SCO's legal entanglements are substantial
Not only are they embroiled in litigation against IBM, they must also defend counterclaims by Red Hat; have threatened 1,500 Linux users for infringing its intellectual property rights and now The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the "SCO Group plans to sue a major user of the Linux operating system for alleged violation of SCO's copyrights as part of an expanded legal effort ... to collect license fees from thousands of Linux users."
"When you do a Linux distribution, you are directly in the crosshairs of SCO's core products," SCO's CEO Darl McBride has said.
SCO has also said it will broaden its copyright protection efforts to include "copyrighted code included in the 1994 settlement between Unix Systems Laboratories and Berkeley Software Design (BSD)." SCO has said it does not expect to file any BSD-related lawsuits until the first half of 2004. [SCO Escalates Legal Battle on Three Fronts]
Finally, SCO is seeking to block the Novell-SUSE deal based on a contract clause that allegedly prevents Novell from competing against SCO's Unix products -- "SCO claims it acquired this noncompete contract as part of an agreement between Novell and one of SCO's previous incarnations." [SCO expands copyright enforcement actions, threatens Novell] Whereas, Bruce Lowry, a spokesman for Novell, said there is no such provision in the contract.
Additionally, in what the Journal is calling an unusual arrangement, SCO has given Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP 400,000 shares, along with $1 million in cash, as part of its contingency fees for pursuing the legal actions. The company said the shares represent an ownership stake in SCO of 2% to 3%.
As a result of all the proposed litigation by SCO and their supposed war chest of $50 million, George Weiss, of the Gartner group, recommends that Linux users keep a low profile and have a contingency plan and that SCO customers have a migration plan in case SCO's legal strategy falters. [SCO's Legal Fees Could Jeopardize Its Software Business]
Specifically, Mr. Weiss recommends that companies:
See also: Lawyer Rips SCO Facts in Linux Brouhaha - Free Software Foundation lawyer Eben Moglen makes a case for why SCO's legal claims to Linux code are without merit.
Update: SCO Forced To Show Evidence - SCO has 30 days to comply with a judges ruling that it show details to back up its contract dispute claims against IBM.
November 21, 2003: SCO v. IBM: proprietary or free? "A new lawsuit is roiling the world of computers. Software company SCO Group is suing IBM Corp. for putting SCO's proprietary computer code into Linux, the core of certain computer operating systems. However, the Linux computer code is governed by a licensing agreement specifically written to make it freely available to all. SCO's case weaves together threads of computer code, copyright and licensing law."
For extensive coverage, please visit: Groklaw.
"When you do a Linux distribution, you are directly in the crosshairs of SCO's core products," SCO's CEO Darl McBride has said.
SCO has also said it will broaden its copyright protection efforts to include "copyrighted code included in the 1994 settlement between Unix Systems Laboratories and Berkeley Software Design (BSD)." SCO has said it does not expect to file any BSD-related lawsuits until the first half of 2004. [SCO Escalates Legal Battle on Three Fronts]
Finally, SCO is seeking to block the Novell-SUSE deal based on a contract clause that allegedly prevents Novell from competing against SCO's Unix products -- "SCO claims it acquired this noncompete contract as part of an agreement between Novell and one of SCO's previous incarnations." [SCO expands copyright enforcement actions, threatens Novell] Whereas, Bruce Lowry, a spokesman for Novell, said there is no such provision in the contract.
Additionally, in what the Journal is calling an unusual arrangement, SCO has given Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP 400,000 shares, along with $1 million in cash, as part of its contingency fees for pursuing the legal actions. The company said the shares represent an ownership stake in SCO of 2% to 3%.
As a result of all the proposed litigation by SCO and their supposed war chest of $50 million, George Weiss, of the Gartner group, recommends that Linux users keep a low profile and have a contingency plan and that SCO customers have a migration plan in case SCO's legal strategy falters. [SCO's Legal Fees Could Jeopardize Its Software Business]
Specifically, Mr. Weiss recommends that companies:
Because, as Weiss states, "an unfavorable judgment could cause SCO to cease operations or sell itself [which] could harm future support and maintenance.keep a low profile and do not divulge details on Linux deployments; not pay SCO the license fees it has asked for to settle its allegations of infringement of intellectual property rights, Until a judgment in a case would unequivocally warrant it; not permit SCO to audit your premises without legal authorization; pressure high-profile Linux vendors to contractually guarantee against infringement claims by covering court costs; and fence off the innocuous Linux deployments (such as network-edge solutions) from the performance-intensive ones.
See also: Lawyer Rips SCO Facts in Linux Brouhaha - Free Software Foundation lawyer Eben Moglen makes a case for why SCO's legal claims to Linux code are without merit.
Update: SCO Forced To Show Evidence - SCO has 30 days to comply with a judges ruling that it show details to back up its contract dispute claims against IBM.
November 21, 2003: SCO v. IBM: proprietary or free? "A new lawsuit is roiling the world of computers. Software company SCO Group is suing IBM Corp. for putting SCO's proprietary computer code into Linux, the core of certain computer operating systems. However, the Linux computer code is governed by a licensing agreement specifically written to make it freely available to all. SCO's case weaves together threads of computer code, copyright and licensing law."
For extensive coverage, please visit: Groklaw.
