SCO "Disappointed" by Red Hat Lawsuit 778
schmidt349 writes "SCO has issued a preliminary response to Red Hat's lawsuit, in which President and CEO Darl McBride advises that SCO will prepare a "legal response" to Red Hat's requests for injunctive relief. In addition, he promises that the countersuit that SCO will file may include "counterclaims for copyright infringement and conspiracy." His final statement-- that Red Hat's "decision to file legal action does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux--" is chilling in light of the business strategy that SCO has adopted in its sales of UnixWare licenses to actual and potential users of the Linux kernel."
Fuck you, Darl. (Score:4, Funny)
What an arrogant little prick.
A laugh a minute (Score:3, Funny)
This guy oughtta write for Letterman!
Poll (Score:2, Funny)
a) Good
b) Bad
c) CowboyNeal
Whua!? (Score:4, Funny)
Um...no you haven't. Nobody has seen this comparison but Darl McBride and his evil twin brother.
SCO "Disappointed" (Score:5, Funny)
SCO's "Disappointed"? Awe poor SCO.
Well SCO, I'm very disappointed in YOU!
Now go to your room and don't come out until you've thought about what you've done.
Translation for the uninitiated: (Score:5, Funny)
"We at the SCO..." (Score:5, Funny)
We are awaiting further instruction from out legal team, however this may be delayed as our current course of action provided by our lawyers lists only the phrase "2. ???" for our next step. We are awaiting clarification from them before continuing.
Disappointed by RedHat Lawsuit? (Score:1, Funny)
Get used to disappointment. There's a lot more on the way.
Bury them in Paperwork. (Score:4, Funny)
I liked Red Hat's letter to SCO. So much that it leaves me wondering what would happen if every Linux user coordinated sending a copy with their demands to SCO on the same day. We could all demand responses.
Instead of supporting their FUD campaign with license fees, we could create cost by forcing them to deal with a mountain of letters. Make sure you send it registered/certified so that someone has to sign for it.
Just picture the tractor trailer backing up full of letters...
Re:Amazing (Score:5, Funny)
McBride's reality checker is broken. We tried to send him replacement parts, but he keeps sending them back to us with a note saying that he doesn't need reality since he owns Unix. Poor bastard...
Re:Whua!? (Score:5, Funny)
Is that his other brother Darl?
in other news... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:good faith discussions (Score:4, Funny)
Well said.
Essentially, SCO's letter could alternately be read, "Waah! No fair! I'm the only one who can do that! You're not playing nice. I want my mom!"
Go Red Hat. I hope they tie up SCO in court for a nice long time and win their case. SCO seems to be playing the intimidation game and is being very smug -- the tune will change if they get a slap in the face in court. Too bad only Red Hat has had the nads to fight back up to this point.
Re:Fuck you, Darl. (Score:2, Funny)
text of the article (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Laughing out loud! (Score:3, Funny)
That's nothing - he can do that with both of his faces as well.
A quick translation for those not familliar (Score:5, Funny)
SCO has consistently stated that our UNIX System V source code and derivative UNIX code have been misappropriated into Linux 2.4 and 2.5 kernels
We just want to scare you into paying us money. Thats easier than actually producing a product that anyone wants.
We have been educating end users on the risks of running an operating system that is an unauthorized derivative of UNIX.
We have been trying to extort money from you.
SCO's claims are true and we look forward to proving them in court.
If we can get you to give us money, then we don't really have to prove anything. Our lawyers told us that.
Recent correspondence from SCO to Red Hat further explains SCO's position
Holy SH*T someone is calling our bluff, what? They have lawyers? Suing WHO? I can't belive it, threatenting to sue is the way to do business, can't we grease your palm with some of our liscence fee to make this go away?
In Soviet Russia... (Score:2, Funny)
No wait, we did that already
Come one now... (Score:2, Funny)
Is NIL. SCO does not have a legal team. For some time now the company HAS become a law practicing firm. So the RedHat suit comes just like getting a new client.
Re:Wtf? (Score:5, Funny)
Is that too contrived?
Re:good faith discussions (Score:3, Funny)
oh wait, you mean where the IBM lawyers don't laugh in their faces and tell them to GFY. No, I don't think that happened somehow.
Re:good faith discussions (Score:5, Funny)
What's even worse, is that you'd never know if they actually had them or not. Their story keeps changing.
First they say that they discovered stolen code in December ... no wait, it was March, wait... I think it was January. They said they decided to take legal action when we saw a presentation by IBM people saying that Unix was irrelevant .. no wait .. they decided when they did a code audit .. wait ... when they spoke with some Linux hacker in Keokuk Iowa .. yeh - that's it. Because of course, there is 80 lines of stolen code .. no wait... a couple hundred lines of code .. no, now they have discovered thousands of lines in hundreds of files. That's it. That's the ticket.
They're suing IBM for breach of contract - but don't worry Linux users. Wait, then they thought should sue Linus Torvalds too. They claim he didn't answer their emails about it .. but wait, then they said that they had spoken to him about it in December.
Now they want to go after *all* Linux users .. but wait.. if you buy a license, we won't touch you.
As I said, they may have decided to have good faith discussions with IBM, or Santa Claus, or whovever .. you'd never know it.
Re:fud (Score:2, Funny)
"I thought it was best to telephone you and speak in person to see if we could resolve the issues between our companies short of litigation."
Oh and here is something amusing.
" I am disappointed that you were not more forthcoming about your intentions. I am also disappointed that you have chosen litigation rather than good faith discussions with SCO about the problems inherent in Linux."
Not more forthcoming? Isn't this SCO's entire business strategy for 2003-2004?
"Of course, we will prepare our legal response as required by your complaint. Be advised that our response will likely include counterclaims for copyright infringement and conspiracy."
Conspiracy? Is this guy off his medication again? Ye Gods! I believe this guy is gunning for the idiot of the year award. Before year end he will be more popular than my favorite idiot. The Iraqi Information Minister
SCO's new NEW business plan (with code!) (Score:5, Funny)
for (i=0,i<=inifinity,++i){
Sue();
GetCountersued();
CountersueCountersuer();
}
Profit!
I leave it to you to work out all the bugs for SCO and upload the source via CVS to the following ftp server: ftp://ftp.scogroup.com/evilbits/code/profitengine
Thanks!
new SCO business model? (Score:5, Funny)
Here's a suggestion that I am proposing for Darl McBride, which he is free to use without paying royalties to myself:
I would pay good money for that!Re:conspiracy 8-) (Score:3, Funny)
Re:good faith discussions (Score:5, Funny)
I count this to their eternal credit. They know who's the David and who's the Goliath as well, so they're not even really taking much of a chance. The worst-case is that they just revive AIX.
Re:good faith discussions (Score:2, Funny)
SCO: "you broke our contract, give us a bag full of cash, lots of bags full o' cash"
IBM: "you're freaking nuts, enjoy your stock inflation while it lasts, now get the hell outta my face, i've got products to sell!
Slashdot Crowd: hahahahaha!!! roflmmfao!!! hahahahah! rolfmmfao!!!
Re:"We at the SCO..." (Score:5, Funny)
Your sense of humor has cost me the second monitor this week. You will be hearing from my layers soon. I am however willing to settle this matter out of court for the cost of 2 Bounty paper towel squares and a bottle of windex to remove the Mountain Dew from my screen.
Respectfully,
J
This article's pretty funny (Score:5, Funny)
"Linux geeks howled a bit, but then wrote off SCO as a bunch of sleazebags and went back to playing live-action roleplaying (LARP) games in their mothers' basements, or whatever it is they do when they're not writing device drivers and complaining about clueless end users."
Re:SCO quote (Score:4, Funny)
Well, no surprise, but I'm surprised that you're suprised that SCO is surprised.
I'm just... surprised.
Re:Whua!? (Score:5, Funny)
I have seen the code in question, it is a shameless copy, and occurs throughout the source. Here is just a brief snip of code that is seen copied throughout:
then there is some text that looks like linux coders put in to conceal the copied code, but it always ends exactly as the SCO code:
*/
Re:Fuck you, Darl. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:good faith discussions (Score:2, Funny)
>>litigation rather than good faith discussions
>>with SCO about the problems inherent in
>>Linux."
Kettle? Hi Kettle....
Wake up Kettle, we have someone for you to meet.
This is Pot. Say hi to pot.
ouch (Score:2, Funny)
Re:good faith discussions (Score:5, Funny)
Hey
Re:good faith discussions (Score:5, Funny)
I am also disappointed that you have chosen litigation rather than good faith discussions with SCO about the problems inherent in Linux
So, Darth McBride finds their lack of good faith discussions disturbing?
Speaking of logs.. (Score:4, Funny)
Monday:
Judge: Please state the files, lines, etc that are in question.
Sco: File xyz.c lines abc.c
Judge: This could be incrimenating, yes.
Tuesday:
Judge: Linux Distro X, do you have anything to say before we proceed?
Penguin: Only that we clean-roomed the files in question and rebuilt the kernel last night while you were sleeping. Any code SCO might lay claim to is no longer an issue.. We had offered to remove the offending material, but SCO never told us where it was... it is now gone. At the courts disgression, we can also remove the source logs of the offending files
Kill 2 birds with one stone... (Score:3, Funny)
Somebody needs to call up RIAA and convince them of the following:
1) All their copyright infringers are using Linux
2) Linux is apparently the same as SCO
3) Thus, the root of all their problems is SCO.
Lock RIAA and SCO up in the same room and let them fight each other. Now that would be a reality show worth watching.
Re:good faith discussions (Score:3, Funny)
In no time they'll be out of business.
Wait a minute, would that be called a Legal DDoS? Same idea right?
Re:good faith discussions (Score:5, Funny)
I'm waiting, every day ... (Score:5, Funny)
"OH GOD! YES! I DID IT! I COPIED V5 SOURCE CODE INTO THE LINUX KERNEL.
I'M SO SORRY! THE PRESSURE! I COULDN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE! AAAARGH! *sob*"
Whereupon we can all go "you know - you're a dick" and buy him a beer. Then everyone cleans up after him.
As to Dee McBride
Dude - *you're* disappointed? Well let me tell you how *we* feel
Re:good faith discussions (Score:5, Funny)
Counter suite to a counter suite to a suite. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:good faith discussions (Score:5, Funny)
Pot makes you sit around and eat chips all day.
SCO is on crack
*******
This is your brain. [Insert picture of a computer running Linux.]
This is your brain on crack. [Insert picture of computer running SCO Unixware.]
Any questions?
From SCO's web site: (Score:2, Funny)
It's too bad SCO has already distributed Linux 2.4.x under the GPL. Thanks, SCO, for delegitimizing your own claims.
They even specifically mention SMP improvements. Isn't their claim to copyright infringement against Linux 2.4's SMP code? So they can jump on the Linux bandwagon, say, "Hey, we've got improved SMP scalability, and we're distributing it under the GPL (because we have to)!", then jump off when their business fails and sue everybody for code they themselves distributed under the GPL?
I browsed through their RPM archives on their FTP. They've removed all the kernel RPMs and SRPMs. Oh well.
Fuck SCO. I hope they crash and burn.
Re:good faith discussions (Score:5, Funny)
Re:good faith discussions (Score:3, Funny)
Talk about good faith... hah!
Psychopathy (Score:1, Funny)
SCO news releases and icons (Score:5, Funny)
I appreciated the link in the story to the SCO. It is always best to get the story straight from the horse's mouth. Or, in the case of SCO, the other end of the horse. However, would it be too much trouble to put a "goatse.cx" disclaimer on further links to SCO's website? They are clearly too closely related for my comfort.
On another issue, I understand that there has been conversation regarding changing the SCO icon from it's current Mickey Mouse looking thing to something resembling the goatse.cx picture. I, for one, cast a whole-hearted "no" vote on that potential change. I think that the current Mickey Mouse looking icon accurately reflects the nature of SCO's enterprise and that the proposed alteration might be traumatic for the younger readers of this "family" website.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
guacamolefoo
And now the portion of code SCO makes available (Score:3, Funny)
}
}
;
}
Re:Chilling (Score:3, Funny)
I have seen the light now...this is the very reason why SCO won't release the infringing code. To do so would gut whatever claims they have against Linux. This really isn't about protecting proprietary property. It's about milking a cash cow for all its worth before it wanders away to greener pastures.
Line-by-line disassembly of what the moron said: (Score:3, Funny)
Fuck you and the source you rode in on,
Attached is the letter I discussed with you during our July 31, 2003 telephone conversation.
I am attaching a letter for your review.
Instead of actually sending the letter, I thought it was best to telephone you and speak in person
We didn't have enough in the petty cash drawer to buy a stamp, but I got this really good deal on long-distance calls, so...
to see if we could resolve the issues between our companies short of litigation.
PLEASE DON'T HURT US!
We left the conversation with a preliminary agreement to meet and continue our discussions further.
You're buying this round, I'm broke.
To my surprise, I just discovered that your company filed legal action against The SCO Group earlier today.
Et tu, Matthew?
You, of course, mentioned nothing of this during our telephone conversation.
You're a sneaky bastard and I'm proud of you, son.
I am disappointed that you were not more forthcoming about your intentions.
*sniffle*
I am also disappointed that you have chosen litigation rather than good faith discussions with SCO about the problems inherent in Linux.
You talking to me?
Of course, we will prepare our legal response as required by your complaint.
/me is opening a can of legal whupass. Oops, it's way past the expiry date...
Be advised that our response will likely include counterclaims for copyright infringement and conspiracy.
We're gonna get medeival on your ass.
I must say that your decision to file legal action does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux.
insert boilerplate_empty_threat.c
Yours truly
Fuck off
Darl C. McBride
Darl "My sandbox was full of cement" McBribe
President & CEO
Chief Entertainment Officer, The Up the Creek Correctional Facility LLC
Re:good faith discussions (Score:3, Funny)
Re:good faith discussions (Score:3, Funny)
I must say that your decision to file legal action does not seem
conducive to the long-term survivability of Linux.
What Darl meant to say was:
"I must say that our decision to file legal action (against IBM) does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of SCO."
Re:good faith discussions (Score:4, Funny)
Bill Gates stock sale? (Score:0, Funny)
Daryl: OMG! Bill, RedHat is suing us! All our plans are fucked!
Bill: I've grasped that, Daryl. All I'm doin' is contemplating the "ifs."
Daryl: I don't wanna hear about no motherfuckin' ifs. All I wanna hear from yo' ass is, "You ain't got no problem, Daryl. I'm on the motherfucker. Go back in there, chill them niggers out and wait for the calvary which should be coming directly."
Bill: You ain't got no problem Daryl. I'm on the motherfucker. Go back in there, chill them niggers out and wait for the Wolf who should be coming directly.
Re:Linux Bashed on Kudlow and Kramer! (Score:4, Funny)
"In future postings, please replace the word 'analyst' with the word 'chimpanzee'."
Re:Psychopathy (Score:3, Funny)
Please note, there is no actual conspiracy against SCO; it only seems that way because everyone hates you.
TINC
Darl thinks he's Tony Saprano (Score:3, Funny)
Of course, he can threaten RedHat like this because the two 'gangs' are roughly the same size... But IBM is standing over in the shadows behind RedHat.
Darl needs psychiatric help and someone should should get his HBO shut off to help him come out of his fantasy world.
Re:good faith discussions (Score:2, Funny)
Ahem. National Bunghole Anti-Defamation Leage on Line Two.
Business Plan v2.0 is ready (and peer-reviewed!) (Score:3, Funny)
Peer Review: (to be confidential inside SCO under standard NDA)
This business plan has several problems:
Re:Just disappointed...? (Score:2, Funny)
golf party [engine101.com]
Here's the common code (Score:1, Funny)
All of the documentation and software included in the 4.4BSD and 4.4BSD-Lite
Releases is copyrighted by The Regents of the University of California.
Copyright 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994
The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
are met:
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software
must display the following acknowledgement:
This product includes software developed by the University of
California, Berkeley and its contributors.
4. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors
may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
without specific prior written permission.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGE.
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and the American
National Standards Committee X3, on Information Processing Systems have
given us permission to reprint portions of their documentation.
In the following statement, the phrase ``this text'' refers to portions
of the system documentation.
Portions of this text are reprinted and reproduced in electronic form in
the second BSD Networking Software Release, from IEEE Std 1003.1-1988, IEEE
Standard Portable Operating System Interface for Computer Environments
(POSIX), copyright C 1988 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, Inc. In the event of any discrepancy between these versions
and the original IEEE Standard, the original IEEE Standard is the referee
document.
In the following statement, the phrase ``This material'' refers to portions
of the system documentation.
This material is reproduced with permission from American National
Standards Committee X3, on Information Processing Systems. Computer and
Business Equipment Manufacturers Association (CBEMA), 311 First St., NW,
Suite 500, Washington, DC 20001-2178. The developmental work of
Programming Language C was completed by the X3J11 Technical Committee.
The views and conclusions contained in the software and documentation are
those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing official
policies, either expressed or implied, of the Regents of the University
of California.
NOTE: The copyright of UC Berkeley's Berkeley Software Distribution ("BSD")
source has been updated. The copyright addendum may be found at
ftp://ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/4bsd/README.Impt
included below.
July 22, 1999
To All Licensees, Distributors of Any Version of BSD:
As you know, certain of the Berkeley Software Distribution ("BSD") source
code files requir
Re:good faith discussions (Score:3, Funny)
For instance, *clearly* Linus Torvalds doesn't know jack about operating systems because he doesn't use a microkernel-based approach.
Re:good faith discussions (Score:3, Funny)
Correction (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Whua!? (Score:2, Funny)
for(i = 0; i sz; i++) {
}
Worst of all was all the infringing in the
Re:SCO quote (Score:3, Funny)