Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Caldera Government Operating Systems Software The Courts Unix Linux News Your Rights Online

SCO To Counter Groklaw With 'Fair' Coverage 557

Posted by timothy
from the whiplash-backlash dept.
linuxwrangler writes "Tired of being 'flamed, dissected and dismissed' on Groklaw, SCO has decided to fight back. SCO's site, scheduled for launch on November 1, will be called prosco.net. Just yesterday SCO CEO and favorite /. whipping-boy Darl McBride gave a speech comparing the software industry to the 'wild west' and warning companies that they must protect their intellectual property or risk being 'sacked by open source-touting bandits.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SCO To Counter Groklaw With 'Fair' Coverage

Comments Filter:
  • Ahh ahh!!! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:16PM (#10516028)
    Wait for it...

    And in tonight's news, Fox News is sueing SCO over the use of the word Fair! SCO allegedly plans to countersue saying they've got prior art on using litigation to stifle competition!

    More at 11!

    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:05PM (#10516762)
      That's not funny.

      MSN can't post links to Groklaw. SCO's anti-Linux FUD that M$ bought is failing. M$ needs a way to spin these latest developments and send up more FUD signals.

      First SCO puts up a site to blow smoke up our collective asses. We don't bite, but we're not the target audience.

      Next M$ has MSN announce "news" stories along with links to case analysis on SCO new sites. Again, the few of us who actually visit MSN to see the FUD shake our heads and laugh at the unbelievable remarks. Unfortunately the ignorant masses buy into it and repeat it as truthful objective news.

      M$ ends up with much more FUD bang for their buck while SCO prepares to spin their bankruptcy in a way that squarely places blame on FOSS. FOSS killed SCO, you're next!

      Hey, maybe SCO can charge MSN freelance fees for doing stories for them! That'll help resupply SCO's dwindling war chest!
      • by |/|/||| (179020) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:57PM (#10517399)
        Just a thought...

        Most members of the "ignorant masses" probably have a friend or relative that is a Slashdot reader. Not only that, but when it comes to technology issues they'll probably value the slashdotter's opinions, 'cause "you understand this computer stuff."

        Perhaps we need to start making a concerted effort to inform the uninformed about technology issues? Next time you're talking to the technologically clueless you might bring up the subject of DRM/SCO/OSS/IP/etc. No, I'm not suggesting that we try to make people understand the issues, because they're obviously not that interested. People are willing to carry around opinions that come from reliable sources, though. Who will your relatives believe - you, or MSN?

        • by liquidpele (663430) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @09:06PM (#10519575) Journal
          "Most members of the "ignorant masses" probably have a friend or relative that is a Slashdot reader"

          Not true I'm affraid. Very few people know anyone that is up to date on technology as far as the industry goes and not just "how do I get the internet?" Especially many small business owners. They'll read MSN, and take it as the word of God. There really needs to be another news source reporting anti-SCO stuff, or at least linking to articals at Groklaw, Fool.com, etc.
        • by Ohreally_factor (593551) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @11:14PM (#10520362) Journal
          Perhaps we need to start making a concerted effort to inform the uninformed about technology issues? Next time you're talking to the technologically clueless you might bring up the subject of DRM/SCO/OSS/IP/etc.

          I've been doing this for quite some time with great success, as evidenced by not being invited to parties anymore, friends not answering the phone when I call, and the court ordering me not to approach the postman. I miss the days when telemarketers would call.
  • by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:16PM (#10516030)
    "The new gold is IP," McBride said. ...SCO soon to become ghost town, after unsuccessfully mining the Linux kernel and not finding one itty bitty nugget.
    • by Frymaster (171343) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:34PM (#10516305) Homepage Journal
      i love the "wild west" theme. it's so... untenable. my fave:

      ...risk being 'sacked by open source-touting bandits.'"

      by extension this implies that sco is guilty of carrying a concealed source... perhaps in one of those fast tear-away source holsters.

    • Re:New gold my hiney (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Jaywalk (94910) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:35PM (#10516327) Homepage
      "The new gold is IP," McBride said. ...SCO soon to become ghost town, after unsuccessfully mining the Linux kernel and not finding one itty bitty nugget.
      Right idea, wrong metaphor. Linux is a source of gold, but it's more like The Goose that Lays the Golden Eggs [bartleby.com]. As in Aesop's fable, you can feed and care for the goose and a reliable source of gold will come your way. Darl is trying to kill the goose to get at all the eggs at once but, like the fool in the story, he's ending up with nothing. Those who have been looking after the goose (Red Hat, Novell, IBM, et al) have profitted.
      • Re:New gold my hiney (Score:5, Interesting)

        by sacrilicious (316896) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:58PM (#10516674) Homepage
        Right idea, wrong metaphor. Linux is a source of gold, but it's more like The Goose that Lays the Golden Eggs [bartleby.com]. As in Aesop's fable, you can feed and care for the goose and a reliable source of gold will come your way. Darl is trying to kill the goose to get at all the eggs at once but, like the fool in the story, he's ending up with nothing. Those who have been looking after the goose (Red Hat, Novell, IBM, et al) have profitted.
        Might be worth noting that unlike the golden goose, Linux can't be killed. Perhaps we could use a reverse-Midas analogy where everything Darl tries to possess turns into dung, whereas it becomes gold in anyone else's hands.
        • Might be worth noting that unlike the golden goose, Linux can't be killed.

          Or you can freely make copies of the Linux golden goose, so Darl can kill his copy, and the rest of us can just keep feeding and caring for ours.

    • by symbolic (11752) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:53PM (#10516611)

      Of course, greed is nothing new, but "IP" is just a way for companies to milk something that isn't really there. To be fair, I do believe there is some innovative effort that deserves protection, but the key word here is "innovative". Amazon's "one-click" patent, for example, is in NO WAY innovative. Most of the patent applications coming from the software industry aren't innovative, they're just attempts to steal empowerment from the public at large.

      I was thinking about this the other day - software is the only industry I know where an individual or company has the right to own common methods. What if, for example, I went to the hardware store to buy some lumber, nails, and a hammer so that I could build something that would add value to my life? What if I also had to consult a patent attorney before doing so, fearing that the method I use to construct this item might be covered by someone's patent? The idea is ludicrous, but this is the very situation that we now face in the software industry. Every time a developer puts an idea into code, there is a very real possibility that a patent violation is in the works - not intentional, not maliscious, but by mere virtue of the fact that the developer has the ability to empower both him/herself and others by what they produce. Any alleged infractions exist only because someone also had the same idea, and was greedy enough to claim ownership.

      Let's face it - this isn't about IP. It's about greed, lockout, and theft of empowerment.
      • by kinko (82040) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:39PM (#10517153)
        I was thinking about this the other day - software is the only industry I know where an individual or company has the right to own common methods. What if, for example, I went to the hardware store to buy some lumber, nails, and a hammer so that I could build something that would add value to my life?

        Unfortunately, I don't really think this is true - it's just that in the computer industry we find out about computer-related patents more.

        Lots of industries seem to have similarly absurd patents. Razor companies patent the design of the clip that holds the disposible blade to the handle, and then use the patents to prevent people making compatible disposible blades, for example.

        The hot-air hand dryer in our bathroom proudly lists the patent numbers that protect its design of heating up air and blowing it out....

      • by bstone (145356) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:41PM (#10517174)
        Notice that the InfoWorld article states that the SCO litigation is over patent infringement. So far, it's been about almost everything else (copyright, contracts, the Constitution, criminal theft, destruction of the world economy, etc.), but I don't recall the issue of patents ever coming up in any of the cases or in any of Darl's rants before.

        "McBride, whose company is mired in litigation with IBM Corp. and others over patent infringement claims concerning Unix source code, warned of the "high stakes" if companies in the software and music businesses don't protect their property now."
    • IP Gold Rush? Pah! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by OmniGeek (72743) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:29PM (#10517062)
      OK, so let's play along with Mr. McBride's crazy gold-rush metaphor for a minute...

      In a gold rush, lots of get-rich-quick types run around trying to grab a nominally free resource (minerals lying on the ground) and peddle it as their property. Some of them are rather, shall we say, unscrupulous in their methods.

      If we accurately apply this metaphor to the situation of IP, and more particularly to Open Source software and the IP rights thereto, the present SCO are a bunch of thieving claim-jumpers screaming "Mine! My Preciousss! Gollum!", and the Open Source community are out there giving the stuff away for free -- as long as you're willing to share it fairly.

      "Counter-cultural," says Mr. McBride? Maybe so; I for one am totally counter to the culture he advocates. Let's counter that culture for all we're worth!
  • by wbav (223901) <Guardian.Bob+Slashdot@gmail.com> on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:17PM (#10516040) Homepage Journal
    A case of Robin Hood than Wild West Bandits.

    McBride the sheriff of Naughtingham?

    • by ccharles (799761) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:26PM (#10516197)
      McBride the sheriff of Naughtingham?

      No, Robin Hood actually stole from the Sherrif. That would suggest that Linux actually stole code from SCO. I think we're all pretty confident that that hasn't happened.
    • That's naught how you spell Nottingham, you insensitive clod!
    • If we are looking for a literary metaphor McBride is more akin to Snidely Whiplash.

      Mcbride is the almost perfect villian and hollywood writers should take note - for inspiration if nothing else.

      He is a consummate blend of hubris, arrogance, ignorance, knavishness casted into a tongue wagging, smirking package with just barely enough intelligence that you don't completely discount him.

  • I can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AKAImBatman (238306) * <akaimbatmanNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:17PM (#10516049) Homepage Journal
    that they'll have a public forum open long enough to get their comments debunked on their own site! :-D
    • by TigerNut (718742) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:21PM (#10516118) Homepage Journal
      Nope - according to Darl himself (as quoted in TFA), if they had a forum on that site it would just be overrun by pro-open-source zealots with nothing better to do than to lambaste SCO.
      • Re:I can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)

        by AKAImBatman (238306) * <akaimbatmanNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:26PM (#10516188) Homepage Journal
        I skimmed the article but I hadn't noticed where he said that. Oh well, it just makes things that much more difficult for them. They're not going to develop a following of defenders (*snicker*) without a community to support them.

        The truly amazing part is that Darl actually believes that there are individuals out there who buy his story. I don't think ANYONE believes his story at this point. At the very least, he can stop waiting for that groundswell of vocal support from the pro-SCO grassroots campaign.
        • Re:I can only hope (Score:5, Informative)

          by TigerNut (718742) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:38PM (#10516381) Homepage Journal
          Sorry - I misattributed the statement to Darl - it was actually one of his minions, Blake Stowell:
          "The site will include a calendar of the cases SCO currently has in litigation as well as access to the legal filings made in SCO's cases. There are, however, no plans to allow readers to discuss the documents on the Web site. "If we opened it up to that, it would simply become another one of the message boards that our detractors use to try and overwhelm us," Stowell said."
        • Re:I can only hope (Score:5, Interesting)

          by nadamsieee (708934) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:49PM (#10516548)

          Sadly, the business world is full of idiot-greed-mongers just like Darl. I'm sure he is a cult hero at Forbes [forbes.com]. So I would suggest that there are probably many such 'business leaders' who either do believe him or would believe him if they knew anything about the on-going litigation.

          I'm not going to name any names, but there is at least one Fortune-500 company that has a "no F/OSS unless absolutely neccessary" policy that is a direct result of SCO's rhetoric.

    • by mr_z_beeblebrox (591077) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:26PM (#10516187) Journal
      that they'll have a public forum open long enough to get their comments debunked on their own site! :-D

      I think I saw the Beta site. A lot of members, let me list some:
      McBride
      Dary1234
      DarylM
      MrMcB
      These people were really pro sco. I hope he er... they don't start ScoDotting our servers :-)

      It was like one guy, but he could hit refresh REALLY fast
    • by kuwan (443684) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:50PM (#10516570) Homepage
      Don't you see, this is SCO's next step in their vexatious litigation strategy. They're going to launch their Pro-SCO site and open up the forums. Then when the masses of FOSS supporters flock to the forums to debunk all of SCO's claims, SCO will be secretly recording their IP addresses, personal information, etc.

      Then they'll take their newly acquired information and track you down so they can sue you! Then they'll be rich Rich RICH!

      MWAHAHA MWAHAHAHA MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
    • Unwise? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by PCM2 (4486) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:25PM (#10517014) Homepage
      More importantly, is it really a good idea to post rants on a public Web site stating your position in a lawsuit that's still pending? Isn't that the very first thing pretty much any reputable attorney says to clients -- don't go running off your mouth about the case? "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law" is what the cops tell you in criminal law ... this certainly will apply to SCO as well.
  • by Crashmarik (635988) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:17PM (#10516050)
    But can they get anyone to read them ?

    It will be even better if they do comment on what groklaw is convering. The SEC takes a dim view about companies making false statements about their business.
  • Good 'ol Darl... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chordonblue (585047) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:18PM (#10516061) Journal
    I guess when you can't fight on the side of truth then you can always try and rewrite it after the fact.

    See Darl? This is why the old guard from Caldera warned you not to go after the 'open source crowd'. Your page of lies will be dissected by hundreds of others on Groklaw. The best thing is, this time instead of shooting off your mouth, your words will be in some web cache.

    Choose your topics wisely Darl. You will be watched...

    • Re:Good 'ol Darl... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Bozdune (68800) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:37PM (#10516360)
      PJ "expressed surprise" that SCO would comment on ongoing litigation.

      This is disingenuous, though. As PJ and every Groklaw reader knows, this behavior is typical and wholly unsurprising. SCO are idiots, and their lawyers at this point are merely scrambling to avoid malpractice censure.

      My only regret is that when this is all over, and McBride is just a humorous case study at every B-school in America, a great source of daily entertainment will be no more.

      But I will deal. Somehow.
      • Re:Good 'ol Darl... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by FunWithHeadlines (644929) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:04PM (#10516757) Homepage
        "This is disingenuous, though. As PJ and every Groklaw reader knows, this behavior is typical and wholly unsurprising. SCO are idiots, and their lawyers at this point are merely scrambling to avoid malpractice censure."

        Given SCO's history, it may well have been said tongue in cheek. But it is actually surprising, and always has been, that the law team hasn't muzzled McBride and company. That is typically how these things are done. You don't see IBM execs shooting their mouths off, after all, even though they have been the ones accused of wrongdoing. You can bet that any lawyer worth their fees will tell their client to shut up and let them do the defending in the court.

        In fact, SCO's behavior has been so surprising, I wouldn't be a bit shocked to one day learn that they overrode their lawyers, or they worked in concert with their lawyers, to try the case in the court of public opinion since they knew they had no real chance in court. Of course, that would imply nefarious behavior on SCO's part, and I wouldn't want to speculate on that. Who knows what they really think. But yeah, it is suprising that SCO would comment on ongoing litigation. The smart move is to say, "No comment."

  • How long before... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by malchus842 (741252) <stephen@adamsemail.net> on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:19PM (#10516072) Homepage

    How long before they have to shut off comments or block users en masse because the comments and postings are all negative.

    I'm betting that IF they allow user input to be posted it will be heavily censored. It would have to be. SCO has zero friends. That's what happens when you sue your own freakin' customers!

    • by ravingsanity (779600) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:25PM (#10516184)
      According to the article:

      "There are, however, no plans to allow readers to discuss the documents on the Web site. "If we opened it up to that, it would simply become another one of the message boards that our detractors use to try and overwhelm us," Stowell said."

      So there will be no comments allowed on the site.
      • ""If we opened it up to that, it would simply become another one of the message boards that our detractors use to try and overwhelm us," Stowell said."

        what does he mean by "try"???

        Do or do not, there is no "try"... I personally think Groklaw is doing a pretty comprehensive job of exposing every stupid statement from SCO to the harsh light of day... they can't hide from it, there are several thousand outraged geeks scouring all the nooks and crannies of the internet for evidence of SCO's stupidities.

    • by d^2b (34992) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:26PM (#10516185) Homepage
      Those smart SCO guys are way ahead of you. If you (cough) read the article, you see that they do not plan to allow any comments at all, from the very beginning.
  • Wild Wild West (Score:3, Interesting)

    by usefool (798755) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:19PM (#10516075) Homepage
    Actually his analogy can be quite true, well, not true about what he has claimed, but the way the whole software industry is working FOR the patents/copyrights/trademarks rather than channeling the resources into something more useful, like Practical Properties?
  • by gspr (602968) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:20PM (#10516086)
    OK, we all knew the SCO guys were lacking a few parts of brain mass that most others posess, but this is really something. What marketing guy said "let's launch a site called ProSCO under the flag of 'fair coverage of the events', everyone will believe us!"?
  • by bigtallmofo (695287) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:20PM (#10516089)
    It's a universal mantra of any company involved in litigation. "We are unable to comment due to ongoing litigation". Now they're going to be reguarly commenting on active litigation on multiple fronts. They are breaking yet another fundamental rule of the universe (the first being, don't piss off the entire world in a ridiculous attempt to enrich yourself).
  • by douglips (513461) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:21PM (#10516120) Homepage Journal
    prosco.net [groklaw.net]
    The SCO group [groklaw.net]

    etc. etc.
  • Well... (Score:3, Funny)

    by radish (98371) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:21PM (#10516124) Homepage

    I, for one, welcome our new by Open Source-touting bandit overlords!
  • prosco? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jaywalk (94910) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:23PM (#10516142) Homepage
    Okay, so let me get this straight. Since they can't get people to believe SCO's spin when it's reported via credible news sources, they figure it's going to get a better reception when posted on an admittedly self-serving web site? I know it's standard on Slashdot to assume that the PHBs will accept anything they read, but even a PHB (or at least most of them) would have to know the difference between news and spin when the site's name is Pro-SCO. Somebody would have to be deliberately looking for SCO's spin even to go to this site.

    If anyone actually reads this site it's only going to be for the comic relief.

    • Re:prosco? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Skraut (545247)
      Why not, It works for Fox News
    • by twitter (104583) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @07:18PM (#10518790) Homepage Journal
      Since they can't get people to believe SCO's spin when it's reported via credible news sources, they figure it's going to get a better reception when posted on an admittedly self-serving web site?

      I'll bet it's more like no one in the press is going to print their BS anymore so they have to do it themselves. They might get one or two reporters to look at it, but that will stop when the reporters notice that there's no difference between the site and their nutty press releases. They won't stop reading Groklaw.

      It's amazing, you tell lies and people quit listening to you.

  • Similar tactics: (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Romancer (19668) <romancer@de3.141 ... oor.com minus pi> on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:24PM (#10516158) Journal
    Isn't this like MSNBC reporting on Microsoft, or MSN.com having "News" about the great new features of MSN messenger?
  • Free? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MynockGuano (164259) <(hyperactiveChip ... (at) (gmail.com)> on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:24PM (#10516162)
    "The open source movement says that proprietary software shouldn't exist. They say that the operating system should be free, but that's a slippery slope," McBride said. "There's 12 million developers worldwide, are you gonna let their work be free?"

    Yes?
    • Re:Free? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by imadork (226897) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:32PM (#10517085) Homepage
      The question we should ask Darl is, if someone wants to give away their work for free, who is he to stop them? His position is a lot like saying that Habitat for Humanity is taking food off the tables of building contractors...
    • Re:Free? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by seanellis (302682) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @05:49PM (#10517960) Homepage Journal
      There's 12 million developers worldwide, are you gonna let their work be free? - McB

      If they want it to be free, then fine.

      If they don't then fine.

      However, if you take someone else's work, which they have chosen to make free, claim it's yours, and then threaten people with lawsuits in the hope of shaking them down for money, then that's not fine.

      Which, of course, is why Groklaw and its associated community are shining a 10,000 lux light on SCO's every flaw and blemish.
  • by mykepredko (40154) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:25PM (#10516172) Homepage
    is positioning for the role of "Robber Baron".

    Somebody should tell him that Bill Gates has that job sewed up.

    myke
  • by LuxFX (220822) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:25PM (#10516175) Homepage Journal
    At first I thought prosco.com was for pros. co., as in "A Prosecuting Company". That about sums it up.
  • by PMuse (320639) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:31PM (#10516256)
    You've gotta be kidding me! SCO is going to open up a whole site mouthing off while they're still in the middle of a court case?

    Quick! Some one start an egg timer to see how long it takes before the Judge sees something SCO wrote on there and takes their heads off for it.
  • by Radical Rad (138892) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:31PM (#10516262) Homepage
    The new web site will be known as... SCOfflaw.net
  • by RealProgrammer (723725) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:33PM (#10516287) Homepage Journal

    He has huge stones, I'll give him that.

    McBride saying that the FOSS community are trying to take away his precious IP is ... I just tried to think of an analogue and I couldn't.

    • Kerry calling Bush indecisive?
    • Bush calling Kerry a war hawk?
    • Bill Gates calling Groklaw's Pamela Jones greedy?

    What hulking brass ones! How does he walk?

  • Question remains... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:36PM (#10516341)
    ...companies that they must protect their intellectual property or risk being 'sacked by open source-touting bandits.'

    As is so often the case, the question here is "how is this issue any more relevant to Open Source than it is to proprietary software?"

    Is there any reason to believe that open source developers (who have every reason to believe that they would be caught) would be more likely than closed-source developers (who have a much smaller chance of getting caught) to "steal" someone else's IP?

    Damn those evil open source developers! Always stealing my IP, and me with no way to tell, or prove it. You know, unless I look at the code or something. Damn them! And God bless the closed source developers, who don't show me their code, but whom I trust implicitly anyway.
  • by Chris Brewer (66818) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:36PM (#10516350) Journal
    I guess they figured that it'd be a waste of money springing for a two-year registration. It's not like there'll be anybody there left to renew the domain next October after they've been left as a smouldering caldera...
  • How humiliating (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ikekrull (59661) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:37PM (#10516362) Homepage
    Darl has run this once innovative and successful company so far into the ground that they see 'the competition' as PJ/Groklaw.

    So now it's not about IBM, it's not about UNIX, it's not about Linux, it's not about 'Intellectual Property'.

    Now it's about a lone ex-paralegal who had the balls (and i mean that in the nicest way possible) to tell it like it is.

    We can't have that, can we Darl? God forbid anyone actually accept a version of events that corresponds with legal and technical realities instead of simply believing whatever stupid lies you cooked up after another hard night on the Canopy crackpipe.

    Whats next, are you going to come up with an alternate justice system because no court in the US will accept SCO's ridiculous legal 'arguments' either?

    People *hate* what you and your company are doing, Mr. McBride.

    It is wrong, and no amount of P.R. spin will change that. Shame on you.

  • SCOX going nowhere (Score:5, Informative)

    by Animats (122034) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:38PM (#10516369) Homepage
    SCO stock has been wandering around $3.50 since midsummer. Hasn't been above $4 since mid-August. Hasn't fallen below $3 yet, although it did make it down to $3.18 once.

    Nobody really cares about SCOX any more.

    Nobody is going to buy SCO as an ongoing business because IBM has huge counterclaims against them. Remember, IBM is sueing SCO for stealing IBM code. [com.com] IBM released IBM code into Linux under the GPL. Then SCO resold it, but refused to accept their obligations under the GPL. So IBM revoked SCO's implied license under the GPL, which the GPL allows, and is sueing them for major copyright violations. And IBM can show (and has shown) exact copying of megabytes of IBM code by SCO.

    We're getting close to the day when some of IBM's summary judgement motions get decided. If IBM wins any of those, SCO is in deep trouble. At that point, no spin control will help SCO.

  • by 955301 (209856) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:38PM (#10516370) Journal
    As long as we're comparing to American western history, let's take a more comparable example: General Custer.

    1. Rumor has it the guy was a lunatic by the time he decided to attack the natives. Check.
    2. He and his little army set out to battle against an opponent with a larger head-count. Check.
    3. The natives didn't have a choice: Custer was pretty much set on attacking them no matter what they did. Check.
    4. The natives were fighting for existence. Custer for glory. Check.
    5. The end result was the glorifying of Custer and a signature point in the demise of the Native American population. Let's hope squashing SCO doesn't backfire into some sort of us against them attitude with big business.

  • Foot-shoot (Score:5, Interesting)

    by k98sven (324383) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:38PM (#10516378) Journal
    Am I the only one who thinks this might just be one of SCO's biggest PR gunblasts to their own foot in quite a while?

    I'm not sure if they could've given Groklaw more legitimacy if they tried.

    Who are they aiming at? Certainly they must understand that they have no chance whatsoever at building up the kind of community and following Groklaw has?

    So who, then? Journalists? Which journalist is going to quote 'pro-SCO.net' as a source? And if they do, in the future, it's hardly likely they'd do it without quoting Groklaw.. now that they're officially 'the other side'.

    (The question of who, in such an exchange, is going to come out sounding more trustworthy is left as an exercise for the reader.)
  • by Speak Forcefully (818082) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:38PM (#10516382) Homepage
    McBride is right about it being the Wild West, but it's more like the railroads vs the farmers and small merchants. The rail roads would come in and pull all kinds of stunts to get what they wanted and at times wipe out entire towns, usually under color of law with the sheriff working to further their interests. I've lost count the number of Kevin Costner-type movies that were made about such subjects, with the good guys coming out as something less than winners.

    McBride is merely a sheriff working for his boss (Microsoft, Sun, etc) and looking to bring some good old "law" to The West on their behalf. I have no idea what to call IBM and Novell. They'd kill us tomorrow if it suited their interests, but I guess for the moment they are the gun slinging Clint Eastwood types that have a disdain for the townsfolk, but really, really, really hate the corrupt sheriff, his henchmen and the railroad goons. I guess we should be ... sort of thankful.

    So McBride's notion about it being The Wild West is actually pretty accurate, with SCO representing the interests of the railroads and robber barons.

    Why do you think when you were getting shafted in the old days the term often used was "This was a railroad job" or "We railroaded those guys off the map" and so on... it was because the railroads had lots of power and generally screwed over the little guy.
  • by LiteForce (102751) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:38PM (#10516383) Homepage
    Domain Name: PROSCO.NET
    Created on: 04-OCT-04
    Expires on: 04-OCT-05
    Last Updated on: 04-OCT-04

    Obviously, SCO feels that they aren't going to be around after this date... or one would think they would at least have bothered to splash out the extra cash for a 2-year reg rather than just a 1-year reg.

  • by thedarb (181754) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:44PM (#10516464) Homepage
    You know it's just got to be a honey pot, right? I'm guessing they are trying to bait someone into hacking the new web site in hopes of making the Open Source community look bad to the press and to the courts. Remember, they already claimed Open Source advocates attacked their main web site a while back... but now they'll spin it as us trying to censor free speach. It's a setup to try and identify our Open Source community with the evil dregs of computing, script kiddies.

    • What do you mean don't fall for it? They can fake a DDOS attack or a hacked site without anyone actually even trying. Heck, they probably have the "linux rulz, sco sucks!!" hacked page already done up and ready to post when they need a stock boost.

      Finkployd
  • Don't let them win (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 3ryon (415000) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:45PM (#10516486)
    Obviously no one is going to go to prosco.com, surely not even the PHBs in SCO think that. Perhaps the purpose of this web site is just to dilute the DOSing they're constantly under by giving people more target.

    Not that I suggest DOSing under any circumstances...no matter how stupid the recipient might be.
  • by happyemoticon (543015) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:45PM (#10516487) Homepage
    SCO is a company with good intentions. Remember, fellas: they developed the original Unix from scratch with punch cards and tweezers and jumpers and things.

    Now they're being picked on by all these dangerous firms on the edge of legality like "International Business Machines" (clearly a front for the communist and/or nazi party) and an irregular army of anarchist hacker geniuses.

    I mean, seriously, if SCO doesn't turn this thing around, what WILL happen to Unix?

  • by francisew (611090) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:52PM (#10516594) Homepage

    I wonder if he's also waiting for aliens hiding behind a comet to come and rescue his business from all the 'open source bandits' who want to rob real developers everywhere of their work.

    Has he not yet realized that open source doesn't mean that developers can't be paid. Does he not realize that there is a commercially viable business model for open source and free software? Doesn't he know that open source doesn't mean free?

    Darl, wake up: you are crusading against something that will only end up helping people!

    I bet that the '12 million developers worldwide' would prefer to see SCO invest their litigation costs in actual software development.

    That kind of money (multibillion dollar lawsuit ) could produce a valuable open source software package. heh. With the right business model, they might even be able to turn a profit without suing the pants off everyone they can point a stick at. more heh.

    If "the new gold is IP," why is it costing SCO so much to have enforced? It's alchemy they are after, not mining. Unfortunately for them, lead doesn't become gold without great expense.

  • by Anonymous Cowpat (788193) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:55PM (#10516642) Journal
    When the site launches, and some wag *looks in mirror* finds a reason to submit a story about it every day for the first few months, one of 2 things will happen.
    Their servers will keep running at a nice, cool, 40 degrees c, and we'll all find out that they're running THEIR operating system, yeah, the one which everyone else has and THEY want to keep for themselves, or something, because they claim that it's theirs, although everyone else has it.
    Or they'll be running windows..

    Nice choice, effectively hang a sign around their necks saying "we're hypocrites" or have their site go down and get ridiculed on /. for using M$ based stuff...

    Oh the dilemma, my heart bleeds for them...
  • by lilmouse (310335) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:57PM (#10516660)
    Come on - "prosco.net"? At least they're not doing something like "fairandbalancedonsco.net"...

    It should be fun to see what positive spins they can put on their case, and I'm sure the fellow over at GrokLaw will have a ball with what they post!

    Sure it's propoganda, but it's way to late to do them any good.

    --LWM
  • by neurocutie (677249) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:57PM (#10516668)
    Darl McBride gave a speech comparing the software industry to the 'wild west' and warning companies that they must protect their intellectual property or risk being 'sacked by open source-touting bandits.'

    Nevermind the legalese and who can "win" lawsuits...

    I was reading a recent review of SCO's Unixware. The review seemed fair, objective and Unixware didn't come out too badly, BUT it was amply clear that the MAJOR reason that Unixware is still a product that one wouldn't be totally crazy to deploy, the MAJOR reason that Unixware could be viewed as even somewhat competitive is OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE, the OSS packages such as Samba, Apache, Open-SSH, etc that SCO "grabbed" from OSS to make Unixware a credible product.

    So here we have SCO borrowing HEAVILY from OSS, not paying a dime for key, strategic software that form the basis for whether Unixware is even slightly competitive on the market, and yet SCO is crying that OSS is 1) bad for the industry, 2) is stealing their oldy-moldy SysV code. I just find that APPALLING. Those guys have no shame, really. They should be GIVING BACK to OSS something for all the software they have taken into their own products, rather than trying to claim IP rights to this SysV, invalid as their claims are. This "all TAKE, no GIVE" approach of theirs to the community is the ultimate in despicable behavior.

  • by lildogie (54998) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:58PM (#10516679)
    SCO could get in trouble with the SEC if they misrepresent their standing in court on their website.

    Besides which, the judges are noticing SCO's public statements, and if SCO contracticts what they're telling the judge, or what the judge is telling them, they could annoy the judge.
  • by TilJ (7607) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @03:59PM (#10516698) Homepage
    Behind every corporate website is a SysAdmin.

    I'd like to hear their story -- are they just doing it for the buck? Do they believe what their web site is promoting?
  • by dtfinch (661405) * on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:07PM (#10516784) Journal
    SCO must be the band of train robbers.
  • by dj245 (732906) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:08PM (#10516803) Homepage
    Darl McBride gave a speech comparing the software industry to the 'wild west' and warning companies that they must protect their intellectual property or risk being 'sacked by open source-touting bandits.'"

    The speechwriter of Darl McBride has been sacked. Anyone offering further commentary on the person who sacked the person who was supposedly sacked, will be sacked. This thread will now continue in a completely different manner and at great expense.

  • by sjalex (757770) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:14PM (#10516889)
    someone registered prosco.org today under the name moe sizlak of 123 fake st, springfield, ak.

    hope they do something fun with it.

  • by Goo.cc (687626) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:16PM (#10516928)
    "warning companies that they must protect their intellectual property or risk being 'sacked by open source-touting bandits.'"

    That's right, companies should protect their "IP". And how do we do that? Let's review:

    1. Ensure you actually own your "IP"and that you can actually prove it.
    2. Be sure that you can prove that the other party is infringing on your "IP".
    3. Prevent your CEO from making stupid, unprovable statements to the public.
    4. Be honest with your investors about your chances of winning a protracted lawsuit.
    5. If you end up litigating multiple cases at the same time, be sure that you are consistant in your statements.
    6. Hire good lawyers.
  • by Dirtside (91468) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:19PM (#10516954) Journal
    I'll valiantly sacrifice myself at the feet of Godwin's Law:

    Darl McBride is comparable to Hitler.

    There, it had to be said. I know I lose the debate, but it was worth it.
  • by IGnatius T Foobar (4328) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:24PM (#10517007) Homepage Journal
    This is going to bring in some real revenue for them. All they have to do is put some banner ads on the site, maybe some Google AdSense boxes... since everyone's going to be constantly visiting prosco.com to see what absurd things Darl is saying next, SCO can just sit back and let the ad revenue pour in!

    It'll be more profitable than SCOsource ten minutes after the site launches!
  • Oh dear. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ledow (319597) on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @04:30PM (#10517064) Homepage
    I see, so the idea is to employ a few SCO bods to put up a website describing every detail of the court case, transcribing all of the court documents and putting up articles describings SCO'S opinions and related news articles.

    And you think that the little bit of money that you throw into that website is going to counter a huge base of dedicated people who work on the website on their own time, for fun, go to the courthouses of their own accord and get every little thing that's filed and publicly available as soon as it's released? That it'll make anybody think twice about whether they've misjudged SCO?

    They seriously think that people don't already know what SCO think (we own the world, give us money, why not? Boo Hoo) and that anyone (except Groklaw and the terminally bored or mindless) will actually bother to rifle through their PR rubbish? This can only provide Groklaw with more ammunition to make the whole world laugh at SCO.

    It's also far too late. They've been whinging about Groklaw's influence for months and always seem to manage to talk about it in derogatory terms (sponsored by IBM, you know :-) ) but only now do they bother to even try and counteract it? I bet nothing that gets put onto their new toy will ever contain ever really important, most of it will probably be paid-for PR by either made-up persons like the MIT deep-divers or by known rubbish-talkers.

    And what's worse is that the site ain't even up yet. By the time it does get up and get anything useful or vaguely interesting up, it'll all be over.

    Do they intend to use this site like an anti-Groklaw, to take IBM's public statements and court transcripts and try to poke holes in them, to find inconsistencies, to watch the superb work of SCO's lawyers ripping the opposition to shreds? That'll be fun to read.

    Do they intend to answer all those questions that everyone is just dying to know the answer to, like "Which lines of code?" or "Why can't you tell us which lines of code?" or "Why are you stalling so badly when you've publically claimed such good evidence that you haven't shown anyone yet?". That'll be fun to read.

    It's just a ruse. They hope that some middle-manager somewhere, having heard about all of this legal thing that affects their software decisions, will see Groklaw as a collection of amateurs (which can obviously be safely ignored) but will see ProSCO as a glowing advert which closes their doubts because it's got pretty eye candy and some sort of statement which says they are in the right and it's got quotes from SCO's management on it. Maybe then a few of these managers will just ignore their doubts and go SCO.

    Can't believe this will help their cause at all and can't wait to see the site when they actually get it working. IP may be gold but a good SCO quote can keep you laughing for the rest of your life.
  • by canfirman (697952) <pdavi25@@@yahoo...ca> on Wednesday October 13, 2004 @05:31PM (#10517749)
    Well, I for one am looking forward to a pro-SCO site. No offence to /. and Groklaw (and I'm not trolling here), but it seems that we have many groups that have anti-SCO discussion. I would love to hear somebody from the "SCO Community" (anybody out there...anyone...anyone...Bueller...) give their side of the story. I'd love to know why they feel that Linux is an illegal derivative of Unix and why they feel that they will win their lawsuits. Even if it's pure bunk (and I'd bet $5 it is), I just like to hear their side of the story. I've always believed in open debate and discussion, and only see this as an addition to the debate.

    Of course, it doesn't mean I'd agree with them. I still think SCO is full of shit and hope it gets what it deserves.

Kleeneness is next to Godelness.

Working...