OpenBSD Journal

SCO going after BSD...

Contributed by jose on from the throwing-rocks dept.

Josh was one of many to write: "Well, it appears the SCO isn't satisfied with just making a fool out of itself with the Linux related court fiasco; its now going to try and go after the AT&T/BSD court ruling from 1994. Not sure what this means for OpenBSD...any speculations/thoughts (other than SCO is going to get laughed out of court) on the future?

Source comes from a Newsforge article "

Silly me, I had thought that the BSD legal issues were settled already ... We'll see what the future holds, I guess.

(Comments are closed)

Comments

  1. By Noryungi () n o r y u n g i @ y a h o o . c o m on mailto:n o r y u n g i @ y a h o o . c o m


    Please note that this article was soundly trounced by Marc Rassbach on Daemon News:

    http://daily.daemonnews.org/view_story.php3?story_id=4228

  2. By Peter () peter@ticl.co.uk on mailto:peter@ticl.co.uk

    There is an amusing item in the register related to this:
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/34102.html

    Peter

  3. By Sacha () on

    I wonder how far this would stall OpenBSD's development in the future.

    Would it hurt Theo in Canada?

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward () on

      I'm sure Theo is quaking with fear ...

      SCO (or whomever they are working for) just wants
      to create more FUD amongst the ignorant. If
      someone wasn't finacing them, they would have
      fallen completely silent a while ago...

      They aren't going to step into the Canadian legal
      arena anyway. Fortunately, our market it too
      small (and our court system not friendly enough)
      for us to be of interest.

    2. By Anthony () on

      bah

      If DARPA can't do it, SCO doesn't have good odds.

    3. By mirabile () mirabile@bsdcow.net on http://mirbsd.de/

      It wouldn't hurt me in Germany either.

      SCO could try to sue USA-based BSD distributors,
      but on January 23, 2002, Caldera licenced all
      versions of UNIX® up to 32V under a 4-clause
      UCB-style licence.
      Someone told me that 32V happened to be the last
      version of UNIX® from which code was taken into
      BSD.

      So they could try to sue, but couldn't win.
      In Germany, they're even forbidden to claim that
      (e.g. Linux) infringes their IP, and had to
      change their website etc. accordingly. So I don't
      think they would dare starting to sue someone here.

  4. By EN () on

    SCO is dead meat.

  5. By chris humphries () chris@unixfu.net on http://unixfu.net/

    sco will go broke fighting all these legal battles and end up killing themselves.

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward () on

      I think SCO is already broke. The execs are just doing this last push to bump up the stock price so they can offload more of it. They really have nothing to lose.

  6. By Peter Hessler () spambox@theapt.org on http://www.theapt.org

    SCO can bite my shiny metal ass.

    Comments

    2. By Anonymous Coward () on

      hi bender ;-)

  7. By Joe Price () on

    Here are a few links of interest:

    http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html
    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031119011337666
    http://www.caldera.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html

    final words.. FUCK SCO, all my past experience with them has been negative.

  8. By Anonymous Coward () on


    Here's the slashdot article

    And here's the source article which is pretty funny :D

    Interesting that in THAT press conference he said, BSD is in a clear legal environment. There are dozens of protected BSD files that have made there way into Linux. THEN he says they'll head for BSD this next year.

    To me it looks like he says first that BSD is in the clear and then says that BSD is going to be scrutinized so they can make something up a down the line.

    HOW is this good for their business? What's driving me insane is this: How can SCO stock keep going up?? By now people MUST be seeing that this boat is sinking! Right?!?! Hmmm...perhaps they're just riding it on the 2% chance that SCO actually wins. They're just waiting and watching, with their fingers on the button to flush SCO if they loose (which I believe is inevitable) and make a huge profit. At least that's what I keep telling myself...because people can't be THAT stupid as to believe that SCO will win...right?

    Argh :/

    Comments
    1. Comments

      1. By Anonymous Coward () on


        I hadn't actually checked it since I last heard their stock was going up which was back in October. :) You just restored a small bit of my faith that people aren't TOTALLY clueless. :)

  9. By Ian McWilliam () i.mcwilliam@uws.edu.au on mailto:i.mcwilliam@uws.edu.au

    With the recent problems with compat_ibcs2 it's time to remove it from the source tree entirely. With the way SCO are going SCO && System V systems will be dead shortly. Let's now be proactive and remove any more security problems crap icbs2 emulation may provide.

    Maybe we should have a new POLL on this?
    Time for the BSD world to take a stand against SCO.

    man compat_ibcs2

    OpenBSD supports running Intel Binary Compatibility Standard 2 (iBCS2) binaries. This only applies to i386 systems for now. Binaries are supported from SCO UNIX and other systems derived from UNIX System V Release
    3. iBCS2 support is only well tested using SCO binaries.

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward () on

      Actually, it might be better to leave it in or even enhance it. That way, SCO's remaining cumstomers have more excuses to switch.

      Comments

      1. By Anonymous Coward () on

        Absolutely. Give those remaining enterprise customers a real OS to run their old binaries on, while they move away from SCO OpenServer (open to whom, exactly?).

        Of course, the legality of copying OpenServer libraries you may, in fact, no longer own rights to over to the OBSD box is certainly in question. Not to mention that the whole point of SCO's legal argument is that they own the One-True Unix.

      2. By Anonymous Hero () on

        I agree. Also, a SCO customer is something else than a SCO employee or a SCO CEO. You target the wrong person with such actions and it's pretty childish.

        If you really want to do action, IGNORE them. They have no proof as of now therefore their news is useless. They're abusing the media for their stock and FUD, so what can the media (including ie deadly.org) do? Ignore them, that would go beyond their purpose.

        SCO does not exist. There is no SCO.

        Though i don't believe the mass media will do this. They cooperate with the game.

        After the court has spoken, post a message and everybody will say ''just like i expected''.

        Oh btw i watched soccer a few days ago. The Netherlands against Scotland. The outcome was: NED 6 - SCO 0 (:

  10. By Anonymous Coward () on

    I'm sick and tired of hearing about SCO's whining. They aren't going to get anywhere. If they do, post then.

  11. By Apple User () on

    Since M$ owns SCO , every Unix variant got's to pay copyrights to them ?

    Sure , why not , maybe i should try a scam like that too . Let me buy that first steam engine , then all automobile & other engine producers should pay me copyrights :)

    No really M$ get alive , in the past Unix was a free & open OS that everyone could use . In fact if you gonna take it on to BSD , what about Solaris , NeXT OS & Darwin plus i'm sure there are a lot of OS'es i don't know & they all have Unix/Bsd Roots .

    Luckely SCO wasn't M$ since the beginning but had a lot of owners , assholes like M$ but also real open source company's .

    Guess if that weren't so , there would never been BSD , so there would have never been NeXT & finally there would have never been Darwin . I wonder how Mac OS would look then , but i don't really want to know .

    And yes infact bsd used unix code once , but AT & T wouldn't let em , so all was removed & rewritten . So BSD is in no way in violation with SCO since all was removed since berkeley distribution 4.3 or 4.4 . And since Apple based Darwin on BSD , Apple is save too .

    And if there was only one asshole in the world it would definetly be someone in charge of M$

  12. By Johnny () johnny@utepils.com on mailto:johnny@utepils.com

    http://www.caldera.com/scosource/linuxlicensefaq.html

    41. I am running BSD. Am I required to purchase a license?

    No, you do not need to purchase a SCO IP license to run BSD.

  13. By elj () on

    it's obviously not important for SCO to actually inflict deadly wounds on either linux or bsd. it's about making it look like it's doomed in the eyes of the fabulously rich corporations that buy microsoft's network solutions. and it is working.. as i understand it, microsoft has invested a lot of money into a sinking SCO and now SCO is earning it's keep as a prominent unixoid company, righteously defending itself against evil linux et al.. it really never is about what the deep geeks can comprehend, but what the fabulously rich corporations' CEO's comprehend and decide to act on... the naughty, evil SCO has already harmed linux's march into the corporate market A LOT .. i don't really care though.. it doesn't threaten my own boxes, and you all should propagate this message as best you can - it's about scaring CEO's to opt out of linux.

  14. By Anonymous Coward () on

    Words cant express how fucking pissed off i am at those fucks at SCO they need to try to make some fucking money the real way by fucking working on a product that is accually worth something




    ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....

Latest Articles

Credits

Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]