Topic: SCO VS DaimlerChrysler - SCO is down and being counted out.

[Nemesis]

For those who don't know what this is about.  A company called The SCO Group has launched a series of lawsuits claiming various rights in regards to Linux.  DaimlerChrysler was one of the victims of such a suit.   When things began SCO was claiming that a small number of lines of code (not in the kernal) in Linux were their property and illegally added to Linux.  They have since escalated to millions of lines in the kernal.  But no actual proof has been presented despite repeated attempts to drag evidence out of them in court.

The Sco Group sent DaimlerChrysler a letter demanding that DaimlerChrysler send an inventory of the Unix products they are using.  Since DaimlerChrysler has not used those products since before SCO bought their current rights and had never had a contract with SCO they ignored it.    Link to story

Everything in the case has been thrown out except the part where DaimlerChrysler is asked to explain why they did not respond in a timely manner to the letter. 

There is still the main suit of SCO vs IBM (SCO seems to be on the ropes there)

Also SCO vs Autozone.  Still in process but the SCO vs DaimlerChrysler results might influence it.

SCO vs Novel over what Novel sold to the Santa Cruz Operation which was then bought by The Sco Group.

Finally (unless I missed some)  Redhat vs SCO.  Which seems likely to go down soon if IBM gets the copyright declaration they have asked for in their case vs SCO.

[Sarek]

SCO's strategy was stupid. It appears they were out to intimidate small companies into caving in and paying license fees rather than pay legal fees they couldn't afford (similar to what the recording companies are doing to ordinary people for downloading music). Might have worked if they had just gone after the small guys and never actually went before a judge but they decided to make headlines by filing suit against companies with deep pockets who weren't intimidated. So the small guys sat back and waited for the big guys to do the fighting. Meanwhile SCO, with no license fees coming in, has been hemorrhaging cash.

[Nemesis]

In my opinion the biggest mistake SCO made was when they lacked diplomacy in the comments they made in the media about IBM's actions.  They as much as called IBM thieves and pirates.  They could have implied that IBM had made mistakes or errors in judgement but they did not.  They impugned IBMs name and integrity.

A company like IBM trades in part on their reputation.  They CANNOT allow SCO to make such statements without punishing them.  That made IBM willing to fight all out instead of settling.   Since any punishment sufficient to vindicate IBM is too much for SCO to survive the lawsuit became suicidal.

The DaimlerChrysler case is of little importance in itself.  It is merely a sideshow compared to the IBM case. 

IBM is currently trying to get a judgement that Linux does not contain ANY SCO code.  If they get that judgement it should collapse the Redhat case and perhaps the AutoZone case.   That only leaves the dregs of the IBM case and the Novell copyright case.

SCO also made other errors such as claiming that Computer Associates had bought a SCO license.  In fact a company affiliated with SCO through its holding company had insisted they take the license as part of settling a different case.   Instead of boosting SCOs claim of companies buying licenses it made things appear that NO ONE was buying.  That helped cut the chances of new customers rather than boosting them as planned.

In Germany an injunction was issued forcing SCO to either a/ shutup on the allegations about Linux or b/ present the evidence that they claimed to have.   Rather than present the evidence they shut down the German operation.  Why would they do that if they had 1.5 million lines of SCO code they could prove was in Linux as they claimed at the time?  If they had shown 1% of that the Judge would have been ruling for them rather than against them and it would have had a positive effect on the U.S. cases.

Then there was the hosting company that thought when SCO insisted on a non disclosure agreement on signing it meant SCO didn't want publicity.  SCO immediately went public with exaggerated claims leaving the hosting company unable to directly state anything.   Also leaving the hosting company with annoyed customers, some of which left to go to hosts that did not submit to the SCO blackmail.

Finally the fact is that every company that SCO has sued have or had contracts with SCO or a predeccessor to SCO in the ownership of Unix.  Would you want to sign a contract with a company that sues it's customers on a routine basis?  Would you want a contract that they claim gives them control of anything you program to run on a Unix or Linux system?  They made it so only idiots or the uninformed would sign up with them.

Stupidity is the only universal death sentence.

[Sirgod]

The whole SCO thing could Be made into a Lifetime movie. It's amazing the things they thought they could get away with.

Stephen

[Nemesis]

The whole SCO thing could Be made into a Lifetime movie. It's amazing the things they thought they could get away with.

Stephen

Why shouldn't they think they could get away with it?  They had the precedent of Microsoft manufacturing "evidence" during the anti-trust trial and when caught not be punished.   Why was no one charged with perjury in that incident?  Why were the lawyers not disbarred for that piece of chicanery?  So why would SCO not think that they could do anything at all in court and get away with it? 

SCO has even tried to claim that Linux is a potential terrorist tool.

The sad thing is that CEO Darl McBride will likely walk away wealthier than he started. 


Here is a Link to a story on one of SCO's current claims as to why Linux is an illegal clone of Unix. 

Limited Quote below:

ELF is sorta like Microsoft's DLLs and was developed by AT&T's Unix System Labs as part of the Unix Application Binary Interface (ABI) before Unix was sold to Novell in 1993.

In 1995, the year Novell sold Unix to the Santa Cruz Operation, an industry group calling itself the Tool Interface Standard Committee (TISC) came up with a ELF 1.2 standard and to popularize it and streamline PC software development granted users a "non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license" to the stuff, effectively putting it in the public domain, SCO says.

SCOsource chief Chris Sontag, the SCO VP in charge of the company's hate-inducing IP push, claims TISC, which folded immediately after the spec was published, exceeded its rights even though both Novell and the old SCO - as well as Microsoft, IBM and Intel - were on the committee.

Sontag also says that any entities that ignore SCO's ELF copyrights are infringing. Such a claim is likely to put SCO on a war footing, if it isn't already, with the Free Software Foundation, whose GNU operating environment makes broad use of ELF.

Notice the reference to "Old SCO", that is the Santa Cruz Operation.  "Old SCO" sold to The SCO Group those rights that they currently have.  How could "New SCO" have more rights than "Old SCO"?  How can "New SCO" invalidate these actions that took place when "Old SCO" was the owner?

Just what are they smoking that they believe a judge would rule in their favour?

[Abfalter]

The sad thing is that CEO Darl McBride will likely walk away wealthier than he started. 

And that, truthfully, is what this is all about.

This whole thing started shortly after Microsoft (who is threatened by Linux) linked up SCO with an investment group.  I think it was called Baystar Capital, but I cannot recall for sure.   Then the lawsuits started, spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt in the marketplace over whether it was safe for companies to use Linux.   And who do you turn to for an OS if you are running PC's and not using Linux?  Hmmm.

I am sure McBride, as Microsoft's hired assassin, will walk away with much more money in his pocket than he started with.   SCO will go down in a burning wreck, and McBride will have secured himself as the most hated man in tech --currently surpasssing even Bill Gates --and will have secured himself a lot of pocket change.

[Sethan]

Actually, SCO's strategy has been brilliant.  The company was in serious financial trouble, with no relief in sight - so they sued everybody in the hopes of getting licensing fees out of them that would keep the company afloat.  The lawyers are being paid with 20% of the company stock, so Darl wins no matter what happens.

Every day these lawsuits go on is one more day SCO survives.

[Nemesis]

This whole thing started shortly after Microsoft (who is threatened by Linux) linked up SCO with an investment group.  I think it was called Baystar Capital, but I cannot recall for sure.   Then the lawsuits started, spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt in the marketplace over whether it was safe for companies to use Linux.   And who do you turn to for an OS if you are running PC's and not using Linux?  Hmmm.

Not quite right in sequence.

1/ McBride is hired.  He has a history of sueing companies he has been connected to.

2/ Lawsuit started against IBM

3/ Microsoft buys license (spending millions). What and why they licensed Unix stuff for is unclear.  Some people believe that it was to fund the case.  Some have gone so far as to claim that there was a deal between MS and SCO that MS would buy the license if the lawsuit is started.  No proof has come forth on this accusation.

4/ Microsoft "encourages" the Baystar deal - repeatedly.

[Abfalter]

Actually, SCO's strategy has been brilliant.  The company was in serious financial trouble, with no relief in sight - so they sued everybody in the hopes of getting licensing fees out of them that would keep the company afloat.  The lawyers are being paid with 20% of the company stock, so Darl wins no matter what happens.

Every day these lawsuits go on is one more day SCO survives.

Brilliant, in much the same way that Nazi Germany was brilliant in moving from a failed economy to a powerhouse that almost took over Europe before it collapses.  Evil, in much the same way, too.  And destined for the same end.

[Bonk]

As I see it there are only so many ways to skin a cat, Linux, UNIX, and Windows are bound to contain sections of effectively identical code. No way to avoid it, and if you ask me it would be counter productive to progress to try. Developers would not only have to figure out how to code something, but how to code it in a new and original way, and then be obliged to prove it. Some tasks are simple, some are not, new applications are guaranteed to have original code. Design of an OS framework is going to have to do some of the same jobs regeardless of who is writing it. Sillyness... just as silly as the law trying to tell MS what they can and can't put into their OS... gimmie a break. Law and government should just bloody well stay out of the way of science and technology - environmental regulation excepted. There ought to be a law against it... lol..