[nylug-talk] Companies demonized as "Scummy" and "Evil" -- WAS: Looking for recommendations

[Bryan J. Smith]

Eric Moore wrote:  
> Well, would you consider SCO's approach acceptable?

Which "SCO" approach?

The SCO that GPL'd a lot of legacy, but important and useful, UNIX
Systems Labs (USL) code?

Or the SCO that radically changed in 2002, made a "last ditch effort" in
2003 March to resolve a "contract dispute" (to quote Linus, ESR and
others) with IBM?

Or the SCO that started "Smoking Crack" (to quote Linus) in 2003 May
after their original 2003 March filing met rabid response from the Linux
community (who didn't realize that the original 2003 March filing was a
contract dispute, not an affront on Linux, that wasn't until May when
IBM didn't settle and SCO went off the legal reservation)?

SCO is the result of the tragedy of Caldera.  It's a lesson that spans
from the split of Ray Noorda from Novell in 1994 to the IBM-SCO Monterey
Project in 1998-1999, to the purchase of SCO by Caldera in 2000, IBM's
withholding of source code on Monterey, and the struggle Caldera ran
into with their completely botched strategy as a result.

It's also a lesson on IBM.  IBM is our partner, not our friend.  When
IBM feels threatened by a split Linux-UNIX strategy, as HP, Caldera and
several other companies have been, IBM will do everything it can to
cross them, including crossing Linux (as HP will regularly attest).  In
the case of Caldera, there were many mis-steps that cost them legally
during and after the acquisition of SCO.

But in the end, we lost a lot of GPL code as a result.  That's what I
take issue with.

Microsoft might be the 800lbs. software gorilla, but make no mistake,
IBM is the 8,000lbs. IP gorilla.  Luckily enough effort in the developer
community is ready and willing to "bark back" on IBM and stomp on their
code submissions until they open patents and other IP encumbered
submissions.  IBM has gotten much better than they were just 3-5 years
ago, I'll be the first to admit.

Furthermore, IBM is turning into a very effective partner on ODF.
Despite everyone "tuning into IBM for the money" like the old '50s US
quiz shows (where they spend $1B here, $100M there, on maturing their
proprietary product line), IBM does actually produce some good GPL/IPL
software.  It's just not as much as people think, and they are still
about proprietary IP.  Remember that.

> How about a hypothetical "Black Hat Linux" that sold it's product
> by "nice website you got here, would be a shame if there were to be
> a DDOS attack on it" <DDOS attack follows>.
> Is there any business practice sufficiently low and scummy for you
> to "demonize" it?

I only exist to explain, not demonize.  I had an entire project canceled
from under me at a Fortune 20 company because of SCO v. IBM, when SCO
expanded and started "Smoking Crack" after 2003 May.  I did not have the
luxury of demonizing SCO, only explaining the real, legal issues that
did and did not exist.

In fact, and I regularly argue, if it wasn't for the rabid demonization
of SCO by the Linux community, people would have realized that SCO had
no case against Linux at all.  But because so many rabid people in the
Linux community wanted to ignorantly and immediately side with IBM, the
IT media started assuming it was SCO v. Linux, instead of the reality
that it was SCO v. IBM.

That's how people missed the fact that SCO _never_ sued anyone just
using Linux, but only IBM, AutoZone and Chrysler -- companies that had
binding, written contracts with SCO.  That's why I don't demonize.
Because it's the important, factual, legal information I have that is
what matters to decision makers in corporations.  And it's also why I
often despise the demonizers.

Because they "drown out" my sound, technical counsel, and "invent"
things that are not an issue.  Again, SCO never sued any Linux users,
and never threatened to sue any, period.  SCO had no basis to do so.
And the legal actions by Red Hat, Novell and others addressed the market
non-sense that SCO was guilty of causing, and that's what people should
have gotten behind (not IBM in SCO v. IBM).


-- 
Bryan J  Smith              Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org  http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith
-------------------------------------------------------------
           Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution