SCO Says 'Linux Doesn't Exist' 739
4A6F656C writes "In an article on LinuxWorld.com.au, Kieren O'Shaughnessy, director of SCO Australia and New Zealand, details SCO's plans for Australia, stating that they have 'prepared a hit list' and "would approach Australian Linux users to ensure they had an IP licence." In closing, he adds 'Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix'." UnknowingFool writes "IBM's lawyers have been busy the last few days. Groklaw has reported a number of different filings. On the heels of last week's motions (1) and (2) for summary judgement, they have filed more documents. First, IBM wants large portions of SCO's testimonies striken (removed) on multiple grounds. Deep in the motion, they call out SCO to produce the 'experts' that did the code comparison analysis. If IBM wins on most of these points, SCO will have very little left in the way of legal evidence. SCO answers on IBMs 10th counterclaim. IANAL but from I understand SCO says this copyright infringment that SCO has allegedly committed on one of IBM's patents is irrelevant to the case and the court doesn't need to decide on it. So SCO is saying that they can sue IBM for infringing on their Unix copyrights and patents but IBM can't counter sue on a specific patent. IBM also filed another memo to support summary judgement. As a matter of law, SCO has to produce evidence to backup its claims. This mountain of evidence SCO has claimed all this time: If they don't produce it, the court has to rule in IBM's favor."
They must not! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:They must not! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:They must not! (Score:4, Funny)
Face the Fax (Score:5, Funny)
Darl, Chris and Blake walk into a bar.
The waitress says, "Darl, you have a telegram waiting, its the quarter-end results." Darl happily takes the telegram and tosses it on to the bar's grill, where it bursts into flames.
The waitress comes back and says, "Darl, you have a phone call. Its an industry analyst." Darls walks over to the phone, and while talking, he pivots in a circle until the call is complete, then returns.
Finally, the waitress announces, Darl, you have a fax coming in. Darl gets up, and backs slowly toward the machine, rips off the page, and returns to the booth.
Blake looks at Chris and says, "I understand the part where Darl habitually cooks the numbers and spins a tale, but what was that last thing?" Chris says, "Oh that? He'll never ever face the fax."
(:) 2004, the Tubby Nuisance Network.
"All wrongs preserved."
Nah, Linux's virtualisation is better than theirs (Score:4, Funny)
I wrote IDG a nastygram about the article. A copy of it's on the GrokLaw page.
May the trend continue... (Score:5, Funny)
Misleading Graph (Score:5, Informative)
Showing a graph of 3 months is worthless, since this whole thing has been going on for years now. If you look at the 2 year chart [yahoo.com], you will see that they still have quite a bit to dip before they even hit the low point.
Re:Misleading Graph (Score:5, Funny)
God: Nietzsche is dead
SCO: Linux is dead.
..a bit later:
Linux: SCO is dead.
Re:Misleading Graph (Score:5, Funny)
"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed at the next zebra crossing.
Re:Misleading Graph (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Misleading Graph (Score:3, Informative)
Yet if you look at the chart on the link you provided you will notice their 52wk low was this morning.
Market Value (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean the perceived market value before they started this pump and dump exercise? What exactly will that tell you? What the three month dive means to me is that even Wall Street realizes that there is no SCO case, there will be no further buyouts and SCO is worthless. People who bought into SCO are sorry they did, including Baystar who recommend that SCO fire their remaining technical staff and become a full time IP scam house.
Re:Market Value (Score:5, Funny)
IBM: SCO is trying to inflate their stock price while while we deal with their legal issues. Lets use our resources to tie them up in court until Nasdaq kicks them off the exchange, then we can buy up the remains of the company. Oh, and collect a group of people infront of the office. We'll send Daryl a picture of us flipping the bird at him.
Not really (Score:5, Informative)
A log scale chart is more meaningful when it comes to the real value of the company - a share price drop from $5 to $4/share means they've lost 20% of their value, while going from $15 to $14 is only about a 7% drop. The log scale graph comes a little closer to representing how serious each day's change is to SCO (and their investors).
Re:May the trend continue... (Score:3, Funny)
Given IBM's legal filings... (Score:5, Informative)
If you read them, SCO is betting the farm on a diversion tactic to answer IBM's request for summary judgement.
Basically, they're feigning surprise that this is an issue, complaining that they need more discovery, and trying to say that they haven't had time to properly prepare for this because it could take 25,000 man hours.
Unfortunately for them, IBM responds that it's been hammering SCO on this question for over a year now (in spite of SCO sticking their heads in the sand to avoid it). Also, IBM's experts say that SCO's characterization of the times involved is ridiculous and SCO has already claimed in the media *many* times to have made these comparisons already (even though it refuses to provide them to IBM).
Worse, SCO's "experts" haven't been properly qualified, they're testifying about things they would appear to have no personal knowledge of, and as such IBM is moving to strike our large portions of their declarations, meaning that SCO wouldn't have much of an arguement left. This is especially true because SCO's Samir Gupta, the only "expert" who appears to have done any code comparisons (and I say "expert" because they give no credentials for him other than him being in the employ of SCO), has completely ignored the abstraction & filtration required by the case law (whereas IBM's properly qualified MIT professor has done one refuting theirs, which respects the case law in question).
Lastly, they point out via copious amounts of case law that SCO does *not* need any more discovery. They show that the only thing which matters for a judgement in terms of *copyright infringement* is the two final works. SCO surely has its own product line, and IBM points them to every version of Linux since 1.0, which is available online.
Taken in sum, unless SCO can pull off one hell of a miracle to convince the judge in the oral arguments, I would tend to think that SCO is screwed here. SCO's tactic of sticking its head in the sand to try and duck IBM's arguement doesn't seem very persuasive, and *SCO* has the burden of proof to show that there are material facts in dispute. Given how IBM so carefully destroys all the testamony SCO relies on, it's hard to see how SCO could prevail in any meaningful way when these motions are resolved.
Re:Given IBM's legal filings... (Score:5, Informative)
25,000 man YEARS.
IBM had a nice zinger (pg. 34 of IBM's Redacted Reply Memorandum In Further Support of its Cross Motion For Partial Summary Judgment on its Claim for Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement):
"Under SCO's view of what is required to review source code, it would take
14 million man-years to review this additional code." [referring to the AIX and Dynix code SCOX wants].
Backpedalling we a'go... (Score:5, Interesting)
These lines are the kicker (and send exactly the opposite message from the summary here on
Can anyone seriously say that they are really committed to victory in the courts if they have backpedaled that far on enforcing "their violated rights" down under?
Re:Backpedalling we a'go... (Score:5, Informative)
I believe it's a cricket reference. Out for a duck is out for no runs, breaking your duck is actually getting somewhere (i.e. making some runs).
Re:Backpedalling we a'go... (Score:5, Informative)
In Cricket, that funny game played by Poms, Kiwis and Aussies (among others) a zero score is known as a duck. To break one's duck means to have scored, at least, one run. So SCO are claiming to have sold, at least, one Linux "licence" down-under.
Re:Backpedalling we a'go... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Backpedalling we a'go... (Score:5, Interesting)
to who? SCO Australia Ltd?
Keep in mind that SCO is now bundling Linux licenses with it's Unix products, so every time they sell a Unix license they can crow about another customer finally recognizing the need to purchase a Linux license.
OTOH, this whole lawsuit thing has really hammered their sales figures into the ground, so that's *still* not very many Linux licenses to crow about.
Re:Backpedalling we a'go... (Score:3, Informative)
Slang derived from cricket. Broke our duck means to break zero. In cricket, to be out for zero is called "scoring a duck" or just "out for a duck".
Be very careful how you pronounce those phrases. Remember - the letter is 'd'. Definitely 'd'. Not any other letter. Oh no.
Cheers,
Ian
Re:Backpedalling we a'go... (Score:5, Funny)
and profit forecasters say (Score:5, Funny)
Indeed. (Score:5, Funny)
And for that matter, you guys don't exist when I close my eyes! Neener neener neener!
Re:Indeed. (Score:5, Funny)
Would you stop blinking already? I'm sick and tired of fading in and out of existence. Thank you.
Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:5, Insightful)
The neat thing about the GPL (Score:4, Insightful)
IBM's doing what they're doing out of self-interest, but the entanglement created by the GPL means that in order to act in self-interest they must indirectly act in the interests of the community as well.
Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:4, Interesting)
IBM, on the other hand, is the 4 ton gorilla (ie, King Kong) in the semiconductor and hardware industries. They make somewhere around 90% of the ICs in the world, if I recall correctly.
Intel and AMD are toy companies in comparison. They may be cutting edge, but they're tiny. If you need an analogy, they are like id software. Top-quality stuff, highly respected, but generally not a major industry force. A major consumer force, yes, but not an industry force. They're a very specialized company, and don't seem particularly eager to try and diversify. EA and the other mega-developers view them as outsourced game engine R&D. IBM views AMD and Intel and, on the software side of things, the Open Source community, in the same sort of way. Cheap R&D.
Still, not a bad deal.
Re:your .sig [OT] (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes.
I don't think all of us will now put down our lives for IBM. If they ever tried to pull a fast one, I have no doubt everyone would turn on them real quick. But for the mean time they have proven themselves to be a friend. And many of us are in positions to make purchasing decisions. And while we may not all go out and buy Big Blue mainframes, when two comperable deals are on the table IBM now has a slight advantage.
And that's not the only reason to support FOSS. IBM is doing several things that are good for its business. They sell hardware, and hardware needs software. Better/cheaper software makes for more profit on hardware.
Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:5, Insightful)
I say they're a comfortable ally, and moving into friend catagory.
They do that because of profit. (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, if IBM would fund a drive to eliminate software patents in the US, THAT would show they were a friend.
They are an "ally" only because they see Linux (and Open Source) as useful and profitable and an alternative to being second to Microsoft.
Re:They do that because of profit. (Score:5, Insightful)
Our allies are simply those who interests align with ours. Stop asking companies to do more than act in their own interests: it will never happen. The advance of open source in the corporate world has been because it offers real value, not because of ideals. Ideals may drive the creation, but not the adoption.
Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:5, Insightful)
1) They don't have to pay the billions in damage SCO wants.
2) Fear. It had previously been common computer world knowledge; "Don't mess with IBM's legal team". SCO is going in the face of the convention. I think IBM is reestablishing that.
3) Yes, they are getting good will.
Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't about "big" vs "little" as SCO would try to contend. This is about "right" vs "wrong". In other words if you file a lawsuit you better have something to back it up.
Re:Do IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:3, Informative)
As long as they're defending open source with their lawyers, I can't imagine a sane person wanting to attack it--I've read the legal briefs, they don't miss a thing.
Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:5, Informative)
It sure beats HP's
and Sun's IBM, of all the vendors, took by far the most productive aproach without trying to leverage and further hype SCO's fud. They're certainly my prefered Linux vendor, and probably will be unless/until their position changes radically.Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:5, Informative)
So yeah, we agree- they have bought a lot of loyalty with their code contributions, their defense of the GPL, and more.
It's probably appropriate to consider IBM as a services rather than a software company. Distributing software for free enhances the value of the services they provide enormously - it makes the market possible. IMHO, a services business benefits tremendously from open source, while a software business will be inevitably chewed up and spit out without govt. intervention in the form of prior-restraint patent laws. So IBM's switch to outright developer coddling (seen in this context) is less of a dubious religious conversion and more of a practical business necessity- the more stuff I can do for free, the more stuff I can do on customer's behalf without having to sock them with a huge oracle or microsoft tax.
Re:Does IBM's actions buy loyalty? (Score:5, Informative)
As a former IBM employee, I had the opportunity to sit in on a lot of different presentations on many different topics in the FOSS and Linux areas.
One thing a lot of people seem to miss is that one of the very important reasons why IBM started embracing Linux had nothing to do with it being free, but instead being able to offer a single OS and API set across all of their hardware platforms. This had been a "holy grail" at IBM for some time -- I actually sat in on a public presentation one time where IBM developers were talking about extending OS/2 up to their mainframe line -- and Linux fits the bill.
IBM is still, at its core, a hardware company, and being able to have a single API with which you can use to control all their different systems is a huge potential benifit.
Java, another technology IBM has pushed heavily, is one such solution. And Java isn't free -- IBM pays Sun licensing fees in order to create the JVMs for all their different platforms (OS/2, Linux, Windows, AIX, OS/400, etc.).
IBM got into Linux in a big way not so much because it was free, but because it was readily portable (a side-effect of being free).
IBM wants to be able to sell you an Intel-based xSeries server for your business. And then another. And then as you grow, upgrade you to a bigger server (like an iSeries). Then a xSeries mainframe. If you start off running Linux and developing your business code in Java, they can push bigger and more expensive solutions on you, and you don't have to retrain your IT staff to deal with a new OS, and you don't have to rewrite your business code.
That's where the big benifit to IBM is. Of course, it doesn't hurt IBM when it's trivial to port DB2 (and WebSphere, and other big business products) for Intel Linux over to an S/390 also running Linux. They can target different hardware without having to hire on a whole new development team to port it to yet another platform.
Yaz.
Doesn't Exist? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Doesn't Exist? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Doesn't Exist? (Score:5, Funny)
-N
I'm sorry...
excerpt of article (Score:5, Funny)
IBM: What truth?
SCO: There is no Linux.
IBM: There is no Linux?
SCO: Then you'll see that it is not Linux that you're using, it is only SCO Unix Openserver v. 5. And that will be $699 per CPU please or else you'll be hearing from our lawyers.
Re:excerpt of article (Score:5, Funny)
AND (Score:5, Funny)
The Darl: - Humph. /root, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest weakness.
Tux: If I were you, I would hope that we don't meet again.
SCO should hire this guy.... (Score:4, Funny)
Iraqi Information Minister [welovethei...nister.com]
This is brilliant (Score:5, Interesting)
"The only reason we are [pursuing a lawsuit against IBM] is to defend our Unix business; we are not a litigation company, we are about Unix on Intel," he said.
Accelerates..
"IBM has transformed Linux from a bicycle to a Rolls-Royce, making it almost an enterprise-class operating system.
Goes into overdrive..
"It took us 25 years to build our business and it took [IBM] four years simply by stealing code and then giving it away free."
and ofcourse finally..
"Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix,"
I wish more people like this existed to make my day.
Re:This is brilliant (Score:5, Funny)
Almost? In the same way that I'm "almost" alive? It's surely more 'almost' than some of the stuff being produced by the merchents more usually known as Microsoft.
Wow, this is almost a post.
Going back to their roots, too bad they're rotted (Score:4, Informative)
GNU (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, if Linux doesn't exist, will my computer still work when I get home? I've got important stuff on there, and I'd like it to not be a figment of my imagination, as I haven't backed it up lately.
Wow ... (Score:4, Funny)
That O'Shaughnessy bloke sure is one heck of a solipsist [wikipedia.org].
IBM's response (Score:3, Insightful)
So, pencils are writing and erasers are erasing, students are preparing to embark on novels proving that this chair doesn't exist, except for one student. He spends thirty seconds writing his answer, then turns his final in to the astonishment of his peers.
Time goes by, and the day comes when all the students get their final grades...and to the amazment of the class, the student who wrote for thirty seconds gets the highest grade in the class.
His answer to the question: "What chair?"
Well, to put this in context, since Kieren O'Shaughnessy says Linux doesn't exist, IBM lawyers should respond to all the lawsuits as 'What Linux?'
Re:IBM's response (Score:4, Funny)
This guy spent thirty seconds writing "What chair?" ?
Re:IBM's response (Score:3, Informative)
Penmanship counts.
Re:IBM's response (Score:4, Informative)
His answer to the question: "What chair?"
Probably an urban legend, as discussed [snopes.com] by Snopes [snopes.com]. Nice analogy, though!
More to the story (Score:5, Funny)
Afterwards, he went on to discuss SCO's legal strategy of, "I am rubber, you are glue, what bounces off me sticks to you".
There's a lot more on groklaw (Score:5, Informative)
Re:There's a lot more on groklaw (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps if SCO had studied under Pai Mei they wouldn't be in this situation.
Re:There's a lot more on groklaw (Score:5, Funny)
Like a Child (Score:5, Insightful)
When I was a little boy I came home from school and asked my mom if we could skip Thursday. She was puzzled and said "no". She later found out that I had gotten in trouble at school, and the teacher had scheduled a disciplinary meeting on Thursday afternoon.
Thursday doesn't exist.
If Linux doesn't exist... (Score:5, Funny)
Lines of code... (Score:3, Insightful)
Then it was in the thousands... then the hundreds, then the dozens...
Now all of a sudden its the whole damn thing? I would love to hear SCO explain how someone could have the complete code to an unlicensed version of Unix and have gotten away with it until now.
Crack must be real cheap in Utah these days...
Credibility (Score:5, Insightful)
Using terms like "hit list" is not a good way of gaining credibility with investors and with judges. Claiming that something doesn't exist and then trying to sue people for using it doesn't help your credibility with anyone.
The legal system isn't deaf or blind to the media; SCO's ridiculous actions will affect the outcome of subsequent court cases. As we've seen with IBM's increasing success in court, SCO just hasn't learned these lessons.
Not that I mind at all.
Contemplating Existence (Score:5, Funny)
Linux computes, therefore it is.
But if SCO falls in a forest of futile legal filings, did it really make a sound or was that just wind breaking?
Does this remind anyone (Score:3, Funny)
They certainly would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for those meddling kids [ibm.com]
Me neither.
Forgive me D.A. (Score:5, Funny)
"I refuse that Linux exists," says SCO, "for Linux denies Copyrights, and without Copyrights I am nothing."
"But," says Torvalds, "Open Source copyrights are a dead giveaway, aren't they? They could not have evolved by chance. In Linux they exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."
"Oh dear," says SCO, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
"Oh, that was easy," says Torvalds, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed at the next zebra crossing.
Most leading software developers claim that this argument is a load of dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid making a small fortune when he used it as the central theme of his best-selling book, 'Well That About Wraps It Up for SCO.'
Moderation Results (Score:3, Funny)
Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix
-1 Troll
Not quite right... (Score:5, Funny)
Small correction: It's GNU/Linux. And GNU's Not Unix.
Re:Not quite right... (Score:5, Funny)
Look! Someone just discovered recursion!
In other news... (Score:4, Funny)
SCO doesn't care about this (Score:5, Insightful)
The connection between themselves and Microsoft is firmly established now. I guess it is still open to debate if Microsoft was the company that came up with the idea of using SCO as a massive FUD machine against Linux, or if they simply started backing SCO once they realised what potential that would have. My personal guess would be that you could probably trace the very idea back to Redmond, but that's really irrelvant here.
For all the time this has been going on, there has been a blanket of FUD over Linux. Most people here saw through it, but even on Slashdot you could find posts along the lines of "...but what if SCO is actually right and their IP is in Linux..." The business world, getting their news from sources like Forbes, had a far different perception. To them, Linux suddenly became a poison pill that no IT manager would touch. You may believe Linux's reputation will eventually recover, but SCO was able to plant seeds of doubt in so many minds in the mean time.
The real trajedy here is that this type of tactic has made SCO management and board members rich, SCO employees unemployed, Linux tarnished in the eyes of the businessman, and most likely nothing will ever be done to punish those responsible for the lies.
Re:SCO doesn't care about this (Score:5, Informative)
It is now an undisputed fact that Microsoft was behind BayStar investing 50 million in SCO, and a BayStar manager has admitted that they made the investment based on the guidance of Microsoft. Microsoft also purchased SCO license(s) for Linux for an undisclosed sum (I'm assuming it was a bit more than $699).
Re:SCO doesn't care about this (Score:5, Informative)
Where is the source for this information?
Does this little lot help?
http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween10.h
http://trends.newsforge.com/trends/04/03/08/04572
http://www.practical-tech.com/business/b05212003.
What a scam... (Score:3, Insightful)
Hmm, the stink of fraud is certainly filling up the room now...
Re:What a scam... (Score:3, Insightful)
That could land them in hot water in Australia, depending on how they choose to use it. ASIC doesn't take very lightly to those sort of tactics.
In the end, though, SCO will run away from the "there is no linux" claim, by stating that it was taken out of context during a media interview or some shit like that.
OT: Should the word "Linux" be capitalized or not? (thinking of the recent Internet/Web conversation)
The Green Mile for SCO (Score:3, Interesting)
That didn't happen then SCO thought maybe they could extort lots of money from Linux users.
That didn't happen so then they thought they could sue other companies to scare people into buying.
That didn't happen and now they are walking the Mile. Expect lots of sound and fury but in the end it will signify nothing.
already discussed at Groklaw... (Score:3, Informative)
these last days, such redundancies have become quite frequent. My guess is that cowboyneal is on a vacation.
What? (Score:5, Insightful)
There were other unix workalikes that don't exist (Score:3, Funny)
Then there is Xenix. SCO sold that for years after Microsoft sent it their way. Bill Gates hasn't mentioned Xenix in a long time so it must not exist either.
But if Linux doesn't exist, what was Caldera selling all those years (before it became SCO)?
I'll Pull This Car Over! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm rubber, you're glue. Whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you.
SCO lawyers:
Yeah, well you're all stupid.
IBM lawyers:
I know you are... but what am I.
SCO laywers(amongst themselves):
Damn, that was good one. Do we have anything else? (shuffle through papers) How 'bout "Our dads can beat up your dads"? No. Try this.
SCO laywers(to IBM):
You're mom!
I was wondering where that guy went.... (Score:5, Funny)
"There is no Linux here!! It is LIES, from the mouth of the evil Stallman!! It is all a Zionist conspiracy against the brave people of Utah! The people are united undet the benevolent and loving rule of Darl McBride, who shall lead us to glorious victory against the heathen penguins!! The infidels shall commit suicide against the walls of our bullshit!!
Every man and boy in Utah is ready to resist the invading horde of penguins with his life! We have held them off, and are slaughtering them like sheep on the shores of our Greeat Salt Lake! There are no Linuxes within Salt Lake City, as we defeat the avian aggressors and drive them from their homes! Our lawyers are mercilessly cutting them down as we speak, any reports of Novell or IBM winning are lies! LIES!!!
SCO is great! Praise be to SCO! There is no UNIX but SCO!!"
man ioctl (Score:3, Funny)
Meanwhile, back at The North Pole... (Score:4, Funny)
If Santa Claus does not exist, he cannot have possibly invented Linux! I can't wait to submit this new evidence in court!
Does Unix exist anymore? (Score:4, Interesting)
So when they say Linux is an unauthorized Unix, what Unix are they talking about? Besides, doesn't the original email from Linux talk about how Linux is a "Minix" clone, which in turn is a much scaled down version of Unix? Why doesn't SCO go after Minix too while they're at it. Or Plan9...that's very Unix-like.
Or Windows...oops, no, not that one. Besides, that's more VMS than Unix.
Also reported not to exist (Score:4, Funny)
A need for more than 640k
a Windows Monopoly
HTTP 404 errors
Neitzche (Score:5, Funny)
"SCO's case does not exist" --IBM
Coming soon...
"SCO does not exist" --Wall Street
I'm trying to see things from SCO's point of view (Score:5, Funny)
Yes! (Score:5, Funny)
br
SCO threats becoming irrelevant (Score:5, Insightful)
I think they're going to go out, not with a bang, but a whimper. Their ability to construct a case is just going to wither away and die. We'll quit hearing about them (thankfully); then, 20 years from now, we'll hear a "Whatever happened to SCO" retrospective?
This is a little unfortunate. I was counting on their legal shenannigans to destroy them in a publicly enjoyable way.
The market isn't buying (Score:5, Informative)
The current price is roughly consistent with their cash position, now that they've paid off BayStar. There's an earnings call on August 31, and then we'll know how well, or badly, SCO did this quarter. SCO has lately been issuing press releases for many minor events, and none of them mention substantial revenue. So there probably isn't any new income.
Meanwhile, many of the various motions in SCO vs IBM will be heard in September. If IBM wins any of them, SCO is toast. If IBM doesn't win any of them, IBM is no worse off.
Australian slander laws? (Score:5, Interesting)
"IBM has transformed Linux from a bicycle to a Rolls-Royce, making it almost an enterprise-class operating system.
It took us 25 years to build our business and it took [IBM] four years simply by stealing code and then giving it away free."
This seems like a statement that could put one in jail. Claiming that someone stole from you without proof seems a risky move at best.
Yes SCO everyone does hate you. No one will ever want to business with you ever again. Suing customers is not the way to make people want to do business with you. By your actions you have made IBM look like a warm, friendly, and even cool company and the hero of the IT world. Yes the former evil empire now looks like Santa Claus while SCO's image is that of the Iraq information minister. I would say that SCO hasn't reached the level of the Anti-Christ. Frankly most people would expect the Anti-Christ to not be as incompetent as SCO. No not even level of Hitler. SCOs level of evil is about at the level of a pimple faced Neo-Nazi skinhead publishing newsletter out of his bedroom. Full of lies, stupid ranting, and a false sense of injustice.
Yes SCO you have sunk so low that you are not even really hated anymore. SCO you have sunk to the level of disgust. SCO has sunk to level of a guest on Jerry Springer.
Linux does not exist? (Score:4, Interesting)
I love IBM's lawyers... (Score:5, Interesting)
The calm, cool, confident, and respectful manner in which IBM is handling itself in court is admirable; IMHO, this puts them head-and-shoulders above SCO's legal team.
Mathematical Proof of Non-Existance (Score:4, Funny)
We know from the FSF that Linux = GNU/Linux
Multiplying both terms by Linux: Linux x Linux = Linux * GNU/Linux
Simplifying: Linux^2 = GNU
Since Linux is a kernel, it stands to reason: (Linux Kernel)^2 = GNU Kernel
or: Linux Kernel = SQRT(GNU Kernel)
Since the GNU Kernel is vaporware, the Linux Kernel cannot exist!
Re:Delisting SCOX (Score:3, Informative)
As for us, we were given grace in the aftermath of the attack on the WTC, and the period was extended long enough for us to get our stock price up. Soon after we go t bought by a much larger company, so those days ar over...