... Okay, now I'm *mad*.

SCO ready to clean out Linux users for $1399 per CPU

“But SCO claims that IBM and Red Hat are the ones that forced it to put the blame on Linux users. Since IBM and Red Hat won’t rush to the Linux community’s rescue and hand over millions for unproven claims, SCO must attack the little guys.”

… FUCK that! I’m not gonna pay for something I legally own to 100%! >=( p:unch::

Then why don’t you make a thread about it… oh wait… riiiiiiiiiiighhhttt


WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY THINKING? The CEO’s language is enough to chill me. I’m not a Linux user, but it’s obvious that this is seriously FUCKED UP.

Hey, it’s a big scam to raise their stock price. Don’t you know that their owners used the profit from that to buy a company that actually brings them money? That license-thing is just good for 2 things:

  1. Raise the stock again.
  2. Get a few gullible people to pay.

Since Red Hat sued SCO, I assume that they will have to shut up soon enough. I’ve been reading countless articles and comments about that and I’m pretty sure that SCO is just spreading FUD. And no, I doubt Microsoft is behind this.

For those of us who don’t give a rat’s ass about Linux and have no idea what this is about, would you be so kind as to give us a little more background information so we at least have some idea of WTF you’re refering to?

(I read the article, still doesn’t really tell me why they want to charge $1399 per cpu)

According to the article, it’s because SCO coded some shit using Linux (Which is an open-source OS, if I recall correctly) but they didn’t want that code to be open source commercially. IBM and Red Hat are using that code. IBM and Red Hat do NOT want to pay SCO for the code. SCO backtracks and wants to charge the normal users a certain amount of money to use the code.

Think of it as religious propaganda cross-overed with shady business tactics.


That’s a very good sum-up about all of this.

A Linux thread that is actually interesting!


But to the subject… uh… there isn’t really much I can say except.


Bull Shit.

Not that must be annoying, I’m just glad that I don’t use Linux.

I just have two words to say: Dirty bastards!

Hahah, that’s hilarious. Seriously, it is. They’re gonna have a fun time getting everyone to pay… :get it?:

I feel sorry for them. Not only are they delusioned, but what profit could come from suing end-users of Linux: Everyone knows they don’t own a dime - Just look at Wertigon. Not to mention that someone could decide to take a brutal revenge for being called “Tainted”.

Yea, trying to get people to pay for open-source software is pretty pathetic.

Actually, paying for Open Source is not in any way legally prohibited. It’s just the fact that why should I pay $200 when I can get it legally for free from my neighbour who paid for it?

Here’s the rundown in SCO/IBM stuff:

  1. SCO sues IBM, claiming IBM put SCO’s intellectual code into the Linux kernel (YOU BASTARD YOU STOLE OUR CODE!).
  2. IBM denies charges, and countersues.
  3. SCO doesn’t have much credibility to begin with, especially because of some statements such as “Linux could never have gotten to enterprise level without this code” which is basicly slapping every Linux developer in the face.
  4. The fact that SCO, even after 6 months, has not showed which code they’re talking about; could be anything. This fact doesn’t exactly increase their credibility.
  5. Lawsuit is due to be held in 2005 earliest; SCO will most probably not point the code out until then, and when they do I think we’ll see something similar to what happened to BSD; the four files that were a problem simply got deleted from the kernel. Problem all solved, except it took about 10-15 years for AT&T to say which code was being stolen.

That aside; SCO is trying to make me pay outrageous sums for something I might not be using at all. How would you feel if Microsoft all of a sudden required you pay for Office 2003, even though you don’t use Office 2003 or have no intention of getting Office 2003? This is basicly the same thing.

Eh, what’re ya gunna do…

The amount of people they’ll have to sue makes for a really high cost with lawyers. They’d waste so much to take this thing on that even if every Linux user payed them those 1400 bucks SCO’d still go bankrupt.

Poor Werty

Originally posted by Wertigon
How would you feel if Microsoft all of a sudden required you pay for Office 2003, even though you don’t use Office 2003 or have no intention of getting Office 2003? This is basicly the same thing.

It’s more like Microsoft giving out free copies of Microsoft Office 2003 and then another of their branch asking you to pay for them :stuck_out_tongue:

Dunno how many know that, but Red Hat countersued SCO with a “put up or shut up”-trial.
SCO already had to shut up in Germany, because they did not present any evidence what-so-ever.
I still say this is just a scam so their stock price rises and the group SCO belongs to gets mucho dollars. The managers from SCO already sold much of their stock, becoming pretty rich.
Oh, and another thing: McBride has a history of such ridiculous trials. I don’t think there’s anything more behind it than just greed.