SCO = Splutteringly Crap Opinions?

Copyright and licensing issues and the whole SCO versus Linux argument isn’t something that grabs me particularly, so a lot of the recent noise has passed me by. But then I came across this piece of dissembling crap from the CEO of SCO - a sample:

“Despite the raw emotions, however, the issue is clear: do you support copyrights and ownership of intellectual property as envisioned by our elected officials in Congress and the European Union, or do you support “free” - as in free from ownership - intellectual property envisioned by the Free Software Foundation, Red Hat and others? There really is no middle ground. It is no understatement to say that the future of the global economy is in the balance.”

To which I can only say ‘phooey’, or rather stronger words to that effect. If it wasn’t for open-source software, and the people who’ve put time and effort into it for (at times) uncertain reward, then we (as in current company) wouldn’t be in a position to do what I’m doing with the company - a) because it’s doubtful that the web would exist in its current form, and b) because we sure as hell wouldn’t be able to afford software written by the likes of SCO to power the site. Which means we wouldn’t have started the business in the first place, at a net loss to the economy (and us). The idea that there’s no middle ground between the rampant capitalism of SCO and Stallman-esque ‘property is theft’ positions is an intellectually backrupt position that reduces the debate to yelling “commies!” at anyone who doesn’t share their opinion. It’s not often that I rant out loud at something I read on a screen, but this one had me spluttering.

But fortunately, there’s more intelligent people than me taking an active interest, and this counterblast is one result. It would be great to think that the weight of the arguments will be what decides this issue, but I suspect that’s being niave.

Filed under Geek |