Is there anything we can do as a group about SCO ?

[Entelin]

Thats what I am keeping my eye out for as well. There is only a few more
things we need in order to make a complete switch presentable to the
small to medium business that is running on 100% Microsoft stuff. As
hard line as I must sound sometimes I am actually quite moderate on the
concept of free vs closed. While I think its clear that the quality of
free software(the gnu term) is inevitably superior. I also think that
there are things that are simply not viable using a completely free
methodology. For example games, and other multimedia. Things that don't
effect the fundamental operating structure or stability of a system I
don't have any problem with being closed source. Free projects are
driven mostly by interest, and need. Many commercial software packages
do not generate enough of this to drive free software replacements.
However I don't understand why so many companies are so bent to keep
their source hidden away... at least release it after a certain period
of time like ID Software does.

Well at any rate the important thing is that a foundation of free
software creates a medium in which all software vendors can compete
fairly. That, in the end, is my vision of the future.


On Wed, 2003-05-21 at 08:40, Vaughn Treude wrote:
> You make a good point, though I don't feel that all closed-source software is 
> evil, having created a fair bit of it myself.  :-)  What I'm opposed to is 
> the kind of anti-competitive, underhanded tactics SCO is resorting to, 
> apparently with Microsoft's collusion.  I used to say that Microsoft is not 
> evil, it just needs honest competition.  Part of the reason I got into Linux 
> was to further that competition, plus the fact that Linux is superior in many 
> ways to MS products.  But I may be changing my mind on MS.  Though some of 
> their old tactics (that spawned the Netscape-sponsored antitrust suit) were 
> in my view unethical, I didn't view them as intolerable, because it was legal 
> to resist them.  Now I see a number of legal challenges to the open software 
> movement such as the DMCA, that digital rights management crapola, and now 
> this SCO lawsuit, that threaten to make resistance to the Microsoft Borg a 
> federal offense.  Another seldom-recognized threat is the movement to 
> "license" software engineers.  Occupational licensing is always the first 
> step to bringing a profession under government control (note that most 
> dictatorships license journalists.)  I can imagine programs containing code 
> written by students, amateurs, and refuseniks such as myself becoming illegal 
> to distribute under the guise of "consumer protection."   And I do recall 
> seeing an article on the Microsoft web site bemoaning the lack of standards 
> for software professionals . . .
> 
> Anyway, for the first time I'm considering attempting to boycott MS  products,
> though it may not be feasible yet in this slow economy, with good software 
> projects being difficult to find.  Another thing I haven't yet done is try to 
> convince the non-geek types I know to switch to Linux, because of the 
> difficulty of setup and the relative shortage of good applications.  But now 
> there are some very user-friendly distros out there and Windows emulation is 
> getting better.  If I do enough research I can probably find solutions that 
> would suit a lot of the people I know.
> 
> Vaughn
> 
> 
>  encourage others to do the same.  It may not be possible considering my line 
> of work
> 
> On Tuesday 20 May 2003 11:12, you wrote:
> > Sadly your loudest vote is with your wallet.  Refuse to use non-free
> > software.  Refuse to do businesses that require you to use non-free
> > software.  Explain to people every chance you get why proprietary
> > software is hurtful to society. (Note discussing copyright in general is
> > useful)
> >
> > The problem is this notion of "intellectual property" and "control".  It
> > is killing the commons and hurting society (development) on the whole.
> > While it happens in music, movies etc... Those are 'entertainment' so
> > one could argue does it really hurt humanity to stifle them.  However,
> > science (technology) really does advance humanity so acting in ways that
> > stifle innovation (rather than encourage it) really are damaging.
> >
> > Anyhow....
> >
> > On Tue, 2003-05-20 at 04:36, Entelin wrote:
> > > This intellectual property issue SCO is stirring up is out of line. I
> > > don't know what long term goals they think they are going to gain or how
> > > much money Microsoft has bribed them with. However they are slandering
> > > Linux and threating thousands of business's who are expanding this
> > > movement. As someone who tries to keep up to date about issues that
> > > surround our freedoms on the Internet, and ability to create truly free
> > > software I have become accustomed to the occasional and continuing
> > > assaults that we face from various groups such as Microsoft, DMCA, Music
> > > / video Companies and the like. However a company such as SCO who has
> > > put some effort into linux suddenly turning their back 180 degrees only
> > > to threaten everyone from IBM to the distributors and home users really
> > > makes me mad.
> > >
> > > Although I believe this will turn out to be a very self destructive move
> > > on their part I really want to do something to aid in that end.
> 
> ----------------------------------------
> Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
> ----------------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
-- 
Entelin <entelin@users.sourceforge.net>