Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Linux Software

SCO Protest And Anti-Protest In Provo 865

Posted by timothy
from the please-stop-beating-my-wife dept.
a.ameri writes "On Friday, June 20, the Provo Linux Users Group decided to head on over to SCO's offices and hold a protest; information on the event, including pictures and press coverage, can be found on the PLUG page. Among other things, the protesters claim that SCO employes came out and joined the event holding pre-prepared signs saying things like 'I love software piracy' and 'Try communism - use Linux.'" There are some funny shots linked here (thanks to reader lucif latum). Daddio64 points to the press covereage in the Deseret News and Provo Daily Herald.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SCO Protest And Anti-Protest In Provo

Comments Filter:
  • by TRS-80 (15569) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:27PM (#6269021) Homepage Journal
    The original post on LWN [lwn.net] containes a few comments on why the SCO people did this (ie they have a sense of humour).

    Slashdot - stealing LWN stories for fun and profit since 1998

    • by mackstann (586043) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:56PM (#6269254) Homepage
      Yeah, great, but isn't humor inappropriate here? Why are the linux dorks being buddy buddy with their arms around the SCO CEO? They have signs that say "Linux feeds my family", so how can it be a joking matter for them? If someone did something to cause you to lose your livelihood, would you joke around and be buddy buddy with them? Just a thought.

      Note that I'm not a linux dork being defensive, I think it's pretty pointless to go out there and protest, I just like to point out possible hypocrisy when I see it.
      • by innocent_white_lamb (151825) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:55PM (#6269586)
        Why are the linux dorks being buddy buddy with their arms around the SCO CEO?

        Indeed.

        Unfortunately, actions like these take the whole point away from having the protest in the first place.

        I recognize that "techies" are not particularly good at protesting stuff; that's not what they do and there is no reason why they should be. However, this action by Canopy (provide drinks for everyone, buddy-buddy with folks there and "We're all friends now!") was a calculated public relations move to diffuse the impact of the protest.

        If the protest was a cold, "Screw you SCO" affair, that's a real protest and will be portrayed as such. This, however, appears to have been turned into a simple picnic on SCO's front lawn.

        Which is exactly what SCO wanted.
        • by erat (2665) on Monday June 23, 2003 @12:55AM (#6271078)
          Actually, I think you're the one misunderstanding the point of a protest.

          Let's face a simple fact right up front: SCO isn't going to kill a lawsuit because 50+ people picketted behind their building for 2 hours. I hope nobody has any confusion over this.

          Protests are done to draw public attention to an opinion, be it for or against a certain issue. Judging by the actions of the protesters in Utah I have to say they understood perfectly well what they were doing. They notified the press before the protest, they picketted in back of SCO's building which just so happens to be the only side that fronts on a public road, and not long before 4:00pm the protesters LEFT THE AREA to go protest near the entrance/exit to I-15. If they were there to piss off SCO's upper management, they probably would have figured out a way to protest in front of the building where all the offices were (the front of the building faces a parking lot and is not visible from any public road. It would have been an intimate, easilly swept under the carpet show placed for a few SCO employees and that's it. Talk about a waste of time).

          They made themselves and their opinions very visible in very public areas. In doing this, they made their protest successful. They got print coverage in a few local papers (Deseret News is actually fairly big in Utah), and rumor has it that a TV crew got some shots (I didn't see them arrive or leave, but I wasn't there the whole time).

          The lawsuit seems to still be moving forward, but is that really a surprise?
    • by gad_zuki! (70830) * on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:08PM (#6269324)
      >(ie they have a sense of humour).

      I'm not sure about that. Let's see theres a BILLION dollar lawsuit, linux's reputation has been tarnished, IBMs AIX licenses are now in question, Linus himself is getting threatened, and now they're hurling insults under the guise of "just kidding!"

      Its like that wanna-be bully in gradeschool who insults you then says, "I'm kidding!" Its a lame attempt to bait OSS types and get them angry thus producing more negative press.
    • by Sevn (12012) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @07:28PM (#6269767) Homepage Journal
      It is official; IBM confirms: SCO is dying One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered SCO community when IDC confirmed that SCO market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent IBM survey which plainly states that SCO has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. SCO is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

      You don't need to be a Microsoft Zealot to predict SCO's future. The hand writing is on the wall: SCO faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for SCO because SCO is dying. Things are looking very bad for SCO. As many of us are already aware, SCO continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

      unixware is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time unixware developers only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: unixware is dying.

      All major surveys show that SCO has steadily declined in market share. SCO is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If SCO is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. SCO continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, SCO is dead.

      Fact: SCO is dying
    • by iceT (68610)
      Sense of humor my ass. That is SCO property, which is a place of business. If the management at SCO allowed THEIR employees to place those signs out in front of their building during business hours, then they CONDONED the posters. It wasn't a sense of humor, but a glimpse at a childish, petty organization that only comes across as 'smug'.

      Whether they have a valid basis for a lawsuit or not, I expect companies to act like grown-ups. I've seen to many articles recently where executives, management, and l
  • Uh, note to SCO (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:28PM (#6269033)
    You're a corporation. You're supposed to keep quite and smirk at protesters. You do not allow your employees to come out and hold their own "anti protest", especially when a large percentage of the computing world think you're unbalanced anyway!

    Earth to SCO. SCO come in now...I think we lost 'em.
  • by stonebeat.org (562495) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:30PM (#6269047) Homepage
    I wonder how many SCO employees are actually pro-linux, but are afraid to say anything, against their own company......
  • by Daath (225404) <lp&coder,dk> on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:30PM (#6269049) Homepage Journal
    Userfriendly [userfriendly.org] has modified a Gary Larson (Farside) comic to fit SCO! It's quite funny!
    • by Otter (3800) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:51PM (#6269207) Journal
      Fairly typical User Friendly: "I must write a strip ridiculing SCO and defending Linux users against accusations of ignoring the IP rights of others. But how? Got it -- I'll steal Gary Larson's old bit about what the dog hears! Except I'll modify it just enough to make it no longer make sense!"

      And the readers see it and go, "Hey, I use Linux! And I know about SCO! And I know the original cartoon!"

  • Image Problems? (Score:5, Informative)

    by RWarrior(fobw) (448405) * on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:32PM (#6269059)
    I can't mirror the pictures, but when they get Slashdotted, the important text on the signs are below, since I can't mirror them.

    It this really the image these people want to project?

    • "Legalize Stupidity - Smoke Linux"
    • "Give Communism A Try - Free Linux"
    • "Who's Down With IPOP - Other People's Intellectual Property" with Tux saying "I'm Down I'm Down"
    • "My Son Stole Code & Republished It (and all I got was this lousy t-shirt"
    • "I Don't Pay For Music - I Don't Pay For My O.S. Either - So Sue Me"
    • "Software Stealing Is Not A Crime - In Iraq And Parts of France"
    • "I [heart] Software Piracy" complete with Tux in a pirate outfit

    Too bad I'm not an SCO shareholder. Maybe I could sue SCO management for permitting such stupid childishness on company time.

    • i m not justifying any of these, but SCO employees have their right of free speech as well. SCO management can not stop them, nor do they have to.
      • Re:Image Problems? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by drinkypoo (153816)
        Of course, if the signs were dreamed up on company time, especially if they were thought up by marketing (they have that look about them) then it's not a free speech issue, it's a how are you spending money that could instead be used to raise stock prices issue.
      • Re:Image Problems? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by divide overflow (599608) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:24PM (#6269409)
        i m not justifying any of these, but SCO employees have their right of free speech as well. SCO management can not stop them, nor do they have to.

        Yeah, right. What planet are YOU on?
        • The right of free speech is a restriction preventing the government from limiting your speech. It is standard practice for companies to tell their employees what they should and shouldn't say to the press.
        • Do you think for an instant that SCO would allow any of their employees to keep their jobs if they stood out their and SUPPORTED the protestors? That would be a MEANINGFUL test of their right of free speech. If the company didn't want them to come "out of the SCO building with pre-prepared posters for the protest" do you think they would allow them to? Their lawyers would most certainly have sent memos around telling the employees exactly how they were expected to behave.
        In short, the notion that these folks aren't supported by SCO or that SCO wouldn't stop them if they didn't support such activities is ludicrous and absurd. Anyone who would harbor such delusions should seek professional help.
    • Re:Image Problems? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by cowmix (10566) * <mmarch@@@gmail...com> on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:44PM (#6269158) Homepage
      * "Give Communism A Try - Free Linux"

      Hmm.. well is was Caldera riding on high on the capitalistic Linux
      IPO craze of the late 90s that allowed them to purchase SCO thus
      any usable IP left in SystemV code base. It was the promise of Linux
      who bank rolled the whole thing. I think that anyone who bought
      into their IPO because they thought they were investing in a Linux
      company should get their money back.
    • by Kaeru the Frog (152611) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:48PM (#6269186)
      "Who's Down With IPOP - Other People's Intellectual Property" with Tux saying "I'm Down I'm Down"

      Naughty by Nature promptly treatened to sue SCO for unauthorized use of it copyrighted material. When asked what matereal exactly was copied, Naughty by Nature refused to say claiming if they disclosed they risked others also using it without their permission.

    • Legalize Stupidity alright, because at the moment SCO is breaking the law with copious amounts of it.
    • Its called baiting (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gad_zuki! (70830) * on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:03PM (#6269298)
      They want Linux users and OSS types to fly off the handle thus creating more negative press, just ignore them. Right now they're only making themselves look bad. Really bad. Man, these are adults?
      • by Dr_Marvin_Monroe (550052) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @08:21PM (#6270047)
        I can't agree more with the poster.

        At this stage, ANY coverage that SCO gets directly benifits them. This is precisely why they have chosen to "dribble" out little bits of information, escalate their rhetoric and claims and generally try this case in the media BEFORE getting to court.

        The best thing the Linux community could do is to start shaping the "language" of the case in the court of public opinion, making sure that the language is centered on "where's the evidence?"....

        The burden is on them to show where copying took place...do NOT allow them to start making this a case about "Linux helps terrorists" or "Linux is for criminals"....they will attempt to shift the argument to this, baiting us to defend our "non-criminal" status....if it gets that far, they've won...

        The best answer is to follow IBM's lead..."we've done nothing wrong, so there's no need for comment"....followed by media blackout. This would hurt SCO more than a few signs and protesters.....keep them out of the spotlight, and every time they announce another increase in damages or whatnot, they will appear more shrill....

        Shun them completely!....and DONT BUY THEIR PRODUCTS!...but most importantly, stay away from this rabid dog....stay far away....
    • by Dumbush (676200) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:25PM (#6269415)
      Dude, havn't you learn from our leader? You can never go wrong blaming Iraq, France, and communism.

      Now to all hawks, rejoice!
      Hail Bush!
    • by kuwan (443684) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @08:13PM (#6270010) Homepage
      My co-workers and I were the ones that took some of the pictures. You can find more of them here (with mirrors):

      http://www.kuwan.net/scotesters/index.html [kuwan.net]

      http://www.karlrees.com/sco/scotesters/index.html [karlrees.com]

      http://www.normanfam.org/sco/scotesters/index.html [normanfam.org]

      I should note that Ralph Yarrows, head of the Canopy group which owns 46% of SCO, was the one to organize the anti-protest and was the one who had the posters made.
  • I'm getting a bit dizzy. I can't tell the spin from the sarcasm anymore. Any chance the fine folks from SomethingAwful [somethingawful.com] are behind any of this?

    Ryan Fenton
  • actionable? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by lophophore (4087) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:33PM (#6269070) Homepage
    Just wondering: Since some of those signs seem to imply that Linus is a thief, I wonder if he can now sue SCO for defamation???

  • by Martin Kallisti (652377) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:34PM (#6269079)
    From the LWN page: This is sad... (Posted Jun 22, 2003 20:47 UTC (Sun) by erat) (Post reply) No, not the SCO folks who made the signs... It's the people who don't have a shred of humor left and, more importantly, weren't even there who seem to be take everything SCO employees touch as being an insult. I work across the street from SCO. I was at the protest. At one point, I was one of the people carrying a SCO-produced sign (as a JOKE. At one point I even saw picketters holding SCO signs). If you were there you'd know that the entire event -- albeit serious in its message -- was taken in good spirits by pretty much everyone. I'd be surprised if anyone seriously though the SCO signs were meant to be anything but fun. You remember FUN, don't you?? It's like when you're in a bar watching a football game and there are folks rooting for the other team in the bar with you; friendly "traitor" jabs are tossed back and forth, joking insinuations are made, and in the end you all laugh together and say "bye" when you leave. Here are some facts that some (all?) of you didn't get from the pictures: 1) It was very hot that day so Canopy provided drinks for everyone, including the protesters. And yes, protesters took them up on the drinks, and they even said "thanks". 2) SCO and Canopy employees (including Ralph Yarro and Darl McBride, among others) shared laughs with the picketters. No, I didn't see Chris Sontag or Blake Stowell out there, but I don't know them so I could have just missed them. 3) Darl, on his way home, stopped by the picketting near 1600 N. (he didn't have to; he could have driven by and nobody would have noticed) and chatted with the protesters. There are at least two pictures of him with his arms around a few of the protesters, and all of them are happy. Sorry folks, but other than a reporter who got heat stroke, the people who showed up had a good time. The folks there mixed with SCO, Canopy, etc. employees from around the office complex, had some fun with the "rivalry", and went on their merry way happy. At least that was my observation. The intent of the protest was to bring attention to the opinions of those who oppose SCO's actions, not to threaten, throw things, fight, or yell. In that regard, the protest was more successful than I would have hoped. Nobody walked away with a different opinion of SCO's actions, but people can disagree without hating each other. At least here in Utah they can.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:40PM (#6269119)
      SCO still sucks.
    • by mcgroarty (633843) <brian...mcgroarty@@@gmail...com> on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:00PM (#6269280) Homepage
      When somebody's shouting lies about you, while simultaneously trying to steal your property and sell it back to you, humor shouldn't be high up your priority list.

      There are times for fun, and there are times for seriously defending what you think is important.

      This is a time to take up a rigid position, and this isn't an appropriate area for feel-good games. Put plainly: The world's single most important piece of free software and the future of free software's acceptance are at stake.

    • by amcnabb (682951) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:45PM (#6269512) Homepage
      I was there, too, and I don't agree with this interpretation of what the SCO people were doing. First of all, they only gave drinks to two or three people; the rest of us had our own.

      And none of our protesters touched their anti-protest signs. The writer of this comment must have mistaken them for our people because the signs were being marched around.

      Sure, everyone had a great time, but I don't feel like the SCO people were very respectful, except for McBride who talked to us in a political not-actually-answering-any-questions way.
  • by bstadil (7110) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:37PM (#6269097) Homepage
    Even though

    Nostalgia isn't what it used to be !

    it's hard not to feel a little sentimental when you see good old Commie Scare posters.

    Guess the employees protesting felt akin to the Iraqs cheering Sadam at his strolling casual thru streets of Baghdad TV shows.

  • by mocm (141920) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:38PM (#6269106) Homepage
    Wouldn't SCO employees be better advised to write their resumees, instead of protesting. They probably will have to get new jobs soon. Not that they seem busy doing anything else.
    And it doesn't matter whether SCO wins or loses. They seem to be an IP (not that they ever created any) only company now and would probably not need many employees, except for lawyers.
  • by mdb31 (132237) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:38PM (#6269112)
    I don't want to interrupt a perfectly good rant here, but you may want to follow the link in comment #6269021 (should be the FP in this thread if you're reading at a reasonable score treshold...). Idiotic though the whole SCO lawsuit is, the protest and counter-protest actually seemede quite friendly -- to quote a poster on the aforementioned LWN board:

    It's the people who don't have a shred of humor left and, more importantly, weren't even there who seem to be take everything SCO employees touch as being an insult.

    I work across the street from SCO. I was at the protest. At one point, I was one of the people carrying a SCO-produced sign (as a JOKE. At one point I even saw picketters holding SCO signs). If you were there you'd know that the entire event -- albeit serious in its message -- was taken in good spirits by pretty much everyone. I'd be surprised if anyone seriously though the SCO signs were meant to be anything but fun.

    You remember FUN, don't you?? It's like when you're in a bar watching a football game and there are folks rooting for the other team in the bar with you; friendly "traitor" jabs are tossed back and forth, joking insinuations are made, and in the end you all laugh together and say "bye" when you leave.


    You may want to read the rest of that message as well, and just give it a rest... Not if Slashdot hasn't dumped enough vitriol on SCO already lately.
    • by the gnat (153162) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:01PM (#6269283)
      That sounded like bullshit to me, until I found the pictures [lug-nut.com] of Darl McBride and a couple of protestors. God knows the Linux community can be, um, a little humorless and self-congratulatory, and SCO has veered into the realm of insanity. The concept of Darl laughing with the pro-Linux people simply doesn't make any sense whatsoever, since he's accused nearly half the tech industry of outright theft. It's hard to think of any of this as "FUN" when you're dealing with a group of corporate raiders who are literally trying to sabotage the future of computing.

      I'd reached the conclusion a long time ago that Linux was grossly overrated, but it's also done great things for my workplace and my research field, and it's a shame to see another sleazebag IP holding company try to hijack that. I don't condone IP theft or DDoS attacks on SCO's website, but I also wouldn't speak to the likes of Darl McBride except through a lawyer.

      Oh, by the way, the Communism thing isn't funny any more. It's not McCarthyism, but it's pretty fucking stupid and offensive. Most of us in The Real World use and like Linux because it helps us do our jobs and make (and save!) money, not because it fits our half-baked socialist ideals.
  • Wow (Score:3, Insightful)

    by antiMStroll (664213) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:42PM (#6269132)
    I owe the Slashdot crowd an apology. Seeing that type of behaviour here, I thought it was a thousands high schoolers bashing away at a thousand library computers on their first, euphoric Internet high. But damn, professional adults stoop to this kind of bigoted, ad hominem baiting? Communism and Iraq? And France? Man, that's unbelievably depressing. All I can hope is potential future employers of these people see those signs before SCO does it's inevitable endo.
  • Darl McBride? (Score:4, Informative)

    by metatruk (315048) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:42PM (#6269135)
    In this pic you can see that Darl McBride has his arms around two of the protestors:
    http://mirror.lug-nut.com/mcnabb/med/IMG_0057.JPG [lug-nut.com]
  • by chipster (661352) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:49PM (#6269190)
    case in the least bit. This proves their immaturity, and the fact that they cannot in any way, be taken seriously.

    Analogizing drugs and Open Source is 13-year-old crap, and I'm sure ESR and others will have a ball with this.

    Nice going SCO. Thanks for proving (in "graphic" detail) what kind of corporation you truly represent.

  • For the sake of discussion, let's assume the case has merit. The Linux community will rewrite the improperly used code, redesigning it if need be, craft tools to migrate everyone over to it, and go on. This is open source, utter transparency, no secrets. They can't go after every line of the current kernel, we know that, and there's more than one way to do everything.

    SCO will be soon be a shell company. They might as well be making buggy whips. I think this is the ultimate agenda of the leadership, they just hope to cash out with the settlement from IBM.

    It was interesting to me how the PR folks tried to associate Linux with software piracy and communism. I don't think this is because of a real misperception on their part, it seems much more likely to be spin-directed FUD. It's more pathetic than enraging to me.

    It really all seems like a legal strategy to exploit the fact that our IP laws have not really caught up with the PC revolution. They might get some money from IBM, if they do, they leverage their legal victory and liquid revenues to bump the stock price and sell the company. It won't fool Warren Buffet or Peter Lynch, but there are still plenty of fools with money in the world.

    This type of business strategy--utterly bereft of moral values--has not yet entirely faded from view. The real tragedy is not the threat to Linux, but the threat to SCO employees and investors. I don't see this working out well for them in any way. Some lawyers will get rich, though.

    So, follow the money. SCO is now a lawsuit machine. IBM will survive this no matter how it turns out. SCO won't.
  • by arcanumas (646807) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:52PM (#6269222) Homepage
    As much as i hate SCO i have to admit that some of these SCO posters are actually nice.
    I can't help but wonder how much coding thy do and how much drawing.
    If their people did as much coding as drawing they would not be in this position right now.
  • by callforsco (683139) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @05:56PM (#6269253)
    I hate to say it, but I think that this protest isn't going to do a god damn thing. Protests like this are pretty much ignored by everybody in the corporate setting; if anything, all it does is make corporate people roll their eyes.

    Take it from me - I work for a Fortune 500 company (no not microsoft ;-)) that gets protests pretty much *weekly* and the upshot of it is that company email gives logistical directions on where and how to avoid the protests. (ironically, I think that the protesters are *dead on* but believe me, its not going to change the company's practices. Nothing but an act of god is going to do that.)

    Anyways, don't get me wrong. I think that SCO is a borderline illegal company, but to *really* hurt them where it counts, we need to organize online. Hurting them where it counts means presenting the SEC with a well-thought out case on why they need to be investigated.

    I posted the following proposal to slashdot (it was rejected, probably because it was too controversial) and the gist was that SCO's share price (ticker symbol SCOX) has gone up 1400% on rumors and FUD. Now SCO may have a case, they may not have a case, but the least that should happen is an investigation by the SEC into the facts surrounding this incident.

    Here's a SEC link [sec.gov] that lets you enter a complaint. Hell, if SCO gets enough heat from this, they may divulge all. We deserve, as a community, to be able to evaluate their gripe objectively, and that requires full disclosure by SCO of what their gripe is. SCO's failure to do so is *hurting our livelihood* - and at the least it is libelous.

    Anyways, below is the text of the original submission. I'm hoping to get it on the head Slashdot page, so if you could submit it as a story, I think it would do us all a favor. (Note to slashdot editors - a 'soapbox' icon would be very nice... something which allows users to post controversial stories like this whilst having a disclaimer so slashdot can keep its nose clean)

    original submission:

    I just read the vaguely demeaning forbes article [forbes.com] describing the complacency of the linux community, and believe me, this "crunchie" wasn't pleased, at either a) being called a crunchie for having the ethics to be upset about what SCO is doing, or b) for being labeled as ineffective and powerless. The truth is, the open source community isn't powerless. The whole SCO incident has a very bad smell to it, and what they are doing (and the consequent effect on their stock price) is in my opinion highly unethical if not illegal. I am not a lawyer (or SEC official for that matter) but their stock price has jumped from 60 cents to $11 per share, in dubious circumstances... so in my opinion at the very least the SEC should be notified about the unsavory aspects of it and other pieces of background info so they can do an investigation and find out the facts for themselves. So - I think the open source community should take a stand. If you don't like what SCOX is doing, here is the sec complaint form [sec.gov] where you can submit evidence, background facts, personal knowledge, and - if you think so - your opinion about how malfeasant SCOX's actions are and the damages that they are doing. (Any info about how SCOX insiders are capitalizing on the stock price would be especially helpful.. personally, its the element I find most distasteful of all, and if they find manipulation, its information the SEC can directly use.) How many people read slashdot? How would the SEC handle 500,000 complaints? Only time would tell - but I think at the minimum it would warrant an investigation, possibly even a class-action suit. Anyways, if you are going to submit, please be civil about it. The worst thing possible would be for the SEC to get lots of long-winded rants - they want courteous dialog and accurate information they can use, not a vitriolic screed of profan

    • by amcnabb (682951) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @07:04PM (#6269638) Homepage
      What do you think we're trying to do? Do you think we're so stupid that we think we're going to change SCO's mind?

      No way!

      The purpose of the protest was to show normal everyday people, through the media, what is really going on in the peaceful town of Lindon. And you know what? We were successful. Two major Utah newspapers covered our protest, and we had a front page article with one of them.

      After the "chat" we had with McBride, it was obvious that he didn't care at all about what we thought, but as long as the public is a little more aware of the issues, we feel we were successful.

      And besides, we had a lot of fun.
  • SCO spokesman Blake Stowell says his company's lawsuit will not put an end to Linux.

    "Linux could still be used; it just wouldn't be free," Stowell said. "These people are upset because they've been enjoying a free ride for some time. They're upset their free ride will potentially be gone."

    I think that this pretty much puts to rest the question of whether or not SCO wants to own Linux.

    Part of the problem is that this wouldn't work. Under the GPL, if you can't distribute it for free, you can't distribute it at all. To relicense Linux as an SCO-0wned product, you'd have to get the agreement of all the contributors. I doubt that that would happen.

  • Friendly? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by drivers (45076) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:02PM (#6269291)
    With all the comments on here that "the protest was friendly, SCO gave us lemonade, and everyone laughed and had a good time" about the anti-protest it makes me wonder what the protesters were trying to accomplish. The way I look at it is the purpose of a protest is to raise the social costs (in other words make it more costly for SCO to pursue the actions they are trying for than the rewards they think they will gain from it) against the company you are protesting. As it is, SCO is making itself look bad enough through its own actions. It sounds like there were no real demands and anywhere to raise the social costs if they didn't meet those demands.
  • by Bruj0 (114447) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:06PM (#6269314) Homepage
    Topic in #os: hey guyz, stop pickin on irix.
    <SCO> w00t! i bought unix! im gonna b so rich!
    <novell> /msg atnt haha. idiot.
    <novell> whoops. was that out loud?
    <atnt> rotfl
    <ibm> lol
    <SCO> why r u laffin at me?
    <novell> dude, unix is so 10 years ago. linux is in now.
    <SCO> wtf?
    <SCO> hey guyz, i bought caldera, I have linux now.
    <red_hat> haha, your linux sucks.
    <novell> lol
    <atnt> lol
    <ibm> lol
    <SCO> no wayz, i will sell more linux than u!
    <ibm> your linux sucks, you should look at SuSE
    <SuSE> Ja. Wir bilden gutes Linux für IBM.
    <SCO> can we do linux with you?
    <SuSE> Ich bin nicht sicher...
    <ibm> *cough*
    <SuSE> Gut lassen Sie uns vereinigen.
    * SuSE is now SuSE[UL]
    * SCO is now caldera[UL]
    <turbolinux> can we play?
    <conectiva> we're bored... we'll go too.
    <ibm> sure!
    * turbolinux is now turbolinux[UL]
    * conectiva is now conectiva[UL]
    <ibm> redhat: you should join!
    <SuSE[UL]> Ja! Wir sind vereinigtes Linux. Widerstand ist vergeblich.
    <red_hat> haha. no.
    <red_hat> lamers.
    <ibm> what about you debian?
    <debian> we'll discuss it and let you know in 5 years.
    <caldera[UL]> no one wants my linux!
    <turbolinux[UL]> i got owned.
    <caldera[UL]> u all tricked me. linux is lame.
    * caldera[UL] is now known as SCO
    <SCO> i'm going back to unix.
    <SGI> yeah! want to do unix with me?
    <SCO> haha. no. lamer.
    <novell> lol
    <ibm> snap!
    <SGI> :~(
    <SCO> hey, u shut up. im gonna sue u ibm.
    <ibm> wtf?
    <SCO> yea, you stole all the good stuff from unix.
    <red_hat> lol
    <SuSE[UL]> heraus laut lachen
    <ibm> lol
    <SCO> shutup. i'm gonna email all your friends and tell them you suck.
    <ibm> go ahead. baby.
    <SCO> andandand... i revoke your unix! how do you like that?
    <ibm> oh no, you didn't. AIX is forever.
    <novell> actually, we still own unix, you can't do that.
    <SCO> wtf? we bought it from u.
    <novell> whoops. our bad.
    <SCO> i own u. haha
    <SCO> ibm: give me all your AIX now!
    <ibm> whatever. lamer.
    * ibm sets mode +b SCO!*@*
    * SCO has been kicked from #os (own this.)
  • by jonman_d (465049) <nemilar.optonline@net> on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:06PM (#6269315) Homepage Journal
    The protestor's signs were regular protest signs - "SCO AWAY" and whatnot. They were somewhat whitty, but they had a serious point to make. But the SCO signs were downright awful. I don't know about you, but portraying Linus as Hitler and Tux as a Nazi, with the phrase "give communism a try" isn't funny to me. Especially seeing as how Linus is European...you see where I'm going with this.

    Whether it was intended for humor or not, SCO owes Linus and the OSS community a formal appology.
    • by alannon (54117) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:39PM (#6269492)
      Actually, a mostly overlooked fact was that Finland was allied with Germany against Russia in WWII. Linus is a Finn. If one assumed that whoever put together these posters actually knew of this fact, it could be seen as a huge insult, comparing Linus himself to a Nazi due to his heritage. I would not, however, give them the credit to put those pieces together and assume it to just be a series of barely sequitur insults strung together.
      • by EvilNTUser (573674) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:46PM (#6269520)
        I know you didn't draw any conclusions from Finland being allied with Germany, but before anyone else does, I would like to point out two things:

        1) Russia sought to invade Finland
        2) No one else would help
        • by glesga_kiss (596639) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @08:52PM (#6270188)
          Which is pretty much why Cuba embraced all things Soviet...the USA sought to invade Cuba. And did. Twice. With "Terrorists". So the Cubans turn to the Ruskies, get the bomb as a self-defence, last resort, and WW3 nearly kicks off.

          Most strategic alliances are based on self-interest rather than ideology.

  • ironic (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ender Ryan (79406) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:09PM (#6269327) Journal
    Is it not ironic that SCO calls Linux "communist", but Linux companies are making more money than SCO these days in the (relatively) free market?

  • by OeLeWaPpErKe (412765) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:09PM (#6269329) Homepage
    what else would a non-lawyer sco employee be doing all day ?
  • by Chicane-UK (455253) <chicane-uk AT ntlworld DOT com> on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:48PM (#6269533) Homepage
    "Linux could still be used; it just wouldn't be free," Stowell said. "These people are upset because they've been enjoying a free ride for some time. They're upset their free ride will potentially be gone."

    Maybe he needs to be reminded about GPL and what it stands for. I hate to tell you this Blake, but you and your bullshit company will get annhilated by IBM.

    It sickens me that companies (and people) like this feel that potential threats to their business can potentially be converted into revenue streams simply because they have (in the short term at least) money to throw away on lawyers and big threats.

    I hope IBM leave the judicial equivilant of a smouldering crater where the SCO office stood.
  • They don't care (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mcrbids (148650) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:51PM (#6269556) Journal
    SCO doesn't care anymore.

    They aren't the same company as Caldera once was - even Ransom Love is gone. I'd seriously doubt if any employees of the company from 2 years ago are there, and most of those from a year ago are probably gone.

    The only thing that exists of the Caldera we once knew are the records of its past. It's just a bunch of lawyers at this point, and maybe a few remaining techies.

    It is now a purely parasitic organization - and we can all just hope that the remaining IP around Unix is either opened (as being "generic" now) or that the IP is bought by a company that (like AT&T) allows its free use.
  • by Unleashd (664454) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @06:59PM (#6269611)
    Everyone is always talking about the fact that SCO wants a buy-out ... I'm thinking that is exactly what they want but they are expecting it from a completely different company than IBM. SCO knows that Linux is becoming a major competitor in the Corporate world and what company is doing everything it can to stop this .... ding ding ding ... that's right Microsoft.

    I have seen tons of comments about how what SCO is doing is very odd ... normally you approach the party that you believe is causing the problem(IBM in this case) and ask for them to resolve the issue, so that both parties can save face if there is a problem ... however SCO began this in the public domain and refuses to show any actual proof. If actual proof was shown the linux community would remove the lines ASAP (contrary to SCO believe there is definatly more than one way to scin a progrm) however at this point that would damage their prospects at a MS buyout (no linux threat = no MS $$$'s).

    At this point they are only damaging their reputation and making people question the reputation of linux. They have destroyed any semblance of a "corporate image". They company that will potentially benefit the most from this whole scandal is MS. I mean look at how quickly they sent funds to SCO. By paying SCO they were trying to "legitimize" SCO's claims in the public eye. I wouldn't be suprised to see a MS buyout of SCO in the neer future.
  • by expro (597113) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @07:29PM (#6269773)

    I was at the protest. I saw it pre-announced on /. and decided to show up. Sadly, from the world's perspective, it becomes what was reported.

    In some of the media, the SCO signs are shown larger than life. In reality, they were 1. devoid of intelligent comment, 2. quite small, 3. sitting off to the side on SCO property for most of the time. They were mostly insignificant except for to those taking pictures. If individual pictures had been taken of the protester signs, there were 10 good protester signs for every stupid SCO sign, and real stakeholders/protesters circulating them.

    It WAS obviously a waste of time to protest in front of SCO for any significant amount of time, and after the first hour the protesters went to a very busy nearby intersection and carried on their protest in complete absence of SCO, and brought hundreds to some degree of awareness of the issues surrounding the case, and what a bunch of scum-sucking lawyers in their community with no technical merit were trying to do to community-developed free software.

    Maybe Utah is not unique in giving the establishment much better press than they deserve. Maybe we bring it upon ourselves. I could not say. But regardless, I will be there again next week.

  • One of the comments made by the SCO reps was "Linux users will still be able to use Linux, it just won't be free. Linux users are just upset because they've been getting a free ride for so long and it's coming to an end".

    Um, I think I have paid for every distro of Linux that I've used in the past 3 years. RedHat, Club Mandrake, Suse. I've either bought them from CrapUSA or paid for the direct from the company (in the case of Mandrake).

    So how have I been getting a free ride? I've paid for an OS that I sometimes use.

    The only freedom that I've had has been that which is like speech, not that which is like beer.
  • SCO could have just originally said... "Here is the code that shouldn't be there" And give a month or two for kernel developers to produce code patches for 2.0.x, 2.2.x, 2.4.x and 2.5.x. Then say that users are legally required to migrate to the nearest patched kernel or perhaps use some kernel diffs on whatever version they are running. Then later go after any "linux company" that is still actively making available the code in question. But then again, as some marketing pundits will tell you "there's no such thing as bad publicity"
    • Actually, now that I think about it, if the above situation would force kernel gurus to focus on reinventing that particular piece of code, someone might step forward and say... What if we did it this way...? And find a better way to do it. Worst case scenario, do the clean room trick were you have 2 people one that can see the code and one that can't and let the linux guy ask the nda guy generic questions about the code, so they can write it from scratch without explicitly seeing it. Who knows, it may ev
  • by kuwan (443684) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @08:42PM (#6270147) Homepage
    My co-workers and I were the ones that took some of the pictures. You can find more of them here (with mirrors):

    http://www.kuwan.net/scotesters/index.html [kuwan.net]

    http://www.karlrees.com/sco/scotesters/index.html [karlrees.com]

    http://www.normanfam.org/sco/scotesters/index.html [normanfam.org]

    I should note that Ralph Yarrows, head of the Canopy group which owns 46% of SCO, was the one to organize the anti-protest and was the one who had the posters made.
  • by gibber (27674) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @09:08PM (#6270259) Homepage
    I can understand that SCO employees feel defensive. If protesters set up a picket out side of HP (my employer) I'm sure I would feel likewise. What I don't appreciate is the apparent reaction of a proper subset of the SCO employees, the libelous and slanderous posters presented at this website [kuwan.net].

    Let us consider the following facts:

    • Linux user cannot be characterized, by and large, as music or software pirates -- there is no precedent to label them as such any more than Microsoft Windows users
    • Not paying for Linux is not a piracy issue, Linux is, by it intent and modus operandi free of licensed and proprietary code
    • Presuming that IBM has placed illegitimate, license bearing code into the Linux source tree this does not necessarily reflect poorly on Linus Torvalds, Linux kernel developers, Linux users or the OpenSource community
    • Linux usage != stupidity. (I can only assume that this was meant to be farsical. In the realm of debate the tactic of argumentum ad hominim, "argument against the man," (In this case: "You're stupid!") is generally abandoned in grade school.
    • "Ya Vol!"[sic] (Intended, correct me if I'm wrong, to be "Jawoll!" a characterization of Nazi adherence to orders popularized by "Hogan's Heroes" [imdb.com].) is a crude characiture of nazism not communism. But hey! To the culturally illiterate, what's the difference? Besides, IBM is an oligarchy.
    • And... Well I could go on but that would be a full scale rant.
    I'm reasonably certain that these posters (A) do not characterize all of the "anti-protesters" and (B) do not characterize most SCO workers. It does reflect poorly on SCO managment who allowed their employees to present the above image at the SCO Lindon facility. In all fairness I have no idea what the "anti-SCO" protesters were carrying. It may have been equivalently malevolent drivel. :-)

  • by pherris (314792) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @09:09PM (#6270261) Homepage Journal
    Years ago there was a protest at Apple headquarters over the ending of the Newton. What did Apple do? They served the protesters drinks (and I think sandwichs). Apple realized that trying to degrade the protesters would only reflect poorly on them. From the start SCO has decided to take the lowest road they could find. Is their "antiprotest" really that surprising to anyone?

    Is it just me or are SCO's actions truly surreal? I mean is someone smoking crack over there?

  • Black Parody (Score:5, Interesting)

    by The Famous Brett Wat (12688) on Sunday June 22, 2003 @10:12PM (#6270528) Homepage Journal
    Astounding. I thought that Tom Lehrer's idea of satire was pretty black, but those SCO anti-Linux posters are blacker than black. So black that they're just plain disturbing whether they are intended as parody or not. They almost make you laugh, but the stronger urge is to run away because you're pretty sure that they were designed by a dangerous psychotic who is probably closer than you think.

    The obvious answer to this is to organise a pro-SCO demonstration, lauding all the worst aspects of that company. "Litigation is better than innovation," and so on. Just make it funny for goodness sake. That's the beauty of satire which the SCO posters miss.

  • by alexburke (119254) * <slashdotmail.alexburke@ca> on Monday June 23, 2003 @12:59AM (#6271095)
    Topic in #os: hey guyz, stop pickin on irix.
    <SCO> w00t! i bought unix! im gonna b so rich!
    <novell> /msg atnt haha. idiot.
    <novell> whoops. was that out loud?
    <atnt> rotfl
    <ibm> lol
    <SCO> why r u laffin at me?
    <novell> dude, unix is so 10 years ago. linux is in now.
    <SCO> wtf?
    <SCO> hey guyz, i bought caldera, I have linux now.
    <red_hat> haha, your linux sucks.
    <novell> lol
    <atnt> lol
    <ibm> lol
    <SCO> no wayz, i will sell more linux than u!
    <ibm> your linux sucks, you should look at SuSE
    <SuSE> Ja. Wir bilden gutes Linux fr IBM.
    <SCO> can we do linux with you?
    <SuSE> Ich bin nicht sicher...
    <ibm> *cough*
    <SuSE> Gut lassen Sie uns vereinigen.
    * SuSE is now SuSE[UL]
    * SCO is now caldera[UL]
    <turbolinux> can we play?
    <conectiva> we're bored... we'll go too.
    <ibm> sure!
    * turbolinux is now turbolinux[UL]
    * conectiva is now conectiva[UL]
    <ibm> redhat: you should join!
    <SuSE[UL]> Ja! Wir sind vereinigtes Linux. Widerstand ist vergeblich.
    <red_hat> haha. no.
    <red_hat> lamers.
    <ibm> what about you debian?
    <debian> we'll discuss it and let you know in 5 years.
    <caldera[UL]> no one wants my linux!
    <turbolinux[UL]> i got owned.
    <caldera[UL]> u all tricked me. linux is lame.
    * caldera[UL] is now known as SCO
    <SCO> i'm going back to unix.
    <SGI> yeah! want to do unix with me?
    <SCO> haha. no. lamer.
    <novell> lol
    <ibm> snap!
    <SGI> :~(
    <SCO> hey, u shut up. im gonna sue u ibm.
    <ibm> wtf?
    <SCO> yea, you stole all the good stuff from unix.
    <red_hat> lol
    <SuSE[UL]> heraus laut lachen
    <ibm> lol
    <SCO> shutup. i'm gonna email all your friends and tell them you suck.
    <ibm> go ahead. baby.
    <SCO> andandand... i revoke your unix! how do you like that?
    <ibm> oh no, you didn't. AIX is forever.
    <novell> actually, we still own unix, you can't do that.
    <SCO> wtf? we bought it from u.
    <novell> whoops. our bad.
    <SCO> i own u. haha
    <SCO> ibm: give me all your AIX now!
    <ibm> whatever. lamer.
    * ibm sets mode +b SCO!*@*
    * SCO has been kicked from #os (own this.)
  • Software Government (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mabu (178417) on Monday June 23, 2003 @03:41AM (#6271476)
    Linux = Communism? I think not.. let's work this out...

    Linux = Multiparty Democracy to Monarchy at times

    Oracle, Sun = Monarchy

    Unix = Anarchy with various flavors being multiparty democracies

    Windows = Single Party State Authoritarian Regime which occasionally morphs into a Military Junta, and occasionally pretends to be communistic to improve public image

One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis

Working...