-
08-19-2003, 08:20 AM
#361
Saw this one today. Pretty funny.
Nigerian SCO Connection
-
08-19-2003, 09:45 AM
#362
It feels sticky in here...
Here is some of the infamous code:
The Infamous Code
And supposedly where it came from:
More Infamous Code
__________________________________________________ _______________________________________
Bigboogie on boogienights.net:
Ammo case
Asus 8N32 SLI MB
AMD Athlon x2 3800+
2 GB Patriot Signature 400 DDR
160 GB Hitachi 7200 IDE
2 x-250 Seagate SATA2
EVGA Nvidia 7900GT
Dell 2007WFP
Logitech 5.1 speakers
Logitech MX1000 mouse
Dell USB keyboard
NEC 3500 DVD-RW
Benq 1655 DVD-RW
(God bless tax refunds)
-
08-19-2003, 10:38 AM
#363
Could Ford motor company sue chevy for making automobiles?
Can 3M sue the dolor store for making a dress with "velcro"?
How about IBM suing every PC manufacturer for making a "PC"?
Like bascule said, of some hundred thousand (my guesse) lines of kernel code, they are gonna complain about a couple "reusable" lines of code? C'mon.
Last edited by deanrantala; 08-19-2003 at 01:58 PM.
-
08-19-2003, 12:33 PM
#364
Code comparison...
(OOPS! "Hard Candy"'s beaten me to this somewhat, but...)
SCO have shown a slide of purportedly System-V against Linux Kernel.
Dunno how this helps, but first, see...
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/...3-000/imh0.jpg
Then follow this google search
http://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kern...io/ate_utils.c
(Why does it say "Copyright Silicon Graphics???" Are they next???)
Then, follow
http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/Inte.../malloc.c.html
AHA! Identical code. Or is it?
Now, did anyone do computer science at school? Can this be a textbook program?malloc.c/AT&T/1973???? Complete with 'textbook' comments?Can someone check???
Which is the reason I'm a bit suspicious of the Silicon Graphics stuff. If S.G have merely ported 'textbook' code, then modified it, then, sure, it's their copyright. No problem. SG? And Interdata_V6?
But, if SCO are touting this example, and it can be proved to be 'textbook' code, they're gonna look real dumb. And I mean 'REAL'. This would be the total SCO-killer. Just one example like this blows their whole argument out of the water.
Love the Greek. It's explained on a thread someplace (not here) but it's just letter replacement for something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than on the parallel slide.
I guess so the dumb clucks in the audience are forced to see the trees, not the wood.
-Andy
PS If the German magazine pulls the piccies, goto
www.thelinuxpc.com/imh0.jpg
and
www.thelinuxpc.com/imh1.jpg (Hey!!, if you look at line 2, won't compile - does this mean that this 'linux 2.4' code aint what they say it is? Her-indoors is using all the bandwidth for something else, and I'd get the "Wrath of Kahn" if I tried to download the Kernel source right now. i.e., is this genuine Kernel, or are they modifying it for their own ends? If the latter, this woud explain David Boies' absence at the SCO Forum (which got a fairly universal pasting, by the way). If someone has the time to d/l the bit in the second link to the sourcecode slide, it'd be interesting.... Open-source? Open-lawyers, more like! Where's Lassie when you need her most??)
Posting the piccies? They can bloody well sue me!
Sorry about the crappy site - work currently in progress
PPS OOER! That Wayback Machine again!
http://web.archive.org/web/200101241...rs/ancient001/
And from the same source...(click on 'offers')
"SCO has always supported open standards, UNIX Systems and server-based technologies and solutions that benefit business computing. Our engineers have continuously participated in the Open Source movement, providing source code such as lxrun, and the OpenSAR kernel monitoring utility. We offer a free Open Source software supplement that includes many Open Source technologies as well as making our commercial UNIX products available free for non-commercial use.
Thus, ANY of us can install Linux for Personal Use!!!! YAAAAAAAAAAAAY!!!!!!!!
Last edited by andycrofts; 08-19-2003 at 03:43 PM.
-
08-19-2003, 04:58 PM
#365
Is SCO leaving themselves open to be sued when they lose there case if so then SCO selling shares now could devalu the company.
So should some one then take an court order out freezing trade in SCO shares untill this fars is sorted.
The world is your play ground why
don't you play
-
08-19-2003, 05:26 PM
#366
-
08-19-2003, 08:44 PM
#367
MS did pay them...
Originally posted by Exodus2001
Red Hat has already lost 6% of their stock over this crap. Linux is going to take a huge hit over this because 1000's of fickle business people are going to think twice about switching over now.
Stock schmock... RedHat has $300m or so in cash. They are in a very good liquid position...
SCO is going under and nothing is going to stop that.
An interesting side note to RH's $300m cash position is SCO's stock position... nothing on hand, and a market cap of about $125m... So... RH could just take SCO out in a hostile bid and there's nothing anyone could really do about it.
On the other hand, IBM could do much the same thing and do it much more easily. This is definitely an attempt by SCO's management to either get aquired or at least stir up enough fud for MS that they can continue to get a few more (highly suspicious) UNIX license sales to MS (!!!)... which leads me to my next point...
What if Microsoft paid them, lets say, 10 million dollars to start this. Microsoft knows it would make them look bad if they attacked Linux directly. Why not use a company that is already doomed to do the dirty work for them? Would you put this past them? Would you put it past Apple? I wouldn't.
MS did pay them to do it. MS is - in their own little way of thinking - the only software company in the world, or at least the only one that means anything (read as "the only one that means anything to Bill Gate and his management crew"). They bought a hugely expensive UNIX license from SCO either around the time when SCO decided to go after IBM.
Does SCO have any UNIX product that actually matters to the world? No. Does SCO have any technology that MS would be interested in actually licensing? No... especially since MS already deploys Linux on several of their servers (!!!). Would MS ever pay for something it already had for free, especially since the only threat to their use of such was from a failing, wimpy little easy-to-buy-out company that had already released its "secrets" under the GPL long before? No... of course not. There's no way MS paid SCO to cover themselves in a legal sense. They paid SCO to go after IBM, I believe. Otherwise the cost associated with the license they bought wouldn't make any business sense for MS, and MS's business decisions almost always make sense... from some point of view.
I see this as SCO and MS's paniced attempts to get air as they realize they are slowly suffocating.
"Beat your children at least once a day; if you don't know why, they do."
-Some surprisingly famous guy
barfdader.com
barfdader@yahoo.co.jp
ICQ# 297237035
Yahoo.com IMID: thegiantpotato
-
08-19-2003, 08:56 PM
#368
Interesting implications of SCO's case
I looked at a graphical timeline on SCO's website earlier this morning, and from what they label as being their own IP and derivatives under their extremely broad concept of product derivation... SCO apparently has rights to every single piece of modern software... anywhere.
Under their definition, if the original System V was ever the first to use a structure called a "file" (for example), then the concept of "files" is obviously an SCO-exclusive IP, and therefore even DOS, MacOS, and any other OS that ever used a system of "files" would be in violation of SCO's IP rights by derivative assiciation.
This is totally ridiculous.
My example may not be perfect, because I'm sure something before System V used files... but this is just an illustration. Many of the protocols we either use today as a matter of course or were the precursors to what we use today were originally implemented somewhere in System V at some time, and SCO claims they own everything that could ever operate in the same way.
In effect, SCo is saying that not only are implementations pantentable, but the underlying idea is, too.
This will probably someday become a sticky issue legaly, since software sometimes presents a very fuzzy line between ideas and their implementation. Hopefully when SCO loses this case it will set a legal precedent that will clear this issue up without directly addressing it.
"Beat your children at least once a day; if you don't know why, they do."
-Some surprisingly famous guy
barfdader.com
barfdader@yahoo.co.jp
ICQ# 297237035
Yahoo.com IMID: thegiantpotato
-
08-20-2003, 06:20 PM
#369
I hate to ask this but...
Hi
I hate to even evoke their name because it inspires such anger and passion but I have to tell you that I am getting sick (and I mean "hand-me-a-barf-bag" SICK) of reading about SCO in the news every day. Now these weasils claim to be tracking Linux end-users and say they will be requiring them to license up and if they don't...see you in court!. They say they will "stop at nothing" to protect "their" intellectual property.
In the beginning I just blew them off but since I AM an "end user", this is starting to get a little bit personal and has me concerned. I don't run a server and I'm not the CEO of some "major company". I'm simply a person who uses Linux at home and for personal use. They way they carry on each day and beat the drums of war, I'm 1/2 expecting them to be busting down my door any day now and I'm tired of feeling paranoid about that. While I know there is only a small chance this could happen, I must admit that I DON'T like feeling like I have to hide in a dark corner of my basement to use an OS which is supposed to be free and made to feel like some kind of freakin' criminal for it!.
It seems that every day they get a little crazier and outdo themselves. I don't want to have to wait until 2005 for them to settle this because even after it's settled, M$ (or some other greedy company) will be trying to find some other way to attack us (patents, copyright, etc). Linux is like a piece of road kill (but in a GOOD way) and here you have all these vultures fighting over who is going to feed first and who get's the biggest piece, etc. It's crap like this that will eventaully turn what used to be the internet into a corporate-controlled black box.
Just my 2-cent rant
-
08-21-2003, 12:28 AM
#370
Your reaction is exactly what this FUD campaign is designed to elicit. After reading the analysis of the "evidence" SCO has presented, I'm even more convinced this entire debacle is pure and simple FUD, and it's not being generated by SCO. Someone does not get to be the CEO of a company by being as stupid as Darl McBride has been. This entire campaign has been "masterminded" by a company that is scared to death of Linux, and it's a MUCH bigger company than SCO. I believe SCO knows they don't stand a chance in court, but their purpose is not to win in court, it's to SLOW LINUX DOWN AT ANY COST. I believe we have only seen the beginning of the war raged on LInux. When an animal is cornered, it's the most dangerous, and the company that's sponsoring this FUD campaign is only going to feel more and more cornered. I don't think we've seen the nasty stuff yet.
What's so ironic is this big company has brought most of the animosity on themselves with their licensing and greedy policies.
Debian Sid
Athlon 1.2 Ghz
512 Meg memory
HDA: 80 gig Maxtor (windows)
HDB: 80 gig Seagate (linux)
-
08-21-2003, 02:27 PM
#371
I want Darl Mcbridge dead.
Specs:
Dually Opteron 246's
1GB DDRDRAM (400)
OS - Gentoo 1.4 KDE 2.6 test9 64-bit kernel
games - UT2k3, Q3A, SSE/2, RtCw,UT, Tribes 2, Homeworld - natively
Under Wine - HalfLife, Homeworld Cataclysm, Max Payne
Registered user 292384
-
08-21-2003, 03:04 PM
#372
SCO renamed - Thanks, Linus...
..from now on, let's refer to SCO by their (new) full name..
The Smoking Crack Organisation
Priceless quote from Linus T.
-Andy
PS - bit odd. Have you seen smo'crak's shares today?
Unfortunately, doing well...
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SCOX&d=c&t=1d&l=on&z=b&q=l
..let's hope the 'balloon effect' is about to kick in.
Last edited by andycrofts; 08-21-2003 at 03:07 PM.
-
08-21-2003, 04:34 PM
#373
Re: SCO renamed - Thanks, Linus...
They've been doing well for a long time now. They'll start going down soon I think (when they meet IBM or RH in court).
-
08-22-2003, 04:38 PM
#374
I've just had a nasty thought.
When the Smoking Crack Organisation lose this case to IBM, what happens if they sell the rights to the UNIX code to Microsoft??
Our diversity is our strength.
-
08-22-2003, 08:34 PM
#375
1. The sale would be blocked
2. It would be seen as anti-competitive
3. It would be a PR nightmare
However, remember that nothing's impossible, just improbable.
Social Engineering Specialist
Because the is no patch for human stupidity
I spent a night in Paris. Wanna see the video?
This post has been brought to you by the STFU Foundation.
The Origins and Future of Open Source Software
A NetAction Whitepaper by Nathan Newman
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|