Sat, Oct 25, 2014, 11:24 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

SCO GRP INC (THE) Message Board

  • crunchie812 crunchie812 Dec 29, 2003 11:28 AM Flag

    Help Wanted


    The Yahoo! SCOX message board is desperately in need of posters in support of SCO who meet the following criteria:

    1) Should have basic literacy skills, i.e. a knowledge of spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar, etc.

    2) A basic working knowledge of the legal, technical, financial, and moral issues raised by SCO's actions.

    3) The ability to present aguments in favor of SCO in a reasonable, coherent manner, without resorting to lies, distortions, and mistatements that can be debunked in seconds by a Google search.

    This post has been vacant for a lengthy period of time. All qualified applicants will be welcomed.

    This topic is deleted.
    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • "hmm... brain damage kinda describes The SCO Group. Maybe we're on to something here."

      Where did all the Mad Cow go?
      Did SCO have a BBQ last year?
      SCOvine spongiform encephalopathy would explain the Bizarre claims from Lindon......

    • >> hmm... brain damage kinda describes The SCO Group. Maybe we're on to something here. <<

      Yes, when I read the lyrics, they somehow match my feelings when I see McBride's and Sontag's faces over and over again in the online news.

      "The lunatic is in the hall.
      The lunatics are in my hall.
      The paper holds their folded faces to the floor
      And every day the paper boy brings more." (Brain Damage, Roger Waters)

      SCOX to the moon...

      "And if your head explodes with dark forebodings too
      I'll see you on the dark side of the moon."

      -- if you want to sell land on the moon,
      you first have to buy land on the moon

    • OK, you got me. The Darl Side of the Moon is a derivative work of "Brain Damage" by Roger Waters.

      hmm... brain damage kinda describes The SCO Group. Maybe we're on to something here.


    • <We are currently talking to many Linux users about the need for licenses and we are confident that it will not be necessary to sue anyone.>

      You've put the cart before the horse again. FIRST, you prove that there is a -need- for a license. THEN you talk to Linux users about how many licenses they need, and how to obtain them.

      What you're doing is simply extortion.

    • <The code I can talk about is the code that IBM illegally donated to Linux in breach of contracts with SCO. As a part of the project Monterey IBM agreed to keep our joint code from the project secret. IBM took that code and donated it to Linux against the terms of the contract between us.>

      That should be extremely easy to prove. If it was "joint code" you should already have the original code. If it is now in Linux, you should be able to point to a line of Linux code, compare it to a line of your "joint code", and demonstrate that they are the same. Since Linus keeps a record of who donates what code, it should be easy to prove that IBM donated the code in question.

      Why is it that SCO has not been able to do this simple thing?

      <The code was (mostly) not directly line for line copied but was derived from our joint coding.>

      Then you have to define what -exactly- you mean by "derived", and prove that your definition complies with the legally-accepted definition of a derivative work. While that definition is somewhat grey (and up to the lawyers to argue, and a judge to be convinced) here's a working definition:
      "The primary indication of whether a new program is a derivative work is whether the source code of the original program was used, modified, translated or otherwise changed in any way to create the new program. If not, then I would argue that it is not a derivative work."
      Issue 105: Geek Law: Derivative Works, posted by Lawrence Rosen (

      So how does SCO define a "derivative" work, and how does that differ from a programmer independently writing code to perform the same function that code in the Monterey Project did? Frankly, if it is not a "line-for-line" copy of the code you lay claim to, you'll have a very tough time convincing anyone that it's your code, especially if IBM can show that the Linux code was written by a different programmer than the Monterey code.

      <This is why we need discovery and all of the versions of AIX and Dynix to trace the evolution from our code to Linux.>

      You've just blown your own theory out of the water! Either you KNOW that IBM put SCO code into Linux, and exactly how it got there, and can prove it, or you DON'T KNOW. You're just fishing for proof AFTER you've made the allegation (repeatedly, publicly), and that is not allowed.

    • <I have been assured that it is more than just a few header files.>

      Yes, we've all been assured that it's more than a few header files. Just a short few months ago we were all assured that there were millions of infringing lines. The only thing that we've been assured of that is actually coming to fruition is that NewSCO is bent on dragging this out for as long as possible.

    • >Ask yourself would a reputable comapny such as SCO with many years in the UNIX and Linux business, take out an IP lawsuit against IBM (of all companies) without a good case?

      I smell a Wookie!

    • one more time, they have not admitted that code was "SCO IP".
      you are not SCO but you are not SGI either, so don't speak for SGI.
      please continue to speak for SCO though :)

    • "SGI pulled some other code that was fishy"

      They openly admitted the code should not have been there and pulled it as you say, we are pleased that we were able to sort out that violation.

      I am not SCO ....

    • >We need to be able to show the evolution from our code to Linux, so we need the AIX and Dynix versions we asked for<

      Didn't you already get the code you asked for?
      If so, why haven't you shown anything? :)
      Again, what code are you talking about? Dynix SMP code? Wasn't it developed well before project Monterey? What kind of evolution are you trying to show?

    • View More Messages
0.020.00(0.00%)May 23 10:22 AMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Digital River Inc.
NasdaqGSFri, Oct 24, 2014 4:00 PM EDT
Yelp, Inc.
NYSEFri, Oct 24, 2014 4:01 PM EDT