SCO: Fortune 500 Company Buys License, IBM Retort 557
An anonymous reader writes "SCO announced today that an undisclosed Fortune 500 company purchased Linux licenses for each of their servers running in their business. SCO: 'This Fortune 500 company recognizes the importance of paying for SCO's intellectual property that is found in Linux and can now run Linux in their environment under a legitimate license from SCO. We anticipate this being the first of many licensees that will properly compensate SCO for our intellectual property.'" kanly writes "The full text of IBM's countersuit against SCO is now online at LWN." M : Our own Roblimo has a pretty good take on it. Keep in mind that SCO could sell a blanket license for $1, for the publicity value.
SCO: Preparing Invoices (Score:2, Informative)
Good news is SCOX closed down 14% today.
SCOX going down, let's hope the trend continues (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Why can't Linus charge SCO for using HIS IP? (Score:2, Informative)
The best bits from IBM... (Score:5, Informative)
No idea what most of this means, but it sounds very impressive :-)
First Defense
The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Second Defense
SCO's claims are barred because IBM has not engaged in any unlawful or unfair business practices, and IBM's conduct was privileged,performed in the exercise of an absolute right, proper and/or justified.
Third Defense
SCO lacks standing to pursue its claims against IBM.
Fourth Defense
SCO's claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the applicable statutes of limitations.
Fifth Defense
SCO's claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the economic-loss doctrine or the dependent-duty doctrine.
Sixth Defense
SCO's claims are barred by the doctrines of laches and delay.
Seventh Defense
SCO's claims are barred by the doctrines of waiver, estoppel and unclean hands.
Eighth Defense
SCO's claims are, in whole or in part, pre-empted by federal law.
Ninth Defense
SCO's claims are improperly venued in this district.
Tenth Defense
SCO has failed, in whole or in part, to mitigate its alleged damages.
Take that, SCO! ;-)
Re:To the unnamed company (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.historybuff.com/library/refbarnum.ht
Fairly obscure, so I'm not too upset that I didn't know.
Re:I am guessing (Score:2, Informative)
Copy of newsforge text (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, they found someone gullible enough to bite. At least that's what they're claiming in a press release that's being spread all over the place, including on money.cnn.com. Naturally, SCO can't tell you who it is because of "confidentiality provisions," but the truth will certainly come out sooner or later.
Of course, if this anonymous Fortune 500 company later finds that SCO had no legitimate right to sell Linux licenses in the first place, they are going to be a bit upset, and since one characteristic shared by all Fortune 500 companies is the availability of nearly infinite numbers of inhouse lawyers and outside law firm attorneys, SCO is going to be in a world of hurt if it turns out, as IBM claims, that SCO released all the disputed Linux code under GPL.
Not that we care, since we don't own any SCO stock, and we don't use any SCO (proprietary) software products that are likely to become unsupported orphans if SCO gets trampled by the combined legal might of the growing number of companies their license blackmail scheme has offended.
Linux is worth big money!
We should look at this latest episode in the SCO soap opera as heartening news. Somewhere out there, one of the world's largest corporations has decided Linux is worth paying plenty of money to use, even if that money is going to the least-deserving party possible. This certainly gives the lie to any statement about how Linux has only gained corporate acceptance because it's free.
SCO's antics may cause a few potential (corporate) Linux converts to hold off deployment for a bit, but in the long run this may be the most positive PR boost Linux has ever gotten.
Call Now! (Score:5, Informative)
I wonder what a million phone calls and requests for written information would do for SCO? :) Perhaps all Linux users should at least request written (paper) documentation on all information from SCO.
Re:There is one word to describe these people: (Score:5, Informative)
An undisclosed Fortune 500 company paid an undisclosed amount for an undisclosed number of licenses for undisclosed code in the Linux kernel.
Is anyone else skeptical? Or is it just me?
download sco (Score:1, Informative)
Re:There is one word to describe these people: (Score:2, Informative)
Unless it's M$FT. Then the two words are: Silent partner.
--Given the boom in world population the rate has to be every 28 seconds by now.
Re:So what happens when we win? (Score:1, Informative)
http://www.cafeshops.com/politinerd [cafeshops.com]
Fight Sco!
Re:There is one word to describe these people: (Score:5, Informative)
SCO's stock price had been declining, for the most part, all day. But then the announcement of the license purchase seems to have helped them pull it back up a bit.
There was a rather interesting dip to $8.27 a share from around $9.00 a share just before they released the news.
See SCOX on finance [yahoo.com]
Re:Word for the wise... (Score:1, Informative)
This like needs to be put here more often. There's even XML data available. . .
--
me
22-KB IBM answer and counterclaim d/l available (Score:1, Informative)
Re:The best bits from IBM... (Score:5, Informative)
"10) Even when they (SCO) found what they say we (IBM) did wrong, they didn't try to stop it first, they just went straight to the lawyers."
Should be more like:
10) Even if we did something wrong (which we didn't) SCO isn't allowing anyone to remove its supposed code, so any damages they suffer they have brought upon themselves.
Re:I know who bought it.. (Score:4, Informative)
SCO Stock Price (Score:3, Informative)
Quite unfortunate that my broker didn't have any shares available for me to short.
It is not Microsoft or Sun according to SCO. (Score:3, Informative)
The deal is not with Microsoft Corp [infoworld.com]. or Sun Microsystems Inc., two prominent companies that have already signed other licensing agreements with SCO to cover their commercial products, Stowell said.
Re:mythical suckers (Score:2, Informative)
Microsoft just anounced that it had a Linux test lab. I am sure MS has just bought a license for every processor in that lab and more. Remember that the "license" it has already paid for is for its Unix Services not Linux.
Just another way to funnel the FUD money. And to enable SCO not to have to outright lie in its press release. As if they wouldn't lie - they are just "economical with the truth"
Fortune 500 idiots (Score:3, Informative)
M$?? (Score:2, Informative)
Insider trade this morning? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Mirror the UNIX Source Code (Score:2, Informative)
The source code for which Caldera International, Inc. grants rights are limited to the following Unix Operating Systems that operate on the 16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early versions of the 32-Bit Unix Operating System, with specific exclusion of Unix System III and Unix System V and successor operating systems:
This is the very old codebase, just when 32-bit CPUs started showing up. And they specifically exclude Sys III and Sys V, which are the modern incantations of Unix.
Re:But didnt they BSD their "IP"??? (Score:3, Informative)
It is the "UNIX System V" that is in question...
Sco takes feedback (Score:2, Informative)