SCO: The truth will be on ProSCO

By Iain Ferguson, ZDNet Australia
14 October 2004 04:03 PM
Tags: prosco, linux, iain, ferguson, source, open, site
commentary ZDNet Australia  and, no doubt, the open source community are waiting with bated breath for the launch of one of the most long-awaited Web sites for some time.

The SCO Group is planning to launch a Web site which will chronicle, from its perspective, its ongoing litigation against Linux. The launch is viewed by most observers as a counterbalance to the highly effective, pro-community Groklaw site and an effort to win back some ground in the propaganda war.

Your commentator gives the ProSCO.net site -- due to launch by 1 November -- less than a few seconds' existence before hackers try to deface it or take it down. If there's one thing you learn writing about the online world, it's that there's a minority out there who are inclined to vandalise rather than argue their point in a more acceptable manner.

That said, it seems SCO is not particularly keen to unleash the wolves onto a forum or similar feedback mechanism on the ProSCO site. ( SCO's ubiquitous spokesperson Blake Stowell is quoted as telling CNET News.com that, unlike Groklaw, SCO won't let others post their opinion on the site). It doesn't take much imagination to guess at the volume and tone of posts from the open source community that would be made to the site; in ZDNet Australia's  experience, the only people more vociferous than the Linux crowd are the Apple crowd.

According to Stowell, the site will be "informational" for those who want to follow the twists and turns of the litigation.

"We've received a lot of feedback from people saying 'I would like to follow what's going on, but I would prefer to not have to visit Groklaw'," he said.

Your commentator thought he'd test the situation locally and ask Kieran O'Shaughnessy, SCO's Australian and New Zealand boss, whether the reporting and commentary in Australia was fair and balanced or whether ProSCO was needed to offset a bias or imbalance. Unsurprisingly, he came back with "in Australia, I have come to the view that the coverage is not necessarily even-handed.

"We see a need to make more information available [on SCO's perspective]".

O'Shaughnessy added that more people had approached him over the last six months to understand SCO's position on the litigation, undiluted by the opinion or distortions of others.

In terms of sheer weight of commentary in print and online regarding SCO's actions, ProSCO is unlikely to make much of an impact. However, it is interesting to ask who the company is targeting with the site: the Linux and open source communities who are already vociferous about their views or the business and investment communities who have a much more dispassionate view of the issues.

What do you think? Is ProSCO likely to have any positive impact for SCO? Will you visit the site?

Advertisement

Talkback 11 comments

    ProSCO would appear to be a de ...Anonymous -- 14/10/04

    ProSCO would appear to be a desperate last attempt for SCO to save face and pump more SCO friendly FUD into the allready FUD filled waters surrounding this issue.
    If, or more probably *when* the ProSCO gets its first DDOS attack, I predict it will be only hours or a couple of days old.
    SCO acted disgracefully and now they are trying to wriggle out of it. I don't believe this tactic will work, people aren't as stupid or ignorant of this kind of thing any more.

    LOL. I'd love to see SCO trans ...Anonymous -- 14/10/04

    LOL. I'd love to see SCO transgress the court rules on an active court case, by making statements that they are not supposed to on ProSCO.

    Why McBride and Co. aren't in prison for securities fraud is one of the great mysteries...

    Now we have SCO's version of & ...Anonymous -- 14/10/04

    Now we have SCO's version of "TASS news agency" during the cold war. What a joke!

    I wonder if the site will explain why SCO has deliberately dragged out the case as long as possible, but refused to release enough detail to conclusively prove their case?

    Kieran having a moment of gran ...Anonymous -- 15/10/04

    Kieran having a moment of grandeur again:

    "We've received a lot of feedback from people saying 'I would like to follow what's going on, but I would prefer to not have to visit Groklaw'," he said.

    Please! Read the damn court transcripts Kieran (they are already on Groklaw). OK, I know they are long (hey, it's SCO that always submits huge memos, don't blame me) but they are worth a read. If you don't have time Kieran (selling Linux binary licences must be taking a lot of your time), here's the summary:

    IBM: We want to see the code.
    SCO: No, no, we'll show it later.
    IBM: We want to see the code now, judge ordered you to show it.
    SCO: We *could* show it if we wanted to...
    IBM: So, show it!
    SCO: Not fair, not fair! Hm, er, [mutter] ...
    IBM: What?
    SCO: [Crying] I want to go home now, mummy!

    And so on an so forth, but no code. None, zero, zilch, zip, nada. Doesn't exist and never will. ProSCO or not.

    Exactly what 'truth' is it new ...Anonymous -- 17/10/04

    Exactly what 'truth' is it newSCO wants to tell? The truth of the disappearing MIT professors that, after deep diving into Linux found 'millions of lines of direct copying' that newSCO now claims they need more discovery and 25000 man years of time to make the comparisons to find 'non-literal' copying (what, exactly, is non-literal copying? Either its a copy or it isn't.) Under newSCO novel interpretation of copyright laws Margaret Mitchell's 'Gone with the Wind' is a non-literal copy of Tolstoy's 'War and Peace'.

    Is it the truth that, despite three court orders, newSCO has still failed to produce a single line of verifiable copying?

    Is it the 'truth' that every example of copying they have shown so far came from BSD and newSCO deliberately removed the original copyright notices?

    Is it the truth that, although newSCO publicly claims copyright infringement, not a single action of copyright infringement has been brought concerning the Linux kernel?

    Is it the truth that every person involved in the original transaction between IBM and AT&T deposed stated the AT&T did not make any claims to original works by licensees? On the contrary they all specifically stated that AT&T expressed that all original works for the AT&T Unix were the property of the companies that wrote them?

    Is it the truth that every 'expert' that newSCO deposed and represented as an expert has failed to remotely qualify as an expert?

    Is it the truth about the strategy of newSCO's lawyers to litigate 'anywhere but here' and 'anybody but us'?

    Is it the truth that newSCO violated the GPL by publicly stating they had no intention of honoring the terms of the license and is attempting to sell licenses for software written and copyrighted by others while still distributing Linux from their corporate website?

    Is it the truth that, regular as clockwork, every few months newSCO asks the court for permission to change their complaint in an effort to pump up their stock prices and drag this out as long as possible?

    Will newSCO finally give us the details of the the MS connection and tell us how MS pumped $$$ millions into newSCO and induced others to pump $$$ millions into newSCO under false pretenses in an effort to prop-up newSCO's frivilous claims so MS can have more time to dump their stripped down longhorn on the market?

    Will it be the truth of how almost every motion newSCO files with the court is denied? Will it be the truth of the dismissal of newSCO's ridiculous lawsuit against DC being dismissed as totally groundless?

    I, and I would be so bold as to say others as well, are really interested in knowing what truth newSCO is going to tell. All the court documents are available as public domain works from PACER and IBM and Red Hat are using Mr. McBrides preposterous public statements against newSCO in court already. (BTW, please do continue with these types of 'truths'. It makes the job of IBM, Novell and Red Hat's lawyers so much easier.)

    So, newSCO, we are anxiously awaiting the 'truths' you are going to enlighten us all with. Please hurry. You've dragged this out long enough.

    looks lkie the LIERS on grokla ...Anonymous -- 17/10/04

    looks lkie the LIERS on groklaw have finally met there match. i hope sco will put a stop to the FUD and brainwashing that the linux fanatics are doing.

    The lack of intelligent commen ...Anonymous -- 17/10/04

    The lack of intelligent commentary from an SCO side says it all... (BTW, there is no "E" in Liar) It's fairly obvious to anyone with half a brain cell that SCO has nothing. They've yet to produce ANYTHING of substance and have been caught lying and stalling time and time again. This is really just a last attempt to gain some support, and they're going to be rudely met in this effort as well.

    "SCO: The truth will be o ...Anonymous -- 17/10/04

    "SCO: The truth will be on ProSCO" I seriously doubt it .. SCO has been talkin out their behinds since they first started this mindless litigation more than a year ago now. So far they have shown nothing to substantiate theyre claims so to say the truth will be on ProSCO is a poor joke. So far SCO has twisted, misreprisented, lied and otherwise bodged all claims relating to linux at every opertunity. Iain, please explain ..

    Prosco might be able to have s ...Anonymous -- 18/10/04

    Prosco might be able to have some comedic value.
    I think Userfriendly.org found the funny on this one.

    I hunger for SCO's point of vi ...Anonymous -- 18/10/04

    I hunger for SCO's point of view. Not that I'm inclined to believe it, but the only "pro sco" comments I see on most websites make broad based undocumented accusations (Even a post here states they look forward to the sco site stopping the Groklaw Lies, but they do not provide specifics as to what the lies are). I look forward to direct dissection of factual issues.

    I'm sure ProSCO will do SCO lo ...Anonymous -- 18/10/04

    I'm sure ProSCO will do SCO lots of good in the short term. The buisness suites looking to set up IT contracts will not know the difference between what SCO says there and the truth. They will be more inclined to believe what is on ProSCO.net because it comes from fellow business suites. Still, in the end SCO will fail because their claim is baseless, their product is obsolete, and rather than adapt to changing times their management has decided to secure their retirement funds through baseless lawsuits. The only losers in the long run will be the average SCO employee, and their customers whom will find themselves with neither a company or a community to provide support.

Add your opinion

Latest Videos

Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Blogs

  • David Braue All I want for Xmas is Telstra pricing
    Five consecutive days without broadband has led me to what seemed at the time to be an act of desperation: contemplating signing up for Telstra's 100Mbps cable modem service.
  • Array Sick of broken tender sites
    Some of the state governments desperately need to invest in more user-friendly tender sites so that looking for information on government tenders doesn't have to be a game of blind man's bluff.
  • Array Cyberwar: What is it good for?
    In this week's episode, Cyberwar. What is Australia's place in the world of digital warfare? What are the implications for the NBN?
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured