Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Business Caldera Your Rights Online

OSDL Says SCO Suit Was Good for Linux 270

Posted by CmdrTaco from the makes-a-good-point dept.
sebFlyte notes a zdnet story thats says "Speaking at Queen Mary, University of London, on Monday night, Open Source Developer Labs chief executive Stuart Cohen said the lawsuits [SCO suing everyone in sight over supposed issues with Linux] were "the best thing that ever happened to Linux"'
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

OSDL Says SCO Suit Was Good for Linux More

OSDL Says SCO Suit Was Good for Linux

Comments Filter:

  • I can think of better things (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jasper-la ( 866654 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:45PM (#11901968) Homepage
    Well I can think of better things happend to Linux! Big companies choosing Linux' side for example. Or the GPL with version 0.12!
    • Or even (shock) Linus actually deciding to write it in the first place!!

    • Re:I can think of better things (Score:4, Insightful)

      by falconed ( 645790 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:49PM (#11902040)
      Sure there could be better things. But there's no such thing as bad publicity, and the more publicity Linux gets, the better.

      The SCO case put Linux on the front page. Maybe it wasn't under the best circumstances, but I'll bet it got a lot of people saying "Linux? What's that?" and actually getting an answer.

      • Sure there could be better things. But there's no such thing as bad publicity, and the more publicity Linux gets, the better.

        I agree there are examples of when bad publicity is a good thing. For example Paris Hilton's sidekick get's hacked, and suddenly there is a huge spike of sidekicks.

        However I'd hate to be Check Point right now, everyone (incl. Slashdot, FoxNews, CNN) keeps saying Check Point lost thousands of peoples data when in fact that was Choice Point. For a security company losing thousands of
    • ... or IBM offering Linux on its high-end servers [ibm.com], or the SE Linux initiative [nsa.gov].

  • It just proves the old adage (Score:4, Insightful)

    by winkydink ( 650484 ) * <sv.dude@gmail.com> on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:47PM (#11901990) Homepage Journal
    There's no such thing as bad publicity.

  • False (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Coneasfast ( 690509 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:47PM (#11901998)
    If anything it accelerated the use of Linux, so it is one of the best things that ever happened to the operating system.

    Uh, no, the SCO thing had no effect on this, it would have happened either way.

    If anything, the only good thing about this whole SCO fiasco is we had someone to laugh at during a rainy day.
    • If anything, the only good thing about this whole SCO fiasco is we had someone to laugh at during a rainy day.

      And man, was this the longest monsoon season we ever had, since records began.
    • It gave publicity to Linux - which is a good thing. Think of it as free advertisement. So yes it is a good thing....to say it would have happend either way is kind of presumptuous. Without all of this publicity, chances are the status quo would have stayed the same for a long time and by then we can't really speculate (at least I admit that I can't) if Linux would have gained a good boost or dropped like a rock in water.

      Remember, the best product (not saying Linux is or isn't) doesn't always make it to

      • Re:False (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Ohreally_factor ( 593551 )
        Well, it also made some management types hesitate, until they were able to see which way the wind was blowing. So I think that counterbalances whatever publicity (more or less).

        And as things unfolded, we learned that SCO didn't have anything substantial as far as linux goes, and probably contractually to IBM, either.

        Really, it was a sideshow, a distraction. Perhaps it gave us a feeling of solidarity, being under attack and all that. And we do have SCO to thank for motivating PJ to start Groklaw [groklaw.net]. In fact,

  • I can relate... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Andrewkov ( 140579 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:47PM (#11902002)
    Yeah, it reminds me of the time someone beat me up and stole my bike when I was in grade 4. Best thing that ever happened to me!
    • If you hooked up with a mysterious Asian gentleman, became an expert in the martial arts, tracked the thief down, got your bike back, beat him up, made him see the error of his ways, and the whole thing got made into a movie -- then yeah, obviously it was the best thing that ever happened to you!
    • Mr. Anderson beat you up and stole your bike when you were in grade 4?
    • What a coincidence, I used to beat up kids in the 4th grade and steal their bikes. It was the best thing that ever happened to me!
    • Yeah, it reminds me of the time someone beat me up and stole my bike when I was in grade 4. Best thing that ever happened to me!

      Yeah, sorry about that. You can have the bike back if you want.

    • Better analogy... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gosand ( 234100 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:44PM (#11902791)
      Yeah, it reminds me of the time someone beat me up and stole my bike when I was in grade 4. Best thing that ever happened to me!

      Actually, it would be more accurate if: A bully with no friends accosted you and said you stole his bike, but all your friends, even some people you didn't know, gathered around and told the bully to get lost. He kept getting more and more belligerent, said he was going to get his big brother, but everyone started laughing at him. Even an ex-bully was on your side and gave the bully a bloody nose. He finally ran away crying, and went back to the creepy guy in the park, who had given him a bag of candy to stir up trouble because all the guy had was a homemade bike that wasn't very nice because he put it together from old parts of other bikes that he found or stole. The guy in the park didn't have any friends either because he had been a complete jerk to everyone his entire life. The creep really didn't want your bike, he just didn't want anyone else to have a nice bike. But the creep survived because he had lots of money from killing puppies and selling their souls to the devil. And he had a bad haircut. The end.

  • Not terribly suprising. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by PopeAlien ( 164869 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:48PM (#11902013) Homepage Journal
    Sco news is good news.

    theres no such thing as bad publicity.

    "There was a lot of due diligence around the world with people looking at the code and looking at software stacks, and all this work validated that there was nothing there, no risk, no issue," said Cohen. "The SCO court case ended up on every Web site, in every newspaper and every magazine. Everybody had to do due diligence -- you could not be a CTO or CIO and not do due diligence in 2003/2004 when SCO was suing end users," he added.


    this just goes to show the strength of community involvment.. A system where the teamining bearded hordes CAN check every line of code and confirm each others findings.

  • The best thing that happened? (Score:5, Funny)

    by tod_miller ( 792541 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:49PM (#11902027) Journal
    I would say that would be a Mr Torvalds if-you-please.

    I woudl certainly say it was the best thing Microsoft have done for linux so far, I mean, spending all that money to legitimise and place such great precedent for future generations of linux users.

    Lets all not forget to thank bill and his minions next time we fire up tux racer!

    adios.

  • Everybody likes a good underdog (Score:5, Interesting)

    by J Barnes ( 838165 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:49PM (#11902031) Homepage
    I've got to say that as a dumb windoze user, I paid a lot more attention to the developments in the linux community once I learned of the SCO lawsuits. I'm still sitting in a windows environment, but after being enthralled with the underdog publicity generated by the legal manuverings, I'm taking alternate operating systems a lot more seriously.
  • SCO basically created a situation where they were the nemesis of open source software and everything it stands for. Through their frivelous claims and litigation, they hoped to boost their stock value enough for many of the bigwigs to cash out before the enevitable end (see: delisting) transpired. In the midst of all this, they obviously did not count of the amazing amount of good press and support the open source community garnered. The looming threat now is the ridiculous patent law in Europe which cou

  • Anti-lawsuit FUD (Score:2, Insightful)

    by crow ( 16139 )
    This sounds like anti-lawsuit FUD. The message to Microsoft and friends is that they helped Linux by supporting the lawsuit. If they buy the message, then they won't continue to support SCO or others who might file similar suits.

    Granted, in this case, the message may well be true, but I haven't yet RTFA.

  • I agree completely (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Weaselmancer ( 533834 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:50PM (#11902052)

    The public flogging SCO received at the hands of their entire customer base serves as a stern warning to anyone who would try to lay any similar hijinks in the future.

    "Hey Dan, this lawsuit sounds like a bad idea. Remember what happened to SCO?"

    It's been wonderful good publicity, too. Nothing like showing the whole world who your allies are. The list of companies willing to back Linux (such as IBM) is impressive. Now, and thanks entirely to the lawsuit - people know that IBM backs Linux.

    If Linux ever seemed fly-by-night, it sure as hell doesn't now.

    • It was bad publicity (Score:3, Insightful)

      by bonch ( 38532 )
      I disagree completely. It was bad publicity. It makes Linux seem like this chaotic thing with lawsuits that you might get embroiled in. Windows would be the "safer" choice.

      With the issues the 2.6 kernel had this year and last, the SCO negativity was the last thing Linux needed. I think this article is one of those positive rallying cries to make people feel better, but SCO was a very bad thing for Linux. It's no longer seen as the invincible little free operating system. Its heritage was brought into

      • Re:It was bad publicity (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Weaselmancer ( 533834 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:24PM (#11902532)

        Respectfully, I also disagree.

        It's no longer seen as the invincible little free operating system.

        According to the dictionary [reference.com], one definition of invincible is "Incapable of being overcome or defeated; unconquerable." And up until now it's only been something that fans of Linux have claimed. Now it's something that has been shown to be true. Linux now has a legal track record. It's not hearsay anymore.

        Its heritage was brought into question

        Yes it was. And that solves another thing that Linux fans have always claimed - and has now been found to be true in a court of law. And also by example - SCO drained itself trying to prove the opposite, drained its investors and came up with absolutely, positively nothing. Again, now it's no longer a claim, it has a track record.

        And it's a track record and only a track record that can make something seem stable. Now, thanks to SCO, Linux has one.

        That $50mil that Microsoft funneled into Baystar was the best advertising that Linux could have ever hoped for. Even better than the IBM Linux commercials.

      • It makes Linux seem like this chaotic thing with lawsuits that you might get embroiled in. Windows would be the "safer" choice.

        You're right. Microsoft has never [sun.com] been [com.com] named [microsoftmonitor.com] in a lawsuit [usdoj.gov] and is clearly the safer choice in that respect.

      • Re:It was bad publicity (Score:4, Insightful)

        by MrHanky ( 141717 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:47PM (#11902836) Homepage Journal
        Oh yes, it was bad publicity, but Linux managed fine. The lawsuit was, in the end, obviously frivolous, and proved only that there's actual money behind Linux. And money is the only thing that makes Windows a "safe" bet. Microsoft has lost many lawsuits, and will continue to do so as long as the US patent system is in its current state. Windows is also a security nightmare. Windows safe? No. But it's not going away soon.

        (and re: your sig -- why not use a dictionary:
        R'egime \R['e]`gime"\ (r?`zh?m"), n. [F. See {Regimen}.]
        1. Mode or system of rule or management; character of government, or of the prevailing social system.)
      • Right... because everyone knows that Microsoft hasn't been involved in ANY lawsuits at all. *cough* antitrust *cough* *cough*eolas patent *cough*

        Anyone can be sued... at least Linux was shown to be "in the right"
      • Stop saying "Bush regime." You've never experienced life in a REAL regime or seen what a real regime does.

        regime:

        1a. A form of government.
        1b. A government in power; administration.

        Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

  • Linux passed the test? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by tji ( 74570 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:52PM (#11902076)
    I don't know if he is just making lemonade from the SCO lemons, or if he really has a point..

    The negative way to look at the SCO thing is that it's just the beginning of a huge wave of patent infringement lawsuits that all the big boys and many little patent leaches are positioning themselves for.

    The positive spin would be that Linux withstood a well funded / backed instance of that strategy, and people didn't stop moving to Linux while the lawsuit was active. So, this would imply that Linux can survive and even flourish in the face of the inevitable lawsuits.

    I'm not sure which I actually believe. I think our porous patent system is transferring all the burden they should be taking unto the court system (which has been ill equipped to handle complex technical cases in the past).
    • well either way, I agree with point 2. It seems Linux has withstood a "well funded/backed instance of that strategy, and people didn't stop moving to Linux..." Linux is still alive and well, even in the heat of all the lawsuits. If point 1 actually is true, and there do happen to be more lawsuits by big companies against Linux, I feel Linux has a fighting chance against them as well. In the end, Linux is not a company or entity that you can sue. Sure, Company A can attempt to sue IBM or any other compa
    • The negative way to look at the SCO thing is that it's just the beginning of a huge wave of patent infringement lawsuits

      ...except that the SCO case has absolutely nothing to do with patents.

  • pooping is good for you, because it gets rid of all the bad toxins from the body.

    Sure, it feels awful while you're in there, suffocating in the ensuing stink. But sooner than you think, the job is done, the filth is flushed away into the drain, and you emerge from the bathroom...a better, improved you.

  • Not according to CIO's (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MLopat ( 848735 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:54PM (#11902095) Homepage
    While he may make optomistic comments about the lawsuit filed by SCO, from speaking with hundreds of technical decision makers, including CIO's, the lawsuits have actually been a stumbling block in using a fullblown linux back end for alot of companies. As a CIO, you're concerned about the longterm value of your solution. And if you're the one that's penned your signature to a $5million system that is using software that may not be supported (or worse) then you can pretty much kiss your ass goodbye. Long gone are the days where "nobody got fired for buying IBM"

    You can argue that there is no "safe bet" right now on platform decisions, but with all the positive marketing Microsoft has put forward in recent years, and all the negative publicity that Linux is receiveing as a direct result of this lawsuit, its just one more incentive to check out other avenues, and may ultimately be the deciding factor when a company decides NOT to implement a Linux solution as has been the case with many now Microsoft clients.

    So you guys will probably mod this down to a sub terrarian level.
    • Can anyone say "shill"? Or at least "gross misspellings"? It may have temporarily cooled Linux deployment, but Linux has had itself proven as a solid and legal system to use through this suit. And it brought it to the attention of a lot of people who may have not even known that there was an alternative. What Linux won here was mindshare, not marketshare.

      Do as the parent suggests, and mod him down to an optimistic sub-terranian level.
      • Haha I apologize for the misspellings of optimistic and subterranean. I myself, hate reading misspelled words in posts, but in an effort to get a point across early and get some feedback, I am occasionally hasty in my editing.
    • You should have told them their angst can be insured: http://www.osriskmanagement.com/
    • I agree with your reasoning, in that you want to minimize the exposure to your company. However, even you have to admit, that SCO's legal case against Linux distributors (and, I guess you can say, Linux itself) has pushed the OS battles to the forefront. Many people I know who are Windows users had not heard of Linux until SCO. Even then, they had questions.

      I'd agree that, in the beginning of the SCO lawsuit, Linux sales may have been impacted. However, IT managers, industry analysts, and even the finan

      • Those are good points that you make about validation and exposure. That sort of marketing and impact is very pricey, and an open source project is probably incapable of generating that otherwise.

        Unfortunately, too many of the TDM's that are around today are old and scared of change (and even more scared of being kicked out of their cushy six figure jobs)

    • Re:Not according to CIO's (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ajs ( 35943 ) <{moc.sja} {ta} {sja}> on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:27PM (#11902562) Homepage Journal
      "While he may make optomistic comments about the lawsuit filed by SCO, from speaking with hundreds of technical decision makers, including CIO's, the lawsuits have actually been a stumbling block in using a fullblown linux back end for alot of companies."

      I think you're looking at this upside down. How many of those people who are using this as an excuse didn't need this event to make an execuse? Would the fact that Red Hat is a new company or IBM might go back to the Windows camp or something else have been the issue otherwise? I suspect so.

      There are many people I deal with who look at the giant farms of Linux servers that I interact with and say, "hey, that's scary stuff!" Invariably, they are the dinosaurs who are busy being rendered obsolete. IBM mainframes were scary stuff at one point too, and no one could understand why you would want to stake your business on a MACHINE that could make MISTAKES... until a few dozen companies made it clear that NOT going that way was a ticket to extinction.

      Windows desktops were the same way.

      Unix servers: same story.

      Web-based business transactions: same thing.

      Every new technology requires a period of early-adoptors, and we're exiting (or just starting to exit) that phase with Linux. That's a scary time. These guys see the writing on the wall, and they're trying to make any rationalization they can to avoid the descision that they know they have to make. Tough nuts, industry doesn't care about their rationalization, only results.

  • As much as it pains me to admit it, (Score:5, Insightful)

    by idontgno ( 624372 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:55PM (#11902111) Journal
    the SCO fiasco has had positive effects.

    • Gave the community a good scare, shaking off some of the complancency and reminding us that if software is a business, and you're competing in it, it's a nasty business and a bruising game.
    • Made everyone re-examine the code itself, just to be sure we're clean. SCO's charges seem ridiculous, but it never hurts to audit just to be sure.
    • Exposed one of the more virulent and extreme anti-OS points of view to objective examination. This examination finds that set of opinions greivously deficient.
    • Firmed up the nebulous "open-versus-closed software" battlefield. Now it's harder to avoid taking a side, and those who do (Sun, for instance) have to engage in marketing and PR contortionism to do so, looking visibly quite silly in the process.
    • And of course, comic relief.

  • it was even better for the bsd's (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 10, 2005 @01:55PM (#11902117)
    freeBSD has picked up quite a fair bit of steam over the last two years. I know of a few companies that ditched linux for bsd specifically due to the sco case.
  • I guess that it's true, the lawsuit has helped Linux, by allowing people to see the development process, warts and all; all of its benefits, all of its pitfalls. Transparency is better than nothing IMHO.
  • Microsoft effectively made the biggest clanger well before when they sponsored that benchmark of NT4 server versus Linux... beforehand, there was only word of mouth for Linux, afterwards, Microsoft had raised Linux to be a real alternative to NT4 server (even though the benchmark was bad for Linux). it not only put Linux up there as a creditable alternative, it kickstarted development on the Linux kernel to fix the bottlenecks and beat NT4...
    • That's an interesting perspective, albeit an incorrect one. Microsoft recognized at an early stage that Linux would be a contender in the OS market and some praise should be given to their foresight. So many companies infact choose to simply not address the issue of this new platform that it would have become embarassing if a survey was conducted that showed this relatively unknown and obscure OS had eaten up 20% of the market. Microsoft pre-empted this attack early on by generating defensive evidence suppo

      • That's an interesting perspective, albeit an incorrect one. Microsoft recognized at an early stage that Linux would be a contender in the OS market and some praise should be given to their foresight. So many companies infact choose to simply not address the issue of this new platform that it would have become embarassing if a survey was conducted that showed this relatively unknown and obscure OS had eaten up 20% of the market. Microsoft pre-empted this attack early on by generating defensive evidence suppo

        • What part exactly is taken from the teachings of Baghdad Bob? If you're questioning my "pre-emptive" statement, all I can suggest is that things may have been severely worse for Microsoft had they not acted as early as they did. Missing the bus with the Internet in 1995 served an invualable lesson to them, that the senior members of MS's teams aren't likely to forget.
      • By pre-empted you mean of course MS again totally missed the boat, and is now attempting to use large amounts of FUD and pure unadulterated bullshit (like you wrote above) to keep their fingers in the server market. Linux threatens the only part of their business that's even worth spitting on; workstations running MS-Office. I doubt they'll ever be anything now but a small fish in the server world, and if they get hosed on Office, then they've got a real problem.
        • You really are a dipshit.

          Worth spitting on? Yeah I'd say that billions of dollars in revenues from two successful business units, namely Windows and Office, are more than a drop of spit in the bucket. And if you look closer, you'll see they're still gaining momentum on the server market. You can stick your MS hating FUD up your open source ass.

  • Linux license refund from SCO? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 3770 ( 560838 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:00PM (#11902191) Homepage
    Some companies bought the $699 linux license that SCO was selling.

    If (or when) SCO loses this lawsuit I would argue that they didn't have the right to sell those licenses. They were selling something they didn't own.

    Will the companies that bought those licenses be refunded (yeah, sure)? But could they sue SCO to get that money back? And can they win?

    Did SCO protect themselves somehow in the license agreements they sold for this very scenario. They could have done that by not really selling them licenses to use Linux, but to use Caldera Linux and telling the customers that this will give them the rights to use whatever other version of Linux that they are using too.

    I don't know how many that bought those licenses but I've heard some rather large numbers. We could easily be talking about _real_ money here.

    Could SCO could risk a fast and swift death if they lose their lawsauit against IBM et al?
    • Could SCO could risk a fast and swift death if they lose their lawsauit against IBM et al?

      Regardless if customers ask for a refund or not, I think SCO would have "a fast and swift death" if they lost. Their credability is shot, they're losing money hand over fist, and it would take a miracle for them to come out of this one - that, or a massive restructuring involving firing the upper management and trying to repair the damage to their name. A win by IBM in their lawsuit would be the death knell for SCO

    • Having seen (but of course not paid for) one of these licences, I can say the chances are slim. The licences just say you have the right to use SCO's intellectual property.

      However, you might be able to get your money back if you could prove that SCO were threatening you with regards linux, and knew they had no actual code in there. That would be damn hard to do...

  • GPL is next (Score:3, Interesting)

    by selectspec ( 74651 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:00PM (#11902197)
    The suit was a big help in Linux because the impending failure of SCO has boosted confidence in the Linux platform from Enterprise community.

    The next real challenge will be the GPL. The GPL has yet to have its "day in court". Such suits clarify the unclear, and let's face it: there are some unclear issues in the original GPL.

    • Re:GPL is next (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Dan Ost ( 415913 )
      It's my understanding that the GPL hasn't had its day in court because it's
      case is so strong that nobody is willing to go up against it.

      If you are aware of unclear issues in the GPL as it currently reads, please
      list them. If you're right, then you're right. If you're wrong, someone
      knowledgable might demonstrate to you what is wrong and all who read will
      benefit.
  • I think TFA is right. The massive scrutiny that this put linux under has increased confidence in linux a great deal. If there were indeed "copyright infringements" somewhere in the source, I think they would have become very public during that case. I think other companies will not be willing to attack linux without any basis.

    I think we FOSS/linux advocates can point to this case as a nice reference when making our point. We can say that linux was put under quite a bit of scrutiny, and seemd to pass the te

  • I disagree (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bogaboga ( 793279 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:01PM (#11902213)
    The best thing that happened to Linux in my opinion is the fact that Linus and his early lietenants agreed on what kind of license to use. If I were Linus, I doubt that I'd have given away all my work "for free." The GPL as a new form of licensing is the best thing that happened to Linux. It is also good to hear that it's a living document, i.e., it's being modified here and there to reflect the "hostile" environments FOSS programmers are forced to operate in.

    If it were not for that license, slashdot would not have had Linux as a sub-topic and Apache would not be having the standing it has on the web. This applies to many other software that I even do not know about.

  • Only if McBride and crew end up serving time (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NZheretic ( 23872 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:02PM (#11902215) Homepage Journal
    This will only be good for Linux if the SEC get off their arse and lay criminal charges [rcn.com].
    • I second that. At the moment SCO is still as arrogant and deceitful as it was before. For example, on their front page [sco.com] they boast the following:

      SCO Ranked #1 Corporate Query Site by Google. Based on billions of searches conducted by Google users around the world, the 2004 Year-End Zeitgeist ranks SCO's corporate Website as the most searched site for the year

      Never mind that people were looking at, who were those lying SOBs. SCO is still trying to make a positive spin out of it. My guess is that even if

  • Here's the title:

    SCO was the 'best thing that ever happened' to Linux

    Here's the summary:

    SCO's litigation over Linux was hugely unpopular but there was a big upside, says the chief executive of Open Source Development Labs,

    Here are the first two paragraphs:

    The multitude of law suits brought by SCO against companies selling and using Linux has been beneficial to the open source operating system, according to one of the most influential organisations in the Linux world.

    Speaking at Queen Mary, Unive

  • Clueless (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mcrbids ( 148650 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:08PM (#11902312) Journal
    Open Source Developer Labs chief executive Stuart Cohen said the lawsuits [SCO suing everyone in sight over supposed issues with Linux] were "the best thing that ever happened to Linux"

    Gee. Wouldn't "the best thing that ever happened" be, eh, it getting developed in the first place???

    (sits and thinks...)

  • Isn't this premature ? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DrStrangeLug ( 799458 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:11PM (#11902347)

    There hasn't been a verdict in the case yet, and we all know the judges in the US (or anywhere for that matter) don't always judge logically. Althought it looks promising, lets wait until the end before we pop the corks on the bubbly.

  • SCO sued its distributors and clients ferchrissake... No sane Unixware or Open Server user is NOT looking into Linux today.
    Well, not those that switched already..

  • He has a point. It did help. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @02:25PM (#11902542) Homepage
    Somebody challenged Linux. Spent lots of money, got expensive lawyers, issued public statements, and went to court. And they got rolled over. From a business perspective, that means Linux isn't going to fold up at the first challenge.

    Look where SCOXE [yahoo.com] is today. Nobody is trading the stock. Volume is down 90% since the NASDAQ listed them as out of compliance with SEC regs. They may be kicked down to the Pink Sheets next week, but they're already trading like a Pink Sheet stock.

    Everybody laughs at SCO now. Business Week, Fortune, and Forbes are all very negative on SCO.

    Darl was interviewed by Business Week a few days ago. [businessweek.com] Some great momments:

    • Q: Ralph Yarro was terminated in December as CEO of Canopy Group, SCO's longtime financial backer, for allegedly overpaying himself. Is Ralph Yarro still on SCO's board?

      A: Yes.

      Q: Do you want him to stay on the board?

      A: Ralph has been a great board member. He's been very supportive and valuable in terms of the input he has provided.

      Q: What has he helped you do?

      A: Ralph has a great entrepreneurial mind. He's been good on intellectual property and legal battles. I wouldn't call him the architect of our legal strategy, but he clearly has added value. How that's all going to play out, I don't know.

      Q: Are you concerned about his ability to serve?

      A: We had a board meeting last week. The company needs to get some clarity about the situation. It's important to figure out who represents the Canopy shares. As long as the cloud is there regarding the Canopy situation we want to remove the cloud.

      Q: Will he stay on the board?

      A: No one on the SCO board has asked him to step down. He will continue to serve.

    Canopy owns part of SCO. Yarrow used to represent Canopy on the SCO board, but he doesn't, any more. Canopy fired Yarrow. Yarrow and Canopy are sueing each other. This is clearly a dysfunctional organization, not a serious threat. They've been referred to in the press as "the gang that couldn't sue straight".

  • Not with HP/Compaq. I purchased a HP/Compaq laptop because I was told they are committed to Linux and will protect any HP/Compaq customer from any SCO lawsuit.

    So I bought a Pressario 2500 laptop from them. I installed various distros of Linux, but none of them supported my wireless LAN device on the laptop or other hardware like the modem. I called HP/Compaq, and they told me that they do not support Linux for that laptop (apparently the salesperson I talked to that told me it did, had lied) and that insta

  • Not so sure (Score:2, Interesting)

    by sad_ ( 7868 )
    Perhaps long term, but remember the trail is not over yet, it has hardly begun it seems.
    Anyway, why would i make this statement? Because right now in the company i work for there is a full OSS stop, to the extreme! It is not only Linux that is infected, but all project using bits of OSS. We already had unfinished web apps rewritten from PHP/MySQL to Java/Oracle (for no other reason then to move away from OSS). Next my colleagues courses for Perl got cancelled because Perl is OSS. No use trying to explain th

  • Lighter Side (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Deliveranc3 ( 629997 ) <deliverance@NOSpaM.level4.org> on Thursday March 10, 2005 @03:35PM (#11903468) Journal
    Linux coders work independantly, a lot of them don't care about software patents.
    Why? Because they have no incentive to, the truth is in software there is often a "best way"tm to do something and if it gets patented they'll probably trample on it.

    SCO sent out a precedent, a company with massive software patents, access to the full source code, and a history as one of the founding forces behind Linux and it couldn't win!

    Further Linux stood up to millions upon millions in legal fees thanks to the EFF and others.

    Future cases will have to be very convincing to even GO INTO court, no scare tactics will cause companies to shell out for linux licences, and the absurdity of trying to sue software created for society was repudiated and ridiculed.

  • Yeah, I guess it was (Score:3, Informative)

    by Ridgelift ( 228977 ) on Thursday March 10, 2005 @03:45PM (#11903593)
    FTA: "And look at what happened with the market share; people did not say let's wait until this thing is over. If anything it accelerated the use of Linux, so it is one of the best things that ever happened to the operating system."

    Although this whole ordeal probably hasn't changed the faith and minds of the technical community, it most certainly has garnered the attention and confidence of the general public, most of whom really don't care all that much about Linux (no, I'm not blaspheming...I'd say most people are as excited about Linux as they are about their toaster or refridgerator).

    When it comes time for Joe Consumer to buy a new server, they will probably find Linux a lot more palatable than before the SCO lawsuit. And as Microsoft continues their assault on Linux, those same people will probably be able to see through their ridiculous FUD.

    I also think that politicians and lawyers may see more clearly the value and strength of the Open Source community. Maybe they'll head off the SIG's that will try to thwart Linux in the legal arena.

    Linux went through the fire and came through unscathed. Thanks Darl McBride for helping strengthen Linux.

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Close