Most Read Technology Reporter For More Than Two Decades

Maureen O'Gara

Subscribe to Maureen O'Gara: eMailAlertsEmail Alerts
Get Maureen O'Gara: homepageHomepage mobileMobile rssRSS facebookFacebook twitterTwitter linkedinLinkedIn


SCO Using Web Site for Linux Tax

SCO Using Web Site for Linux Tax

The SCO Group has taken to peddling its Linux license off its Web site, which means it's finally gotten its EULA written down.

The company is offering paid-up licenses ranging from $699 to $4,999 depending on the number of CPUs and has added new annual licenses that run $149 to $1,079 also depending on how many CPUS are in the server.

A paid-up desktop license is $199 and a renewable one is $49.

If SCO's enemies and the lawyers ranged against it are right it's merely an exercise in wishful thinking.


More Stories By Maureen O'Gara

Maureen O'Gara the most read technology reporter for the past 20 years, is the Cloud Computing and Virtualization News Desk editor of SYS-CON Media. She is the publisher of famous "Billygrams" and the editor-in-chief of "Client/Server News" for more than a decade. One of the most respected technology reporters in the business, Maureen can be reached by email at maureen(at) or paperboy(at), and by phone at 516 759-7025. Twitter: @MaureenOGara

Comments (2) View Comments

Share your thoughts on this story.

Add your comment
You must be signed in to add a comment. Sign-in | Register

In accordance with our Comment Policy, we encourage comments that are on topic, relevant and to-the-point. We will remove comments that include profanity, personal attacks, racial slurs, threats of violence, or other inappropriate material that violates our Terms and Conditions, and will block users who make repeated violations. We ask all readers to expect diversity of opinion and to treat one another with dignity and respect.

Most Recent Comments
David Mohring 02/27/04 05:05:42 PM EST

The SCO Group is effectively scamming Linux end users with a variation of the "Data Protection Scam".
The SCO licenses are entirely unnecessary, because the SCO Group has already granted all users the right to use the Linux kernel under the rems of the GPL.

1) Since 1994, both Caldera ( which only changed its name to The SCO Group in 2003 ) and the Santa Cruz Operation ( The original SCO which changed its name to Tarentella ) have accepted, profited from and redistributed copyrighted source code from hundreds of developers under the terms of the GPL license.
The SCO Group has failed to put forward ANY substantial legal theory why the SCO Group should not be obligated to abide by the terms of the GPL.

2) It is a criminal offense to claim, with fraudulent intent, that you have a copyright if you do not. The SCO Group does *NOT* hold the copyrights to the UNIX source code. Novell has *NOT* transfered the title for the works that the SCO Group fraudulently filed for copyright in 2003. The SCO Group do not have the right to sue anybody for violation of copyright works without the assent of the title holder.

3) The SCO Group claims the right to sue for work in standard UNIX and POSIX interfaces that AT&T and Novell granted full rights to use royalty free in perpetuity for the ISO, ANSI and FIPS federal standards.

4) The SCO Group's contract claims against IBM and others based upon the AT&T license in respect to rights of so called derivative works is in direct contradiction to evidence presented to the SCO Group by Novell.

5) The SCO Group though the press and SEC filings, has bolstered the share price of the SCO Group based upon demonstrably false claims to the contrary of above points 1,2 and 3. The SCO Group CEOs and legal agents were notified by Novell and IBM *before* making these false claims and presenting them as fact. The actions of the SCO Group must be in violation of several SEC regulations.

The SCO Group is effectively scamming Linux Users with a variation of the "Data Protection Scam"

Check with your local "Better Business Bureau" if this is in violation of local Fair Trade Acts and Unfair Practices Acts.

Nathan Wallwork 02/27/04 03:36:16 PM EST

SCO's license isn't just wishful thinking. It is an open invitation for authors to sue SCO for copyright infringment. By distributing the copyrighted work of other authors under anything other than the license those authors allow, SCO is violating copyright law.