SCO Linux Licenses Could Increase In Price

prostoalex writes "ZDNet UK says that, while SCO Group's legal department took a timeout from generating new lawsuits, their Linux license prices might be increased. 'Companies that license now may be able to do so cheaper than if they do so later,' [Blake] Stowell said. In the upcoming financials call, SCO expects to announce 6-figure revenue from its SCOSource division."

Cheaper...

[IronMagnus]

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just not by a license at all?

"Six Figures" is just $ from an old deal!

[DiscoBobby]

I think the only reason that SCO will be able to announce 6-figure revenue for SCOSource is because this is the fiscal quarter that they'll book the revenue from the EV1 scam - the first and to my knowledge ONLY large deal (other than the war-chest they got from Microsoft) they've ever closed.

If this is the case, this does NOT indicate new deals, this does NOT indicate a new revenue source, this does NOT mean that did a dime's worth of business in the last 3 months - it's just when the revenue from their only decent deal some time ago hit the books.

A quote from the SECOND quarter conference call (Darl speaking to Maureen O'Gara):

McBride: We had a few deals on the SCOsource side, Maureen. You know with last quarter we had announced a major deal with EV1. That is not part of the revenue stream that we're reporting in second quarter. That revenue will start to be accounted for in the quarter that we're currently in.

O'Gara: Sorry. The EV1 revenues will show up on this quarter?

McBride: Yes. They will start this quarter, and they'll be booked over multiple quarters going forward.

Now, within that conversation, Darl claims to have deals in the pipeline:

O'Gara: Well, we'll see how that .... Now, you forecast 10 to 12 this quarter, but that's mostly from the UNIX business, which ....

McBride: Yeah, until there's a stream of revenue that comes out of the SCOsource side, we're not going to get in the business of handicapping or projecting the forecast of it. You know, the pipeline that Bert is talking about that is healthy right now is not really part of that 10 to 12. Once we have more predictability, then we'll start to get projections on that.

Notice he hints "10 or 12", but I suspect all he got this time was money from EV1. Looking forward to the conference call to see if anybody challenges his smoke-and-mirrors show.

Before we panic ...

[crimethinker]

When I saw the mention of six figure revenue from SCOScam^H^H^Hource, I thought, oh shit, the FUD has been working. But then I remembered the EV1Servers deal. Didn't that happen too late to be counted on last quarter? Really, has anyone publicly stepped up and said, "SCO is right, and we're buying a license." I mean, since EV1 got slapped by the community for swallowing the BS hook, line, sinker, rod, and fisherman?

-paul

Great line

[Kafka_Canada]

"SCOsource is the Linux users' shakedown program. Apparently, no one is paying up. It took in $11,000 last quarter. That's not a typo. President and CEO Darl McBride paid more lip service to 'increasing shareholder value,' but you really have to wonder about the viability of his vision when his firm's most engrossing initiative brings in less money than the guys who mow lawns in my neighborhood."

--the Motley Fool [yahoo.com]

Re:cost increase

[RKBA]

"I really don't get this joke."

Microsoft purchased a license from SCO early on, ostensibly because they have some sort of Unix interfacing or development tools that run on Windows.

Re:Oh no!

[tonyr60]

"Seriously, what good is a licence from a company that will be bankrupt in a few years from multicast litigation?"

It is likely that the license would survive such a bankruptcy. In the event of SCO going belly up uts assetts would be sold off, including any Intellectual property it may own. The purchaser (which could be Microsoft, Dell, IBM, whoever) would continue to own the licensing rights.

None of the above should be interpreted to mean that I think that that SCO has any intellectual property of value, or that it hold the right to license *unix or anything else.

Re:Enderle: "Free Software and the Idiots Who Buy

[Anonymous Coward]

He has some kind of followup on Linux Insider [linuxinsider.com]. Which, by the way, is not necessarily an aptly named website. They seem to have lots of anti-Linux articles.

Re:Formation of SCO

[twiddlingbits]

This one has been debunked by Torvalds himself, he STUDIED Minix in school and thought he could do it better and so he built Linux from scratch with some help from his friends. There has never been any Minix code in Linux. Minix was never meant to be more than a teaching tool thats why it was never upgraded. This topic came up on Groklaw a while back and someone actually emailed Linus and got his permission to post his reply to the Minix question.

Re:Only works if people pay.

[Kynde]

0 in base 0 is 1

The hell it is. 1 is not even a number in base 0. Not that base 0 makes any sense, but when someone mods your post "interesting" rather than "funny" that someone is way off.