Posted on 06/24/2003 6:07:26 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
You accuse him of name calling to make his pointless case, but then you resort to the same tactic. At first you were winning the debate, but at this point it just took a turn and Eagle boy is one step above.
Then try using freepmail instead of posting it on the public board for discussion.
Maybe you believe that users of closed source are safer because any potential theft would be hidden from prying eyes? I believe that users of open source are safer precisely because the code is exposed for the world to see, and any stolen code is more likely to be quickly located and replaced.
This argument equates to saying "It's nice of my guys to leave their stolen cars in the front yard, so you cops can easily find them. You should let them keep doing it, just for that."
If you are unwilling to accept that analogy, perhaps you will understand this - this is strictly placing the burden of finding the stolen code on the true owners, or on law enforcement, as Torvalds freely admits he does not do this (in fact read this, for more interesting Torvalds comments: Linus Torvalds when warned by developers of patent infringement)
The owners should have no obligation to have to do this, at least until there are some provisions made by the accused theives to prevent it from accidentally (or purposefully) happening, which Linus Torvald's gang has been unwilling to do.
Where your specific argument breaks down even further is where you said quote "any stolen code is more likely to be quickly located and replaced"; wherein the adjective "quickly" incorrectly implies the event is likely to happen whatsoever at all.
Do you really think big software companies like M$, Oracle, CA, Symantec, have time to waste pouring through Linux source to see where pilfered items might be? No way, they are not the ones trying to 'keep up' with open source.
The reason SCO claims they found the duplicate code (and is an excellent 'excuse' per se) was the fact that they were working on some new interoperability projects between the two, when they "were appalled when they saw it and had their hearts broken by IBM". Quite a cheesy story if I say so myself, but it sets them up exceptionally well entering the trial as 'the victim'.
Again, in closing, I appreciate the dignified manner in which you delivered your comments and hope to dicuss these issues again.
Thanks, I'll try to remember that and add it to the reasons I think SCO has a good case. At least my own personal fellings about it.
Please, I'm facing enough personal attacks as it is. Thanks.
It's going to sound like that, and I accept that as part of the drill. The case involves them, and so the terms "IBM" and "linux" are going to appear at regular intervals throughout my comments. So be it.
It's accurate to say that I am rooting for IBM, in this lawsuit. I hope they deck those lawyers, and get through to them personally, and leave them in personal bankruptcy. I hope that because everything I see points to a coven of shysters conducting an extortion-by-lawsuit. I hate it when that happens.
I do admire the company, not because I ever worked there but because I competed against the b*st*rds for many years. They're tough. That's OK. I didn't expect anything else from them.
You will not find any comments from me saying that UNIX sucks, or that SCO products suck, or that Microsoft products suck -- or that any of those things are a threat to the Republic. I would argue that trial lawyers who strip entire industries and leave everybody in them bankrupt are a threat to the Republic. I see that starting here, and I don't like it. There is no end to these IP lawsuits. This is tobacco and asbestos all over again. The only thing that will stop it is if the first guys in get decked but good, and sent fleeing for the hills with less money than they came in with. I sincerely hope that happens here. And if it's IBM that does it, good for them.
At my level, I have to put people like you back in their place at work every day, this is no different.What a man! What a Soaring Eagle!
The poor cubicle bound geeks how actually produce engineering, software, technology, what are they to a MAN the SIZE of GOLDEN EAGLE?
Here are some more golden wisdoms from the Golden Eagle:
Get over yourself and realize why I have a two window corner office and oversee the entire operation you're down in cubeville. I know the system, and where you fit in.Just so's all y'all understand who this MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE is. In his own mind, of course.
And HE wonder's why he draws venom and personal attacks from others? Give us a break! He's in nanna-nana land.
No Nick, this is like the RIAA trials, which is an issue I haven't discussed with you before, and God I hope you agree with me on them because then you might finally be able to see what SCO's complaint is about.
Still, your style runs between a flatter's fluttering-eyelid over-praise and the belittling arrogance.
LMAO. It's in this very thread!
I wonder if you even made cubeville. Probably pushing the broom around.
You people get mad when you question my credibility, then I crush yours. Nothing else.
Not that I haven't already provided sufficient evidence that your position has deteriorated from "this case will get thrown out or settled" to "I am rooting for IBM", BUT, what about the greater issues, that I have rotated my whole position around, if not for US Federal Court but for the consumption of FR, but independent of the case and of which you have unfortunately refused to address?
Not only theft of US technology, which is what the case is mainly about, but about the other prominent issues like -
Illegal distribution through the General Public License (GPL) of technology to foreign adveseries that would normally suffer trade restriction?
What about the affect of the GPL on a modern business society, especially the software industry that is the intellectual property center of the technology sector?
What about the principles of the Open Source Software (OSS) security model such as 'many eyes'?
What about the similarities between the modern founders of OSS such as Linus Torvalds, Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation and the commnunistic viewpoints they so apparently represent?
Again, outside the case, what are your viewpoints on these issues, despite you countless posts on the history of IBM, I believe I've seen only very rarely seen these items discussed on your behalf?
I know what SCO's complaint is about. I've read it. I consider it a work of shyster lawyering that fairly reeks of extortion-by-lawsuit. They allege that certain property is theirs. They then allege that IBM took their property and made it available in linux, under the GPL, which they assert IBM had no right to do.
I find no evidence that it was their property, and a lot of evidence that the items they named are IBM's property. I find no evidence that they have any rights over IBM's property, or any right to tell IBM what it can do with its property. I find SCO's claims specious, and in some cases ridiculous. I expect the entire suit to be dismissed, with prejudice. If that's all that happens I will be disapppointed.
I hope it continues in the other direction, with IBM ultimately showing that SCO's officers and directors knew, or should have known, that their claims were specious, and that they are liable for the damage they have caused to IBM's business. I then hope every linux ISV and consultant in the country takes a bite out of them as well, for the damage SCO has caused their business. And finally, I hope that Mr. McBride goes to jail for securities fraud, on the grounds that he claimed there was merit that was worth money in a lawsuit that he knew to be totally without merit. That would be my ideal outcome. McBride in jail, and the rest of them bankrupt.
You will note that my entire reply turns on IBM defending its property rights from those who would steal its property by legal chicanery, claim it for themselves, and attempt to extort money from people for using what they did not even own.
Commentary: Will This Feud Choke the Life Out of Linux?
By raising national security concerns, software maker SCO's suit against IBM hamstrings the open-source movement...
Better not post that whole article on FR just yet. But let's just say from the looks of it their case is shaping up very well.
Our foreign adversaries are doing just fine getting their hands on stuff. If the French aren't selling them reactors, the Democrats are selling them missile guidance systems. Please don't sit there and tell me we can "stop IP at the borders." It's 2003, we have to live with what we've created. There is far more dangerous stuff than linux code published every week in scientific journals. It's the price we pay for an open society. We get scientific progress, they get a backward society bristling with weaponry. In the end we kick their butts. Good.
Linux works. Apache works. PHP works. It works as well as anything else out there. Don't tell us the whole process is hosed. It's not. Most of the people doing this stuff are pros who do this for a hobby. Can we "cast doubt" on them? Of course; that's what FUD is.
"Many eyes" is hardly the 'security model' for open source software, any more than 'security by obscurity' is Microsoft's. We are starting to see security flaws appearing in the security-flaw stoppers. This means we are approaching the limits of human ability to make things secure.
Do not sign me up as a fan of Richard Stallman. I have no use for his "philosophies." gcc is a pretty good compiler, though. I think we're years away from software that can have political opinions, although Al Gore had me going for a while.
Ah, now we're getting somewhere. SO, like the French, and the Democrats you say, we should go along as well?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.