Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 01:40:37 +1100, Sridhar Dhanapalan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SCO has decided to sue IBM for $US1 billion for alleged intellectual property infringement regarding IBM's contributions to GNU/Linux. SCO's actions are NOT good for Linux or open source, and we the community should not stand for it. PCLinuxOnline has decided to respond by boycotting SCO and its products. See our front page [http://www.pclinuxonline.com/] for details. We ask that you spread the word on this boycott -- if enough people listen to the call and boycott their products, hopefully SCO will realise that their actions are doing them more harm than good. PCLinuxOnline now has a petition up to hopefully convince SCO to drop the lawsuit. Please sign it: http://www.pclinuxonline.com/modules.php?name=Newsfile=articlesid=4639 -- Sridhar Dhanapalan [Yama | http://www.pclinuxonline.com/] Recently I bought Office XP. It was quite unpleasant feeling giving so much money for so buggy product. ... Solution: Uninstall Office XP and Windows. -- Georgi Guninski, security expert, http://www.guninski.com, 2001-07-12 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
On Saturday March 8 2003 05:21 pm, Joeb wrote: Anyway, as I have said before, IANAL, so I'll let the free software foundation make their arguments. I'm sure they will do a much better job than I could do! Joeb Only thing I know about court cases is the outcome is rarely based on common sense, what's right or wrong, or what's fair. 'Bout the only thing most of us can do about this situation is to go to http://www.gnu.org/ and make a donation or become an Associate Member. If you become a member they send you a credit card size membership card which is also bootable Linux CD ;) -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
On Saturday 08 March 2003 02:21 pm, Joeb wrote: On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 17:11:23 -0500 Greg Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 08 March 2003 04:53 pm, Joeb wrote: Not to disagree with you Todd, but when you say They get their billion... are you referring to SCO or the lawyers (not that it makes much difference)? :) Way I see it, there are a couple of questions. Q1) Was IBM entitled to use the code? A1) Yes, that is not part of the litigation. Q2) Was IBM entitled to release said code under the GPL? A2) Maybe, that's what the courts will now decide. Q3) What are the ramifications for Linux? A3) Could be as simple as said code must be removed - as with most things, there are several implementations that are submitted for the kernel, so a different one might need to be chosen. Q4) If IBM was not entitled to release said code, what are the damages? A4) That's the tricky part, since SCO Unix's value has increased along with the work IBM did with Linux, it's hard to argue damages (especially if the offending code is removed). Remember, most of the code is in the 2.5 Kernel which isn't officially released yet. Finally, Q5) What are the long term ramifications? A5) IBM may have to pay some money, Linux will continue to grow (although with some changed modules), SCO will continue to go down the tubes and most importantly, the lawyers will laugh all the way to the bank. The suit doesn;t just talk about code, but methods and concepts as well. If not one single piece of UNIX source code ended up in Linux, they are trying to say that the way it works still infringes on it's IP. I find that quite specious. The way I read your response, you seem to assume that code actually made it into the kernel. This has only been alleged, not proven. The suit also refers to Linux capability today in production. It would seem to me that if any of this were true, but restricted to the 2.5 kernel, then damages would be significantly less since it is not in widespread use. -- Greg I agree it is a bold leap to say that methods and concepts are infringed, because even with the work that IBM has contributed, the methods and concepts were there before IBM's participation. Yes, the 2.4 kernel has better memory management than the 2.2 kernel, but memory management was still part of the 2.2 kernel (that's just for example, I don't know if SCO is saying memory management is one of the IP issues). You are correct in the way you are reading my response in that I am assuming it deals with the kernel (as that is the only part that is actually Linux and other applications normally included in distributions haven't been mentioned). I was under the impression that most of IBM's contributions were made after the 2.4 kernel was released, but I could easily be mistaken. Even so, if SCO is found to be correct, then the current 2.4.x kernel would be tainted. That still is not a show stopper as I said in my earlier post, for just about everything in the kernel, many submissions are made. Worst case for the kernel would be that 2.6 would be delayed to roll back tainted code and replaced with alternative clean code. I know that isn't a trivial task, but what it actually means is that even with a worst case, SCO wins all, Linux, as we know it would still survive (and SCO would still be going down the tubes). Again, IANAL, but another issue, particularly if SCO claims code further back than 1995 is tainted (when they bought UNIX back from Novell) is why they didn't take issue with the IP rights then. Since, they had a Linux distribution, they were fully aware of what was going on inside of it (or should have been). I have been told that one possible outcome of this suit is the possibility that the courts could say, that if you don't take action to enforce IP when it is first known to be misused, you implicitly allow it's use. Actually, this argument could hold for code even after 1995. If so, then SCO's suit boils down to they are upset that IBM broke a contract with them. But, they didn't sue for breach of contract, they sued for lost IP. One would have to ask why and the answer is how do you award damages on a speculative RD contract when there isn't any market shown to exist? You can't. IP on the other hand, you can show damages. But, as I stated earlier, SCO's market value h Now for the really interesting part. Let's assume that SCO is correct and IBM has tainted linux with IP that they did not own. Isn't that same tainted code in United Linux which SCO is part of? So what does SCO do now? They could allow United Linux to use the code with a restricted, non-open license, but if it is tied to the GPL'd kernel, then you couldn't release your own kernel with a more restrictive license than the original kernel had, could you? So, if SCO is successful in their argument against IBM, they
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
Not to disagree with you Todd, but when you say They get their billion... are you referring to SCO or the lawyers (not that it makes much difference)? :) Way I see it, there are a couple of questions. Q1) Was IBM entitled to use the code? A1) Yes, that is not part of the litigation. Q2) Was IBM entitled to release said code under the GPL? A2) Maybe, that's what the courts will now decide. Q3) What are the ramifications for Linux? A3) Could be as simple as said code must be removed - as with most things, there are several implementations that are submitted for the kernel, so a different one might need to be chosen. Q4) If IBM was not entitled to release said code, what are the damages? A4) That's the tricky part, since SCO Unix's value has increased along with the work IBM did with Linux, it's hard to argue damages (especially if the offending code is removed). Remember, most of the code is in the 2.5 Kernel which isn't officially released yet. Finally, Q5) What are the long term ramifications? A5) IBM may have to pay some money, Linux will continue to grow (although with some changed modules), SCO will continue to go down the tubes and most importantly, the lawyers will laugh all the way to the bank. If I were a shareholder of SCO I think I would counter-sue the CEO and board of directors for squandering resources on this lawsuit instead of looking at ways to repair the company. Or, if SCO is successful, and they receive billions, it might be time to liquidate the company so it goes to the shareholders instead of the few at the top. Just my two cents and remember, IANAL! Joeb On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 17:08:40 -0800 Todd Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jack Coates wrote on Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 08:55:41AM -0800 : SCO has decided to sue IBM for $US1 billion for alleged intellectual property infringement regarding IBM's contributions to GNU/Linux. They are of course shooting themselves with this action... however, I Here's the point that I think all of you are not getting. They don't *CARE* if they shoot themselves in the foot. They get their billion dollars, get out of town, and live on the small island they just bought. They are in it solely for the money, consumers be damned. Blue skies... Todd - -- | MandrakeSoft USA | Security is like an onion. It's made | | http://www.mandrakesoft.com | made up of several layers and makes | | http://www.mandrakelinux.com | you cry. --Howard Chu| Mandrake Cooker Devel Version, Kernel 2.4.21-0.12mdk -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+aUKYlp7v05cW2woRAjKqAKCWcD0Cpg0b0KhDs4K6cMhflT9IcACdHmI8 twzHFdaScAGX3FQmXVw9YRI= =4fJV -END PGP SIGNATURE- Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
On Saturday 08 March 2003 04:53 pm, Joeb wrote: Not to disagree with you Todd, but when you say They get their billion... are you referring to SCO or the lawyers (not that it makes much difference)? :) Way I see it, there are a couple of questions. Q1) Was IBM entitled to use the code? A1) Yes, that is not part of the litigation. Q2) Was IBM entitled to release said code under the GPL? A2) Maybe, that's what the courts will now decide. Q3) What are the ramifications for Linux? A3) Could be as simple as said code must be removed - as with most things, there are several implementations that are submitted for the kernel, so a different one might need to be chosen. Q4) If IBM was not entitled to release said code, what are the damages? A4) That's the tricky part, since SCO Unix's value has increased along with the work IBM did with Linux, it's hard to argue damages (especially if the offending code is removed). Remember, most of the code is in the 2.5 Kernel which isn't officially released yet. Finally, Q5) What are the long term ramifications? A5) IBM may have to pay some money, Linux will continue to grow (although with some changed modules), SCO will continue to go down the tubes and most importantly, the lawyers will laugh all the way to the bank. The suit doesn;t just talk about code, but methods and concepts as well. If not one single piece of UNIX source code ended up in Linux, they are trying to say that the way it works still infringes on it's IP. I find that quite specious. The way I read your response, you seem to assume that code actually made it into the kernel. This has only been alleged, not proven. The suit also refers to Linux capability today in production. It would seem to me that if any of this were true, but restricted to the 2.5 kernel, then damages would be significantly less since it is not in widespread use. -- Greg Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 17:11:23 -0500 Greg Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 08 March 2003 04:53 pm, Joeb wrote: Not to disagree with you Todd, but when you say They get their billion... are you referring to SCO or the lawyers (not that it makes much difference)? :) Way I see it, there are a couple of questions. Q1) Was IBM entitled to use the code? A1) Yes, that is not part of the litigation. Q2) Was IBM entitled to release said code under the GPL? A2) Maybe, that's what the courts will now decide. Q3) What are the ramifications for Linux? A3) Could be as simple as said code must be removed - as with most things, there are several implementations that are submitted for the kernel, so a different one might need to be chosen. Q4) If IBM was not entitled to release said code, what are the damages? A4) That's the tricky part, since SCO Unix's value has increased along with the work IBM did with Linux, it's hard to argue damages (especially if the offending code is removed). Remember, most of the code is in the 2.5 Kernel which isn't officially released yet. Finally, Q5) What are the long term ramifications? A5) IBM may have to pay some money, Linux will continue to grow (although with some changed modules), SCO will continue to go down the tubes and most importantly, the lawyers will laugh all the way to the bank. The suit doesn;t just talk about code, but methods and concepts as well. If not one single piece of UNIX source code ended up in Linux, they are trying to say that the way it works still infringes on it's IP. I find that quite specious. The way I read your response, you seem to assume that code actually made it into the kernel. This has only been alleged, not proven. The suit also refers to Linux capability today in production. It would seem to me that if any of this were true, but restricted to the 2.5 kernel, then damages would be significantly less since it is not in widespread use. -- Greg I agree it is a bold leap to say that methods and concepts are infringed, because even with the work that IBM has contributed, the methods and concepts were there before IBM's participation. Yes, the 2.4 kernel has better memory management than the 2.2 kernel, but memory management was still part of the 2.2 kernel (that's just for example, I don't know if SCO is saying memory management is one of the IP issues). You are correct in the way you are reading my response in that I am assuming it deals with the kernel (as that is the only part that is actually Linux and other applications normally included in distributions haven't been mentioned). I was under the impression that most of IBM's contributions were made after the 2.4 kernel was released, but I could easily be mistaken. Even so, if SCO is found to be correct, then the current 2.4.x kernel would be tainted. That still is not a show stopper as I said in my earlier post, for just about everything in the kernel, many submissions are made. Worst case for the kernel would be that 2.6 would be delayed to roll back tainted code and replaced with alternative clean code. I know that isn't a trivial task, but what it actually means is that even with a worst case, SCO wins all, Linux, as we know it would still survive (and SCO would still be going down the tubes). Again, IANAL, but another issue, particularly if SCO claims code further back than 1995 is tainted (when they bought UNIX back from Novell) is why they didn't take issue with the IP rights then. Since, they had a Linux distribution, they were fully aware of what was going on inside of it (or should have been). I have been told that one possible outcome of this suit is the possibility that the courts could say, that if you don't take action to enforce IP when it is first known to be misused, you implicitly allow it's use. Actually, this argument could hold for code even after 1995. If so, then SCO's suit boils down to they are upset that IBM broke a contract with them. But, they didn't sue for breach of contract, they sued for lost IP. One would have to ask why and the answer is how do you award damages on a speculative RD contract when there isn't any market shown to exist? You can't. IP on the other hand, you can show damages. But, as I stated earlier, SCO's market value has grown right along with the growth of Linux, so where is the damage? Now for the really interesting part. Let's assume that SCO is correct and IBM has tainted linux with IP that they did not own. Isn't that same tainted code in United Linux which SCO is part of? So what does SCO do now? They could allow United Linux to use the code with a restricted, non-open license, but if it is tied to the GPL'd kernel, then you couldn't release your own kernel with a more restrictive license than the original kernel had, could you? So, if SCO is successful in their argument against IBM, they would still
[expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
SCO has decided to sue IBM for $US1 billion for alleged intellectual property infringement regarding IBM's contributions to GNU/Linux. SCO's actions are NOT good for Linux or open source, and we the community should not stand for it. PCLinuxOnline has decided to respond by boycotting SCO and its products. See our front page [http://www.pclinuxonline.com/] for details. We ask that you spread the word on this boycott -- if enough people listen to the call and boycott their products, hopefully SCO will realise that their actions are doing them more harm than good. -- Sridhar Dhanapalan [Yama | http://www.pclinuxonline.com/] ... I will claim that nobody else designed Linux any more than I did, and I doubt I'll have many people disagreeing. It grew. It grew with a lot of mutations - and because the mutations were less than random, they were faster and more directed than alpha-particles in DNA. -- Linus Torvalds pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 07 March 2003 09:40 am, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote: SCO has decided to sue IBM for $US1 billion for alleged intellectual property infringement regarding IBM's contributions to GNU/Linux. SCO's actions are NOT good for Linux or open source, and we the community should not stand for it. PCLinuxOnline has decided to respond by boycotting SCO and its products. See our front page [http://www.pclinuxonline.com/] for details. We ask that you spread the word on this boycott -- if enough people listen to the call and boycott their products, hopefully SCO will realise that their actions are doing them more harm than good. This isn't as simple as it would appear. SCO is part of a super-entity, called The Canopy Group, a venture capital thingy. There are a LOT of other companies that are part of this group, including TrollTech, the creator/providor of QT which is required/used by KDE. This Canopy Group share management functions. If SCO is going after IBM (and linux indirectly by default) then it is driven by Canopy more than SCO itself, which is subsumed in Canopy. Ultimately, it is my hope that this is a stupid move to get SCO bought out by IBM, which could consume SCO without feeling it, and this will go away. praedor -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+aL/2aKr9sJYeTxgRArgUAJ9CYyn+Tn/XHBCiUYVWOgwrGa5nlwCgtF3r +LDurEsdBS5Bw2zi7iW3l7E= =PKTT -END PGP SIGNATURE- Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 06:40, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote: SCO has decided to sue IBM for $US1 billion for alleged intellectual property infringement regarding IBM's contributions to GNU/Linux. SCO's actions are NOT good for Linux or open source, and we the community should not stand for it. PCLinuxOnline has decided to respond by boycotting SCO and its products. See our front page [http://www.pclinuxonline.com/] for details. We ask that you spread the word on this boycott -- if enough people listen to the call and boycott their products, hopefully SCO will realise that their actions are doing them more harm than good. They are of course shooting themselves with this action... however, I beleive the applicable terms might be euthanasia or self-inflicted coup de grace :-) Seen any SCO or Caldera out there in the real world lately? I haven't. They're as dead as OS/2 already and are trying to rattle a few more coins out before closing shop. -- Jack Coates Monkeynoodle: A Scientific Venture... Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 06:40, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote: SCO has decided to sue IBM for $US1 billion for alleged intellectual property infringement regarding IBM's contributions to GNU/Linux. SCO's actions are NOT good for Linux or open source, and we the community should not stand for it. PCLinuxOnline has decided to respond by boycotting SCO and its products. See our front page [http://www.pclinuxonline.com/] for details. We ask that you spread the word on this boycott -- if enough people listen to the call and boycott their products, hopefully SCO will realise that their actions are doing them more harm than good. problem with the boycott they wouldn't notice it...nobody buys the antiques they have anyway. * evil grin * James Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
maybe we should be doing the opposite, and supporting IBM in this.. they are after all the biggest company promoting and helping the linux movement.. sell, IBM products and services and let them know we are on their side in this one... rgds Franki -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James Sparenberg Sent: Saturday, 8 March 2003 3:20 AM To: Expert List Subject: Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 06:40, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote: SCO has decided to sue IBM for $US1 billion for alleged intellectual property infringement regarding IBM's contributions to GNU/Linux. SCO's actions are NOT good for Linux or open source, and we the community should not stand for it. PCLinuxOnline has decided to respond by boycotting SCO and its products. See our front page [http://www.pclinuxonline.com/] for details. We ask that you spread the word on this boycott -- if enough people listen to the call and boycott their products, hopefully SCO will realise that their actions are doing them more harm than good. problem with the boycott they wouldn't notice it...nobody buys the antiques they have anyway. * evil grin * James Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jack Coates wrote on Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 08:55:41AM -0800 : SCO has decided to sue IBM for $US1 billion for alleged intellectual property infringement regarding IBM's contributions to GNU/Linux. They are of course shooting themselves with this action... however, I Here's the point that I think all of you are not getting. They don't *CARE* if they shoot themselves in the foot. They get their billion dollars, get out of town, and live on the small island they just bought. They are in it solely for the money, consumers be damned. Blue skies... Todd - -- | MandrakeSoft USA | Security is like an onion. It's made | | http://www.mandrakesoft.com | made up of several layers and makes | | http://www.mandrakelinux.com | you cry. --Howard Chu| Mandrake Cooker Devel Version, Kernel 2.4.21-0.12mdk -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+aUKYlp7v05cW2woRAjKqAKCWcD0Cpg0b0KhDs4K6cMhflT9IcACdHmI8 twzHFdaScAGX3FQmXVw9YRI= =4fJV -END PGP SIGNATURE- Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
Jack Coates wrote: They are of course shooting themselves with this action... however, I beleive the applicable terms might be euthanasia or self-inflicted coup de grace :-) Seen any SCO or Caldera out there in the real world lately? I haven't. They're as dead as OS/2 already and are trying to rattle a few more coins out before closing shop. Seeing as how OS/2 isn't dead, what is it you are trying to say? http://www-3.ibm.com/software/os/warp/ http://www.ecomstation.com/ -- A gentle answer turns away wrath.Proverbs 15:1 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/ Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] [OT] SCO sues IBM over Linux and UNIX
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 21:05, Felix Miata wrote: Jack Coates wrote: They are of course shooting themselves with this action... however, I beleive the applicable terms might be euthanasia or self-inflicted coup de grace :-) Seen any SCO or Caldera out there in the real world lately? I haven't. They're as dead as OS/2 already and are trying to rattle a few more coins out before closing shop. Seeing as how OS/2 isn't dead, what is it you are trying to say? http://www-3.ibm.com/software/os/warp/ http://www.ecomstation.com/ Right. Picture of health. My mistake. /me backs slowly toward exit with what is hopefully a soothing facial expression... -- Jack Coates Monkeynoodle: A Scientific Venture... Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
