SCO Group Inc. trying to own Linux

[gameoverDude]

http://www.itworld.com/Man/2685/030805scolicensing/

This is so screwed up and yet another example of massive corporate greed. Fuck SCO. Hopefully their plan will plummet in a tailspin after getting shot down in flames by a judge.

SCO unveils Linux licensing scheme
IDG News Service 8/5/03

Robert McMillan, IDG News Service, San Francisco Bureau

One day after being sued by Linux vendor Red Hat Inc. for "unfair and deceptive actions" relating to its claims about intellectual property violations in the Linux source code, The SCO Group Inc. Tuesday will tell Unix users exactly what it would cost to bring their systems out of the sights of SCO's lawyers.

SCO's charge: US$699 per processor.

SCO claims that the Linux source code contains unauthorized contributions, and in March it sued IBM Corp. for $1 billion, claiming that Big Blue had made some of those additions in violation of its Unix licensing agreement with SCO. Since then, the Lindon, Utah, company has widened the scope of its claims. It is now seeking more than $3 billion in damages from IBM, and maintains that Linux users themselves could be subject to lawsuits for illegally using SCO's intellectual property.

Tuesday's announcement presents users with the option of paying SCO rather than running the risk of litigation. The $699 per processor fee applies to server licenses only, said SCO spokesman Blake Stowell. His company also plans to offer less expensive licensing options for desktop and embedded Linux users, he said.

The license, called the SCO Intellectual Property License for Linux, lets Linux users run SCO's intellectual property in binary form only. "It gives you a license to run the software only. You can't view the source, and you can't contribute it to an open-source product for everyone's use," Stowell said.

Open-source advocates have said that such a license would violate Linux's GNU General Public License, (GPL) which prohibits the Linux source code from being mixed with a license like SCO's, but Stowell disagreed. "This is a license that is designed to run in addition to the GPL," he said.

SCO's price tag is too high, according to one industry analyst. "That seems pretty steep to me," said Sageza Group Inc. analyst Charles King, referring to the $700 ballpark figure that SCO had previously mentioned. "If they made this thing so cheap and so easy that it made more sense to pony up a few thousand bucks and pay it, and not think about it anymore, they might actually generate some interest in it."

By pricing its Linux license fee in the same range as its UnixWare license, SCO may prompt Linux users to demand that it first prove its allegations, King said. "The enterprises that are deeply invested in Linux are going to pull out their slide rule and say, 'OK, prove it'."

For those users, SCO is offering an additional incentive. A single processor server license will jump to $1,399 after Oct. 15, Stowell said.
Bob McMillan is U.S. Correspondent for the IDG News Service.

[stormy]

assholes

[Schlep]

They're gonna have lawsuits coming at them from all directions.

[Kenshin]

Man. Two parties I hate. Greedy capitalist lawyers, and linux fanatics.

Maybe we'll get lucky, and in some cosmic calamity they'll cancel each other out.

[MVS]

You sound like you are on the verge of tears.

[Calliander]

The SCO people are still around? Didn't they all get killed when Apple Computer dropped the atom bomb on Unixland?

[DArque Bishop]

Considering a similar "put up or shut up" lawsuit in Germany resulted in SCO shutting up, I don't see much basis in SCO's threats.

That, and SCO will get my money the instant they prove they're entitled to it. They haven't, so they get jack shit from me.

Just my $.02...

[Wolffen]

Red Hat is suing SCO now, so hopefully some good will come of that.

Open-source advocates have said that such a license would violate Linux's GNU General Public License, (GPL) which prohibits the Linux source code from being mixed with a license like SCO's, but Stowell disagreed. "This is a license that is designed to run in addition to the GPL," he said.

Problem with that is, he has to get every Linux contributor's permission to do so. If you are going to distribute Linux, you HAVE to distribute the source as well. Period. Fin. End of Line.

And now, SCO is making implied threats that it will go after end users. http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/

[DArque Bishop]

Red Hat is suing SCO now, so hopefully some good will come of that.


Problem with that is, he has to get every Linux contributor's permission to do so. If you are going to distribute Linux, you HAVE to distribute the source as well. Period. Fin. End of Line.

And now, SCO is making implied threats that it will go after end users. http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/

They do!

Get your kernel sources right here!

... of course, this means that I don't need the license they're selling, seeing as I'm accepting the GPL license they're distributing this kernel under. Thanks, SCO!

[cka]

Who cares. Linux is for bitches.


BSD 4EVA.