Does anyone know how much lindows paid sco? What they got for the money? Is it a ongoing contract? If you use lindows/spire does it bother you in the slightest to know that part of the money that SCO is using came from you? Just wondering, thanks for any thoughts at all.... even opinions.....

I was thinking about something else as well....
What if the technology sco licensed to them wasn't SCOs to license? What if it is shown that the technology was actually under the GPL or still owned by novell and SCO not only infringed copyright but that linspire bought it and distributed under a SCO license? Does that make linspire liable?

Honestly, has anyone ever seen any details about the deal? I would honestly like clarification on what it was?

I may be wrong, but I think you have your facts messed up.

I don't recall Linspire ever paying any money to SCO.

Thank you for your insight! You might wish to research further yourself but I thank you for taking the time to post!

Just wonder why linspire isn't being asked about being approached by SCO and entering into a agreement with them. Did lindows know SCO was about to do what they did as novell states that SCO approached them about a linux licensing scheme.

Would you mind posting a link?

Because I don't recall this ever happening. I did happen to take your word on this and tried to confirm with my own search.

Linspire was never high on my radar, and maybe you are better informed.

certainly
http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-1011040.html

http://www.cmpnetasia.com/PrintArticle.cfm?Artid=19956

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-1011040.html

just a few teasers to get ya interested, quickly yahoooed, i think they all work... not sure what they say tho but a good start

And i think it was MR that said linspire takes no sides regarding the sco case.... So if it is as simple as another poster put it "linux against microsoft" then it seems we got some players that arent putting in their best effort huh? IN my opinion of course...

Well when the whole $CO deal was mentioned on the Linspire forums someone from Linspire made a post that they had some kind of licensing agreement with $CO, but it was a long time ago and I don't remeber the exact content of the post. And I don't know what the agreement was about. I guess it was somekind of license to make sure they wouldn't sue Linspire or their users for using "their" code, but it could be someting completely else.
I think you need someone from Linspire to reply to be sure what's it about and even then it's possible they are not allowed to disclose any information (much like they are not allowed to disclose much about the Microsoft settlement).

Now IF it turns out that SCO doesn't own the Unix copyrights (and it seems to be that way). I guess Linspire (and the other companies who bought liceses from SCO) can sue them and request their money back. I doubt that Linspire can be held liable for this. I mean IF I were to pull a scam on you, would you be liable because you were tricked by me ??
I don't know about the American Law system but that wouldn't work here in Belgian courts.

now to ask your questions :

Sorry, Guess they are not going to disclose that information anytime soon

I guess some kind of License to use certain stuff, I don't know what since Linus claims all code that SCO claims comes from them isn't even present in the 2.6.x kernel anymore or something like that, read that a while ago).

I don't know

I Don't use Linspire but I'm an Insider so it could be part of my money and I hope SCO goes down faster then the Titanic and takes Microsoft with them
But I don't blame Linspire, I guess they did it to make sure their customers are safe from those "crack smoking freeks at SCO" even the name SCO (Santa Cruz Operation) sounds like a Drug Cartel to me.

Just my Huble Opinion though

Maybe not.
But since Linspire is a comercial company (and a small one) it would be stupid for them to choose a side in this. we don't know how the SCO deal is gonna turn out (offcourse we all hope for the best) but it's possible that picking a side is gonna be a bad thing for them in the near future, so I guess it's just what they have to do to survive IMHO.

No I personally think it would be a noble thing to do! So you often act two faced to make sure you are cool no matter which way the hatchet swings?
I hope that wasnt too mean, if it was then I will gladly retract!

What do you mean with two faces ??
- I don't like SCO and I never stated otherwise.
- I might not like it that some of my money goes to SCO but WHAT CAN I DO ABOUT IT ??
- I don't always agree with what Linspire is doing or has done.
I just tried to answer your questions about Linspire and SCO to the best of my knowledge.

All i mean is:
"is this how you act?"
"are these actions something you see as noble and the right thing to do?"
" would you like it if a good friend of yours decide to pull a judas on you whenever you wasnt looking?"

I mean linspire certainly chose a side when M$ challenged them about the lindows name. They picked a side then! Why not now?

I certainly did not mean to imply you PERSONALLY just asking if you would act that way. But that is true, you arent linspire but why associate with a company that does things you see as wrong?

My opinion is that you are a Microsoft troll who is paid to try to badmouth Linspire.

The news reports that you pointed to, simply said in 2001, Linspire licensed some software from SCO. SCO had many legitimate products (including a Linux distro) and customers at this time. It's quite feasible that a start-up built around combining Linux and Windows would find something useful to license from SCO. That's how businesses work.

SCO didn't start trying to extract bogus Linux license fees until March 2003.

So what's your point? Do you actually have any information that points to something dishonest here? Or is the dishonesty, once again, all on your part, "Jake"?


Peter

No and IF I remember correctly I even posted that I felt that Linspire should take a stand in the SCO deal and support the Linux community. But in this case they decided to stay out of the fight.
I can't say I agree with it, but I have to say that I somewhat understand their position.

No, I don't like dishonnest people, but Linspire wasn't dishonnest about their license deal with SCO they clearly stated that they had that deal. I would have felt worse if they had made a silent deal with SCO at least they pointed it out to us.

The M$ Lawsuite was about the name Lindows and I feel they should have continued the fight and prove for once and for all that the name "Windows" is a generic computer term and not a valid trademark from Microsoft. unfortunatly Lindows is/was a small company and they realy needed that 20Mil from Microsoft.
Again I didn't agree with it, but I guess they had the choice of staying in business with a diffrent name or take M$ to court and loose it all.
As I said before they are a commercial company and they need money and survive.

Well I guess every company makes some bad decisions but that doesn't make their product bad.
I became an Insider when there was NO Linspire or LindowsOS for the general public. I joined because I believed in their product (an easy Linux for all). And I still support their goals in bringing Linux to the masses. Like Peter stated in another thread Linspire is the best shot for Linux to convert people to desktop linux. I might not fully agree with that statement but it's for companies like Linspire and Xandros that do a lot for the community. I've also bought outher distro's to support Linux and Desktop Linux, just to name a few :
Linspire (you already knew that)
Xandros : bought 1.0 2.0 (upgraded to 2.5 but I think that was free) and 3.0
SuSE : might not be seen as a Desktop Linux but still
Mandrake : got a silver membership
Debian but that doesn't realy count since Debian doesn't realy have a commercial product I just bought the Woody DVD-Box and I guess some money from that flows back to Debian.
...
And I also support the FSF (Free Software Foundation).

I might disagree with some things Linspire has done in the past and might do in the future, but like I said you can't always agree and the great thing about Linspire is that they actually listen to our comments. They don't always do what WE want but that's a diffrent story.

Once again, here I am simply asking a question and yet here come peter (buy my book) to attack me. I simply was wondering what "technology" they licensed from SCO and what the deal was? If you have information and would like to enlighten me then please feel free to do so....

I then discussed something with cloudy and it was off topic and if I offended him...well I offered to retract!

I see you once again call me a troll.... I think a moderator would take care of my account and posts if I was not simply asking a legitimate question? Are you the linspire police?

It doesnt say they purchased a product, does it? That would hardly be news! And certainly that wouldnt be a secret would it?

Boy it is a shame that purchasing that secret "product" didnt help chrysler or autozone did it!

It basically says that because of that agreeement linspire is not a party in any of the disagreements! Thats pretty interesting to me.... How is telling the truth "badmouthing" anyone or any company?