Linus to SCO: 'Please Grow Up' 1163
brakk writes "From this article at Infoworld, Linus responds to SCO's open letter in a manner reminiscent of patting a child on the head." chrisd notes that his company is making SCO employees unhireable.
Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
Another relatively uninteresting open letter, however this part of the submission caught my eye:
chrisd notes that his company is making SCO employees unhireable.
[from that link]:
Any resumes which include the Santa Cruz Operation after May of 2003 will be immediately deleted as well.
That is truly childish. The real assholes at SCO are the suits and money-grubbing lawyers responsible for this charade. A code monkey in the trenches who needs a job to pay the bills isn't necessarily an enemy of open source.
Guilt by association is a slippery slope, remember Joe McCarthy?
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Insightful)
Any EOE experts to give some clarification?
I believe this could be considered discrimination, and companies are required to keep all resumes they receive on file.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Interesting)
Companies are only required to keep resumes on file that meet their submission guidelines. If you clearly state, "This is the only way you can send a resume" than you only need to store those that come in that way.
Any EOE experts to give some clarification?
I'm not an expert, but I pretend on Slashdot. This is just speculation, so treat it as such.
From Damage Studio's Point of View they are filtering their applicants based upon previous documented work ethics. You can filter applicants based on past history, without it being discrimination. For example, would the SEC hire someone from the financial department at Enron? Probably not, as they have a history of supporting false claims.
Same thing. SCO employees are supporting false claims, as well as bogus lawsuits. This is something Damage doesn't want to get involved with, so they are opting to not hire people who have worked for a company who is very well known for doing that.
Discrimination usually means things you can't help, too. Nobody is forcing anybody to work at SCO.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Interesting)
If you were an employee of a company that had conflicting values then it's reasonable to reject you based on that fact. It is already common for companies to not hire employees from their competitors fearling IP leaks and the lawsuits that follow.
Under that logic it is a perfectly valid concern that a SCO employee might "inevitably" bring some SCO IP into the company and result in SCO filing a lawsuit.
Does that make it ok to not hire someone just because they worked for SCO? I think it's moraly wrong, baseless and absolutley retarded. But I doubt that it's illegal. But of course IMNAL...
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly right. As a project manager you can't allow an ex-SCO engineer to code on one of your projects. Do you think it would take one week or two before you were sued for SCO IP in your software? According to SCO, simply being around their sacred code taints everything you do afterward. Well, so it does.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Interesting)
In half the places I applied for a job, if the company was very concerned about thier IP and considred itself in a highly competitive enviroment not only did I have to sign an NDA just to enter the building but I also had to fill out an extensive form detailing where I worked, what I did and if the company was a competitor. I also had to sign a paper saying that none of my family members work for any company that they consider a competitor. Better yet, having worked for eBay I had to sign a paper saying that I will not work for any retalier of used goods over the internet for the next 3 years...
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Informative)
Where I live, disrimination is only illegal when it is done on the basis of race, religion, age, gender or sexual orientation. It is completely legal to discriminate against someone on the basis of their past affilliations. I can't see this being any different anywhere else in the world that civil and human rights are protected.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Interesting)
Employees of SCO are not a protected class under any iteration of federal or state civil rights legislation of which I am aware. Discrimination in hiring is not illegal. In fact, it is encouraged. Generally, you want to discriminate against the stupid, lazy, and dishonest. Discriminating against members of protected classes while hiring is illegal, however.
Typically impermissible grounds for making hiring decisions include:
-sex
-race
-religion
-age
Sexual orientation is a close fifth behind those four biggies. Previous status as an employee of a certain organization may not be impermissible, unless it is seen as a covert method of excluding members of a particular group.
For instance, stating that you will not hire someone who is a member of the NAACP would probably be impermissible because it smells like subterfuge for keeping out blacks, even though you need not be black to be in the NAACP. Stating that you won't hire members of the NRA, or less policitally, members of Mensa, would probably be ok, although it might seem bizarre.
In this case, stating that you won't hire SCO employees is probably quite defensible, and perhaps the company in question thinks that it will make them distinguishable from other companies in the market for labor (more "street cred" with GNU/Linux geeks, I guess).
IMHO, most GNU/Linux geeks recognize that the problem isn't the guys in the cubes -- it's the guys at the top, so not much street cred is to be had here, in all likelihood. It just looks sort of juvenile. Besides, don't we want to encourage any and all talent to leave SCO?
In any case, it got their "help wanted" site some free pub, which was probably the idea in the first place.
GF.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Informative)
As someone else stated though, automatically deleting them is probably against the law. All resumes should be kept at least 1 year depending on where the business is located and state law.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it is entirely reasonable to make one's judgment as an employee part of the screen for a new job. I would look seriously askance at someone so mercenary as to stay in a morally bankrupt organization, like a Monsanto or a Nike or an SCO or such. It's not as if they were conscripted. And there are thousands of job candidates out there who have more of the courage of their convictions - I'd certainly prefer to hire them.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Interesting)
That's why they said "any resumes which include the SCO Group after September of 2003 will be immediately deleted" - they're specifically giving SCO employees until the end of the month to quit if they want to be eligible for employment at Damage Studios. That seems fair to me - anyone who is still working at SCO in a month is clearly part of the problem. They've known about SCO's actions for nine months - if they haven't been looking for a new job and preparing to quit, then clearly their ethics do not agree with mine and I don't want to work with them.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:3, Insightful)
Happens all the time. People gotta eat... Lets be more reasonable here, and remember who we all are...
Not that I expect anything to change because *I* asked...
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Insightful)
On the other hand, if their motives are to take revenge on SCO, why not automatically hire any programmer (not executive) that will leave SCO immediately.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Insightful)
What chance does the average coder who works to feed his family and keep a roof over his head have of influencing company executives (who can sakc him) who smell a big pay packet? Get real. Absolutely none at all. Sure, he can leave but if everyone who worked at companies who have undesirable motives, or were pursuing easy money then there'd be no one working!
chrisd if I were you, I'd get this taken off because you're company just looks petty and rather spiteful. Who would WANT to work for a company where the person who is interviewing you is mainly concerned with nothing to do with your job? You don't do yourself, or your company any favours whatsoever. What's next - judge someone on where they worked 5 years ago? God help your current employees with MS experience or if Red Hat etc ever do anything amiss!
You will get the applicants you deserve.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Interesting)
> mainly concerned with nothing to do with your job?
Your totally missing the point.
If they are hiring a programmer, working for SCO means you _can't_ do your job.
You can no longer program for any company in the US (Atleast until SCO is removed from the face of the planet)
If any company hired a SCO worker, _especially_ an 'average coder', that worker will taint your code the instant he speaks to any of your corders about anything what so ever related to programming, and SCO can(Will) sue for it.
The SCO execs fucked their workers over big time by doing this. No one else.
SCO has all but said outright "If you use any code that may be ours, we will sue."
I say it would be a firable offence to the interviewer if he/she knowingly and willingly hired someone from a company that stated they plan to sue anyone that uses that workers code or knowledge.
Its fucked up of SCO to do this to all of their workers, but atleast point the blame where it belongs... Not at the companys that simply dont want garenteed lawsuits pressed aginst them, but at SCO for ruining all of their workers futures by doing this.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, now that there's a new item for Open Letters, here's the extensively revised version of the one I posted a couple days ago. You can also see it on my journal page [slashdot.org].
A Linux User's Open Response to Darl McBride's Open Letter to the Open Source Community
By John Gabriel, NYC, 9/11/03
"What comes of litigation? Poverty and degradation to any community that will encourage it. Will it build cities, open farms, build railroads, erect telegraph lines and improve a country? It will not; but it will bring any community to ruin." -- Brigham Young, JD 11:259.
"Contracts are what you use against those with whom you have relationships." -- Darl McBride
Dear Mr. McBride,
First, let me introduce myself. My name is John Gabriel. I have been working in the technical field for 15 years, as a Network Administrator, Applications Manager, Network Manager, Sr. Networking Engineer, and now, Freelance Consultant. And, yes, I'm an MCSE.
My first experiences with Unix occurred in the late 1970's, during school field trips to local colleges. I also did Unix technical support for students while taking a class in Pascal in the late 1980's. My first experience with Linux dates to 1994, when I downloaded whatever Linux kernel was available at that time.
While I did install it successfully, on a Compaq Deskpro 386/25, I quickly abandoned it as the Deskpro didn't have enough memory to support the X Windows System. Several years later, in 1998, I became a Caldera customer, with a purchase of Caldera OpenLinux Base ver. 1.22, with Linux kernel 2.0.33. I ran into similar problems once more.
About a year ago, I again became interested in Linux, and now run Linux on my home workstation in a dual-boot configuration with Windows XP.
About 4-5 months ago, I began following the SCO v. IBM story. I was at first inclined to be open-minded towards SCO's claims. It wouldn't be the first time a small company has had its copyrights violated by a larger vendor, though the violator is usually, in my experience, Microsoft, as exemplified by Caldera's history with DR-DOS.
However, the more I researched the story and SCO's claims, the more convinced I became that SCO's claims were, well, baseless. Being the type that usually likes to "root for the underdog", I was surprised by my conclusions.
Anyway, that's enough introduction. What follows is an Open Response to your Open Letter to the Open Source Community. I grant everyone, including you, permission to re-publish it, or quote from it, without restriction, except that my comments be properly attributed to myself. Consider it under a "BSD-style" license if you like.
Open Letter to the Open Source Community [sco.com]
By Darl McBride, CEO, The SCO Group [sco.com]
1) The most controversial issue in the information technology industry today is the ongoing battle over software copyrights and intellectual property. This battle is being fought largely between vendors who create and sell proprietary software, and the Open Source community. My company, the SCO Group, became a focus of this controversy when we filed a lawsuit against IBM alleging that SCO's proprietary Unix code has been illegally copied into the free Linux operating system. In doing this we angered some in the Open Source community by pointing out obvious intellectual property problems that exist in the current Linux software development model.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:3, Insightful)
grow up.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
I run a business. I hire some people who were formerly employeed by SCO. I release a major new product which brings in millions. What is to stop SCO from taking me to court, saying that the employees I hired from them used SCO IP to improve my product?
SCO has already shown a willingness to sue based upon shaky grounds. I'd bet if they don't win the IBM lawsuit they will go after someone else next.
Just the threat of a lawsuit affects stock prices and can have a dramatic impact on a business.
I'm not saying this is the case here, but it would make me think if I was in charge of hiring people.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Interesting)
"We're going to throw away all resumes, but especially those from SCO."
BTW, note that submitter chrisd is listed on the exec team of damagestudios, along with other former VA/Andover/Sourceforge folks. Basically this is a just a tacky PR ploy, and I guess I fell for it. Looks like they're trying to get some free hits on their site more than anything else. They should just pay for their ads like everybody else.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Informative)
It isn't really Guilt by association if you are part of the problem...I think this is a measured, appropriate response to SCOs attack on free software. Note the date is well after they launched the lawsuit, giving employees time enough to go find new jobs..
chrisd
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Insightful)
I disagree. If a person shows a willingness to stay with a company that is very obviously doing the Wrong Thing, I wouldn't want to work with them. Yeah, it's a tough job market -- and SCO is trying to make it tougher for folks in the Linux crowd by sowing FUD about Linux and trying to stall or stop its adoption. If you stay on with the company -- even as the receptionist or janitor, you're condoning its actions.
Trying justify this "anything for a buck" mentality just doesn't work for me. How evil would a company have to be before you'd stop taking money from them?
You are so out of touch with reality its scary (Score:4, Insightful)
Try explaining to your kids why you can't buy them food or pay for their school or why the lights just got shut off. An answer of "Oh well I had to make sure my stance on ensuring the freedom of Linux and GPL software everywhere was loud and clear. Sorry you feel faint from hunger but hey at least my startling irrelevant opinions on the computer industry's morality remain untarnished!"
I mean are you on 100% Genetically Enhanced Columbian Crack Cocaine? Janitors and receptionists? WTF would they care about Linux at all for? Its just a job for them. Most likely they aren't even AWARE of anything other than windows (I'll bet you $5 the receptionists at SCO or even Red Hat have Windows based PC's on their desks). This isn't the civil rights movement were talking about here. A LITTLE bit of perspective would do you a world of good.
Re:I'd rather die hungry and die honest (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes and can you look at yourself in the mirror and be SURE that you "did the right thing" when you have responsibilities to your family?
Oh sure 'I' don't mind a bit of pain to make my stand, but am I willing to hurt other to make my stand? I think not.
You have NO idea how happy I am to be working. I know people who are graduating IST/CS right now and have NOTHING but 50k-70k in loans. I can tell you right now that even the most moral of them will BEG for a job at SCO, right wrong be damned. You wouldn't be so sure about "doing the right thing" when your car got repoed and you filed for bancrupcy..
Re:I'd rather die hungry and die honest (Score:5, Insightful)
You have NO idea how happy I am to be working. I know people who are graduating IST/CS right now and have NOTHING but 50k-70k in loans. I can tell you right now that even the most moral of them will BEG for a job at SCO, right wrong be damned. You wouldn't be so sure about "doing the right thing" when your car got repoed and you filed for bancrupcy..
And they are absolute fools. Trust me, I have learned this the hard way. You do not want to take a bad job just so you can have one. It is bad for you, your career, and your self-esteem. It is never worth it. Yes, they feel like begging SCO for a job now, and I feel their pain. But they will thank themselves a couple years from now if they don't do it.
Besides, it is ridiculous to work at a job you hate, or for a company you cannot believe in, for any reason. I have generally chosen companies based on agreeing with their moral stance and their product, and this has turned out best for me. YMMV, but realize that if you hate your job you will not do a good job, and not doing a good job will not help your career at all. Working at a job you hate, for a company you hate, is not good for your health, self-esteem, or career. It is the stupidest thing you can do, regardless of the rationalizations you try to make for it.
Re:I'd rather die hungry and die honest (Score:4, Insightful)
-Hope
Re:I'd rather die hungry and die honest (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I'd rather die hungry and die honest (Score:5, Interesting)
Admirable though this sentiment is, I can't help but wonder if it is being opined by someone who has never felt real hunger.
Me? Given the choice between dying honest and living in guilt, I'd choose to live in guilt. There are very, very few things in this world worth dying for.
Re:I'd rather die hungry and die honest (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You are so out of touch with reality its scary (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not the original poster, but I'm kind of amused, because you've pretty much described me, except that the other "professional field" I jumped into for five years (three, so far) is stay-at-home motherhood. That cut the household income in half.
I expect to jump back in at the point where I left off, partly because I'm spending these five years working on free/open source projects and other stuff like that (okay, and reading Slashdot, too... I keep up on the industry).
If you look at it right, it's really not that much different from quitting an unethical company, other than that I'm *guaranteed* to be staying out of the IT field, where the hypothetical ex-SCO employee isn't.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
So, how was a person who was working support, or development or whatever, doing the "Wrong Thing?"
Guilt by association?
In the big picture what SCO is doing is not really wrong, its just business... its bad business... and they will fail... but that's all it is, a very bad (and stupid) business decision made by a half wit and a gaggle of hungry lawyers. What you have is a bunch of fragile knee jerk geeks who think its true evil and get all bent out of shape when faced with confrontation. It isn't evil... and to punish those who just want to feed their kids, save for retirement and do their thing is not only unfair, but is stupid, supremely stupid.
To quit one's job over the SCO vs. Linux debate is intensly stupid and shows a real disconnect with reality... and to discriminate against those that don't is as stupid.
I think what gets lost is, in the grand scheme of things... this SCO thing is insignificant. In fact, I would say those that really cry the loudest about this are the one's that need it the most... gives them something to complain about on
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
What if someone had quit SCO, one week before IBM would cave in and buys SCO?
You can bet everyone at SCO _is_ looking for a new job (even Darl McBride, lol) , but what on earth could, say
Oh, and maybe we'll see some "Halloween" documents from SCO in the future, just because there are still some good guys left there.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd rather have to tell my kid someday that I had to sell out so that he wouldn't have to than tell him "sorry that you had to go to bed screaming because you were hungry when you were two, but I had a point to prove."
Why not be a voice of reason on the inside? (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at you, all principled and what-not. It's easy to talk big. When you're looking down the barrell of sudden unemployment in a tight market at your own hand it's a potentially harmful tipping point for your career and those you love. See if your wife cares about your principles when you're missing your second mortgage payment in a row and you can't look your son in the eye because you can't afford your new eyeglasses prescription...
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Interesting)
Not that I want to defend lawyers, but American (US) lawyers are indeed a separate species from at least German ones. That might have something to do with different ecosystems. Over here, Lawers are reasonably regulated. Among other things, the following rules apply:
- No advertising
- Minimum fees are fixed, depending on the value of the lawsuit (and that will be set by the judge). The lawyer typically gets paid the same for winning and for loosing. He can't work for just a percentage of the damages awarded.
- Looser pays the winners reasonable legal fees.
All in all, it makes for a lot less ligitious society. It also means that damages are reasonable to low (as opposed to much to high to insane in the US).Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:3, Insightful)
Anytime an employer does something one finds disturbing, that person should just change employers? That would eventually leave him/her unemployed. Too many jobs in too short a period on a resume is a red-flag.
Remember that your employer does not speak for you.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
Leave: No paycheck. No sure new job. And since not fired, no unemployment benefits to speak of.
Now, if a person had a job to change to, then it'd be different. Blocking that door doesn't help the codemonky, it helps SCO.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:4, Interesting)
It hasn't been easy getting new jobs over the past few months, so I understand people holding on to whatever jobs they've got.
Now with the economy on it's rise it might be a different story.
I find it wrong to judge people in this manner, the actual coders at SCO probably have NOTHING to do with the "crusade" against Linux.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
As much as I think SCO is a bad company and what they're doing is reprehensible, do you really think that someone should risk their home and family over it?
I might be inclined to do it if I was literally fighting for my community against some real threat (ie, armed invasion or military coup d'etat), but over the SCO/Linux debacle?
I think you have to have a serious lack of perspective if you think that committing economic suicide over SCO is the right thing to do.
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe (Score:5, Insightful)
If they're applying for a job at a Linux company, shouldn't it be painfully fucking obvious that they're TRYING TO JUMP SHIP?
Why benefit SCO by making it *HARDER* for their employees to jump ship?
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Informative)
- They have kids
- They have a wife
- They have car payments
- They have house payments
- They have many bills to pay
- The economy sucks, and working at Domino's Pizza does not present a viable alternative
Any other questions?
Re:Childish screening procedures. (Score:5, Insightful)
So when do you draw the line? What if your company was making dangerous chemicals and not disposing of them properly? What if they were making chemical weapons? What if they were selling chemical weapons to terrorists?
Ethics that only come into play when it's convenient to use them aren't really ethics.
chrisd's company evidently has a higher standard of ethics for its employees than you have for yourself. Most of the world would probably side with you on this one too, but if they want to miss out on potentially great talent because of this, that's the sacrifice they're making.
The problem is that chrisd is HELPING SCO! (Score:4, Insightful)
The point some of the above posters have made is that you can't draw the line, if people like chrisd will find you guilty by association. If more companies did what chrisd did, then SCO employees CAN'T jump ship, even if they want to.
Why help SCO? What you SHOULD be doing is giving SCO employees INCENTIVES to leave!!!!
SCO's rebuttal (Score:5, Funny)
Linus to SCO: "Please Grow Up"
SCO to Linus: "My OS can beat up your OS. Nyah nyah nyah!"
Re:SCO's rebuttal (Score:3, Funny)
SCO to Linus: "My OS can beat up your OS. Nyah nyah nyah!"
Linus to SCO(Rebuttle): Oh yeah, well your a poopy-pants.
SCO to Linus: Oh yeah, well I'm telling your mommy.
Re:SCO's rebuttal (Score:4, Funny)
Mom: But the candy jar is for everyone everyone... they didn't steal your candy, the candy jar is to share candy. We love to share in this family, don't we?
SCO: But I want it ALL!
SCO Lawyers: They have to pay us $700 for each candy they took. And, we declarer sharing candy in the form of public candy jars illegal!
Re:SCO's rebuttal (Score:4, Funny)
My Code is Rubber, your Code is Glue,
Whatever I Code bounces off me and sticks with you until you pay me my f@!#ing $699 you Finnish Son of a @$#@$!
oh this is funny (Score:5, Funny)
Until then, please accept our gratitude for your submission
Haha.. thanks LINUS!! now i got dr. pepper all over my purty flat screen!!!!
Re:oh this is funny (Score:3, Insightful)
Just point to the infringing code in the linux source...
Lottery (Score:3, Funny)
SCO scratch off tickets? Now there's an idea!
childness hiring? (Score:5, Insightful)
However, with the laying off of most of the r&d coders is there any one left that is accoutnable in nature?
Only a matter of time....... (Score:4, Funny)
Post-trial Justice [temporal-acuity.net]
Ian
If we had openings, we wouldn't hire you (Score:5, Funny)
I'd complain about how immature the policy is except that if you read the page, you see that they are not hiring, so SCO employees are ineligible for all zero of the openings they have available.
SCO Childish (Score:3, Interesting)
Linus!!! (Score:4, Funny)
You were a hero of mine, until this letter. Now, you are a SuperHero! The SuperBestFriends had an opening, but I would say it is now taken.
-Spack
Hiring Policy (Score:5, Insightful)
That's capricious and sick. It is not the rank and file who is responsible, it is the brass. To punish people who have done nothing wrong, guilt by association, is cruel and unfair. This would be like throwing an Enron middle-level mananger in prison simply because he/she worked for Enron. SCO isn't Nazi Germany, people!
Excellent points (Score:5, Insightful)
Although a poster below made a good point - This could be intentional to avoid intellectual property problems. SCO noncompete agreements might likely make their employees ineligible to apply for employment at ChrisD's company in the first place.
That said, the wording of the statement on ChrisD's website is immature and vengeful.
More proper wording which I would accept is, "Due to intellectual property issues and conflicts of interest, we regret that we cannot hire former employees of the Santa Cruz Operation at this time."
Re:Hiring Policy (Score:5, Funny)
"Springtime for SCO"
from Mel Brooks' The Thieving Whore Bastards CEO's
SCO was having trouble, what a sad, sad story
Needed a new leader to restore its former glory
Where oh where was he? Where could that man be?
We looked around, and then we found, the man for you and me,
And now it's
Springtime for McBride and SCO,
Utah is happy and gay.
We're marching to a faster pace,
Look out, here comes that smug [computerworld.com] Mcbride face.
Springtime for McBride and Utah,
Winter for Linus and Eric S Raymond.
Springtime for McBride and Utah,
Come on, Utah, go into your dance
I was born in Salt Lake City, and that is why they call me P Diddy.
Don't be stupid, be a smarty, come and join the SCO party.
Springtime for McBride and Utah
(SCO Unix box beeps twice)
Goose-step's the new step today
(SCO Unix box gun fires)
NDA's falling from the skies again,
(NDA's falls and explodes)
Utah is on the rise again
Springtime for McBride and SCO
System V are sailing once more
[woman's voice]: "Well! Talk about bad source!"
Springtime for Mcbride and SCO
Means
We've got to be going
You know we'll be going to
Unhireable Ex-SCO people (Score:5, Insightful)
Equal Opportunity? (Score:5, Insightful)
You can't seriously claim to be an Equal Opportunity Employer and at the same time reject applicants based on where they used to work. I know there's not a law but come on, that's the spirit of EOE.
Re:Equal Opportunity? (Score:5, Insightful)
Federal EEO laws prohibit an employer from discriminating against persons in all aspects of employment, including recruitment, selection, evaluation, promotion, training, compensation, discipline, retention and working conditions, because of their protected status.
I think the point is that you don't choose your race, sex, color, religion, national origin, age, physical/mental handicap, sexual orientation or to be sexually harassed. That is the spirit of EOE. If you choose to prostitute your talents for a morally corrupt company, then that is your choice and you accept the consequences.
Phillip.
They didn't squander the IPO money (Score:5, Interesting)
What they didn't do was use it to make good products or a functional business. "Squander" implies they ever intended to try to do either of these.
By the way, am I the only one who always thinks about Resident Evil's Umbrella Corporation every time he hears the name Canopy?
Snowball's Chance in Hell (Score:5, Funny)
Not quite my friend. Somehow I think my Mega Millions ticket has a better chance of winning that SCO getting anything from the community.
Darl to Linux (Score:5, Funny)
Alright, Linus. The gloves are off.
We'll now show the most damning evidence yet [qpine.net]. There we have it, we've presented the basis for not hundreds, not thousands, not tens of thousands, but hundreds of thousands of derivative code in the Linux kernel.
Let's see you dig yourself out of this one, wunderkind.
Hiring ban (Score:3, Funny)
So they're refusing to consider SCO employees for any of the open positions that they
Wow, that'll teach them a lesson.
Linus Flame (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Linus Flame (Score:5, Funny)
Today's top story (Score:5, Funny)
The real shocker here, of course, is that a Linux advocate spelled "bated breath" correctly for the first time in recorded history.
What's the point of making them unhireable? (Score:3, Informative)
I doubt that anybody looking for a job in the software field would have SCO from May, 2003 on their resume.
Take that! (Score:3, Funny)
"BUUUUUURRRRRRRNNN!"
Sorry, I just got caught up in the wicked burn. Linus is awesome, what can I say? He certainly has a way with words. I laughed so hard after reading that.
I'll hire SCO people! (Score:5, Insightful)
And their first task will be going through the SCO customer list in my geographic area and whacking each and every SCO system they can locate.
You have to view it from their perspective - years, some times decades of hard work, stock in the company trapped by trading rules, and scam artists from Canopy making it all just a sick joke.
If you really want to jab SCO, find a job for *every* person there who does real work, and do it quick.
Karma whoring ... (Score:3, Informative)
---
Dear Darl,
Thank you so much for your letter.
We are happy that you agree that customers need to know that Open Source is legal and stable, and we heartily agree with that sentence of your letter. The others don't seem to make as much sense, but we find the dialogue refreshing.
However, we have to sadly decline taking business model advice from a company that seems to have squandered all its money (that it made off a Linux IPO, I might add, since there's a nice bit of irony there), and now seems to play the US legal system as a lottery. We in the Open Source group continue to believe in technology as a way of driving customer interest and demand.
Also, we find your references to a negotiating table somewhat confusing, since there doesn't seem to be anything to negotiate about. SCO has yet to show any infringing IP in the Open Source domain, but we wait with bated breath for when you will actually care to inform us about what you are blathering about.
All of our source code is out in the open, and we welcome you point to any particular piece you might disagree with.
Until then, please accept our gratitude for your submission,
Yours truly,
Linus Torvalds
Not a troll but... (Score:5, Insightful)
I find the attention/flames that everybody is giving to SCO highly surprising, as a result it is hard for bystanders to differentiate between the opponents. It would be much more mature of Linus and Co to either ignore the whole matter or respond professionally, instead of playing the same game.
Linus's Letter (Score:5, Interesting)
As for Damage Studios' policy, I think it is mostly just for show. But they have got every right to refuse ex-SCO employees, and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. There are things I, personally, would far rather be on the dole than do. As long as you have a head on your shoulders, a hand on each arm {and, absit omen you should ever have to use it, a hole in your arse}, there is no reason why you should be going short.
It's all a Microsoft driven plot... (Score:4, Funny)
For a non-native English speaker: (Score:5, Insightful)
Hiring a SCO person may be risk of future lawsuits (Score:4, Insightful)
Problem with SCO is that since nothing they're doing makes sense, predicting future moves is equally difficult.
good day for SCO (Score:5, Interesting)
Wow, that must really concern management at SCO, that they don't have to wory about employees leaving and going somewhere else because no one will hire them. Even is this were true, it actually would be great news for top management. Between that and Linus's response being a lame "grow up" while they watch company stock go through the roof and some chumps actually paying them and they must really be having a good day today.
The Main Point (Score:5, Insightful)
This is so beautiful because it so totally destroys SCO's "reason" for not disclosing the infringing code: the argument that they can't disclose it becauses it's proprietary (even though, by their own statements, it's already in the publicly available kernel source code).
Characteristically, Linus curts stright to the crux of the matter.
Now thats a long copyright (Score:5, Funny)
(C) Copyright 2002-2403 Damage Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Re:Now thats a long copyright (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Now thats a long copyright (Score:5, Informative)
Chrisd
Re:Now thats a long copyright (Score:4, Funny)
Damage Hiring Policy is good thinking (Score:5, Interesting)
Bear with me for a moment....
By hiring a SCO employee, and knowing SCO's current mindset (sue for money), I would not be surprised if you got a knock on the door six months down the road from SCO counsel asking for a code audit, thinking that the former employee must have given your company some IP knowledge due to past experience at SCO....
So by not hiring an ex-SCOer, you would be keeping yourself from being exposed to such risks.... not at all unfair.... and good thinking
Re:Damage Hiring Policy is good thinking (Score:4, Interesting)
Chrisd
Media Response Team (Score:4, Informative)
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030909/tech_sco_linux_1
I would encourage all
Here's what I wrote them. Please feel free to send my letter verbatim, or something similar. The more feedback they get, the less likely they will be to do a one-sided treatment of this in the future.
To: editors@reuters.com
I am writing in reference to the September 9 article on SCO's current lawsuit and critique of the Open Source community.
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030909/tech_sco_linux_1
Your article failed to provide any response from members of the Open Source community, or to articulate the views of the community, and as such was an entirely one-sided treatment of the topic.
The author lamely suggested that Open Source leaders were "unavailable for comment" either unaware of, or deliberately ignoring the mountains of responses generated in recent days, weeks, and months regarding the lawsuit, and in particular, and McBride's letters. Given the lopsided nature of the article, I suspect that the author did not try very hard to find responses from the Open Source community regarding SCO's claims.
In the interest of balance, I would strongly encourage you to write another story articulating the Open Source movement's response to McBride's letter.
For references in which the Open Source, and other communities, notably the Open Group which holds the UNIX trademark, have responded to SCO's claims in general, and to the particular letter being reported on in yesterday's article please review the following references:
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2003
http://www.osdl.org/docs/osd
http://www.perens.com/SCO/SCOSlideSho
http://www.opengroup.org/comm/press/unix-b
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/sco/sco.ht
Please give the following email addresses to authors doing future research on SCO's claims regarding the Open Source community.
moglen [at] columbia [dot] edu Eben Moglen
esr [at] thyrsus [dot] com Eric Raymond
bruce [at] perens [dot] com Bruce Perens
rms [at] stallman [dot] org Richard Stallman
torvalds [at] transmeta [dot] com Linus Torvalds
SCO in Vegas... (Score:4, Funny)
SCO's forum 2003 took place in vegas...
Linus gets what ESR and Bruce don't (Score:5, Insightful)
That SCO is so full of bullshit that by repeating and denying any particular version of their fantasy-land claims, we only give credence to them. This is the letter than ESM and Bruce should have written. Short, to the point, and utterly dismissive.
But it could be even better. I hope that from now on, if open/free advocates decide to bite Darl's trolling, that they restrain themselves to just saying "Identify the infringing source," and not one word more. Unless it's "fuckwad".
Plan to end all our woes (Score:4, Funny)
- Write a song about Linux, and include some source code in the lyrics.
- Build up enough interest in it so that some record label offers a deal. Major labels only, please.
- Play the hell out of the song. Get all of Slashdot to buy multiple copies, get it preinstalled on Linux distros, etc.
- Profit!!! (but we're not done yet)
- Tell SCO that the second verse contains System V code.
Things will just, well, work themselves out. On there own. Easy.Re:*sigh* (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:*sigh* (Score:4, Informative)
>youimmediately think of code they've written, or an
>image of them jumping up and down on a soapbox?
Maybe it's me, but emacs comes to mind with Stallman.
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a place for apolitical techies like Linus and another place for visionaries and advocates like Stallman and Perens. This may be news to you, but code doesn't just float in the void; without the right legal and social environment OSS doesn't exist. It's fine for Linus to ignore SCO -- that's not his job to deal with it -- but if everyone ignored it we'd all be up shit creek when SCO walked out of some courtroom with legal rights to our code.
Re:My letter to Damage Studios (Score:5, Funny)