Linux under siege, geeks to battle

Vishnu K. Mahmud, Contributor, Jakarta, vmahmud@yahoo.com

If there's one thing many people despise, it's bullies. Be it those who use weapons to terrorize innocent people or nation- states that cause collateral damage during invasions, a bully is still a bully. Which is precisely what the world's Linux community may be facing right now.

Linux is an open-source operating system, making it free for programmers to download, modify and share source code with others. Any problems or bugs can immediately be eradicated and tested by practically anyone, to ensure security and cohesiveness. The system's entire source code is also open for inspection, to make sure that no one has tampered with it by inserting viruses or Trojan horse programs.

With this community zeal, Linux has managed to capture the hearts of people and corporations looking for an alternative, secure and cost-effective operating system.

Suddenly, this idealistic digital commune finds itself under the barrel of a rather nasty legal battle. The Santa Cruz Operation (www.sco.com) have declared that portions of the Linux kernel (the heart of the operating system) contained some parts of their UNIX proprietary code that was illegally incorporated.

The company is also suing IBM for US$3 billion due to its "concentrated efforts to improperly destroy the economic value of UNIX, particularly UNIX on Intel, to benefit IBM's new Linux services business." They have accused IBM of inserting the SCO code into Linux.

In addition, SCO issued letters to 1,500 large companies claiming that Linux is an unauthorized derivative of UNIX and that they may face legal risks as users for copyright violations. SCO recently offered a licensing scheme for Linux end-users ($699 now, $1399 in October 2003) to ensure compliance. Some see it as a "pay us and we won't sue you" kind of deal.

With this legal cloud in the air, many companies are getting worried about being in the middle of an intellectual property battle. SCO have so far refused to identify the offending code in Linux (except under a nondisclosure agreement), nor have they issued evidence that the said code is officially theirs. Which is rather ironic since SCO themselves have sold their own version of Linux (with the offending code) under the General Public License (GPL), the cornerstone of the open-source movement.

With the trial of the case against IBM set for 2005, there is still plenty of time to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt about the viability of open-source software. Linux's competitors are no longer talking about its overall total cost of ownership, reliability or security, but about its potential copyright liabilities.

Is Linux doomed? Far from it. Red Hat (www.redhat.com), one of the world's top Linux distributors and solutions providers, has filed a lawsuit against SCO, basically telling itup or shutover does he meant "it to put up or shut up over"? its copyright allegations. Red Hat entered the fray after seeing many of its customers becoming increasingly worried about potential legal liabilities.

According to Red Hat's general counsel Mark Webbink, SCO's unsubstantiated and untrue public statements attack Red Hat Linux and the integrity of the open-source software development process. They also want to ensure the protection of their user's legal rights, noting that the collaborative process of the open- source software movement has been unjustly questioned and threatened.

Red Hat has also said they are always careful about intellectual property rights and would correct any mistakes found. With the help of the open-source community, those corrections could be done immediately, taking mere days, if not hours, to devise a program around it and to patch.

IBM has also countersued SCO, saying they violated the Free Software Foundation's (www.fsf.org) GPL license. According to a FSF statement, the fact that SCO themselves distributed the Linux kernel under GPL through their Caldera Linux meant they had licensed "anyone, anywhere, to copy, modify and redistribute that code." The fact that the code was always open for inspection makes some people wonder why they didn't catch it in the first place.

Linux geeks at the popular Slashdot (www.slashdot.org) website have also condemned SCO's moves. Some even say these legal maneuvers and accusations are part of the company's "pump and dump" strategy to raise their stock in order to sell it for a profit. Formerly a penny stock, SCO stock is now in the $11 range.

Frank Hayes, a senior news columnist at Computerworld (www.computerworld.com) noted the company recently purchased Vultus Inc. with newly issued SCO stock, whose price gets a boost whenever a new threat is issued. Is this a battle about intellectual property or a cynical play on the dotcom era's stock bubble as revenue to gain profits?

In any event, sales of Linux products and servers since the lawsuit began have continued to climb. Governments in Germany, Brazil and Chile are using Linux, as are many Fortune 500 companies. Most are confident about the viability of open-source software and are ready to lend a hand in the battle if needed.

Is this a case of David (SCO) versus Goliath (IBM), or an evil empire against a rebellion alliance (Linux)? Only time will tell, but as an IT Manager for a major American bank noted, there are too many Linux users now, and they won't stand idle while their open-source movement is destroyed by proprietary software. Linux users can easily create their own software en masse quickly and securely within the confines of intellectual property rights law.