SCO Identifies EV1Servers as Linux Licensee 740
jasonhamilton writes "EV1Servers.net has been identified as a Linux licensee, giving them the dubious title of being the first dedicated hosting company to have a licence agreement with SCO. Rather than 'eliminating uncertainty from our clients' hosting infrastructure', as Robert Marsh (CEO of EV1Servers) claims, some users of EV1 appear to be somewhat upset."
Re:Users definetly upset. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. Show that sponsoring the terrorists is not tolerated.
No doubt Darl et. al will bring this up as an example of how the Linux Community (tm) attacks everyone that deals with them, but hey, there's nothing wrong with that.
Show the world that SCO is a disease that infects everyone that touches it.
Bring out the torches!
BTW, I hope nobody is moronic enough to DDOS them. It's a losing strategy. Boycott is much better.
(Obviously these guys could also be out friends, and this might be a scheme to get to SCO, perhaps for selling what they don't own or whatever, but that seems rather far-fetched).
Re:You want me to Refresh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure, Slashdot EV1... they're ready for it! (Score:5, Insightful)
Considering that they didn't pay the "going rate" of $699 per server, and likely got a huge discount for allowing SCO to use their name, I'm pretty sure this one's being written off as an advertising expense. Slashdot and the rest of the tech media is taking the bait hook, line, and sinker.
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:5, Insightful)
That's a nice theory and for a minute there I briefly considered buying an SCO license, but in reality I doubt there will be any meat left on them bones by the time IBM is done with them. Of course you could play vulture and hope that IBM gets full and leaves a few scraps for you -- but I suspect there won't be anything left of SCO other then a bloody stain on the ground where they went down. IBM will probably grind up the bones and use them to make soup before it's all said and done ;)
hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
One interesting thing to note (Score:5, Insightful)
Note in all the articles & releases that 1: there is no mention if these licenses were purchased for any amount of money 2: it only covers "SCO Intellectual Property" and 3: it makes it seem like this is a Fortune 1000 company that's involved. The release states "EV1Servers.Net joins other Fortune 1000 companies that have signed up for a SCO IP license". Go take a look at any list of Fortune 1000 companies and check for yourself if EV1Servers.Net is listed. It's not even close.
In reading this press release it looks to me like the SCO FUD Machine is working at high speed.
Re:Users definetly upset. (Score:1, Insightful)
Isn't it obvious? You tell them you are leaving EV1, and recommend that they refuse to deal with EV1 as well.
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Users definetly upset. (Score:2, Insightful)
What matters is that this hosting company is publicly saying that they have some arrangement with SCO, which will lend credence to SCO's claims in the minds of some.
They should be made to feel the pain - if their current customers say 'hey, I'm switching away from you because I don't want to give my money to a company that will support SCO's bull in any way, shape, or form" they will get the point.
No kidding... (Score:5, Insightful)
[From Groklaw]
Sadly, that last link seems to be slashdotted already via Groklaw. The old "too many connections" PHP error. Heh.
I was apparently a bit late in submitting this article, but I have to wonder, would this action not terminate SCO's license to Linux under Section 4 of the GNU GPL [gnu.org]?
Section 4 reads:
Of course, IANAL.
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, that's still better than them displaying a whole lot of PHP mysql command errors. Strictly speaking, that one remaining error should go, also...
At least it shows that whoever coded the thing could at least think a little bit of this "error handling" thing. I wonder why so many PHP coders don't care enough to check if they actually have successfully got the connection and, if they haven't, bail out gracefully...
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:3, Insightful)
Likewise, if SCO's FUD turns out to be legally valid, Red Hat goes under as everybody all at once sues Red Hat to make them pay up on their idemnification pledge.
SCO's game is one of legal deathmatch. A few bucks (not too many, just a few) is a good deal for somebody who wants to sit this whole thing out.
Cheap publicity stunt (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, someone from EV1 said on the (now Slashdotted) forum that they bought a site license, not a per server licence, so they did not pay $700 * 20,000 servers. Hell, for all we know they could have paid zero. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours, right?
Re:What does this do for SCO's legal case? (Score:5, Insightful)
While it might have the effect of making other companies choose to buy a license, legally it has no weight. If I set up a scam and you fall for it, and I get caught, I can't tell the judge "Look, this guy bought one, so it must be legit!" That would simply not fly in a court of law in the US.
Glad I skipped them (Score:3, Insightful)
I found many problem reports about them and decided against using them. This makes me even more glad I decided to bail from the order form.
Until there is a ruling from a judge, upheld by appeals, saying infringement has occurred, I am not willing to have ANY of my $$$ go to SCO for a "license" to use Linux, even indirectly though someone I do business with.
Re:You want me to Refresh? (Score:1, Insightful)
ads for ev1 (Score:3, Insightful)
Irritating Hyperbole (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, for crying out loud, does every irritating jackass who uses intimidation tactics have to be called a "terrorist" now?
What a great idea, let's treat being litigious and greedy the same as being insane and murderous.
Re:My letter to them today (sent a few hours ago) (Score:1, Insightful)
No GPL violation (Score:3, Insightful)
This is completely legal for EV1.
Re:My letter to them today (sent a few hours ago) (Score:5, Insightful)
Letters like this can help. However, if you're going to send an email purporting to be CTO, can we at least get some decent grammar in a letter written as a professional?
Contrary seem to open yourself up
weaving nothing but lies and decept in
fear that your going to have
Maybe there are something to those college degrees after all...
Re:Cheap publicity stunt (Score:3, Insightful)
People running a business don't care about "sticking it to SCO". They want a cheap server (which EV1 offers) and ....."
This only works for so long. I work at a company that is a bit more expensive, but we offer better service and more reliable features. Some people leave, but most of them come back claiming that the other place sucks/was down too much/bad service/bad connections, etc. People want something cheap, but more importantly is that it actually works for them.
EV1 has opened themselves up to abuse by SCO (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not insurance, it is anti-insurance. Now they have a contractual relationship with SCO, a contractual relationship which gives SCO the power to sue EV1, but does not offer EV1 any tangible protection whatsoever. See the groklaw analysis of the SCO licensing terms for specifics.
EV1 is now in a position where it can be sued by SCO and not have the lawsuit thrown out immediately
I'd say EV1 is likely in for a world of hurt, and their customers would be well advised to be looking around for alternatives.
Re:No kidding... (Score:5, Insightful)
Also the Windows solution is praised as not requiring techs to physically touch the new systems that they're working on. Does this mean Microsoft has some sort of network booting now?
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Insightful)
People complained that tech jobs being outsourced to India will hurt the job market. Nothing was done and jobs were outsoured, causing massive layoffs.
Boycotts never happen on its own.
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Insightful)
Rackshack moving to a 2003 model. (Score:1, Insightful)
Rumors in the industry have it that they are being used as a primary "showpiece" for Microsoft web servers.
I know this because I used to work for the competition, and Microsoft approached us with the same offer. Mind you, we all got laid off as our jobs were outsourced to India.
Same idea as Spam (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:One interesting thing to note (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Great Advertising! (Score:3, Insightful)
But you have to realize a few things. First, the failure of a mysql/PHP system just shows that their coder isn't all that great. Second, that you can get to see that error at all shows that their pipe (and the box proper) is holding up just fine.
Re:Meage a Trois Licensing Scam (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Great Advertising! (Score:5, Insightful)
Since the company did it without your knowledge or consent its hardly your fault, but it is your fault if you keep giving them money to give to SCO.
SCO lies about EV1 Fortune 1000 status! (Score:5, Insightful)
"EV1Servers.Net joins other Fortune 1000 companies"
The word "other" implies that EV1 is also a Fortune 1000 company, and it is not. SCO's ability to write misleading crap remains intact.
GPL conflict? (Score:4, Insightful)
Except what about this SCO license--doesn't it include no-redistribution terms that conflict with the GPL? Is EV1's permission to redistribute Linux now terminated under the GPL as well as under the SCO license? Can they be required to stop offering Linux hosting, by anyone that has GPL'd code compiled into the kernel? That would include quite a few parties like Red Hat and IBM, whose attitude towards SCO is less than favorable and which have the lawyers to back it up.
EV1 may find itself much more screwed by its SCO deal than if it had refused to deal with SCO.
Re:Boycott EV1Servers (Score:5, Insightful)
Regardless of whether your estimate on the money involved is in the ballpark (I tend to think it's high in fact) your final conclusion is wrong. SCO couldn't do anything about the server to begin with. Now they can. The license gives them grounds to sue that were non-existent before. It's made the situation less reliable, not more, and that's the reason that if I were doing business with EV1 (I'm not) I would terminate that relationship ASAP. I don't care if the 'license' was free, or even if SCO paid them $150,000 US to take it for that matter, it's still overpriced. It gives the buyer nothing, and gives SCO a contractual relationship on which a lawsuit could later be based where there was none before. Taking that license at any price indicates severe incompetence on the part of EV1s counsel, or even more severe incompetence on the part of their executives if they did this over the contrary advice of their counsel.
Re:Maybe, just maybe... (Score:3, Insightful)
IIRC for it to be fraud you have to show that SCO intentionally midled someone. As whacked as it may seem, its possible SCO actually believes what its saying and it would be almost impossible (IMO) to prove they don't believe what they're saying.
I'm thinking at best they might be able to recover the cost of the licenses, which probably wouldn't be woth the effort.
Re:Their other accolade: (Score:2, Insightful)
A good argument for dumping EV1... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:There seems to have been a slight problem.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Due to a recent slashdot article related to SCO, the forums are experiencing an extremely high number of connections, we are actively working on upgrading the servers and should be able to restore some order shortly.
Wonder if they will "upgrade" to Unixware?
Re:GPL conflict? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:EV1 admin's response (Score:2, Insightful)
There is, in fact, pending litigation that directly involves the ability of EV1 to continue supporting Linux. As much as the arm-chair lawyer croud on Slashdot likes to think Linux is free and clear, the case is still pending. And while the case is still pending, anything can happen. Just because the current evidence certainly makes it look like SCO doesn't have a chance doesn't mean they can't win through any number of bizarre circumstances that have nothing to do with whether or not the GPL is valid or not, actual SCO code got into Linux, or whatever. Litigation is uncertain, which is why even companies with open and shut cases often settle out of court.
Re:EV1 admin's response (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm saying they may have been clueless to the pandora's box that their agreement with SCO was going to open.
Re:I host there (Score:3, Insightful)