- Legacy - lists.gtalug.org

SCO has valid case
by posman-FfUIX6OOeZE＠public.gmane.org 24 Aug '03

24 Aug '03

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, Rick Tomaschuk wrote: > The more I read from you the better the other guys are looking in > terms of business partners. I'm sure happy I don't have to work with > you. What happened? Mama put you on the toilet seat the wrong way > around? > RickT > > If you kick every yappy dog on the way to town...you'll never get > there. Bark Bark Amir > Okay, first off, don't top post. It's annoying for those of us who want to actually read the thread. Second off, if you are going to respond to someone's post, please make note of the spelling of their name... it's "Emir"; not "Amir" you imbecile. Third off, if you're going to participate in "flame wars", at least make it worth our while... "Mama put you on the toilet seat the wrong way around?" ... extremely lame you fucking moron. -- Paul Osman paul-FfUIX6OOeZE at public.gmane.org http://perl.eval.ca "Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes." - E.W. Dijkstra -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO.com and Caldera.com dead?
by posman-FfUIX6OOeZE＠public.gmane.org 24 Aug '03

24 Aug '03

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, Madison Kelly wrote: > Hi all, > > I know there was a thread on SCO so this may already have been > pointed out but if so, I missed it. It looks like the SCO and Caldera > websites are gone and have been for several hours now. Curiously, it > follows after two days of steady rise in SCOX share price. A rumour we > didn't know about? > > Madison > I wonder what their customers think now that they can't even access their website. Fucking losers... honestly. -- Paul Osman paul-FfUIX6OOeZE at public.gmane.org http://perl.eval.ca "Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes." - E.W. Dijkstra -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO has valid case
by rickl-ZACYGPecefkNbK0NzMECUg＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

The more I read from you the better the other guys are looking in terms of business partners. I'm sure happy I don't have to work with you. What happened? Mama put you on the toilet seat the wrong way around? RickT If you kick every yappy dog on the way to town...you'll never get there. Bark Bark Amir On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 22:34:24 -0400, Emir <emir-rdkfGonbjUTTQjIoRn/dzw at public.gmane.org> wrote : > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Rick Tomaschuk wrote: > | I did not get the impression SCO was trying to drag down the Linux > | name especially as a "past time" but rather they are moving to protect > | their IP (Intellectual Property) in the very same manner the music > | industry has been doing. (ie.Napster) They seem adamant about their > | current holdings (UNIX) and are trying to enforce their legal rights. > > That's OK, we've already concluded beyond reasonable doubt that your power of > perception is somewhat lesser than your skills in web design. Nevertheless, it > is telling that you draw parallel between SCO and RIAA. > > | SCO's assertion is that IBM (as a company, not rogue employees) did > | knowingly introduce AIX code to Linux licensed from the > | SCO/Novell/AT&T agreement. SCOX (Nasdaq $13.55) is a tiny company > | approx. 350 employees & current market cap 100M++ now that their stock > | price has increased from below one dollar a year ago. They were almost > | delisted. > > I can't make head or tail from this paragraph. What exactly are you trying to > say here? What's SCO's assertion on what IBM has and hasn't done got to do > with SCO's market cap? > > | SCO has an impressive team of professionals working on all aspects of this case. > > How exactly did you come to this conclusion? Did you meet these fine people? > How exactly are you so well versed with their expertise and experience? > > | SCO is not a group of "stupid idiots" as many seem to think they are. > > Actually, they are. They're running a scam for someone else (hint: big company > in northwest USA whose latest desktop operating systems allows people to fly, > at least in commercials), hoping to cash in in the process. They certainly > have been so far (looking at the stock dumping their execs have exercised over > the past few weeks), but it's gonna end sooner or later, because they'll > eventually have to show some evidence. They have pissed off the wrong group of > people who will want to see them pay for it. And pay they will, no doubt. > > | I'm amazed no one on the list server with advanced programming skills > | took the time to go to Vegas to try to get to the bottom of things or > | at the very least to hear SCO's side and grill them on the spot. They > | were all there answering any and all questions. At least no one else > | on the list server has spoken out yet about their trip to SCOForum > | yet > > I almost did, but then I realized that wiping my ass with those crisp $20 bills > would actually be money better spent. I quickly backed off, though, as those > greenbacks leave nasty abrasions. > > | Hell I'm almost sorry I said anything now. > > That's OK, you just probably never heard of the saying "when you have nothing > intelligent to say, better not say anything at all" or "better to have people > *think* you're stupid than say something and remove all doubt". You live, you > learn, eh? > > | I UNDERSTAND substantial code exists above and beyond the powerpoint > | presentation however SCO is not prepared to release it publicly...yet. > > You're really beginning to sound more and more like a shill. What's with > "yet"? Darl "The Annointed One" McBride has been rather adamant that they're > not gonna release any "proof" in public, so who are you to insinuate they may > do so in future? > > | Don't dump on me. > > Why not? I'd pay you good money... > > | I support the Linux effort with great enthusiasm > | since it began but need to have options for different customers. I'm > | as adversely affected by all this the same as others in the industry. > > Who's adversely affected? As far as Linux adoption is concerned, it has only > picked up, not slowed down. Linux users cannot possibly be affected by this, > as they can never be asked to pay license fees for alleged copyright violation. > ~ Eben Moglen, Professor of Law at Columbia made an analogy of newspaper readers > being forced to pay fees for reading an article in the newspaper that was > violating copyright of another paper. > > Of course, there's nothing in your posts thus far that would lead me to believe > you'd actually be able to see the idiocy of such a scenario, as you seem to > have accepted all other idiocies served to you. > > | I don't need more FUD in my life. I was working with 3.5, 3.51, NT > | when it first arrived. I sure did'nt need that CRAP in my life > | especially when Novell had (what I considered) to be rock solid > | technology at the time. I welcome all comments. > > Oh, that's cute, you're trying to score some points with the readers of this > list by throwing cheap shots at WinNT, hoping it'll stick coz we all know Linux > users are MS haters... > > | Nothing like a great brainstorming session to liven things up. > > I think you're confused by terminology here, "brainstorm" is not the same as > "brainfart". > > I think SCO has underestimated this forum's collective intellect when they > hired you to shill it. If I was SCO Purchasing Officer, I'd ask for my money back. > > > - -- > Emir. > > "If there's anything more important than my ego around, > ~ I want it caught and shot now." [Zaphod Beeblebrox] > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQE/SCQwuSy542G+Z7QRAjZJAKCBC9UfjW2PYnFXOufv/UXFQbi7WACdEZwg > 6y3c25Rpk2Zk2R0A8p8Vss0= > =o0cC > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > -- > The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org > TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns > How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml > > > -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO.com and Caldera.com dead?
by linux-5ZoueyuiTZhBDgjK7y7TUQ＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

Hi all, I know there was a thread on SCO so this may already have been pointed out but if so, I missed it. It looks like the SCO and Caldera websites are gone and have been for several hours now. Curiously, it follows after two days of steady rise in SCOX share price. A rumour we didn't know about? Madison -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO has valid case
by anton-F0u+EriZ6ihBDgjK7y7TUQ＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

Rick Tomaschuk wrote: > What on earth is >wrong with a free market? Our whole economy is based on a free market. >The world is moving toward globalization. The GPL is a welcome >addition to our world but we still need to maintain other options. IMHO > > > There is nothing wrong with the free market. However, using the system of laws which is designed to restrict (opposite of free) rights to do business is not what I consider free market economy. Rather than spending their energy on developing a better product to compete with linux, or capitalising on its use like IBM has done, SCO is trying to succeed by bringing others down which is the first sign of a bandit (couldn't find a better term). And what do you mean by other options? (I'll spare you my ironic example). Also on the topic of corporations (in response to another recent post) I would like to say that corporations where originally designed to protect individuals from law suits, governments (tax collections, inspections, and other nonsense), etc. However, when the corporation is ran by a hired or public body (management, shareholders), it becomes a body much like our government, and no better than it. I personally agree with Peter that we need to solve the problem first (if SCO actually identifies it) and then worry about who is to blame. I personally think lawsuits should have a time limit - 6 months and then it's over. That way normal people can get on with their life. --- Anton -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO has valid case
by wmcgilvery-6d3DWWOeJtE＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

It's my opinion that SCO is hoping for a settlement and never wants to go to court. Lots of people sue with the hope of getting paid off because it is cheaper for the defendant to handout the money then to defend itself. I think this has from the very beginning been a bluff from a very desperate company. The shenanigan with SCO issuing stocks and then SCO executives cashing in smells really bad. The issuing of licenses appears to nothing more than FUD. SCO has alienated just about everyone imaginable, and the SCO execs are looking for early retirement. Of course this is just my opinion :) Regards, Wil McGilvery Manager Lynch Digital Media Inc 416-744-7949 416-716-3964 (cell) 1-866-314-4678 416-744-0406? FAX www.LynchDigital.com -----Original Message----- From: Rick Tomaschuk [mailto:rickl-ZACYGPecefkNbK0NzMECUg at public.gmane.org] Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 9:56 PM To: tlug-lxSQFCZeNF4 at public.gmane.org I did not get the impression SCO was trying to drag down the Linux name especially as a "past time" but rather they are moving to protect their IP (Intellectual Property) in the very same manner the music industry has been doing. (ie.Napster) They seem adamant about their current holdings (UNIX) and are trying to enforce their legal rights. SCO's assertion is that IBM (as a company, not rogue employees) did knowingly introduce AIX code to Linux licensed from the SCO/Novell/AT&T agreement. SCOX (Nasdaq $13.55) is a tiny company approx. 350 employees & current market cap 100M++ now that their stock price has increased from below one dollar a year ago. They were almost delisted. SCO has an impressive team of professionals working on all aspects of this case. SCO is not a group of "stupid idiots" as many seem to think they are. I'm amazed no one on the list server with advanced programming skills took the time to go to Vegas to try to get to the bottom of things or at the very least to hear SCO's side and grill them on the spot. They were all there answering any and all questions. At least no one else on the list server has spoken out yet about their trip to SCOForum yet. Hell I'm almost sorry I said anything now. I UNDERSTAND substantial code exists above and beyond the powerpoint presentation however SCO is not prepared to release it publicly...yet. Don't dump on me. I support the Linux effort with great enthusiasm since it began but need to have options for different customers. I'm as adversely affected by all this the same as others in the industry. I don't need more FUD in my life. I was working with 3.5, 3.51, NT when it first arrived. I sure did'nt need that CRAP in my life especially when Novell had (what I considered) to be rock solid technology at the time. I welcome all comments. Nothing like a great brainstorming session to liven things up. Rick Tomaschuk rickt-ZACYGPecefkNbK0NzMECUg at public.gmane.org Novell Resource: http://www.TorontoNUI.ca On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 19:45:37 +0300 (IDDT), "Peter L. Peres" <plp-ysDPMY98cNQDDBjDh4tngg at public.gmane.org> wrote : > > On Sat, 23 Aug 2003, Rick Tomaschuk wrote: > peanuts compared to the long term value it offered. What on earth is >wrong with a free market? Our whole economy is based on a free market. > > This is not about free market, this is about some firm or other >dragging down the good name of Linux and attacking the GPL in a FUD >war that precedes a multi-billion multi-year lawsuit in a country >other than the one where you (I understand) and I (certainly) live, >for months on end (**), where such things are a national passtime >apparently. > > The FIRST thing that should worry a Linux user/developer is whether the > GPL was violated by someone. Not by whom. Then the second worry would be > to undo the damage asap, first by applying the GPL provisions for > violations of the GPL license, since THIS is the license that was > violated, not some IP ownership or other, about which as a Linux > user/developer you should care only as a second thought. That means > immediate summons from the GPL and FSF (as appropriate) copyright and > license rights owners (such as Linus Torvalds, who owns the copyright on > the majority of the kernel code) to the involved or suspected parties to > cease distribution and use of Linux and of the name Linux (Linux is also a > trademark of Linux Torvalds) until the matter is cleared, and in parallel > an effort to find and remove the code that OFFENDS THE GPL (I do NOT care > who else it offends !) from the Linux codebase, and replace it as > necessary. THIS is what Linux users and developers need. > > THEN, when on the side, we can talk about whose made a mistake and who > went along with it, and have all the fud you want, about those firms who > are involved in this. *NOT* about GPL and Linux, which is a *victim* of > misuse by someone of someone else's IP, and not *guilty* of it. Come to > think of it, the GPL copyright holders could sue both big firms for > license violation and slander. > > > The world is moving toward globalization. The GPL is a welcome > > addition to our world but we still need to maintain other options. IMHO > > The GPL is a welcome addition to what exactly ? It has been here for > nearly 10 years I think. Other options ? As many as you want. But without > the Linux codebase and the GPL, thank you, we will not have them mixed > into the continuous-lawsuit-thing that takes part in a certain country. > > {\footnote (**) New Linux versions come out about every 6 months. If the > lawsuit will work as such lawsuits worked until now, it could bog down > Linux development for 6 versions, easily. I do *NOT* want that, badly > enough, to start contributing to a new codebase derived from 2.2, and thus > unaffected by the lawsuit, starting tomorrow. And I know I am not alone on > this. Know thy history, at least so you can avoid past mistakes. 'Waiting > it out' is not a good idea in this case. And I don't care if I have to > call it 'Notlin' or something like that. } > > Peter > -- > The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org > TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns > How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml > > > -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO has valid case
by emir-rdkfGonbjUTTQjIoRn/dzw＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rick Tomaschuk wrote: | I did not get the impression SCO was trying to drag down the Linux | name especially as a "past time" but rather they are moving to protect | their IP (Intellectual Property) in the very same manner the music | industry has been doing. (ie.Napster) They seem adamant about their | current holdings (UNIX) and are trying to enforce their legal rights. That's OK, we've already concluded beyond reasonable doubt that your power of perception is somewhat lesser than your skills in web design. Nevertheless, it is telling that you draw parallel between SCO and RIAA. | SCO's assertion is that IBM (as a company, not rogue employees) did | knowingly introduce AIX code to Linux licensed from the | SCO/Novell/AT&T agreement. SCOX (Nasdaq $13.55) is a tiny company | approx. 350 employees & current market cap 100M++ now that their stock | price has increased from below one dollar a year ago. They were almost | delisted. I can't make head or tail from this paragraph. What exactly are you trying to say here? What's SCO's assertion on what IBM has and hasn't done got to do with SCO's market cap? | SCO has an impressive team of professionals working on all aspects of this case. How exactly did you come to this conclusion? Did you meet these fine people? How exactly are you so well versed with their expertise and experience? | SCO is not a group of "stupid idiots" as many seem to think they are. Actually, they are. They're running a scam for someone else (hint: big company in northwest USA whose latest desktop operating systems allows people to fly, at least in commercials), hoping to cash in in the process. They certainly have been so far (looking at the stock dumping their execs have exercised over the past few weeks), but it's gonna end sooner or later, because they'll eventually have to show some evidence. They have pissed off the wrong group of people who will want to see them pay for it. And pay they will, no doubt. | I'm amazed no one on the list server with advanced programming skills | took the time to go to Vegas to try to get to the bottom of things or | at the very least to hear SCO's side and grill them on the spot. They | were all there answering any and all questions. At least no one else | on the list server has spoken out yet about their trip to SCOForum | yet I almost did, but then I realized that wiping my ass with those crisp $20 bills would actually be money better spent. I quickly backed off, though, as those greenbacks leave nasty abrasions. | Hell I'm almost sorry I said anything now. That's OK, you just probably never heard of the saying "when you have nothing intelligent to say, better not say anything at all" or "better to have people *think* you're stupid than say something and remove all doubt". You live, you learn, eh? | I UNDERSTAND substantial code exists above and beyond the powerpoint | presentation however SCO is not prepared to release it publicly...yet. You're really beginning to sound more and more like a shill. What's with "yet"? Darl "The Annointed One" McBride has been rather adamant that they're not gonna release any "proof" in public, so who are you to insinuate they may do so in future? | Don't dump on me. Why not? I'd pay you good money... | I support the Linux effort with great enthusiasm | since it began but need to have options for different customers. I'm | as adversely affected by all this the same as others in the industry. Who's adversely affected? As far as Linux adoption is concerned, it has only picked up, not slowed down. Linux users cannot possibly be affected by this, as they can never be asked to pay license fees for alleged copyright violation. ~ Eben Moglen, Professor of Law at Columbia made an analogy of newspaper readers being forced to pay fees for reading an article in the newspaper that was violating copyright of another paper. Of course, there's nothing in your posts thus far that would lead me to believe you'd actually be able to see the idiocy of such a scenario, as you seem to have accepted all other idiocies served to you. | I don't need more FUD in my life. I was working with 3.5, 3.51, NT | when it first arrived. I sure did'nt need that CRAP in my life | especially when Novell had (what I considered) to be rock solid | technology at the time. I welcome all comments. Oh, that's cute, you're trying to score some points with the readers of this list by throwing cheap shots at WinNT, hoping it'll stick coz we all know Linux users are MS haters... | Nothing like a great brainstorming session to liven things up. I think you're confused by terminology here, "brainstorm" is not the same as "brainfart". I think SCO has underestimated this forum's collective intellect when they hired you to shill it. If I was SCO Purchasing Officer, I'd ask for my money back. - -- Emir. "If there's anything more important than my ego around, ~ I want it caught and shot now." [Zaphod Beeblebrox] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/SCQwuSy542G+Z7QRAjZJAKCBC9UfjW2PYnFXOufv/UXFQbi7WACdEZwg 6y3c25Rpk2Zk2R0A8p8Vss0= =o0cC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO has valid case
by rickl-ZACYGPecefkNbK0NzMECUg＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

I did not get the impression SCO was trying to drag down the Linux name especially as a "past time" but rather they are moving to protect their IP (Intellectual Property) in the very same manner the music industry has been doing. (ie.Napster) They seem adamant about their current holdings (UNIX) and are trying to enforce their legal rights. SCO's assertion is that IBM (as a company, not rogue employees) did knowingly introduce AIX code to Linux licensed from the SCO/Novell/AT&T agreement. SCOX (Nasdaq $13.55) is a tiny company approx. 350 employees & current market cap 100M++ now that their stock price has increased from below one dollar a year ago. They were almost delisted. SCO has an impressive team of professionals working on all aspects of this case. SCO is not a group of "stupid idiots" as many seem to think they are. I'm amazed no one on the list server with advanced programming skills took the time to go to Vegas to try to get to the bottom of things or at the very least to hear SCO's side and grill them on the spot. They were all there answering any and all questions. At least no one else on the list server has spoken out yet about their trip to SCOForum yet. Hell I'm almost sorry I said anything now. I UNDERSTAND substantial code exists above and beyond the powerpoint presentation however SCO is not prepared to release it publicly...yet. Don't dump on me. I support the Linux effort with great enthusiasm since it began but need to have options for different customers. I'm as adversely affected by all this the same as others in the industry. I don't need more FUD in my life. I was working with 3.5, 3.51, NT when it first arrived. I sure did'nt need that CRAP in my life especially when Novell had (what I considered) to be rock solid technology at the time. I welcome all comments. Nothing like a great brainstorming session to liven things up. Rick Tomaschuk rickt-ZACYGPecefkNbK0NzMECUg at public.gmane.org Novell Resource: http://www.TorontoNUI.ca On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 19:45:37 +0300 (IDDT), "Peter L. Peres" <plp-ysDPMY98cNQDDBjDh4tngg at public.gmane.org> wrote : > > On Sat, 23 Aug 2003, Rick Tomaschuk wrote: > peanuts compared to the long term value it offered. What on earth is >wrong with a free market? Our whole economy is based on a free market. > > This is not about free market, this is about some firm or other >dragging down the good name of Linux and attacking the GPL in a FUD >war that precedes a multi-billion multi-year lawsuit in a country >other than the one where you (I understand) and I (certainly) live, >for months on end (**), where such things are a national passtime >apparently. > > The FIRST thing that should worry a Linux user/developer is whether the > GPL was violated by someone. Not by whom. Then the second worry would be > to undo the damage asap, first by applying the GPL provisions for > violations of the GPL license, since THIS is the license that was > violated, not some IP ownership or other, about which as a Linux > user/developer you should care only as a second thought. That means > immediate summons from the GPL and FSF (as appropriate) copyright and > license rights owners (such as Linus Torvalds, who owns the copyright on > the majority of the kernel code) to the involved or suspected parties to > cease distribution and use of Linux and of the name Linux (Linux is also a > trademark of Linux Torvalds) until the matter is cleared, and in parallel > an effort to find and remove the code that OFFENDS THE GPL (I do NOT care > who else it offends !) from the Linux codebase, and replace it as > necessary. THIS is what Linux users and developers need. > > THEN, when on the side, we can talk about whose made a mistake and who > went along with it, and have all the fud you want, about those firms who > are involved in this. *NOT* about GPL and Linux, which is a *victim* of > misuse by someone of someone else's IP, and not *guilty* of it. Come to > think of it, the GPL copyright holders could sue both big firms for > license violation and slander. > > > The world is moving toward globalization. The GPL is a welcome > > addition to our world but we still need to maintain other options. IMHO > > The GPL is a welcome addition to what exactly ? It has been here for > nearly 10 years I think. Other options ? As many as you want. But without > the Linux codebase and the GPL, thank you, we will not have them mixed > into the continuous-lawsuit-thing that takes part in a certain country. > > {\footnote (**) New Linux versions come out about every 6 months. If the > lawsuit will work as such lawsuits worked until now, it could bog down > Linux development for 6 versions, easily. I do *NOT* want that, badly > enough, to start contributing to a new codebase derived from 2.2, and thus > unaffected by the lawsuit, starting tomorrow. And I know I am not alone on > this. Know thy history, at least so you can avoid past mistakes. 'Waiting > it out' is not a good idea in this case. And I don't care if I have to > call it 'Notlin' or something like that. } > > Peter > -- > The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org > TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns > How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml > > > -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO has valid case
by emir-rdkfGonbjUTTQjIoRn/dzw＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Lloyd D Budd wrote: |>I'm confident in the accuracy of the bulk |>of what I'm saying since I've had the opportunity to get answers |>directly from SCO's CEO and other CEO's and officers who seem to know |>what they are talking about. | | I guess that presents it better, as your previous posting appears | biased. No, Lloyd, you don't understand: Darl "The Annointed One" McBride told him so, and he even had a PowerPoint slide to prove it. Why, that alone is proof enough, wee don't need no historical facts, expert knowledge, or stinkin' courts. It *must* be true! - -- Emir. "If there's anything more important than my ego around, ~ I want it caught and shot now." [Zaphod Beeblebrox] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/R/VwuSy542G+Z7QRArpFAJ4xFJT/oadyR034wT5/xTUmW/f4GQCgl6U7 yAL1v1Qf6JCmbmbNskO3H/o= =7izI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0

SCO has valid case
by lloyd-fEEwcc3XMu8jODpR/OX0VQ＠public.gmane.org 23 Aug '03

23 Aug '03

Hello, What likely triggered my response was what seems as an obnoxious, blind statement: > MY UNDERSTANDING is that it is not SCO's intention to undermine the > Linux effort On Sat, 2003-08-23 at 11:54, Rick Tomaschuk wrote: > At the briefing SCO claimed copyright and trademark ownership of the > UNIX name. I am surprised that you have not read that since SCO has made their claims, their claim of having the UNIX trademark is disputed, and SCO likely will need to legally establish that they do own that trademark. I had guessed that you knew this when your previous mailing read " SCO owns copyrights and trademarks for UNIX SYSTEM V." > Unix coming from mixed origins (Berkeley)is > based on confidential agreements and otherwise with AT&T to rewrite code. I believe you used the word "most". Many were in development long before SYSTEM V, but adopted SYSTEM V "feel". Back then it was popular to establish one's UNIX version as a SYSTEM V UNIX (or BSD UNIX). Regardless, how is such information relevant? > While I may not be 100% right on with every tiny tid-bit since I have > better things to do than filter through every line of every article > ever written on the subject Hmm... I am surprised that in your reading you have not learned that your "hard" statements are controversial, and discussion might be improved by providing context for such statements. > I'm confident in the accuracy of the bulk > of what I'm saying since I've had the opportunity to get answers > directly from SCO's CEO and other CEO's and officers who seem to know > what they are talking about. I guess that presents it better, as your previous posting appears biased. > If you are as informed as you think you are we could have > used you in Las Vegas this week. Why were'nt you there? I definitely do not consider myself informed, only it seems that you are drinking from one pool ;-) > The trip cost peanuts compared to the long term value it offered. I am interested to know what you see as the long term value? > What on earth is > wrong with a free market? My comment was more in response to your "packaging" and associating of the ideas. > Our whole economy is based on a free market. I still need to do more traveling of the world to decide my own personal opinion there...but here we greatly digress. > The world is moving toward globalization. The GPL is a welcome > addition to our world but we still need to maintain other options. IMHO Rick, I continue to miss the context and relationship of your statements. I doubt it is your intention, but your mixture of generally agreed assertions with very controversial ones is interesting. I commend you if your intention is to seek out moral truth. Cheers, Lloyd > On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 18:49:51 -0400, Lloyd D Budd > <lloyd-fEEwcc3XMu8jODpR/OX0VQ at public.gmane.org> wrote : > > > On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 17:59, Rick Tomaschuk may have wrote: > > > > > > > My understanding is that SCO owns copyrights and trademarks for > > > UNIX SYSTEM V. > > Err...but it is debatable whether they own the trademark to UNIX. IBM > > had a special contractually arrangement with AT&T. The other UNIX(s) > > that IBM bought have not had their agreements released. > > > > > Most other (nearly all) UNIXes are > > > based upon licences from SYSTEM V (AT&T) so SCO is at the root of the > > > UNIX tree. > > Most? Many UNIX seem to be from mixed origin. > > > > It is not clear to me how relevant other item is, but there is a *huge* > > amount of interesting information on the net related to this. > > > > > > > As for reporters and their articles I've read and will continue to > read all I > > > can find. > > Rick, prior to the briefing where you well versed on the information > > available? > > > > I find it difficult to believe that you have read everything that you > > can find. Otherwise, I do not know how you could suggest: > > > MY UNDERSTANDING is that it is not SCO's intention to undermine the > > > Linux effort but rather to survive as a "for profit" company in a free > > > market. > > > > profit> some have suggested that there has been stock sell off of > > interesting quantity > > > > free market> cringe > > > > > > If you are genuinely interested, it appears there is a lot of material > > available that you might not have read thoroughly. slashdot is a good > > place to start as they provide links to pretty much all of the articles > > I was aware of before I got bored of the topic after many, many articles > > over many, many days, > > Lloyd > > > > > > P.S. This is unlikely be resolved any year soon. > > > > -- > > The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org > > TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns > > How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml > > > > > > > -- > The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org > TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns > How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml -- Lloyd D Budd <lloyd-fEEwcc3XMu8jODpR/OX0VQ at public.gmane.org> -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

1 0