Zombie SCO Loses Again; Is It Dead Yet?

from the please-be-dead dept

We had hoped that after SCO lost its lawsuit (yet again) last summer that the whole SCO vs. Linux legal fight would finally, finally, finally be dead (finally). But, of course, that was wishful thinking. Zombie SCO came back for another whacking, and , as mentioned on Slashdot, another whacking it got. The ruling is worth reading if only for a nice, concise summary of the entire legal dispute and SCO's various attempts to reanimate its very dead corpse.

My favorite part may be a rather minor point in the larger fight, but part of the legal fight involved SCO claiming slander against Novell for telling the world that SCO didn't actually hold the copyrights for UNIX. SCO tried to claim that this hurt its business, and Novell reasonably countered that the thing that really hurt SCO's business was its own actions -- and, as part of that, showed the jury a BusinessWeek article about how SCO was "The Most Hated Company in Tech." SCO claimed this was hearsay, but the court didn't buy it, noting that it was one minor image seen by the jury over a much larger trial, but, more importantly, noted that "there was repeated testimony and argument over the course of the trial pointing out the unpopularity of the SCO Source program."

While there are lots of lessons to be learned from the nearly decade-long SCO legal fight to claim control over Linux and demand a toll from just about everyone, one key lesson is that going legal is no way to build a business that people like or respect. The crux of a strong market system is that it enables transactions where all parties are happy with the results, and all parties feel they came out better off. When your entire business model is to force people to pay, rather than providing real value for which they want to pay, you're positioning yourself for failure.

Filed Under: copyright, linux, slander, unix
Companies: novell, sco

Unix For Sale: Massively Damaged, Sold As Is & Absent Delusions Of Grandeur Over Linux Copyright Infringement

from the $1-obo dept

Having lost pretty much everything -- including most of its business and its longstanding lawsuit concerning Linux -- SCO is now apparently trying to sell off what remains of its "Unix assets," -- which, as you may have heard, does not appear to include the Unix copyrights. It's unclear what anyone would really do with whatever magical assets the sale comes with, but I would suggest suing IBM for infringement is not one of the better ideas.

Filed Under: sale, unix
Companies: sco

Supposed 'Proof' Of SCO's Infringement Claims Against Linux Seem Lacking

from the really?-that's-it? dept

Slashdot has the story of someone involved in the SCO case finally showing off some of the "evidence" that SCO believed proved Linux infringed on SCO's copyrights. Of course, with the case basically dead due to a court ruling (one of a few) that SCO never actually held the copyrights in question, this might not matter, but it's still interesting to view -- and, yet again, suggests how incredibly weak SCO's case is. The "evidence" is in a blog comment on an otherwise unrelated blog post by Kevin McBride, a lawyer who is the brother of former SCO CEO Darl McBride, the mastermind (or puppet, depending on who you talk to) behind SCO's strategy.

In that comment, Kevin McBride lists out 46 different "examples" of code that SCO claimed was copied from Unix into Linux. In case those files conveniently disappear, a Slashdot user conveniently republished the comment and archived the files. If you look through the files, you don't have to be a programmer to start questioning the copyright claims. Most of the lines are not direct copies at all, and seem to be on really, really, really basic functions -- the type of thing that just about anyone would program to create that functionality. In other words, it's difficult to see how there would be any copyright on that code at all, since it was hardly original or requiring any form of creativity. Others in the Slashdot comments point out that some of the code appears to have originated in BSD code, outside of what SCO was claiming it held rights to, and others suggest at least parts of the code came from a separate third party. Furthermore, even looking through the files it's difficult to find many cases where you could even claim "cut-and-paste copying" as was alleged. There does appear to be similar implementations of similar features, but that's quite different than copyright infringement.

Filed Under: copyright, linux, unix
Companies: sco

Zombie SCO Rises Again, Appeals Latest Ruling

from the will-it-ever-die? dept

Last month, when a court ruled against SCO for the... oh heck, we've lost count... 'th time, we wondered if the whole bizarre saga might finally be over. No such luck. Hephaestus points out that SCO has, in fact, appealed. Not much to say about this one, but just shake your head in amazement. Some day, will someone please do a full case study on SCO's elaborate decade-long suicide through bad litigation choice followed by even worse litigation choice?

Filed Under: copyright, lawsuits
Companies: novell, sco

SCO Loses Yet Again; Is It Finally Over?

from the will-it-ever-die? dept

Is the bogus "we own Linux" lawsuit from SCO finally, finally over? I guess we can never say never, because it keeps coming back from the dead. However, it's taken another head shot. As you may recall, many years back SCO claimed to own the copyrights on Unix, and sued IBM and some other Linux users for infringing on their copyrights -- though, it never actually showed any evidence to back that up. Soon after all this started, Novell came along and noted that, as far as it knew, Novell still held the copyrights, not SCO. So the legal battle shifted to who actually held the copyrights, and SCO has repeatedly come out with the short end of the stick. First a judge ruled that Novell held the copyrights. After an appeals court said that a jury should decide that issue, rather than the judge, the case went back to a jury who also found that Novell, not SCO, held the copyrights. SCO then told the judge that the jury didn't really mean what it said in plain language, and said that the judge should order Novell to hand over the copyrights anyway.

That's not happening. Once again, the judge has ruled for Novell over SCO. In theory, this should end the whole saga. The judge ordered that the case be closed, and without the copyrights, SCO's suit against IBM is dead as well. Will SCO give it up finally? Or will it somehow be reanimated yet again?

Filed Under: copyright, linux, unix
Companies: ibm, novell, sco

SCO Says Jury Didn't Really Mean What It Said... And Judge Should Order Novell To Hand SCO Unix Copyrights

from the good-luck-with-that dept

SCO really is quite the zombie of a company, isn't it? It just never dies. It's been a month since getting smacked down yet again and having a jury declare that Novell still owns the Unix copyrights, and they were never transferred to SCO (after a judge had already said the same thing). And yet, as Slashdot alerts us, SCO has now told the judge he should order Novell to hand over the copyrights anyway. Talk about getting desperate. When will SCO finally be put out of its misery?

Filed Under: copyrights, linux, software, unix
Companies: novell, sco

Novell Wins Yet Again; Says SCO Never Got Unix Copyrights

from the is-it-dead-yet? dept

Could the case that never ends finally end? As you may recall, years back SCO sued IBM, claiming that Linux infringed on Unix, whose rights SCO acquired earlier. Except... in 2003 Novell tossed a bit of a firecracker into the whole thing by noting that it still owned the copyrights on Unix. The case went back and forth for ages, with a lot of questionable activity (including questions concerning Microsoft's supposed funding of SCO's activities), including accusations that the whole thing was an attempt to pump-and-dump SCO stock. Back in 2008, we thought it was finally over when a judge ruled that Novell owned the copyrights, leading many to expect SCO to finally just die off. Instead, it declared bankruptcy, got a lifeline and continued the fight -- leading to an appeals court ruling that the question over copyright ownership needed to be determined by a jury rather than a judge. As we noted at the time, this was hardly (as SCO's Darl McBride insisted) a vindication for SCO -- it was just another chance for SCO to lose in court.

And lose, it did. As was widely expected, the jury has that Novell owns the copyrights on Unix and SCO basically has no case. Once again, this suggests that SCO has never had a case, and has just been wasting everyone's time (and a lot of people's money) for a long, long, long time.

But, of course, it's probably not over yet. SCO says it will continue the original lawsuit against IBM, saying that it won't be over copyright, but breach of contract claims. Of course, it's now been almost a decade and we still haven't seen what it is that IBM did wrong. SCO still hasn't shown anyone what code breached what contract. However, as Groklaw notes, even if SCO (with what money?) keeps fighting the lawsuit against IBM over contract terms, that's a much more limited lawsuit, as the terms are just between IBM and SCO -- and wouldn't impact the wider "Linux" ecosystem, since others did not sign any kind of contract with SCO. Still, at some point, you would hope that the folks still left at SCO involved in this case realize enough is enough and just let it die.

Filed Under: linux, unix
Companies: ibm, novell, sco

SCO... Not Dead Yet... Appeals Court Reverses Novell Ruling; Trial Likely

from the not-dead-yet dept

And you thought the insane nightmare was over. Two years ago it seemed like the long national nightmare that was SCO's claims of copyright infringement in Linux were over. A judge ruled that SCO did not actually own the copyrights it claimed it did, and that they still belonged to Novell. While SCO received a slap on the wrist ($2.5 million) for this, it basically wiped out the key part of SCO's lawsuit against IBM, and led SCO to file for bankruptcy. Some investors supposedly pumped some money into SCO to keep it breathing, but later details on that made the whole deal seem very, very sketchy. However, now SCO might have a very slight chance to turn things around.

A judge has overturned part of the lower court's original ruling on who owns the copyrights to Unix, and ordered a full jury trial take place to determine who actually owns the copyright. Oddly, the court did not overturn the part where SCO has to pay Novell $2.5 million -- which could push the company over the final edge. If, however, SCO can stay alive, and it does go to trial, the company could (and likely will) still lose that trial (and, we're still twiddling our thumbs and waiting for any evidence from SCO that IBM actually infringed on the UNIX copyrights... but that's another story and another lawsuit). SCO's Darl McBride (how he's still running the show is beyond me) is claiming this is a validation for SCO, but that's not even close to true. All the court is saying is that there wasn't enough for the summary judgment on the copyright ownership, and the issue should be taken up in a full jury trial. That's not a "validation" of SCO's position -- it's a small, and likely temporary, lifeline.

Filed Under: copyright, linux, unix
Companies: novell, sco

After Finding No Joy Elsewhere, SCO Chairman Takes Anti-Porn Fight To ICANN

from the silent-majority dept

A few years ago, Ralph Yarro, the chairman of everybody's favorite tech company, SCO, put forward a plan to ban all internet porn from port 80, the port used by HTTP traffic. He later added that open WiFi should be banned as a means to stop porn. Not surprisingly, his ideas failed to find traction (except with the governor of his home state, Utah) but Yarro and his anti-porn group are pressing on, and are now asking ICANN to set up a "Cybersafety Constituency" to create binding rules on how to deal with net porn. How's this for a binding rule: don't access porn sites, and you won't be bothered with it? The idea that anybody -- let alone ICANN -- should be able to play the role of global web censor is scary, and opens the door to restrictions on all sorts of objectionable, but not illegal, content. As The Register notes, Yarro called for supporters to make comments on the proposal at ICANN's site, and plenty of people from Utah obliged. Wonder what all the people in the state who love net porn think of the proposal...

Filed Under: domains, icann, porn, port 80, ralph yarro
Companies: sco

SCO Looking To Ditch Actual Business To Try To Keep Lawsuit Going

from the going-full-on-patent-troll dept

Slashdot points us to the latest in the never-ending saga of SCO trying to claim infringement in Linux. Despite massive setbacks that should have just ended the quixotic campaign, it appears that SCO is looking to sell off its actual businesses in order to keep the lawsuit campaign going. It's amazing that after losing pretty much every aspect of this campaign from the very beginning, that folks at SCO still think it's worth pursuing.

Filed Under: copyright, linux, patents
Companies: sco