Comments
yourfanat wrote: I am using another tool for Oracle developers - dbForge Studio for Oracle. This IDE has lots of usefull features, among them: oracle designer, code competion and formatter, query builder, debugger, profiler, erxport/import, reports and many others. The latest version supports Oracle 12C. More information here.
Cloud Computing
Conference & Expo
November 2-4, 2009 NYC
Register Today and SAVE !..

2008 West
DIAMOND SPONSOR:
Data Direct
SOA, WOA and Cloud Computing: The New Frontier for Data Services
PLATINUM SPONSORS:
Red Hat
The Opening of Virtualization
GOLD SPONSORS:
Appsense
User Environment Management – The Third Layer of the Desktop
Cordys
Cloud Computing for Business Agility
EMC
CMIS: A Multi-Vendor Proposal for a Service-Based Content Management Interoperability Standard
Freedom OSS
Practical SOA” Max Yankelevich
Intel
Architecting an Enterprise Service Router (ESR) – A Cost-Effective Way to Scale SOA Across the Enterprise
Sensedia
Return on Assests: Bringing Visibility to your SOA Strategy
Symantec
Managing Hybrid Endpoint Environments
VMWare
Game-Changing Technology for Enterprise Clouds and Applications
Click For 2008 West
Event Webcasts

2008 West
PLATINUM SPONSORS:
Appcelerator
Get ‘Rich’ Quick: Rapid Prototyping for RIA with ZERO Server Code
Keynote Systems
Designing for and Managing Performance in the New Frontier of Rich Internet Applications
GOLD SPONSORS:
ICEsoft
How Can AJAX Improve Homeland Security?
Isomorphic
Beyond Widgets: What a RIA Platform Should Offer
Oracle
REAs: Rich Enterprise Applications
Click For 2008 Event Webcasts
In many cases, the end of the year gives you time to step back and take stock of the last 12 months. This is when many of us take a hard look at what worked and what did not, complete performance reviews, and formulate plans for the coming year. For me, it is all of those things plus a time when I u...
SYS-CON.TV
SCO CEO Posts Open Letter to the Open Source Community
Slams fundamental flaws in Linux development and lousy business model

In an open letter to the OS community, Darl McBride writes: 'The most controversial issue in the information technology industry today is the ongoing battle over software copyrights and intellectual property. This battle is being fought largely between vendors who create and sell proprietary software, and the Open Source community. My company, the SCO Group, became a focus of this controversy when we filed a lawsuit against IBM alleging that SCO's proprietary Unix code has been illegally copied into the free Linux operating system...' Read the full letter here:

The most controversial issue in the information technology industry today is the ongoing battle over software copyrights and intellectual property. This battle is being fought largely between vendors who create and sell proprietary software, and the Open Source community. My company, the SCO Group, became a focus of this controversy when we filed a lawsuit against IBM alleging that SCO’s proprietary Unix code has been illegally copied into the free Linux operating system. In doing this we angered some in the Open Source community by pointing out obvious intellectual property problems that exist in the current Linux software development model.

This debate about Open Source software is healthy and beneficial. It offers long-term benefits to the industry by addressing a new business model in advance of wide-scale adoption by customers. But in the last week of August two developments occurred that adversely affect the long-term credibility of the Open Source community, with the general public and with customers.

The first development followed another series of Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks on SCO, which took place two weeks ago. These were the second and third such attacks in four months and have prevented Web users from accessing our web site and doing business with SCO. There is no question about the affiliation of the attacker – Open Source leader Eric Raymond was quoted as saying that he was contacted by the perpetrator and that “he’s one of us.” To Mr Raymond’s partial credit, he asked the attacker to stop. However, he has yet to disclose the identity of the perpetrator so that justice can be done.

No one can tolerate DDoS attacks and other kinds of attacks in this Information Age economy that relies so heavily on the Internet. Mr Raymond and the entire Open Source community need to aggressively help the industry police these types of crimes. If they fail to do so it casts a shadow over the entire Open Source movement and raises questions about whether Open Source is ready to take a central role in business computing. We cannot have a situation in which companies fear they may be next to suffer computer attacks if they take a business or legal position that angers the Open Source community. Until these illegal attacks are brought under control, enterprise customers and mainstream society will become increasingly alienated from anyone associated with this type of behavior.

The second development was an admission by Open Source leader Bruce Perens that UNIX System V code (owned by SCO) is, in fact, in Linux, and it shouldn’t be there. Mr Perens stated that there is “an error in the Linux developer’s process” which allowed Unix System V code that “didn’t belong in Linux” to end up in the Linux kernel (source: ComputerWire, August 25, 2003). Mr Perens continued with a string of arguments to justify the “error in the Linux developer’s process.” However, nothing can change the fact that a Linux developer on the payroll of Silicon Graphics stripped copyright attributions from copyrighted System V code that was licensed to Silicon Graphics under strict conditions of use, and then contributed that source code to Linux as though it was clean code owned and controlled by SGI. This is a clear violation of SGI’s contract and copyright obligations to SCO. We are currently working to try and resolve these issues with SGI.

This improper contribution of Unix code by SGI into Linux is one small example that reveals fundamental structural flaws in the Linux development process. In fact, this issue goes to the very heart of whether Open Source can be trusted as a development model for enterprise computing software. The intellectual property roots of Linux are obviously flawed at a systemic level under the current model. To date, we claim that more than one million lines of Unix System V protected code have been contributed to Linux through this model. The flaws inherent in the Linux process must be openly addressed and fixed.

At a minimum, IP sources should be checked to assure that copyright contributors have the authority to transfer copyrights in the code contributed to Open Source. This is just basic due diligence that governs every other part of corporate dealings. Rather than defend the “don’t ask, don’t tell” Linux intellectual property policy that caused the SCO v IBM case, the Open Source community should focus on customers’ needs. The Open Source community should assure that Open Source software has a solid intellectual property foundation that can give confidence to end users. I respectfully suggest to Open Source developers that this is a far better use of your collective resources and abilities than to defend and justify flawed intellectual property policies that are out of sync with the needs of enterprise computing customers.

I believe that the Open Source software model is at a critical stage of development. The Open Source community has its roots in counter-cultural ideals – the notion of “Hackers” against Big Business – but because of recent advances in Linux, the community now has the opportunity to develop software for mainstream American corporations and other global companies. If the Open Source community wants its products to be accepted by enterprise companies, the community itself must follow the rules and procedures that govern mainstream society. This is what global corporations will require. And it is these customers who will determine the ultimate fate of Open Source – not SCO, not IBM, and not Open Source leaders.

Some enterprise customers have accepted Open Source because IBM has put its name behind it. However, IBM and other Linux vendors are reportedly unwilling to provide intellectual property warranties to their customers. This means that Linux end users must take a hard look at the intellectual property underpinnings of Open Source products and at the GPL (GNU General Public License) licensing model itself.

If the Open Source community wants to develop products for enterprise corporations, it must respect and follow the rule of law. These rules include contracts, copyrights and other intellectual property laws. For several months SCO has been involved in a contentious legal case that we filed against IBM. What are the underlying intellectual property principles that have put SCO in a strong position in this hotly debated legal case? I’d summarize them in this way:

“Fair use” applies to educational, public service and related applications and does not justify commercial misappropriation. Books and Internet sites intended and authorized for the purpose of teaching and other non-commercial use cannot be copied for commercial use. We believe that some of the SCO software code that has ended up in the Linux operating system got there through this route. This violates our intellectual property rights.

Copyright attributions protect ownership and attribution rights –they cannot simply be changed or stripped away. This is how copyright owners maintain control of their legal rights and prevent unauthorized transfer of ownership. Our proprietary software code has been copied into Linux by people who simply stripped off SCO’s copyright notice or contributed derivative works in violation of our intellectual property rights. This is improper.

In copyright law, ownership cannot be transferred without express, written authority of a copyright holder. Some have claimed that, because SCO software code was present in software distributed under the GPL, SCO has forfeited its rights to this code. Not so – SCO never gave permission, or granted rights, for this to happen.

Transfer of copyright ownership without express written authority of all proper parties is null and void.

Use of derivative rights in copyrighted material is defined by the scope of a license grant. An authorized derivative work may not be used beyond the scope of a license grant. License grants regarding derivative works vary from license to license – some are broad and some are narrow. In other words, the license itself defines the scope of permissive use, and licensees agree to be bound by that definition. One reason SCO sued IBM is due to our assertions that IBM has violated the terms of the specific IBM/SCO license agreement through its handling of derivative works. We believe our evidence is compelling on this issue.

The copyright rules that underlie SCO’s case are not disputable. They provide a solid foundation for any software development model, including Open Source. Rather than ignore or challenge copyright laws, Open Source developers will advance their cause by respecting the rules of law that built our society into what it is today. This is the primary path towards giving enterprise companies the assurance they need to accept Open Source products at the core of their business infrastructure. Customers need to know that Open Source is legal and stable.

Finally, it is clear that the Open Source community needs a business model that is sustainable, if it is to grow beyond a part-time avocation into an enterprise-trusted development model. Free Open Source software primarily benefits large vendors, which sell hardware and expensive services that support Linux, but not Linux itself. By providing Open Source software without a warranty, these largest vendors avoid significant costs while increasing their services revenue. Today, that’s the viable Open Source business model. Other Linux companies have already failed and many more are struggling to survive. Few are consistently profitable. It’s time for everyone else in the industry, individuals and small corporations, to under this and to implement our own business model – something that keeps us alive and profitable. In the long term, the financial stability of software vendors and the legality of their software products are more important to enterprise customers than free software. Rather than fight for the right for free software, it’s far more valuable to design a new business model that enhances the stability and trustworthiness of the Open Source community in the eyes of enterprise customers.

A sustainable business model for software development can be built only on an intellectual property foundation. I invite the Open Source community to explore these possibilities for your own benefit within an Open Source model. Further, the SCO Group is open to ideas of working with the Open Source community to monetize software technology and its underlying intellectual property for all contributors, not just SCO.

In the meantime, I will continue to protect SCO’s intellectual property and contractual rights. The process moving forward will not be easy. It is easier for some in the Open Source community to fire off a “rant” than to sit across a negotiation table. But if the Open Source community is to become a software developer for global corporations, respect for intellectual property is not optional – it is mandatory. Working together, there are ways we can make sure this happens.

Best regards to all,

Darl McBride
CEO
The SCO Group

About Jeremy Geelan
Jeremy Geelan is Chairman & CEO of the 21st Century Internet Group, Inc. and an Executive Academy Member of the International Academy of Digital Arts & Sciences. Formerly he was President & COO at Cloud Expo, Inc. and Conference Chair of the worldwide Cloud Expo series. He appears regularly at conferences and trade shows, speaking to technology audiences across six continents. You can follow him on twitter: @jg21.

In order to post a comment you need to be registered and logged in.

Register | Sign-in

Reader Feedback: Page 1 of 16

Darl,
Up to the same old game again.
You're company was failing miserably and thus you began your terroistic threats of suing companies if they failed to pay "licensing fees". Some did and some didn't. I hope you continue to spend millions of dollars pursuing your dream of cornering Unix/Linux because in the end it will all be for nothing. I'm no expert on law, but those that are say you have a large number of very high hardles to overcome in order to get your way. Keep spending that money buddy!
P.S.
You're a doorknob!

Daryl,
I'm ashaimed that you were ever from Utah, or went to BYU...
good thing for you tucked tail and ran off to London...
there'd be a good old Happy-Valley A$$ woopin'
or do you own those too.
caugh up the goods, or sit down & shut up, and get a real job

http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,8944855%5E15316%5E%5Enbv...

"Microsoft-SCO Link confirmed"

There you have it folks...

Mr McBride

Are you still around? You are looking to make a fast buck so that you can then "withdraw" as the "victim".

My company uses Linux in all areas of our business and we would welcome a lawsuit from SCO. Better still, go and develop your own OS that works!!

Bye now
Mark

So - now that SCO has admitted that there isn't any SysV code that was illegally contributed to Linux - where is Mr. Big Mouth now? Doesn't anybody care that a compulsive liar is being allowed to run a company or that basically he's made fradulent statements for over a year now with regard to Linux and it's developers?

SCO is not teh win!

To quote Darl McBride:
"...Blah, blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah...
blah blah blah blah blah blah..."

Translation:
We screwed up in our attempts to make money off Linux by
CHARGING for it, so we're trying to destroy the GPL, so that
Linux can become OUR property, so that we CAN CHARGE FOR IT!

Dear Mr SCO,

I read the first 20 or so posts on this topic, then skimmed through. From what I can gather, you are jealous that the Linux Operating System (which is free under the GPL) is more widely used, talked about and supported than your own SCO-UNIX based toys. Good on you for taking the time to write a letter explaining your views, and as far as im concerned, your entitled to them.

But the truth is, if you are recieving opposition on such a large scale as you are, there must me something fundamentally wrong in your approach, or maybe you are just all out wrong?

The way I see it, I will use proprietry software from Microsoft, after paying for it; I will use Linux Based Debian, for free (god loves GPL); but I will not use SCO-UNIX, because I do not believe you have the understanding that your potential users want software that worth the costs (if any) without being labelled as the enemy.

You lose SCO, The Open Source Community has your undies and they aint giving them back

Love clonny.

He is lying, basicly that message says: buy our license or risk us suing you. Well if they want my linux copy, they can come and pry it out of my cold,dead hands!

Before the advent of Linux, Unix was a "mid range system". SCO ( in its former incarnation, perhaps, as SCO of the 1980s) and Microsoft both made x86 processor based version of Unix which were not ground breaking or state of the art in their day. They were just reasonably good and mostly solid implementations of the AT&T Unix system, or a derivative kernal that ran on "IBM PC" machines.

It was a text based implementation, and it was okay. But when the Windows operating system changed the paradigm, text based systems fell out of the window. It distracted the main body of potential users into an "easier" interface. Nobody really needed to read the manual so much now, or learn all those tricky command line tools. You just dragged and dropped.

SCO did nothng with Unix to bring it into the new paradigm. The FSF and Open Source community did that. Now the Linux desktop could run without anything remotely resembling Unix. The operating system part of it is just a set of standard functions that are easily rewritten. It is not that hard to write an OS. Marketing it in the present environment may be difficult.

>Meanwhile, why doesn't IBM just scrape together some of its >pocketchange and *JUST BUY SCO* ?
Because they want to show in court that linux is free software, without any doubt. Sco will lose, and go bankrupt, but by then the CEO will have sold all his shares, and they will show what happens when you try and legally attack linux and the GPL.

Anyone else getting bored of this whole thing yet? SCO - tell us what you think is infringing, and in an hour it'll be out, replaced, and your precious IP will be your own again. That's what you want, right? Your IP returned? You're not just in it for the money, are you? ...are you?

Meanwhile, why doesn't IBM just scrape together some of its pocketchange and *JUST BUY SCO* ?

This isn't about IP. This isn't about some half-baked idea of 'what is right'. This is about a company on its last legs scrabbling for a business plan.

Give it up, SCO, and let everyone get back to work.

Look at this statement:

************************
The first development followed another series of Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks on SCO, which took place two weeks ago. These were the second and third such attacks in four months and have prevented Web users from accessing our web site and doing business with SCO. There is no question about the affiliation of the attacker – Open Source leader Eric Raymond was quoted as saying that he was contacted by the perpetrator and that “he’s one of us.” To Mr Raymond’s partial credit, he asked the attacker to stop. However, he has yet to disclose the identity of the perpetrator so that justice can be done.
************************

Maybe he didn't release the guy's name because his name is copywritten. He wouldn't want to get sued now would he???
:P

What a total prick - does he remind anyone else of Al Pacino in the Devil's Advocate - why doesn't he do the world a favour (since he's trying to screw the world effectively) and go suck a tailpipe,
regards,
a linux user and greedy-person hater

Oh, and SCO says the GPL is trying to destroy copyright law. And furthermore, the GPL forbids proprietary ownership, so that means no one can own it


Feedback Pages:


Your Feedback
Hyperionsix wrote: Darl, Up to the same old game again. You're company was failing miserably and thus you began your terroistic threats of suing companies if they failed to pay "licensing fees". Some did and some didn't. I hope you continue to spend millions of dollars pursuing your dream of cornering Unix/Linux because in the end it will all be for nothing. I'm no expert on law, but those that are say you have a large number of very high hardles to overcome in order to get your way. Keep spending that money buddy! P.S. You're a doorknob!
norty wrote: Daryl, I'm ashaimed that you were ever from Utah, or went to BYU... good thing for you tucked tail and ran off to London... there'd be a good old Happy-Valley A$$ woopin' or do you own those too. caugh up the goods, or sit down & shut up, and get a real job
James wrote: http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,8944855%5E15316%5E%5Enbv... "Microsoft-SCO Link confirmed" There you have it folks...
Mark Lawrence wrote: Mr McBride Are you still around? You are looking to make a fast buck so that you can then "withdraw" as the "victim". My company uses Linux in all areas of our business and we would welcome a lawsuit from SCO. Better still, go and develop your own OS that works!! Bye now Mark
fuzzywzhe wrote: So - now that SCO has admitted that there isn't any SysV code that was illegally contributed to Linux - where is Mr. Big Mouth now? Doesn't anybody care that a compulsive liar is being allowed to run a company or that basically he's made fradulent statements for over a year now with regard to Linux and it's developers?
Brian Agatonovic wrote: SCO is not teh win!
Fecal Extrusion wrote: To quote Darl McBride: "...Blah, blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah... blah blah blah blah blah blah..." Translation: We screwed up in our attempts to make money off Linux by CHARGING for it, so we're trying to destroy the GPL, so that Linux can become OUR property, so that we CAN CHARGE FOR IT!
clonny wrote: Dear Mr SCO, I read the first 20 or so posts on this topic, then skimmed through. From what I can gather, you are jealous that the Linux Operating System (which is free under the GPL) is more widely used, talked about and supported than your own SCO-UNIX based toys. Good on you for taking the time to write a letter explaining your views, and as far as im concerned, your entitled to them. But the truth is, if you are recieving opposition on such a large scale as you are, there must me something fundamentally wrong in your approach, or maybe you are just all out wrong? The way I see it, I will use proprietry software from Microsoft, after paying for it; I will use Linux Based Debian, for free (god loves GPL); but I will not use SCO-UNIX, because I do not believe you have the understanding that your potential users want software that worth the costs (if any) without being labelled...
Linux Warrior wrote: He is lying, basicly that message says: buy our license or risk us suing you. Well if they want my linux copy, they can come and pry it out of my cold,dead hands!
Nicholas wrote: Before the advent of Linux, Unix was a "mid range system". SCO ( in its former incarnation, perhaps, as SCO of the 1980s) and Microsoft both made x86 processor based version of Unix which were not ground breaking or state of the art in their day. They were just reasonably good and mostly solid implementations of the AT&T Unix system, or a derivative kernal that ran on "IBM PC" machines. It was a text based implementation, and it was okay. But when the Windows operating system changed the paradigm, text based systems fell out of the window. It distracted the main body of potential users into an "easier" interface. Nobody really needed to read the manual so much now, or learn all those tricky command line tools. You just dragged and dropped. SCO did nothng with Unix to bring it into the new paradigm. The FSF and Open Source community did that. Now the Linux desktop could run without...
Ivan Leo Murray-Smith wrote: >Meanwhile, why doesn't IBM just scrape together some of its >pocketchange and *JUST BUY SCO* ? Because they want to show in court that linux is free software, without any doubt. Sco will lose, and go bankrupt, but by then the CEO will have sold all his shares, and they will show what happens when you try and legally attack linux and the GPL.
freelance wrote: Anyone else getting bored of this whole thing yet? SCO - tell us what you think is infringing, and in an hour it'll be out, replaced, and your precious IP will be your own again. That's what you want, right? Your IP returned? You're not just in it for the money, are you? ...are you? Meanwhile, why doesn't IBM just scrape together some of its pocketchange and *JUST BUY SCO* ? This isn't about IP. This isn't about some half-baked idea of 'what is right'. This is about a company on its last legs scrabbling for a business plan. Give it up, SCO, and let everyone get back to work.
Bobby wrote: Look at this statement: ************************ The first development followed another series of Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks on SCO, which took place two weeks ago. These were the second and third such attacks in four months and have prevented Web users from accessing our web site and doing business with SCO. There is no question about the affiliation of the attacker – Open Source leader Eric Raymond was quoted as saying that he was contacted by the perpetrator and that “he’s one of us.” To Mr Raymond’s partial credit, he asked the attacker to stop. However, he has yet to disclose the identity of the perpetrator so that justice can be done. ************************ Maybe he didn't release the guy's name because his name is copywritten. He wouldn't want to get sued now would he??? :P
James wrote: What a total prick - does he remind anyone else of Al Pacino in the Devil's Advocate - why doesn't he do the world a favour (since he's trying to screw the world effectively) and go suck a tailpipe, regards, a linux user and greedy-person hater
Pandoria Stefford wrote: Oh, and SCO says the GPL is trying to destroy copyright law. And furthermore, the GPL forbids proprietary ownership, so that means no one can own it
Janin Weichelor wrote: I expect next SCO will start specifically refusing to answer certain questions and refusing requests for documents.
Toni Kofur wrote: So what SCO wants is the rights to own Linux becuase their market plan is dead. If their code is in Linux it will not cause any harm to post it in public view.
Alexander Kjær wrote: I think the whole SCO vs The linux community is a joke. The case went really good for them becouse of new investors and their stocks raised. I don't think their case was to win, it was to get publisity, couse eighter way they still got some money out of this. More than i'll probably make in my whole life.
Norm wrote: Someone has called the Darl way of speaking "weasle speak" I call it devil speak, Darl is truely the prince, of half truth and Lies. He claims to be mormon, Darl is no more a true mormon, than I am J.C.
McCarthy wrote: Nothing more than a bleached corporate rant in support of corporate fascism. Transparent as just another political manoeuvre in what has become a delightfully entertaining legal duel.
SOA World Latest Stories
SYS-CON Events announced today that DatacenterDynamics has been named “Media Sponsor” of SYS-CON's 18th International Cloud Expo, which will take place on June 7–9, 2016, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY. DatacenterDynamics is a brand of DCD Group, a global B2B media and publ...
"We do one of the best file systems in the world. We learned how to deal with Big Data many years ago and we implemented this knowledge into our software," explained Jakub Ratajczak, Business Development Manager at MooseFS, in this SYS-CON.tv interview at 20th Cloud Expo, held June 6-8...
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 l...
DevOpsSummit New York 2018, colocated with CloudEXPO | DXWorldEXPO New York 2018 will be held November 11-13, 2018, in New York City. Digital Transformation (DX) is a major focus with the introduction of DXWorldEXPO within the program. Successful transformation requires a laser focus ...
Enterprise architects are increasingly adopting multi-cloud strategies as they seek to utilize existing data center assets, leverage the advantages of cloud computing and avoid cloud vendor lock-in. This requires a globally aware traffic management strategy that can monitor infrastruct...
Containers and Kubernetes allow for code portability across on-premise VMs, bare metal, or multiple cloud provider environments. Yet, despite this portability promise, developers may include configuration and application definitions that constrain or even eliminate application portabil...
Subscribe to the World's Most Powerful Newsletters
Subscribe to Our Rss Feeds & Get Your SYS-CON News Live!
Click to Add our RSS Feeds to the Service of Your Choice:
Google Reader or Homepage Add to My Yahoo! Subscribe with Bloglines Subscribe in NewsGator Online
myFeedster Add to My AOL Subscribe in Rojo Add 'Hugg' to Newsburst from CNET News.com Kinja Digest View Additional SYS-CON Feeds
Publish Your Article! Please send it to editorial(at)sys-con.com!

Advertise on this site! Contact advertising(at)sys-con.com! 201 802-3021


SYS-CON Featured Whitepapers
ADS BY GOOGLE