Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 16:16 UTC
SCO, Caldera, Unixware SCO Group has hired high-profile attorney David Boies to see whether Windows, Mac OS X, Linux and versions of BSD infringe on Unix intellectual property the company owns.
Order by: Score:
Prediction
by imaginereno on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 16:46 UTC

I make the following prediction regarding SCO:

- Within 18 months, they will either:
- file for bankruptcy
- be acquired by a larger company ( IBM/APPLE, etc )
- cease to exist as a company

Stupid, just stupid of SCO....

Rumor
by jaawam on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 16:56 UTC

Thought I read some other press regarding this scenario that basically debunked it as a rumor.

This will not win them any friends.
by Scott on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 16:56 UTC

I thought the days of companies fighting over operating systems were over, Apple & MS managed to bury the hatchet over the GUI (and so did Xerox), this is just a big step backwards.

Just sounds like they are trying to squeeze some money out of other companies who are in a better financial state than them.

Of course, as imaginereno says perhaps someone big will buy them just to make this go away (what they want perhaps?)

grrrr
by FH on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 17:03 UTC

Scumbags. Complete f***ing scumbags. And to think I used to recommend Caldera's (SCO) products. Shame on me, and especially shame on them.

disappointed
by monk on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 17:17 UTC

I understand that companies need to make money, but this really stinks. I have no respect for SCO/caldera whoever tey are today.

You don't hire a lawyer ...
by Anonymous on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 17:17 UTC

You don't hire a lawyer, especially a very expensive celebrity lawyer ...

... to look for infringing code.
... to have friendly discussions with competitors.
... unless you're going to sue someone.

If SCO wanted to make SURE that no one intentionally used their IP, they certainly picked a great way to go about it. They probably thought that they would get paid; instead, they'll speed up the out-migration from their products.

SCO might (or might not) have been able to make a go of it without this mistake. I don't see how they'll be able to last in the long run, with this mistake. I'm sure that there are a few companies which still have critical systems on SCO boxes. Now that SCO has declared its intention to poison the well, I doubt that there will be any more.

Perhaps they simply figured that they had nothing to loose?

USL Lawsuit
by Jeff Flowers on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 17:22 UTC

According to http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/kirkmck.html">Ma... : "The lawsuit settlement also stipulated that USL would not sue any organization using 4.4BSD-Lite as the base for their system."

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. But if SCO does try and take this action, I can see no good coming of it; for SCO or anyone else. Except maybe Microsoft.

Sorry...
by Jeff Flowers on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 17:23 UTC
jeez
by nivenh on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 17:35 UTC

for a company that appeared to be in dire straights not too long ago, they picked an excellent way to get rid of their extra cash.

maybe they'll go out of business quicker now. trying to think positive here...

Yeah, whatever
by Will on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 17:51 UTC

SCO has valid cause for licensing a "SCO Library" so folks can properly run SCO binaries on other OS's.

But, I agree with the others in that they really haven't got a leg to stand on WRT BSD. They've already fought that battle and it's supposed to have been settled.

As to whether they have any claim regarding folks lifting IP out of NDA'd source code and putting it into perhaps the Linux codebase, that will be a very amusing thing to watch from afar.

It sounds just like the arguments over the early BSDs, and they'll have to basically point to infringing bits-o-code.

One way it could happen is SCO says these bits of code are ours, and enumerate the list, and then they ship the list off to Red Hat and say "stop using it". Red Hat says, "we'll look in to it", and the lawyers will have lunch.

Meanwhile, Red Hat puts a plea on the net saying "Yeah, we need 17 functions in the kernel that do this: a, b, c -- can someone code some of these up without refering to the kernel source please? Thanx!"

Now you have "cleaned" sources and SCO can go pound sand. Red Hat says "ok, you win, here's your source code back. Bye!", and life goes on.

What a stupid waste of time.

uhm..
by Pascal de Bruijn on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 19:16 UTC

SCO Go Fish...

Congrats to SCO!!!
by macdude on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 19:25 UTC

This is an excellent move on the part of SCO.....if they want to completely destroy their company in a very short time. This is a desparate move from a bunch of idiots. Let's hope their ship sinks very fast and effortlessly.

Yeah, whatever? Not quite
by velobici on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 19:26 UTC

"ok, you win, here's your source code back. Bye".....and then the penalty phase of the law suit begins. Lost revenue, publication of trade secrets, theft of intellectual property, and that is only the beginning. Kiss RedHat goodbye...they aint got the money to deal with the penalties. Non-commercial code base distributions are not safe either. UCB was sued by AT&T, and UCB was non-commercial. This CAN BE a very big deal for everyone that uses non-BSD code. It all depends on how hard SCO wants to push.....and MicroSoft is the only one with the money to defend itself.

Yeah, whatever....? Yeah, right.

Hmmm...
by Simba on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 19:37 UTC

On one hand you could say this was a very stupid move on the part of SCO. On other other hand, you could say that some commercial UNIX vendor eventually had to take the initiative and sue Linux. After all, commerical UNIX has suffered a great deal because of Linux. The irony here is that the same Linux zealots who accuse Microsoft of anti-competitive business practices because it hurts other companies, don't seem to care that Linux is doing at least as much, and probably far more damage to commercial UNIX vendors than Microsoft ever did.

On one hand, it is a stupid move on SCO's part. After all, they just released SCO Linux (Caldera repackaged of course), and then they t urn around and talk about suing Linux. Sure... That's a great way to get Linux users to want to use your new Linux product...

But I really can see both sides of this issue. Attempting to sue Linux might be the only chance that commercial UNIX vendors have to survive.

Another thought...
by Simba on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 19:40 UTC

Isn't SCO a spin-off of Microsoft? And does Microsoft still have any fingers left in the SCO pie?

Not sure... But just a thought...

this is really rich.....
by Nex6 on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 20:10 UTC

news headline: Day 1

small company sues tech sector


news headline: day 2


small company vanishes.....



Nex6

BLOWN WAY out of ............
by Nex6 on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 20:21 UTC

http://www.practical-tech.com/business/b01162003.htm


pretty much explains it,




quote:

What it may mean is that SCO might charge Unix users who have moved to Linux from Unix but are still using a pair of old Unix ABI software libraries found in UnixWare and OpenServer to run Unix binaries on Linux. (NOTE: this is a pretty awkward run-on sentence). On Linux, these libraries can be used to run some SCO Unix binaries.

end quote:



-Nex6

re: USL Lawsuit
by stahbird on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 21:01 UTC

I followed the link posted by Jeff Flowers, and got to the following paragraph:

Unfortunately, the two sides had dug in so deep that the talks proceed slowly. With some further prodding by Ray Noorda on the USL side, many of the sticking points were removed and a settlement was finally reached in January 1994. The result was that three files were removed from the 18,000 that made up Networking Release 2, and a number of minor changes were made to other files. In addition, the University agreed to add USL copyrights to about 70 files, although those files continued to be freely redistributed.

It sounds like SCO may be attempting to revisit some of these same issues, with vendors who weren't part of that settlement. But hasn't SCO/Caldera released all their Linux kernel code under the GPL? So they wouldn't be able to reclaim proprietary status of any of that code, although I suppose they could go after Unix vendors for GPL violations.

Why SCO WHY???
by Matthew Baulch on Wed 22nd Jan 2003 22:41 UTC

I'm sure many of their corporate customers would be reliant on linux, the BSDs in some form or another. This doesn't sent out a good image to _anyone_. Damn SCO to hell, innovation has eventuated in these OSs that SCO can't hold a candle to with their own business strategy. Shame on you SCO.

This could actually be a good thing
by Iggy Drougge on Thu 23rd Jan 2003 09:48 UTC

Yes, really. As far as I'm concerned, UNIX, in all its forms, is ripe for the junkyard. Let SCO have it; it's even a kind of poetic justice, UNIX will on its final day go back to its ancestors and rest in the family grave, its treasures finally exhausted while its offspring face a bleak future.
UNIX outlived the PDP-7 on which it was spawned, but nothing lasts forever, nor should it in the computer world. IBM will pay its dues and support AIX for the rest of our lives, but that's the way IBM go about it, they're really the safe haven for all systems which have reached the ripe-old age of 30 and above.
Let SCO have their UNIX, take it all! Have Linux, we never wanted it anyway! Have the BSDs, they're not worth the effort! Cease the clay socket which upholds the OSX colossos!

Finally, the computer world can breathe some fresh air. Not recycled Bell Labs air, but the first real fresh air, as if the windows were opened for the first time since the 70s.

Rest in peace, UNIX. We all knew you'd return to Bell^H^H^H^H AT&T^H^H^H^H SCO one day. We will remember you not without a certai nostalgic fondness, just as we remember the DEC cabinets where you first saw the light of day, just as we remember the clatter of the teletypes which had such an influence on your terse vocabulary and rich grammar, just as we remember your search for a place which you could call home, be it on the VAX or the RISC, be it in the rack or on the desktop.
But all things must come to an end, and 30 is a good age for an OS to leave this world. You've certainly left your mark, so you won't go unremembered, but now it's time to let the young ones take over.