, again, the code is already in public view -- the mere fact that the details are obscured from scrutiny by hundreds of thousands of other lines of source code is superfluous. Also, if the Linux kernel were changed to remove their code after SCO announced where the problems were, the fact that it was previously visible to the public would still carry just as much weight. SCO's claim would not be altered by one penny, since the claim for the trade secret's value would be measured against the value *before* it became public knowledge, not after. In fact, the most that SCO could *EVER* hope to collect would be a measurement of their trade secret's worth at the point in time where their company had the greatest net worth *SINCE* the earliest possible time that the trade secrets could have been compromised (which in this case cannot be further back than IBM's involvement with Linux). Guidelines do exist for measuring the value of a trade secret based on the net worth of the company as a whole, so a dollar figure can actually be deduced, but it shouldn't be anywhere even close to billion dollars in SCO's case.

  • Re:Only connect (Score:3, Informative)

    by arivanov ( 12034 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @05:19PM (#6042028) Homepage
    SCO Unix

    I keep reading this and every time I want to f*** cream.

    SCO Unix does not exist. SCO Openserver does not have a X-Open Unix 95 or Unix 98 certification. It has no right to be called Unix and have not had such a right at least for the last 8 years. (Unixware is a different matter).

  • by Reimer Behrends ( 464673 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @06:27PM (#6042416)
    First, an "Abmahnung" is not a lawsuit. It's an out-of-court attempt to enjoin somebody (in this case a competitor) from doing something, in this case presumably continuing dishonest business practices. The case goes to court only if the competitor does not agree to discontinue the objectionable activity.

    In essence, an "Abmahnung" is a cease-and-desist letter with teeth. If you receive one, you have the option to either agree to stop doing something AND to pay a heavy contractual fine if you violate this agreement; if you refuse, that the plaintiff can ask for temporary injunctive relief from a court.

    This process is fast: typically you are given only 1-2 weeks to respond, and after that, temporary injunctive relief can be granted. Unless SCO can provide evidence for their claims, they will eventually be permanently enjoined from pursuing current anti-competitive practices.

    Note also that under German anti-competitive law not only direct competitors can pursue this kind of legal action, but also various kinds of organizations that represent consumers or competitors (so-called passive legitimization).

    (Disclaimer: This is somewhat simplified, I don't know all the details of the case, and finally, I'm not a lawyer.)
  • by frost22 ( 115958 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @06:53PM (#6042573) Homepage
    Yes and no. An "Abmahnung" has a more formal meaning. It is only valid in certain legal areas, most notably the competition law, and the law specifies exactly who may issue an Abmahnung, and who can't (usually it is an affected competitor or certain qualified third parties , like consumer associations and the like).

    Consequently, it also has more legal "power" than a simple cease and desist. For instance, you do not have the option to ignore such a thing - you must either accept it - and accede to its demands - or contest it in court. And if you accept it, you are required to pay the legal costs associated with it.
  • Re:IBM counter suit (Score:2, Informative)

    by Tsu Dho Nimh ( 663417 ) <abacaxi@@@hotmail...com> on Monday May 26, 2003 @08:39PM (#6043199)
    They in effect did ... They got the case moved to a federal court, out of the Utah court where SCO had orignally filed it. That deprived them of "home court" advantage and upped the stakes considerably.
  • by Malcontent ( 40834 ) on Monday May 26, 2003 @11:46PM (#6044480)
    "Would this even be possible?"

    Yes. Scientology did it when their tax exempt status was being questioned by the IRS. They filed thousands of suits against the IRS.
  • by boots@work ( 17305 ) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @02:52AM (#6045392)
    Could this have been avoided using Microsoft? No, and it's important to make sure people remember that.

    Customers of Microsoft were exposed to lawsuits when Microsoft breached Timeline's copyright with code in SQL server.

    I don't see any Linux customers having their business disrupted and confidential information disturbed by an SPA raid, driven by a rumour from a disgruntled ex-employee. That happens to Microsoft customers regularly.

Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.

Working...