SCO Says IBM Hurt Profits 174
AlanS2002 sends in a link from a local Utah newspaper covering the SCO-IBM trial. The Deseret News chose to emphasize SCO's claim that IBM hurt SCO's relationship with several high-tech powerhouses, causing SCO's market share and revenues to plummet. "[A]n attorney for Lindon-based SCO said IBM 'pressured' companies to cut off their relationships with SCO. And 'the effect on SCO was devastating and it was immediate'..." As usual Groklaw has chapter and verse on all the arguments in the motions for summary judgement.
Not their fault (Score:5, Interesting)
Nope, not a bit.
It, like Groklaw, must all be part of a Scientology-level conspiracy by IBM to discredit them and make them look bad.
*sigh*
Re:Hurt Profits? (Score:5, Interesting)
Remember that next time Microsoft is brought up.
There is more to a situation than just "that's what companies do". The reason Slashdotters get their panties in a twist when Microsoft is brought up is because their business practices are not always kosher.
Your +5 Insightful proves, it seems, that Slashdot likes to forget that this can apply to any large company, and that includes IBM and Google.
Re:Well (Score:3, Interesting)
Hey, you got too far when you trash-talk Caldera OpenLinux. Ver 1.3 was the first Linux I installed and then actually USED; I had installed an earlier SuSE, but could not grok how to use any of the programs it installed. COL-1.3 had KDE-1.0; WordPerfect's free Linux word processor was my main app. (I'm a writer.) I used it for several years until Netscape started requiring glibc6 and I had to change to another distro (RH)
OK, COL wouldn't compile even trivial programs out of the box, binary RPMs were nearly impossible to find as its directory structure was unique, and support was nonexistent, but it WASN'T WINDOWS, it didn't crash, and Lisa, its version of SuSE's YaST, was easy to use and worked well, making configuration easier.
We all have our first loves. Sometimes they had pimples and bad breath, but no one likes to hear our first Linux distro called bad names.
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
In which case they should never be in court either and should be sulking in a corner if they have something they don't want to tell anyone. It is very late in the process - there is no evidence only expensive delaying tactics which would not be necessary if there was evidence in their favour.
The fake website DOS attack, the MIT experts on the payroll that didn't exist, the millions of lines of stolen code, the magic briefcase that could hold a couple of hundred kilograms of paper with the complete linux source code legibly printed on it and still be carried in one hand out of an aircraft in Germany - all these things point to a lack of integrity. It is most likely a smokescreen to conceal what is ultimately a con job - and linux is just the vehicle since it is complex enough to fool some credulous investors. I'd be curious to see how much of the SCO legal expenses go directly in the CEO's brothers pocket. It really does look like claim salting in the wild west to me.
This has been happening for decades now. (Score:2, Interesting)
For those of you who remember, it was not too long ago when Microsoft was the champion of freedom and IBM was the tyrannical oppressor.
Microsoft is often bashed about this very same practice, squeezing PC makers to ship machines pre-installed with windows "otherwise....", however, don't forget the hundreds of other companies that resort to similar unethical behavior.
That said, SCO asked for it. They are getting shafted and they only have themselves to blame. This time, I am all for IBM. When it comes to fscking with open source and Linux, take no prisoners and spare no quarter.