Welcome!

Java IoT Authors: Liz McMillan, Yeshim Deniz, Zakia Bouachraoui, Pat Romanski, Elizabeth White

Related Topics: Linux Containers

Linux Containers: Article

Darl McBride's 5 Reasons Why SCO Can *STILL* Win vs IBM

Darl McBride's 5 Reasons Why SCO Can *STILL* Win vs IBM

In an interview just conducted by eWeek, SCO Group supremo Darl McBride demonstrates his unswerving and continuing confidence in SCO's case.

The eWeek interviewer, Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, didn't sound as confident in the arguments he heard as those making them, but that didn't stop McBride and Chris Sontag, senior vice president of the SCOsource division, from outlining at least five reasons why they still think SCO will prevail, in spite of the near-universal criticism the company receives from the Linux community.

Here they are. Draw your own conclusions.

1. "We never contributed our code to the GPL."

McBride: "The fact that we participated with Linux does not mean that we inadvertently contributed our code to the GPL. You can't contribute inadvertently to Linux. We feel we have a very strong position based on the GPL."


2. "If we did contribute code to the GPL...we didn't do so intentionally."

Sontag: "International copyright law does not allow for inadvertent assignments of copyrighted material; the copyright holder must make an explicit assignment, typically in writing, in a contract."


3. "The code IBM has put into Linux copies the sequence and organization of Unix code."

McBride: " A lot of code that you'll be seeing coming on in these copyright cases is not going to be line-by-line code. It will be more along the lines of nonliteral copying, which has more to do with infringement. This has more to do with sequence, organization, which is copyright-protectable. "


4. "System V and Linux have some identical implementations."

Sontag: "In Linux and System V, [dynamic shared libraries] are implemented in exactly the same way. They could have been done very differently and still accomplish the same thing."


5. "The source code underlying the ABI files is identical."

McBride: "When everything is said and done, when everything is on the table in the court case, there will be an argument when the Linux guys come in and say, 'Guys, the words are entirely different, how can you say that's a copyright violation?' But there are two parts to this. There are the words that are in the source code, and there's the music underneath. The actual code that drives these ABI files is structurally and sequentially the same. "

More Stories By Linux News Desk

SYS-CON's Linux News Desk gathers stories, analysis, and information from around the Linux world and synthesizes them into an easy to digest format for IT/IS managers and other business decision-makers.

Comments (22) View Comments

Share your thoughts on this story.

Add your comment
You must be signed in to add a comment. Sign-in | Register

In accordance with our Comment Policy, we encourage comments that are on topic, relevant and to-the-point. We will remove comments that include profanity, personal attacks, racial slurs, threats of violence, or other inappropriate material that violates our Terms and Conditions, and will block users who make repeated violations. We ask all readers to expect diversity of opinion and to treat one another with dignity and respect.


Most Recent Comments
Thomas Frayne 04/07/04 10:24:03 AM EDT

SCOG's first few arguments claim that SCOG did not assign its copyrights. Right, but irrelvant. SCOG had a conditional permission to distribute collections based on GPL'd programs provided that SCOG accepted and abided by the terms of the GPL. When SCOG breached the GPL, it forfeited all rights under the GPL, including the right to keep copies of the collection. However, those receiving the collection are still licensed under the GPL, which also gives the recepient SCOG's permission to use and distribute SCOG's code in the distribution. SCOG cannot revoke this permission, and no court would revoke it for SCOG.

The points 3-5 require more detail to evaluate. SCOG is under court order to provide this detail, and the deadline is in 10 days. In particular, SCOG has to show that it owns the copyrights that it claims IBM is violating. IBM disputes that, and the Novell cases decisions expected during the next month will support IBM's position.

wtf 04/04/04 06:24:42 PM EDT

Anyone who thinks they can increase the earnings of a company solely though LAWSUITS has to be wrong in the head

Smart in a certain way, but wrong in the head

Aaron Klemm 04/04/04 05:04:48 AM EDT

Aren't #3 and #5 the same? Looks like it to me.

David Blomstrom 04/04/04 12:45:03 AM EST

Obviously, Microsoft and SCO are getting a free ride in the Corporate States of America. I suspect deliverance will ultimately come from the international community.

In the meantime, we need more people taking a stand here on the home front. Check out http://www.edrevolt.org/ and get involved!

JWillis 04/03/04 09:06:10 PM EST

I would like to comment on McBride's last reason. Im sure everyone has been to the grocery store. When you go to the cereal aisle you may see Apple Cinnamon Cherrios and you see an imitator Apple Cinnamon Tasteeios. The point to this little story is that just because something does the same thing does not mean you own it. As long as the code (or the ingredients in this scenario) are different then the end product itself is different.

rbeck 04/03/04 07:35:30 PM EST

Sontag confuses licensing copyrighted work under the GPL with assignment of copyrights to the Free Software Foundation. The GPL is a standardized form of authorization (license) of copyright permissions given from the owner to another person, and anyone may use it to govern code they own. IBM's point is that they own the copyrights to their contributions AND they are licensed under the GPL.

br3n 04/03/04 12:26:21 PM EST

I don't understand why people feel that scox is misunderstanding the GPL,they aren't.They understand it perfectly and have designed a scheme to try to get around it to make money as greedy and corruptly as they can.It is sad that this has gone on this long.This has been an orchestrated plan from day 1.We can only hope that in the end jail time is part of the end result,as a lesson and warning for others to not try to twist the GPL.
We have gone from a million lines of direct line by line copying to structure?SEC why aren't you on this?

br3n

brian 04/03/04 10:13:43 AM EST

SCO were NEVER ahead of Red Hat either as a Unix vendor
or a Linux one. McBride feels that by litigating this customers
will flock to SCO. I for one would unplug and get rid of
my computer first.

OddThought 04/03/04 10:12:18 AM EST

Maybe SCO's plan is to let the stock collapse and then file chapter 11? This
will go towards sympathy. The point here is not to win; they know that their
claims are unwinnable. The point is to cause FUD. Besides, if the company
conveniently is dissolved before trial, can the case even have resolution? The
suing corporation no longer legally exists at that point.

GLJason 04/03/04 10:11:11 AM EST

I think it's amazing how McBride keeps saying they must own all rights to UNIX
and anything to do with it because they paid hundreds of millions of dollars to
Novell. It's amazing that in a few years that hundred million dollar investment
became worth $5 billion in a suit against one company (IBM), and billions
more if he actually got $699 for each install of Linux out there. The real
amazing thing is that they think they deserve all that money for an operating
system that they contributed very little to. If their Unix on Intel was
actually that great, why isn't everyone using it now?

SCOwatcher 04/03/04 10:09:31 AM EST

try reading this, a full transcript of Darl's interview with Dan Farber. McBride firmly believes that the result of the lawsuits will be that SCO will pass Red Hat once again.

erick99 04/03/04 08:57:29 AM EST

I went to Ameritrade and did some research on SCO. At the end of last year they had $64M in cash which is not very much money. They are a very small company (comparatively) in the IT world with not even 100M a year in revenues. They have three insiders that sold stock or excercised stock options to the tune of almost $300M in Feb/Mar of this year. I don't understand what would keep them afloat for more than a year. They have negative earnings-per-share and they have a estimated share price of $5 at the end of this year (currently at $9.50). SCO would be better served by having someone at the helm that had a real interest in technology. McBride is inarticulate, mean-spirited, and an opportunist. I wonder if SCO can stay in business long enough to see their various law suits to a conclusion.

Zurab 04/03/04 08:56:43 AM EST

He is trying to make it look like releasing software under GPL is the same as assigning copyrights, which of course it's not. If SCO originally owned copyrights, they still do. They haven't assigned copyrights to anyone. That's total FUD that average reader (read: investor/broker/etc.) will not catch right away, neither did the interviewer.

phoneyman 04/03/04 08:55:48 AM EST

Sontag has no clue what the GPL is, what copyright is, and what a license in general is.

SaywHAT?? 04/03/04 08:54:46 AM EST

So now Linux is Bad because it's Similar to UNIX.

Did Darl ever bother to explain under which portions of copyright law, exactly, it is legal or a civil infringement for Linux to be Similar to UNIX?

Just checking.

David Hume 04/03/04 08:53:13 AM EST

This is standard operating procedure in intellectual property litigation -- even if you have a good claim. First harvest the low hanging fruit. Build your war chest by first feasting on adversaries who won't put up a fight. Avoid the risk that you may not collect from weak players becaue you attacked a strong adversary too early, and received an adverse precedent (i.e., published) decision that the weaker players can benefit from and couldn't otherwise have obtained.

On the other hand, it is also the perfect strategy if you have a weak claim. Attack only weak adversaries who can't afford to defend themselves, or for whom the cost of defense would be greater the the cost of capitulation. There are companies who survive and prosper by asserting weak (cough) intellectual property claims and offer to settle for amounts less than their adversaries' cost of litigation. The key is to make sure that the claim is not so baseless that you expose yourself sanctions or a subsequent claim for malicious institution of a civil action.

Then again, SCO has already violated these rules by attacking IBM far too early in the game. Go figure.

Lost Cluster 04/03/04 08:52:09 AM EST

It seems to me that SCO is going after companies that are more likely to pay up than go to court to fight them, taking a bit of a path of least resistance. We don't know how many private license deals they did in the first quarter of 2004... they'll have to release the total revenues in a few months, but it's not out yet.

SCO might be making more deals than we know with companies less likely to fight back because they know they will lose the IBM fight... so they're profiting while they can.

Talinom 04/03/04 08:46:30 AM EST

What Sontag is saying here is that SCO inserted its code without the required notice assigning it to the GPL. This would mean that their code is not covered by the GPL (which is counter to their business model) and is still SCO's.

Space Life Form 04/03/04 08:44:05 AM EST

As McBride himself says: The truth will come out in the courtroom.

We can only hope

linux guy 04/03/04 08:42:07 AM EST

There are many in the Linux community like myself who could see what was going on and shorted SCO stock when it was in the high teens. Since then SCO stock has come tumbling down and has made us A LOT of money. This money came from people who directly supported the SCO scam by buying their stock. I am going to get extra enjoyment out of spending this cash. I have donated some of my winnings in the SCO lottery to various opensource causes including Groklaw and will do more of that in the future.

There are approximately 2.5m shares of SCO that have been sold short. That is 36% of total shares floating. This is huge. IBM in comparison has 0.8% of its floating shares short.

ljavelin 04/03/04 08:41:03 AM EST

I hope IBM's lawyers trounce what looks to be this SCO/Microsoft partnership.

And given the details that I know, it looks like IBM will succeed in showing that a SCO/Microsoft partnership is in fact a losing partnership.

bckrispi 04/03/04 08:39:31 AM EST

The travesty of this story isn't the Trial By Fire that Linux/OSS have had to endure and it isn't the FUD that's been generated and weathered. The sad fact, my friends, is that when all is said and done, Darl and his cronies will still have been made obscenely $rich$ by this little pump & dump scheme.

IoT & Smart Cities Stories
Headquartered in Plainsboro, NJ, Synametrics Technologies has provided IT professionals and computer systems developers since 1997. Based on the success of their initial product offerings (WinSQL and DeltaCopy), the company continues to create and hone innovative products that help its customers get more from their computer applications, databases and infrastructure. To date, over one million users around the world have chosen Synametrics solutions to help power their accelerated business or per...
When talking IoT we often focus on the devices, the sensors, the hardware itself. The new smart appliances, the new smart or self-driving cars (which are amalgamations of many ‘things'). When we are looking at the world of IoT, we should take a step back, look at the big picture. What value are these devices providing. IoT is not about the devices, its about the data consumed and generated. The devices are tools, mechanisms, conduits. This paper discusses the considerations when dealing with the...
Charles Araujo is an industry analyst, internationally recognized authority on the Digital Enterprise and author of The Quantum Age of IT: Why Everything You Know About IT is About to Change. As Principal Analyst with Intellyx, he writes, speaks and advises organizations on how to navigate through this time of disruption. He is also the founder of The Institute for Digital Transformation and a sought after keynote speaker. He has been a regular contributor to both InformationWeek and CIO Insight...
Machine learning has taken residence at our cities' cores and now we can finally have "smart cities." Cities are a collection of buildings made to provide the structure and safety necessary for people to function, create and survive. Buildings are a pool of ever-changing performance data from large automated systems such as heating and cooling to the people that live and work within them. Through machine learning, buildings can optimize performance, reduce costs, and improve occupant comfort by ...
Digital Transformation is much more than a buzzword. The radical shift to digital mechanisms for almost every process is evident across all industries and verticals. This is often especially true in financial services, where the legacy environment is many times unable to keep up with the rapidly shifting demands of the consumer. The constant pressure to provide complete, omnichannel delivery of customer-facing solutions to meet both regulatory and customer demands is putting enormous pressure on...
Bill Schmarzo, Tech Chair of "Big Data | Analytics" of upcoming CloudEXPO | DXWorldEXPO New York (November 12-13, 2018, New York City) today announced the outline and schedule of the track. "The track has been designed in experience/degree order," said Schmarzo. "So, that folks who attend the entire track can leave the conference with some of the skills necessary to get their work done when they get back to their offices. It actually ties back to some work that I'm doing at the University of San...
CloudEXPO New York 2018, colocated with DXWorldEXPO New York 2018 will be held November 11-13, 2018, in New York City and will bring together Cloud Computing, FinTech and Blockchain, Digital Transformation, Big Data, Internet of Things, DevOps, AI, Machine Learning and WebRTC to one location.
Andrew Keys is Co-Founder of ConsenSys Enterprise. He comes to ConsenSys Enterprise with capital markets, technology and entrepreneurial experience. Previously, he worked for UBS investment bank in equities analysis. Later, he was responsible for the creation and distribution of life settlement products to hedge funds and investment banks. After, he co-founded a revenue cycle management company where he learned about Bitcoin and eventually Ethereal. Andrew's role at ConsenSys Enterprise is a mul...
SYS-CON Events announced today that IoT Global Network has been named “Media Sponsor” of SYS-CON's @ThingsExpo, which will take place on June 6–8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY. The IoT Global Network is a platform where you can connect with industry experts and network across the IoT community to build the successful IoT business of the future.
DXWorldEXPO | CloudEXPO are the world's most influential, independent events where Cloud Computing was coined and where technology buyers and vendors meet to experience and discuss the big picture of Digital Transformation and all of the strategies, tactics, and tools they need to realize their goals. Sponsors of DXWorldEXPO | CloudEXPO benefit from unmatched branding, profile building and lead generation opportunities.