cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE wrote:

> mY LATEST SUPER DUPER TESTIMONY PROVES THAT lINUX IS JUST A COPY OF unix.
> i HAVE YOU now lINUX thieves.
>
>
> http://www.osnews.com/story/19705
>
> cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE, sco

Idiot!


--

Jerry McBride (jmcbride@mail-on.us)

____/ Jerry McBride on Friday 02 May 2008 02:03 : \____

> cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE wrote:
>
>> mY LATEST SUPER DUPER TESTIMONY PROVES THAT lINUX IS JUST A COPY OF unix.
>> i HAVE YOU now lINUX thieves.
>>
>>
>> http://www.osnews.com/story/19705
>>
>> cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE, sco
>
> Idiot!

I think he was joking. See

Deluded SCO CEO on witness stand: "Linux is a copy of UNIX"

,----[ Quote ]
| Novell grilled McBride for the better part of 10 minutes about "filling a
| form 10-K or 10-Q with the SEC that contained a false statement." Novell's
| counsel reiterated that two separate 10-Q forms filed by SCO did not include
| Sun or Microsoft revenue generated by UnixWare licenses. McBride adamantly
| denied any wrong doing, saying that the licenses were for the trunk of SCO
| intellectual property consisting of multiple brands, not the UnixWare product
| branch. This was the most hostile point of the day, with the council asking
| him the same question in several different ways. After two hours on the
| stand, McBride stepped down.
`----

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...y-of-unix.html

It also says "SCO played with fire..... and got burned." Tagged "SCOWned!".
Very funny.

Also see the picture of the tree here:

Transcripts!! Days 1 and 2 of Novell v. SCO

,----[ Quote ]
| So it's both trunk and branch. Hahahaha. Just like in nature. Here's the
| diagram again, so you can see how silly this argument is:
|
| Do you see UnixWare depicted as both the trunk and the branch?? Oops. Is it
| my all-time favorite SCO story? Hard to say, with so many SCO stories to
| choose from, but it's got to be Top Ten.
`----

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...80501194602283

SCO: providing humour for GNU/Linux users since bankruptcy filing in 2007.

--
~~ Best of wishes

Fetch SPAM quicker than you can type 'crond start'
http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Cpu(s): 23.9%us, 3.5%sy, 1.0%ni, 67.3%id, 4.0%wa, 0.2%hi, 0.1%si, 0.0%st
http://iuron.com - semantic engine to gather information

On Fri, 02 May 2008 05:19:36 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

> ____/ Jerry McBride on Friday 02 May 2008 02:03 : \____
>
>> cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE wrote:
>>
>>> mY LATEST SUPER DUPER TESTIMONY PROVES THAT lINUX IS JUST A COPY OF unix.
>>> i HAVE YOU now lINUX thieves.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.osnews.com/story/19705
>>>
>>> cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE, sco
>>
>> Idiot!
>
> I think he was joking. See

You Roy Schestowitz are so utterly boring you wouldn't know a joke if it
fell on top of your flat head.



--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

On Thu, 01 May 2008 22:28:39 -0700, Rex Ballard wrote:

> About the closest Linux ever came to being Linux was when Caldera
> attempted to pass the X/Open Unix/95 compatibility certification.

ITYM: About the closest Linux ever came to being _Unix_ ....

Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> ____/ Jerry McBride on Friday 02 May 2008 02:03 : \____
>
>> cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE wrote:
>>
>>> mY LATEST SUPER DUPER TESTIMONY PROVES THAT lINUX IS JUST
>>> A COPY OF unix. i HAVE YOU now lINUX thieves.
>>>
>>> http://www.osnews.com/story/19705
>>>
>>> cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE, sco
>>
>> Idiot!

That is obvious, especially the schizophrenic spelling of name.
Just the work of another troll.

> I think he was joking. See
>
> Deluded SCO CEO on witness stand: "Linux is a copy of UNIX"
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>> Novell grilled McBride for the better part of 10 minutes
>> about "filling a form 10-K or 10-Q with the SEC that
>> contained a false statement." Novell's counsel reiterated
>> that two separate 10-Q forms filed by SCO did not include
>> Sun or Microsoft revenue generated by UnixWare licenses.
>> McBride adamantly denied any wrong doing, saying that the
>> licenses were for the trunk of SCO intellectual property
>> consisting of multiple brands, not the UnixWare product
>> branch. This was the most hostile point of the day, with the
>> council asking him the same question in several different
>> ways. After two hours on the stand, McBride stepped down.
> `----
>
> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...y-of-unix.html

Article also states,

SALT LAKE CITY—Last August, the nail was poised over SCO's coffin
when Judge Dale Kimball ruled that Novell never relinquished the
copyrights to UNIX, but nobody really knew when it would be
driven home. The decision meant that SCO could be on the hook for
as much as $20 million in unpaid royalties. Not long afterwards,
SCO filed for bankruptcy, but that Chapter 11 filing was only
able to delay the inevitable trial to determine how much Novell
was owed. That long-awaited trial began this week, and Ars was on
hand to report.
Related Stories

Last year, the court ruled that Novell owned the copyrights to
original AT&T UNIX source code and derivatives, including SVRX
(System V, Release X), and threw out the case. Now, the
countersuit brought by Novell is being heard, and should be
finished up this week. Novell has repeatedly said it has no
interest in suing Linux users over UNIX copyrights, which would
be against its interests now that Novell has ties to the
open-source community through openSUSE and SUSE Enterprise Linux
Server and Desktop distributions.

I believe the authors of Linux and related have been very careful
to avoid this so called software patents entanglement, as you
have expressed through your posting articles as such. Of course,
they can't help it if someone patented Pythagoras' theorem.
Ideal of software patents need to be trashed unless they are tied
to a hardware event, per UK's patent office.

--
HPT
Quando omni flunkus moritati
(If all else fails, play dead)
- "Red" Green

____/ High Plains Thumper on Friday 02 May 2008 10:20 : \____

> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> ____/ Jerry McBride on Friday 02 May 2008 02:03 : \____
>>
>>> cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE wrote:
>>>
>>>> mY LATEST SUPER DUPER TESTIMONY PROVES THAT lINUX IS JUST
>>>> A COPY OF unix. i HAVE YOU now lINUX thieves.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.osnews.com/story/19705
>>>>
>>>> cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE, sco
>>>
>>> Idiot!
>
> That is obvious, especially the schizophrenic spelling of name.
> Just the work of another troll.
>
>> I think he was joking. See
>>
>> Deluded SCO CEO on witness stand: "Linux is a copy of UNIX"
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>> Novell grilled McBride for the better part of 10 minutes
>>> about "filling a form 10-K or 10-Q with the SEC that
>>> contained a false statement." Novell's counsel reiterated
>>> that two separate 10-Q forms filed by SCO did not include
>>> Sun or Microsoft revenue generated by UnixWare licenses.
>>> McBride adamantly denied any wrong doing, saying that the
>>> licenses were for the trunk of SCO intellectual property
>>> consisting of multiple brands, not the UnixWare product
>>> branch. This was the most hostile point of the day, with the
>>> council asking him the same question in several different
>>> ways. After two hours on the stand, McBride stepped down.
>> `----
>>
>>
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...y-of-unix.html
>
> Article also states,
>
>

> SALT LAKE CITY—Last August, the nail was poised over SCO's coffin
> when Judge Dale Kimball ruled that Novell never relinquished the
> copyrights to UNIX, but nobody really knew when it would be
> driven home. The decision meant that SCO could be on the hook for
> as much as $20 million in unpaid royalties. Not long afterwards,
> SCO filed for bankruptcy, but that Chapter 11 filing was only
> able to delay the inevitable trial to determine how much Novell
> was owed. That long-awaited trial began this week, and Ars was on
> hand to report.
> Related Stories
>
> Last year, the court ruled that Novell owned the copyrights to
> original AT&T UNIX source code and derivatives, including SVRX
> (System V, Release X), and threw out the case. Now, the
> countersuit brought by Novell is being heard, and should be
> finished up this week. Novell has repeatedly said it has no
> interest in suing Linux users over UNIX copyrights, which would
> be against its interests now that Novell has ties to the
> open-source community through openSUSE and SUSE Enterprise Linux
> Server and Desktop distributions.
>

>
> I believe the authors of Linux and related have been very careful
> to avoid this so called software patents entanglement, as you
> have expressed through your posting articles as such. Of course,
> they can't help it if someone patented Pythagoras' theorem.
> Ideal of software patents need to be trashed unless they are tied
> to a hardware event, per UK's patent office.

Physical byproduct.

Patents in general have all sorts of issues (speaking of the ethics of patents
in medicine and surgery, for example -- patents that kill).

Software patents involve no manufacturing though. It's like patenting auro...
or air.

--
~~ Best of wishes

Roy S. Schestowitz | "The only source is Open Source"
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 132 total, 1 running, 131 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine

On May 2, 3:52 am, alt wrote:
> On Thu, 01 May 2008 22:28:39 -0700, Rex Ballard wrote:
> > About the closest Linux ever came to being Linux was when Caldera
> > attempted to pass the X/Open Unix/95 compatibility certification.
>
> ITYM: About the closest Linux ever came to being _Unix_ ....

Correct. Sorry about that, thanks for the correction.

* cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE peremptorily fired off this memo:

> mY LATEST SUPER DUPER TESTIMONY PROVES THAT lINUX IS JUST A COPY OF unix. i
> HAVE YOU now lINUX thieves.
>
> http://www.osnews.com/story/19705
>
> cHIEF dARL mCbRIDE, sco

Darl, you done gone nuts:

Darl McBride, CEO of SCO, was up next. His answers were... Peculiar,
to say the least. He stated that SCO holds the copyrights over UNIX,
and that "many Linux contributors were originally UNIX developers. We
have evidence System V is in Linux." Which contradicts the statements
made by Sontag, but as Ars explains, due to the witness exclusion
rule, McBride was not present during the testimony of Sontag. McBride
had one throwaway remark, one that really shows how much this man has
lost touch with reality - which may probably be the most opinionated
remark ever in an OSNews news item, but just read what he had to say,
and you can do nothing but agree with me. McBride said:

Linux is a copy of UNIX, there is no difference [between them].

If McBride /ever/ goes into a cell, it will be padded.

--
Stolen's a strong word. It's copyrighted content that the owner wasn't paid
for. So yes. -- Bill Gates, On his use of YouTube to watch videos. "Bill Gates
on ...the Competition" in The Wall Street Journal (19 June 2006); also quoted
in "Bill Gates' piracy confession" at ComputerWorld.com

Liarnut wrote:
> --
> Stolen's a strong word. It's copyrighted content that the owner
wasn't paid
> for. So yes. -- Bill Gates, On his use of YouTube to watch videos.
"Bill Gates
> on ...the Competition" in The Wall Street Journal (19 June 2006);
also quoted
> in "Bill Gates' piracy confession" at ComputerWorld.com


Message-ID:

Of course, whether from the net or from work. Why would I pay $50 for
an app I will use one time?

Especially since hypocrites such as yourself have no qualms about
pirating whole operating systems and office suites.

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/com...&output=gplain

* James peremptorily fired off this memo:

> Liarnut wrote:
> > --
> > Stolen's a strong word. It's copyrighted content that the owner
> wasn't paid
> > for. So yes. -- Bill Gates, On his use of YouTube to watch videos.
> "Bill Gates
> > on ...the Competition" in The Wall Street Journal (19 June 2006);
> also quoted
> > in "Bill Gates' piracy confession" at ComputerWorld.com
>
> Message-ID:
>
>

> Of course, whether from the net or from work. Why would I pay $50 for
> an app I will use one time?
>
> Especially since hypocrites such as yourself have no qualms about
> pirating whole operating systems and office suites.
>

>
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/com...&output=gplain

Aw, some asshole brings up that old post to try to discredit me, just
because I included an old clip from his Fearless Leader, who has
commandeered more intellectual property than I've ever /used/.

What he doesn't bother to include is the whole follow-on, where I
indicate that I, in the end, did not use that software, though not for a
good reason (it was French). Where I admit that I stupidly did not
realize the existence of a free solution already -- GNU Parted. Where I
admit the error of my thinking, and vow to do without rather than
downloading a piece of commercial software.

Can "James" say the same thing?

I have kept to that vow strictly. People make mistakes. Honest
people admit to them and try to do better. I try /hard/ to be honest.

I ****ed up. I've moved on.

--
It's fine to celebrate success but it is more important to heed the lessons
of failure.
-- Bill Gates

Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> High Plains Thumper on Friday :
>
> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...y-of-unix.html
>
>> Article also states,
>>
>>

SALT LAKE CITY—Last August, the nail was poised over
>> SCO's coffin when Judge Dale Kimball ruled that Novell never
>> relinquished the copyrights to UNIX, but nobody really knew
>> when it would be driven home. The decision meant that SCO
>> could be on the hook for as much as $20 million in unpaid
>> royalties. Not long afterwards, SCO filed for bankruptcy,
>> but that Chapter 11 filing was only able to delay the
>> inevitable trial to determine how much Novell was owed. That
>> long-awaited trial began this week, and Ars was on hand to
>> report. Related Stories
>>
>> Last year, the court ruled that Novell owned the copyrights
>> to original AT&T UNIX source code and derivatives, including
>> SVRX (System V, Release X), and threw out the case. Now, the
>> countersuit brought by Novell is being heard, and should be
>> finished up this week. Novell has repeatedly said it has no
>> interest in suing Linux users over UNIX copyrights, which
>> would be against its interests now that Novell has ties to
>> the open-source community through openSUSE and SUSE
>> Enterprise Linux Server and Desktop distributions.

>>
>> I believe the authors of Linux and related have been very
>> careful to avoid this so called software patents
>> entanglement, as you have expressed through your posting
>> articles as such. Of course, they can't help it if someone
>> patented Pythagoras' theorem. Ideal of software patents need
>> to be trashed unless they are tied to a hardware event, per
>> UK's patent office.
>
> Physical byproduct.
>
> Patents in general have all sorts of issues (speaking of the
> ethics of patents in medicine and surgery, for example --
> patents that kill).
>
> Software patents involve no manufacturing though. It's like
> patenting auro... or air.

True, I find it hard to believe that software I wrote in the '80s
could be considered patentable or violate patents. Stupid things
like using the "XOR function to ascertain presence of analog
acquisition channel types", "use of binary roll function with
carry to embed compacted time code generator function in data
record", "use of control characters to display data output on a
computer root terminal", "accelerated tape I/O writes through
task trap software priority interrupt mechanism", ad nauseum.

Sounds nice, but really stupid. I hope the EU brings all of this
to a head and nullifies the majority of software patents, as
there is nothing innovative about them. It is only a way to
hinder innovation and open a Pandora's box for abuse, which
already has been demonstrated.

--
HPT
Quando omni flunkus moritati
(If all else fails, play dead)
- "Red" Green

On Fri, 02 May 2008 05:17:34 -0700, Rex Ballard wrote:

> On May 2, 3:52 am, alt wrote:
>> On Thu, 01 May 2008 22:28:39 -0700, Rex Ballard wrote:
>> > About the closest Linux ever came to being Linux was when Caldera
>> > attempted to pass the X/Open Unix/95 compatibility certification.
>>
>> ITYM: About the closest Linux ever came to being _Unix_ ....
>
> Correct. Sorry about that, thanks for the correction.

No worries. I just wanted to clear it up for those that may not have
understood.

On Fri, 02 May 2008 11:35:57 -0400, Linonut wrote:


>
> What he doesn't bother to include is the whole follow-on, where I
> indicate that I, in the end, did not use that software, though not for a
> good reason (it was French). Where I admit that I stupidly did not
> realize the existence of a free solution already -- GNU Parted. Where I
> admit the error of my thinking, and vow to do without rather than
> downloading a piece of commercial software.
>
> Can "James" say the same thing?


VMware-server-1.0.4-56528.tar.gz and
6001.18000.080118-1840_x86fre_Server_en-us-KRMSFRE_EN_DVD.iso are
downloading right now. I ate three tuna sandwiches for lunch. My dog puked
in the porch this morning.


Anything else you'd like to know?






>
> I have kept to that vow strictly. People make mistakes. Honest
> people admit to them and try to do better. I try /hard/ to be honest.
>
> I ****ed up. I've moved on.


Yeah, sure you have.

"Subject: Ezekiel and Moshe -- internet scumbuckets"