The Haus

Tuesday, August 5, 2003

SCO Sets the Fee

More on the SCO linux deal: SCO has announced the pricing for their Linux Binary License. This license is for commercial (ie: those with real money that can be frightened by lawyers) users of any Linux 2.4 or greater kernel BINARY (IE: using source means you're a target). The intro price will be $699 for 1 CPU (thanks Yahoo). The pricing structure is as follows:

SCO recommends you should not use custom kernels, or distribute any code created from custom kernels. Such BS.

J.t.Qbe comments: Interesting development, isn't it? Let's see: SCO is demanding exorbitant prices for licenses in order to avoid problems, but hasn't yet demonstrated that any such problem exists. SCO execs are dumping their stock now that the prices have risen (due to fools who think that they can make a quick buck by buying in). Lawyer-types and management-types who don't know the facts will hear this stuff and start to fear getting involved with Linux. Does anyone else want to bet that Microsoft is hiding in the shadows here? After all, what better way to destroy Linux than from the inside?

On the other hand, my company is steadily migrating infrastructure from Solaris to Linux. I asked my manager yesterday whether or not the SCO issue has been discussed and what impact it might have. He said, "No one's even mentioned it." Still, if the lawyers start getting nervous, there's always FreeBSD. . .

A.T. Hun comments: Of course, the only reason why BSD is safe is because somebody already tried this stunt with them and was shot down. This fee structure shows how clueless they are. It's like they were all sitting around a table smoking pot and saying, "Let's charge them $699. Bwhahahaha! Pass me the M&M's."

J.t.Qbe comments: BSD's situation was somewhat similar, and the remedy was to replace the tainted code. I wouldn't be surprised to see the same thing happen with Linux, if SCO can even demonstrate that some of its IP actually HAS found its way into the kernel. Personally, I think it's just a bunch of hot air and FUD.

Monday, August 4, 2003

Red Hat Sues SCO

Gadzooks! Even though I put a moratorium on any SCO articles, this one really surprised me. Red Hat announced that it will sue SCO to stop them from spreading FUD about Linux's legality. has more. Here's a snip:

"We filed this complaint to stop SCO from making unsubstantiated and untrue public statements attacking Red Hat Linux and the integrity of the open-source software development process," Mark Webbink, Red Hat's general counsel, said in a prepared statement. "Red Hat is confident that its current and future customers will continue to realize the significant value that our Red Hat Linux platform provides without interruption."

SCO's rumblings must really have been affecting Red Hat for them to sue. All I can say is, "More power to them!" I also hope IBM and others will contribute to their defense fund. Thanks Slashdot.

Past Two Days' News

Recent Headlines

January 5, 2015: It Returns!
August 10, 2007: SCO SUCKS IT DOWN!
July 5, 2007: Slackware 12.0 Released
May 20, 2007: PhpBB 3.0 RC 1 Released
February 2, 2007: DOOM3 1.31 Patch

January 27, 2007: Join the World Community Grid
January 17, 2007: Flash Player 9 for Linux
December 30, 2006: Darkness over Daggerford 1.2
December 19, 2006: Pocket Tunes 4.0 Released
December 9, 2006: WRT54G 1.01.1 Firmware OK with Linux/Mac

All original information on this website is copyright © TheHaus.Net, 1999-2005. The use of original images, text, and/or code from this website without expressed written consent is prohibited. The authors of this site cannot be held responsible for any damage, real or imagined, which comes from the use of information presented on this site. All trademarks used are the properties of their respective owners. This site is not to be used as a floatation device (but if you try, I want a video tape of it).