SCO Zombie Creaks Into Motion Again 208
phands writes "SCO has moved to partially reopen their 10 year old lawsuit against IBM. Unbelievable! Details at Groklaw."
From the article, quoting SCO's filing: "SCO respectfully requests that the Court rule on IBM’s Motion for Summary Judgment on SCO’s Unfair Competition Claim (SCO’s Sixth Cause of Action), dated September 25, 2006 (Docket No. 782), which motion is directed at the Project Monterey Claim, and IBM’s Motion for Summary Judgment on SCO’s Interference Claims (SCO’s Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Causes of Action), dated September 25, 2006 (Docket No. 783), which motion is directed at the Tortious Interference Claims."
Linus's view on the scox-scam (Score:5, Interesting)
In a recent interview, Linus expresses his opinions on patents and copyrights and made the following remark about SCO and the US justice system
"SCO was a classic example of that. Where they tried to use copyrights, which turned out to be completely bogus in so many ways, and made it into a nasty legal battle. They lost badly. What was irritating about the whole thing, as an insider knowing about what they claimed was completely bogus, was that it took them 10 years to lose. It is scary. 10 years! I don't know how many hundreds and millions of dollars IBM and Novell spent on fighting completely bogus crap stuff; fighting lawsuits that made no sense. Literally it made no sense what so ever. To the point that it ended up turning out that they did not even own the copyrights that they were claiming, never mind the copyrights they were claiming weren't actually true. Christ what a chaos!"
http://www.muktware.com/news/2866
Scox-scam continues to be a great success for MS (Score:5, Interesting)
The idea of the scox-scam was never to win a jury verdict. Nor was the idea to collect fees for Linux (I called twice, and asked to be invoiced, scox refused to do so).
The idea behind the scox-scam was to smear linux, and intimidate some people away from using linux, and to scare some companies away from contributing to linux.
Think about it: why did scox (really Microsoft) sue IBM? Why not redhat? IBM is not even have a linux distribution. The reason is: IBM had just contributed a file system to Linux. And Microsoft wants other companies to know that if they contribute to Linux, they better be ready to spend $100 million defending that decision. I would bet this tactic actually worked.
Follow the money. Who stands to benefit from smearing Linux? Caldera/Scox was a linux company. But scox made a lot more $$ accepting MS loot, than from trying to sell Linux.