Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×
Caldera Government Linux Business Operating Systems Software The Courts Unix News

McBride Says No More Lawsuits From SCO 280

thephotoman writes "Well, Darl McBride gave an interview to IDG News Services in which he said that SCO is not going to sue any more customers. They do bring up the issue of the SCOsource Linux licensing, and how much of a failure it has been. Instead, they plan to start marketing their flavor of Unix. However, as he's not dropping the current lawsuits, there's no good reason to believe him on this change in strategy."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

McBride Says No More Lawsuits From SCO

Comments Filter:
  • Good Idea (Score:5, Funny)

    by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @05:59PM (#9872575) Homepage Journal
    SCO is not going to sue any more customers.

    Not suing customers, particularly your own, is usually somewhere high on the list of Winning Business Strategies.

    "Smithers, how much did our iron-fisted grab for licensing fees get us?"
    "$11,000, last quarter, Sir."
    "Ehhxcellent! They must be crowding around like lemmings, eager to hand over their money!"
    "Uh, No Sir, it cost us millions to get that much."
    "In the parlance of that oafish brute Homer Simpson, D'oh!"

    • by Ayaress ( 662020 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:01PM (#9872603) Journal
      Very winning business strategy. You know what's more profitable? A betting pool on when exactly SCO will file their next lawsuit.
      • Re:Good Idea (Score:5, Informative)

        by jc42 ( 318812 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:22PM (#9872770) Homepage Journal
        A betting pool on when exactly SCO will file their next lawsuit.

        Yeah. Note that they didn't promise to stop suing non-customers. And that includes all linux users.

        Or maybe this time they'll claim that there is stolen SCO code in OSX. That could supply our SCO news fixes for a while.
        • HA HA (Score:3, Insightful)

          That's like saying M$ no longer makes operating systems because they have too many bugs.

          SCO is going to find a new revenue route. And it's going to be nastier than sueing nontechnical grandmothers.

        • Re:Good Idea (Score:4, Interesting)

          by ackthpt ( 218170 ) * on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:38PM (#9872991) Homepage Journal
          Yeah. Note that they didn't promise to stop suing non-customers. And that includes all linux users.

          A problem for them, in this regard, would have been a couple of my previous employers. They used both, SCO Unix and Linux for separate purposes. They may not need to be sued, but feel the change in climate and decide to dump SCO. Most companies could care less about the politics of operating system backers, they just want stuff to work and get on with business.

          • Re:Good Idea (Score:5, Insightful)

            by gcaseye6677 ( 694805 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @09:02PM (#9874417)
            It makes a lot of business sense to migrate away from SCO. Who wants to be stuck with an unsupported operating system when SCO goes belly up?
          • Re:Good Idea (Score:3, Interesting)

            by dolson ( 634094 )
            Actually, my employer is about to launch a pilot test to move the top 7 most critical systems from SCO to SUSE Linux. Thankfully, I'm going to have some involvement in it personally.

            They told me that the move had to wait until they saw what would become of the SCO lawsuits, and I guess they've decided that SCO basically was a flop and they aren't scared anymore.
        • BSD (Score:5, Interesting)

          by rd_syringe ( 793064 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @07:05PM (#9873287) Journal
          Didn't they already half-implicate BSD in one of their interviews?

          They love to make those vague implications. For a while there, we were hearing a new one every week. So much for that?
        • by Esion Modnar ( 632431 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @07:11PM (#9873343)
          Next thing, they'll find there's stolen SCO code in their SCO code. Who will they sue? Darl's other brother Darl.
        • ...they didn't promise to stop suing non-customers...

          Please provide at least one instance of SCO having sued a non customer.

          SCO has only ever sued customers (or partners or former customers/partners, or entities that have had a contractual agreement of some sort with SCO specifically). Such as IBM (project Monterrey partner), Autozone (former customer), DaimlerChrysler (former customer), and almost Bank of America (customer).

          Since they have never sued a non customer, they can't stop suing non customers
          • by boots@work ( 17305 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @08:56PM (#9874370)
            Yes, to date SCO have not sued a non-customer in regard to Linux. Take home lesson: don't deal with SCO.

            However, they have subpoenaed various Linux contributors and other parties who didn't have any business relationship to SCO. In some cases this seems to be merely a fishing expedition or harrassment. Not as bad as a suit, but still not something I'd like to see in my mailbox.

            SCO have also sent letters to non-SCO-customer Linux users threatening a lawsuit, although they have not actually filed suit against one of them as far as we know. It would be accurate for the original poster to ask that SCO stop *threatening to sue* non-customers.

            So people should be precise in what they say about SCO, but SCO still suck. I welcome their new future as a Caldera (literally "crater").
            • You are 100% correct in saying that precise language is important. News outlets have implied that because SCO have sued AutoZone (gasp! a Linux shop) and DaimlerChrysler (yikes! another Linux shop) that somehow running Linux puts one at risk. When in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Exactly ALL of the lawsuits today show that instead, being an SCO customer puts one at risk.

              Agreed that being subpoenaed is no day in the park, but people and companies are subpoenaed for various reasons all the
      • by cmacb ( 547347 )
        But more interesting will be a betting pool on when SCO will cease to exist.
    • Re:Good Idea (Score:3, Interesting)

      Yes, but it is a new one for SCO. Because SCO had no copyright case they actually sued former customers on trumped up charges, and so far have lost. I mean it is one thing to sue a customer who screws you over, but SCO were suing customers who had done NOTHING wrong other than perhaps not do as much business with SCO as SCO would like. All this just to create the public impression that SCO was somehow valuable through the public pretence that the lawsuits were over SCO copyrights.

      You'd have to be a raving
  • by dhakbar ( 783117 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @05:59PM (#9872580)
    He must have lost his funding.

    It seems strange that he would give up for any other reason... he's shown himself to be hell-bent on his mission.
  • Bottom line? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SIGALRM ( 784769 ) * on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @05:59PM (#9872581) Journal
    Though SCO's lawsuits against IBM Corp., Novell Inc., DaimlerChrysler AG and AutoZone Inc. have attracted a great deal of attention in the last year, they have not helped SCO's bottom line
    And a marketing push for SCO Openserver/Unixware will?
    • Re:Bottom line? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by PCM2 ( 4486 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:10PM (#9872682) Homepage
      Darl has to pretend that Unixware is a viable alternative to everything Linux, but in reality SCO has a more targeted market than that. As I understand it, they have a big presence in areas like point-of-sale terminals at McDonald's. Those kind of high-volume sales will probably continue to form their core business, particularly if they can continue to create FUD as to whether the Linux alternative will be a viable long-term proposition.
      • Re:Bottom line? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:15PM (#9872724) Homepage Journal

        SCO has one kind of customer, and that is legacy. McDonald's used to use Xenix, and for all I know they still might. If they're still SCO it's only because SCO promised them minimal effort in the upgrade department. Sooner or later they're going to decide they need something SCO can't give them and go to Linux.

        Xenix was basically the ideal OS for point of sale applications because it ran entirely reliably on 286 and 386 class machines. Now that point of sale systems are typically pentium or above (celeron, anyone?) there's no reason to be quite so miserly.

        • Re:Bottom line? (Score:5, Informative)

          by Lacutis ( 100342 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:33PM (#9872920) Homepage
          SCO Unix is the operating system used by one of the more popular retail POS systems on the market named Micros.

          From urants/ :
          "8700 Hospitality Management System (HMS)
          The 8700 HMS is composed of MICROS-developed application software running on the multi-tasking, multi-user SCO UNIX operating system."

          Micros is really popular in the restaurant industry in general.
          • That doesn't surprise me, they've probably been using SCO for ages. But, how long will it be before there's no point whatsoever to using SCO Unix? (Arguably, that time is actually in the past, but they might have a long-running contract or something.)
            • Re:Bottom line? (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Anonymous Coward
              You kinda have things backwards. The company really doesn't have to justify being with SCO what they have to justify is putting up the money for change and that really depends on if they get decent competition that warrents the change. Like it or not for a business like this there is no point venturing onto untested (particularly when doing so costs lots of money) ground unless there is a external force that will force them to.
      • Well, what a big part of their market used to be was smaller companies. UnixWare isn't a crap OS. I wouldn't call it good either, but for a long time it was a nice option for small budget companies. And then Linux happened :)

        Choice quote from the previous vice president of our IT company (about 5 or 6 years ago): "Linux? We won't spend time and energy on that, it is just a hype"

    • by Anonymous Coward
      ...who would even dare think of writing their apps for the SCO Openserver/Unixware platform anymore. In fact it would not surprise me one bit to hear of all the major players begin to announce dropping all support for their products to run on SCO's flavors of *nix in the very near future.
    • Re:Bottom line? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Well, they apparently still have an engineer on staff somewhere.

      They just posted to Bugtraq the other day fixing vulnerabilities mentioned in a CERT advisory which was well over a year old. And CERT advisories are usually only issued once the isses raised in them are old hat...
    • Re:Bottom line? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Pharmboy ( 216950 )
      And a marketing push for SCO Openserver/Unixware will?

      <form action="smoke" value="crack">

      Sure. Now that they are not the litigious bastards [] they once were, wouldn't you want to do business with them? I am sure they will start contributing code to GPL projects, maybe even the same code in questions, to prevent any further problems in the future. I would not be shocked if they released a new version of SCO Linux with the 2.6 kernel in a few weeks, and refunded what few license fees they received
  • Wrong quote (Score:5, Funny)

    by MoxCamel ( 20484 ) * on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:00PM (#9872589)
    To quote Mark Twain, the rumors of our death are greatly exaggerated.

    Someone gave McBride the wrong quote. He actually meant to quote Hudson, from Aliens:

    "Well that's great, that's just fuckin' great man, now what the fuck are we supposed to do? We're in some real pretty shit now man... That's it man, game over man, game over, man! Game over! What the fuck are we gonna do now? What are we gonna do?"

    • by kzinti ( 9651 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:19PM (#9872745) Homepage Journal
      Sontag: How long before we're declared losers can we expect a buyout offer?

      Tibbits: Seventeen days.

      McBride: Seventeen days? Look man, I don't wanna rain on your parade, but we're not gonna last seventeen hours! Those things are gonna come in here just like they did before. And they're gonna come in here...

      Sontag: MCBRIDE!

      McBride: ...and they're gonna come in here AND THEY'RE GONNA KILL US!
    • Engage the suit and nuke them in court. It's the only way to be sure.

      -- IBM
    • Re:Wrong quote (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:45PM (#9873081)
      Wow... Aliens has a lot of apropriate quotes:
      Ellen Ripley: I don't know which species is worse. You don't see them fucking each other over for a goddamn percentage!
  • by zalas ( 682627 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:01PM (#9872596) Homepage
    What's coming up next, Duke Nukem Forever or Doom 3- .... oh wait...
    • by Anonymous Coward
      No, he said he'll stop suing customers. Since
      SCO has no more customers they can sue anybody
      else they want. Actually that last statement was wrong.
      SCO has two customers left and neither of them
      will be sued.
    • I actually hope they come out with Duke Nuekom forever. Just slap that title on a silly old-fashioned side scrolling game. Then we'd get a whole new range of jokes..
  • hmm... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Valar ( 167606 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:01PM (#9872597)
    I guess the acid finally wore off. Spend millions to extract THOUSANDS!!!!!! in licensing fees. I am trully in awe of your threeleet business skillz, Darlzor.
    • According to Darl, everything is fine:

      We look into the future and fully expect that we're going to have some sort of a win against IBM in the courtroom. [...] We think that there's a very bright future in the company to return to the model that we had in the past with Unix Systems Laboratories.

      Uhm. Yeah Darl. Whatever you dream in Utahland.

  • by SoTuA ( 683507 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:01PM (#9872602)
    McBride says they wont sue their own customers any more, but those "communist, anti-american, pro-terrorist" linux users got them just desserts coming, ayuh.
  • SCO Linux? Again? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Matt Perry ( 793115 ) <> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:01PM (#9872605)
    Instead, they plan to start marketing their flavor of Unix.
    Good luck! SCO's pretty much lost the good will of nearly everyone in the computer industry. I doubt people are going to give any legitimate offering from them a second look. Companies that sue their customers will slowly find themselves without customers.
  • Res judicata (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lothar97 ( 768215 ) * < minus author> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:01PM (#9872607) Homepage Journal
    I think the posting is incorrect regards the "change in strategy." As Darl says in the article:

    "I think right now we've got the claims in front of the various courts that we need in order to get our complaints heard and to get them argued and to get resolution. With respect to being more vocal or going after new targets at the customer level, we don't see the need for that. We had the need to get the basic issues on the table, but we're fine to argue the merits of what we have out there right now (in) the current litigation setting."

    There's something in law called "res judicata," (incorrect definition here []) which means if something is decided by one court, it's binding on a court in another jurisdiction. The definition given is incorrect in stating that it applies only to the parties in the original suit. It can be used against a party in the original suit, if it's the same facts/situation, and the original party had ample and adequate opportunity and reason (motivation) to provide a full defense in the first case.

    If there is going to be a lot of cases, usually a company will do several, in different forums/jurisdictions, and see if they get a good result. If they do, such as SCO getting a ruling that all Linux violates their copyright/trade secrets/whatever, then they can use that in subsequent cases when suing. The inverse is also true. If a court finds that SCO is a bunch of mindless jerks that will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes (e.g. their claims are totally without merit), then they really cannot go after anyone else without overcoming some really large hurdles.

    Not only do I play an attorney on TV, I am an attorney in real life as well.

  • by Kenja ( 541830 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:01PM (#9872609)
    "SCO is not going to sue any more customers."

    In other words, now that they have no customers, they will only be sueing ex-customers.

  • McBride: We've got to figure out a creative way to market our brand of Unix or Linux will wipe us out. Anybody know how our product is better then any Unix flavor or Linux. We're not leaving this room until we get some ideas!!!

    *fast forward 12 hours later nothing said*

    McBride's junior exec: Sir, I believe this is known as the "oh sh*t moment in business" sir...
  • I'm sorry (Score:5, Funny)

    by ajs ( 35943 ) <ajs@ajs. c o m> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:02PM (#9872623) Homepage Journal
    It's kind of like saying, "I'm sorry I kicked your dog, but I'm not going to be kicking any more dogs because it seems to get dog owners upset," while kicking the dog several times...

    My personal opinion is that Darl actually loves Linux, and he's been working as hard as he can to, on Microsoft's dime, paint the anti-Linux crowd as raving maniacs... I mean, he's not really this broken, is he?
    • Re:I'm sorry (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:26PM (#9872815)
      "My personal opinion is that Darl actually loves Linux, and he's been working as hard as he can to, on Microsoft's dime, paint the anti-Linux crowd as raving maniacs... I mean, he's not really this broken, is he?"

      In retrospect, I think you're right. It's so surreal, but there was probably no better way to give GNU softare credibility in the business world. Look at how it looks to the corporate world:

      Big companies (Daimler/Chysler, etc) use Linux.

      Big companies like Linux so much, they'll fight in court to keep using it.

      IBM will stand by Linux's IP and defend it legally

      HP will stand by Linux's IP if you pay them for indemnification/insurance

      The code is so clean, despite being a "unix clone", even the owners of unix can't find any infringing code.

    • by Elwood P Dowd ( 16933 ) <> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:52PM (#9873169) Journal
      I mean, he's not really this broken, is he?

      Well, he is Mormon. He believes in magical underoos.
  • by sribe ( 304414 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:02PM (#9872625)
    This is just confirmation that they have committed corporate suicide. I don't think they would do this unless they'd figured out that they have scared off prospective customers (and partners) and sabotaged their sales efforts. But if things have gotten to that point, McBride telling a magazine they're going to refrain from suing customers in the future has exactly zero chance of restoring enough trust in the company to revive their sales.
  • No guarantee (Score:5, Interesting)

    by yamla ( 136560 ) <> on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:03PM (#9872630)
    I love Linux. I think SCO's claims are totally without merit. But please remember, just because Darl McBride says he won't sue any more customers does not mean he'll follow through. Remember, he's made all kinds of claims and promises in the past, almost none of which turned out to be true. His lack of honesty (or, optimistically, his lack of knowledge) cuts both ways.

    So, if you are an SCO customer, or even if you aren't, and if you run Linux, BSD, or Windows (all of which SCO has stated a claim to), you are still not safe. They may still sue you, even after claiming they won't.
    • Darl didn't say anything about non-customers. I can see it now -- their next marketing campaign: We won't sue any of our customers, so take the safe route and become a SCO customer today!
      • In fact, he claims SCO has no intention of launching new lawsuits against "Linux users" (not just SCO customers), at least until the claims currently in front of the various courts are worked out.

        Of course, you could well be right, he may change his mind and claim later that only customers are safe. Of course, this has so far proven incorrect, SCO customers are the least safe.
    • McBride's past lie (Score:3, Insightful)

      by rd_syringe ( 793064 )
      McBride, who in the past claimed SCO wouldn't sue Linux users but later did, is now claiming they won't sue Linux users anymore.

      At what point does McBride's ideas of lies and truth begin and end?
    • by Alsee ( 515537 )
      Hell, if McBride gets any more deranged he's likely to start suing Microsoft customers.

  • What? (Score:5, Funny)

    by theparanoidcynic ( 705438 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:03PM (#9872631)
    SCO has a product and engineers to maintain it? When the hell? I thought they were just a group of ninja-attack lawyers based out of a defunct Taco Bell store owned by a Microsoft operative . . . . .
    • Re:What? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Ayaress ( 662020 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:07PM (#9872662) Journal
      Drop out the "ninja" part and you're halfway there. If they had ninjas, I think they would have actually won a few fights.
    • by MachDelta ( 704883 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @07:27PM (#9873526)
      Judge: "Prosecution? You may present your case."

      SCO Lawyer: "I know... KUNG-FU!! HHYYYAAAAHH!!"

      Judge: "Uhh.. Defense? Yours?"

      Linux Laywer: "We beleive the fact that the prosecution is attempting to break his desk in half with his forehead is representative of our case, your honour."

      SCO Lawyer: "OOH!! This hurt head!! Must try, ancient technique! KKIIIAAAAAAAA--DDAAAARLLLL--!" *WHACK!* *Passes out*

      Judge: ", case dismissed."

      Hmmm. Damnit, now I wish I could actually see a ninja-attack lawyer in action... stupid overactive imagination...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:03PM (#9872636)
    who are not SCO customers...
  • Verbally (Score:3, Insightful)

    by usefool ( 798755 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:04PM (#9872637) Homepage
    Verbal statement is nothing, SCO could be planning for another lawsuit while everybody's relaxed enough to step into a trappy.

    A trappy is like a trap except there's nothing in it, but this doesn't stop people from being frightened by it.
  • by Greg Larkin ( 696202 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:05PM (#9872651) Homepage
    News like this really isn't helping Darl's attempt to become more evil than Satan.

    Darl vs. Satan []

  • by aredubya74 ( 266988 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:06PM (#9872653)
    Ah Darl. Silly, silly Darl. SCO Unix had its day 7-8 years ago, when Linux was still a hobby. The key market they owned was the x86 commodity hardware Unix. Linux absolutely owns x86 hardware-based *nix now, official Unix name or not. No ounce of marketing muscle you could possibly muster will change that fact. You're dead. Go away. And no, "Linux" didn't steal your IP, which you're quietly admitting now. Thanks for the 2+ year roadblock. Now fuck off.
  • Well damn, we've really screwed ourselves and this has been a whole failure. Sorry everyone, we're going to stop being jackasses and pretend we have a business and get some marketing going along those lines. We have to keep the existing lawsuits going because we don't want to look like complete idiots. If you could just forget about the last 18 or so months, it would be appreciated.
  • by Jaywalk ( 94910 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:07PM (#9872661) Homepage
    Darl never actually says they're going to stop suing customers. What the actual interview says is:
    McBride: Rather than trying to pound through all of those issues on a daily basis, we've been content to say, "We're going to work our issues through the courtroom, and when everything is resolved there, we'll be good to go . . .
    IDGNS: By saying you're fine with things, do you mean that you don't expect to be launching any new lawsuits against Linux users?
    McBride: I think right now we've got the claims in front of the various courts that we need in order to get our complaints heard and to get them argued and to get resolution. With respect to being more vocal or going after new targets at the customer level, we don't see the need for that.
    At best, he's promising to stop customers for now, which is nothing more than acknowledging that this is all they can do at the moment. Without a win in IBM and/or Novell, SCO can't win customer lawsuits. They would all end like AutoZone; the judge would tell them to wait until the other cases are done. Or worse, like Daimler-Chrysler, which got thrown unceremoniously out of court with DC's lawyers entering sarcastic letters into evidence about how they did not verify the CPUs the code was not installed on because DC hadn't used the stuff in seven years. Since SCO has no other choice, they make contented noises like everything is going their way. But everything he's saying is predicated on winning both the IBM and the Novell lawsuits and then figuring out a way to get customers to pay SCO. And none of the court cases have been going SCO's way.

    Nothing to see here. Just Darl's usual nonsense.

    • Nothing to see here. Just Darl's usual nonsense.


      Also, I understand that a bit of PHB-speak is called for if you actually are a PHB... but this is well beyond ridiculous:

      "...going after new targets at the customer level..."
      "...we're fine to argue the merits of what we have out there right now (in) the current litigation setting."
      "...the majority of the company resources are very directly pegged to the SCO Unix business."
      "We haven't gotten to the point yet, where we think that is the play

  • by Macrobat ( 318224 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:11PM (#9872689)
    "However, as he's not dropping the current lawsuits, there's no good reason to believe him on this change in strategy."

    That should read, "However, as it's Darl McBride, there's no good reason to believe him at all."
  • I really don't know what to say here. On the surface, it looks like a Big Win for the *nix community, but in the grand scheme of things they're doing the right thing. We now have to wait and see what the courts are going to do in the cases against Autozone and DC Motors - and if the other issues are any indication, it may just be "nothing" - or nothing of significance.
  • by Snap E Tom ( 128447 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:14PM (#9872709)
    Cloudscape donated to Apache, new Helix, Open-XChange going GPL, now this...

    Things are going too well. Look for Microsoft patent lawsuits to be unleashed tomorrow.
  • Oh, yeah.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by k98sven ( 324383 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:14PM (#9872712) Journal
    Exactly who in their right mind would buy SCO Unix?

    With features like:

    Risking having to migrate again in a year or two when they're bankrupt?

    No 2Gb+ file support

    No 64-bit support

    Ever-diminishing support from the OSS community, which ironically provides the most useful server apps for the platform?

    Risk future lawsuits from SCO if you do migrate?

    I mean.. SCO Unix has been uncompetitive for years now, while their management has been throwing all their effort into last-ditch lawsuits.

    Naturally.. it's all bullshitness as usual from SCO. But it's always worth the debunking, in case someone actually thought SCO had something of value.

    • Re:Oh, yeah.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hurfy ( 735314 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:48PM (#9873126)
      In case you are wondering, since we have one of the rare 2004 copies of SCO software. A third party vendor is still selling them as part of their accounting package because thats what it has always used and stability is priority number one (or damned close). None of the customers are gonna risk a $50k accounting package gettign messed up to see if it works on something else. I imagine there are other third party vendors the same. SCO sure better hope so since ours probably only uses a couple dozen copies a year! All the issues listed are not issues for these uses. Support is from the third party anyway, dont need SCO ;) We dont use 2G files or 64-bit systems to run it. I doubt many of the users mess with the unix stuff at all so other programs availble dont enter into it. Anyone doing their own thing on Unix would probably have a running box and not buy the preloaded one anyway. They are still out there, but the vendors using it seem to be small specialty programmers. Dont really blame them for using what worked. Course that didnt keep me from giving them a hard time about it ;p
      • C'mon (Score:3, Insightful)

        by tkrotchko ( 124118 ) *
        "None of the customers are gonna risk a $50k accounting package gettign messed up to see if it works on something else."

        Well, that isn't really the customer's job, that's the ISV's isn't it?

        Seems to me that an ISV that doesn't have a migration plan away from SCO already is one that I wouldn't want to do business with. They should have been migrating to something else 2-3 years ago.

        And even if SCO were to win the lawsuit against IBM, how does that help their core business? More to the point, how are cu
  • He actually says "Back to the future"? How about this for back to the future:

    "You're now hearing those guys talking about incorporating the Unix technology into Longhorn. "

    Um, NT has used components from UNIX since before Darl could spell "SCO". They have huge chunks of the BSD networking code (look for license strings in the binaries) and unlike USL they didn't file the Berkeley copyrights off.

    Not to mention that the original SCO's first product was "Microsoft Xenix". And it was much faster on our old P
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:15PM (#9872719)
    Both customers were sued...
  • Slashdotters will no longer hold 'Darl McBeat-Down Planning Meetings'.

    The next one is at the Mall of America @ Camp Snoopy, BTW. 7pm. Bring tokens!

  • by l0ungeb0y ( 442022 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:18PM (#9872744) Homepage Journal
    McBride saying "No More Lawsuits" is like an alchoholic saying "No more alchohol" after beating on his wife and kids.

    Who knows, maybe there's some 12-step program he can join.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    Easy -- his lip are moving!

    At this point, I beleive a state from SCO about what they will do in the future carries an information content of zero.

  • by Eberlin ( 570874 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:19PM (#9872749) Homepage
    Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale
    A tale of a fateful trip
    That started from a "Unix Port"
    Aboard a sinking ship.

    The mate was a mighty selling man
    The skipper wasn't sure
    Six passengers sat sail back then
    For a legal language tour (a legal language tour)

    The language started getting rough
    The chrysler case was tossed (almost)
    If not for the "courage" of the fearless crew
    The lawsuits would be lost (the lawsuits would be lost)

    The ship held ground on the shore of this
    Old Mormon Desert Isle
    With Billy Gates
    And Ballmer too
    Some millionaire
    Named McBride
    A Courtroom Star
    McNealy and Canadians
    Here on Darl McBride's Isle
  • by raytracer ( 51035 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:20PM (#9872755)


    We know from our experience in bringing suits against customers like Daimler-Chrysler that we are unlikely to reach settlements which generate cash for SCO. We are unwilling however to fold our cards on other corporate lawsuits, having tossed so much money into the pot. After all, the judge could show up drunk. _pause_. Hey, go order a case of schnapps and send it to the judge with our compliments.
  • by Kurt Gray ( 935 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:22PM (#9872774) Homepage Journal
    I definately want to invest my entire IT budget into the flagship product of company that is surrounded with the stench of certain failure. How much is it? $699 per CPU you say? Is that all? Well that's just giving it away! Here, I'll pay you $5000 per CPU because the more I pay the more I get my money's worth, right? I mean afterall you get what you pay for and nothing is free, right? My CEO will be so happy with my informed decision to bank our IT operations on SCO products and support.
  • Risking sanctions (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ( 142825 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:23PM (#9872779) Homepage
    It is not just the issue of expenditure of money and time to fight the lawsuits, if they bring more -- but the risk of sanctions.

    In Damler, the judge threw out most of their case, so they can't argue that the next one is brought in good faith.

  • I wonder if they are just now figuring out pissing all over your cunsumer base is a bad idea. Pretty much everyone who is studying computers and programing right now hates the SCO. They think of them as horrible throwbacks and a sign of everything that is wrong with the software industry. Now the SCO is realizing what this does to the bottom line. These same nerds eventually end up with a job in a major company and make decisions not to use SCO products. Simple and highly effective. I hope the same thing ha
  • by kwelch007 ( 197081 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:27PM (#9872817) Homepage
    Quote "We think in the future, software developers are going to be more motivated by getting paid for their work rather than contributing and not getting paid."

    Um. Ya. I haven't cared about getting paid so far. I'll think about that in the future.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      Thing is, there are thousands of Open Source / Free Software developers who DO get paid for their work. RedHat, SUSE, Mandrake, IBM, Sun, and hundreds of other commercial companies pay people to write free software.

      When Darl says something like this he just proves he has no clue how the Open Source community actually works.
  • What if... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Azureflare ( 645778 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:28PM (#9872842)
    Whenever I see Darl in the news I always think "What if.."

    What if, instead of pursuing hopeless litigation against other behemoth companies, you just tried to please the customers you had and try to make your product a better product?

    They would have failed, yes. Probably. But, who knows? Maybe they would have been able to garner a reputation for good service, and hold onto their core base for a longer time then they are now. Maybe they could have even segued into providing linux solutions, and made partnerships with other major companies (like IBM) instead of suing.

    Would SCO be a more successful company if they had? They might have failed yes, but they would have a good reputation, and they might have even been successful (or bought out), if they had played their cards right. Alas, they threw it all to the wind on a shot-the-moon scenario that will only end in tears for everyone.

    It just saddens me that people have such a lack of perspective.

  • SCO Forum (Score:4, Insightful)

    by _Sprocket_ ( 42527 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:34PM (#9872930)
    From the article:
    ...SCO has apparently chosen to make the company's core Unix business, and not its legal adventures, the center of this year's show.

    Can you imagine what it'd be like if they hadn't decided this?

    "Alright! Welcome to this year's Forum! We've got some exciting things to discuss this year. Now... before we start... how many of you are Solutions Providers and Software Engineers? How many hands? That many. Huh. I have no idea why you guys are here. Now... how about the lawyers? How many? Yeah! Hello. And Buisness Strategists from other companies competing against Linux solutions? Hello! Good crowd! We've got some really exciting news for all you guys...!"

    Granted - any solution providers who DO show up should still be asking themselves what they're doing there.
  • by CedgeS ( 159076 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:40PM (#9873026) Homepage Journal
    As I would have expected, and was the sole intent of these responses, the SCOX stock price [] took a nice step up on Monday following the interview in which SCO's CEO heighlighted SCO's other enterprises.
  • Does Darl think that they'll drop their countersuits at this news? Like a sociopath moving into a hippie commune "We're not crazy anymore... We've changed! We love everyone now. ALL BETTER!"
  • "One question" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by boots@work ( 17305 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:42PM (#9873052)
    As The SCO Group Inc.'s reseller and developer community gathers for its annual SCO Forum convention in Las Vegas this week, one question on many attendees' minds will be whether the company's future will be as a software vendor or as a litigator.

    The answer is No, they do not have a future as a software vendor or litigator.
  • IDGNS: What's the budget for the SCO Marketplace?

    McBride: To start off, it will be in the millions of dollars. If we see a courtroom victory against IBM, than obviously that number will jump up significantly.

    Darl left out the part about what would happen if they lose against IBM and IBM countersues with a vangence.
  • SCO Community Forum? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Kozar_The_Malignant ( 738483 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @06:51PM (#9873155)

    >As The SCO Group Inc.'s reseller and developer community gathers for its annual SCO Forum convention in Las Vegas this week, one question on many attendees' minds will be whether the company's future will be as a software vendor or as a litigator.

    Just who is attending this thing? How large is their "reseller and developer community", and does it have anyone in it other than SCO employees? Where is it being held, the back room of the Denny's on Fremont Street? Anyplace else, and the hall is going to look rather empty.

    I'm pretty sure the question about their future as either a software vendor or litigator has already been answered in the marketplace.
  • by linuxtelephony ( 141049 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @07:19PM (#9873433) Homepage
    Anyone notice this?

    IDGNS: Why did SCO recently decide to file a trademark claim for AT&T Corp.'s old Unix subsidiary, Unix Systems Laboratories (USL)?

    McBride: There are a couple of reasons around going back to the USL part of the business. ...

    We think that there's a very bright future in the company to return to the model that we had in the past with Unix Systems Laboratories.

    Quite a bit of revisionist history going on there, with Calde^H^H^H^H^HSCOG along with McBride and company at USL.
  • by adeyadey ( 678765 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @07:53PM (#9873810) Journal
    McBride Says No More Lawsuits From SCO..

    Bill Gates to refund every Windows XP users money "because its rubbish"..
    An end to all wars in the world..
    A pony for every child..
  • by wintermute42 ( 710554 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @08:03PM (#9873897) Homepage

    Darl: One announcement that we are making at the show is called the SCO Marketplace, and that's a marketplace exchange whereby we are going to allow developers to come and bid on work-for-hire projects that we have, to fill in the gaps where we're going with our development plan.

    Given that software developers in low cost countries like India and Eastern Europe can develop software far cheaper than developers in the US, does this mean that SCO is outsourcing their software development? I can see it now: SCO will fire their engineering staff (what little is left) and announce that they are a "virtual company" consisting of lawyers, suing IBM, and outsourced software projects. SCO will consist of Darl and a few hench-weasels to manage the lawyers and Indian software engineers.

  • duh. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fanatic ( 86657 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @08:06PM (#9873928)
    However, as he's not dropping the current lawsuits, there's no good reason to believe him on this change in strategy.

    It's not a change of strategy. It's a rout. The suit based on copyrights (SCO v AutoZone) was stayed in favor of the original IBM suit and copyright counterclaims - as was Redhat v SCO - so it's clear that any other copyright-based suit will get the same treatment, making the filing worthless, even as intimidation. The other customer suit (SCO v Diamler ) was a joke that was almost entirley dismissed. There's probalby not enough left for any action.

    So it's not a change of strategy, it's a smackdown, one of many they will endure, tho not necessarily quickly.

  • by chipmeister ( 802507 ) on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @09:03PM (#9874429)

    First they came up with "The Plan": Don't buy our products and we won't sue you.

    This failed and they came up with "The Other Plan": Buy our products and we will sue you.

    They finally tried "The Other, Other Plan": If you don't buy our products we will sue you.

    And they had a hit!
  • Perhaps (Score:4, Funny)

    by tkrotchko ( 124118 ) * on Tuesday August 03, 2004 @11:02PM (#9875211) Homepage
    Perhaps SCO is not sueing any more customers because they've pretty much reached the end of their list of customers?

"I never let my schooling get in the way of my education." -- Mark Twain