IBM Countersues SCO, And More! 1156
mr.crutch writes "Few details are available, but CNet is reporting that IBM has filed counterclaims against SCO. CNet also has an interview with Red Hat CEO Matthew Szulik..." Jizzbug writes "Thanks to the folks of K5, we can all obtain our rights to use the Linux kernel from SCO, and without paying up to SCO's extortion. If kernel.org kernels aren't safe, sco.com kernels certainly ought to be." LWN has a copy of SCO's Linux License for your perusal. Bruce Perens is speaking of the dangers of patent portfolios to open source software, notable because IBM's counterclaims include patent infringement. And finally, a company is selling SCO Check, a tool to de-SCOify your Linux system, if SCO ever presents any evidence whatsoever of infringing code in Linux. Update: 08/08 00:16 GMT by T : SCO's public response to IBM's counterclaim is short and to the point. Among other things, it says "If IBM were serious about addressing the real problems with Linux, it would offer full customer indemnification and move away from the GPL license." Given the other links in this story, perhaps SCO should go first on that count.
better and better (Score:5, Funny)
I think that old Darl (www.tubdarl.com) bit off more than he can chew! IBM has more seasoned lawyers that specialize in patent cases than SCO has employees.
Anyone notice that SCO's stock slipped another 11% today? heh.
Re:better and better (Score:4, Funny)
"0wn3d!!"
someone had to say it ... forgive me please ... (Score:5, Funny)
McBride: What happen?
Ballmer: Somebody set up us the bitchslap.
Ballmer: We get lawsuit.
McBride: What!
McBride: Main screen turn on.
McBride: It's You!!
BigBlue: How are you gentlemen!!
BigBlue: All your rights are belong to us.
BigBlue: You are on the way to bankruptcy.
McBride: What you say!!
BigBlue: You have no chance to survive make your time.
BigBlue: Ha Ha Ha Ha
McBride: Take off every preferred share.
Ballmer: You know what you doing.
McBride: Move shares.
McBride: For great profit.
Re:someone had to say it ... forgive me please ... (Score:4, Funny)
Now I've been accused of a lot of things in my time, but this is a first ;-)
Re:better and better (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:better and better (Score:5, Funny)
I, of course, called. They put your name in a queue for a sales call-back. I said I had a couple linux boxes, and they haven't called back, so I think, in order to be effective, you need to front like a big linux shop (or at least medium-sized one). I'm calling back under a different name and call-back number as the head of a subcontractor to Industrial Light and Magic or something...
Re:READING BETWEEN THE LINES (Score:5, Funny)
You're close. It's actually fellatious in that the more they push that license the more I want to shove my dick in their mouths.
Re:READING BETWEEN THE LINES (Score:5, Funny)
That doesn't sound like such a wise idea. I'd bet SCO bites.
Re:better and better (Score:5, Interesting)
Part of the claim demands that SCO stop shipping all of the software infringing on IBM's patents, which is essentially all of SCO's software. I think SCO may have decided that they are not really in the software business anymore but intends to just pursue licensing, contract, and IP infringement claims for years.
If that's the case, then they won't be upset even if they lose the right to distribute their software due to the patent claims.
OTOH, SCO is screwed. I'm waiting for a pacer account to show up in the mail so I can read the counter-claim online. If anyone already has a pacer account, can they download the file and post it someplace where we can all see it?
Re:better and better (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder if Boies is just sitting on his ass and that's all he's supposed to do.
I'd be willing to bet that this whole charade by SCO is just a shell game to pump and dump stock, and earn a bit of scratch from MS and SUN, while plowing the company under. Hiring Boies was a PR move. They never really intend to use him. I'll bet SCO doesn't expect to got trial. That's OK for Boies, he won't get a cut of $3 billion (like that would've happened, anyway) but I'm sure he's getting paid and doesn't have to do a damn thing except let his name be associated with the suit. SCO gets PR pump from his name, Boies gets a little cash (and the appreciation of Canopy, MS and SUN) for doing nothing. Win-win.
I've course, I'm just speculatin' on a hypothesis.
Re:better and better (Score:5, Interesting)
a shell game? You can say that again! [computerworld.com]
Re:better and better (Score:5, Funny)
To both customers? What is that, 2 licenses?
They'll be devistated!
Re:better and better (Score:5, Funny)
When you say "patent portfolio" and "IBM" together in the same post I get this mental picture of the warehouse from the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. They've probably got a small mountain of stuff in there they can destroy SCO with. It just takes them a while to dig it out. It's like getting the Death Star in range, it takes a little while but once it's there you're done.
Re:The Juggernaut (Score:4, Insightful)
The infringing SCO software, IBM said, is its UnixWare and OpenServer operating systems, its SCO Manager remote administration tool and its Reliant HA package for letting one computer in a cluster take over if another fails.
Hey, you stole my marbles!!
Well, they technically aren't *your* marbles anymore because you've been giving them away to other kids. You stop telling everyone I stole your marbles, it's making me look bad. Oh, and that slingshot in your back pocket... mine.
Re:The Juggernaut (Score:5, Interesting)
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
So, yeah, IBM could kill Linux if it wanted to brush off some patent and take RedHat or someone to court. They way I read this (IANAL, duh), if IBM got a court order saying that Linux infringes some of its patents, people would have to stop distributing programs that cannot be used royalty-free, right?
Seems unlikely they they would do that.
According to forbes [forbes.com]:
IBM last year took in more than $1 billion in Linux-related revenue. In its 2002 annual report IBM claims it has 7,500 employees involved in developing, selling or supporting Linux, and that more than 15% of the mainframe capacity it shipped last year was for Linux workloads.
IBM is pulling in some major cash from its Linux business (after having made an equally major investment, it seems). What motivation would they have to piss in their own cornflakes?
Re:The Juggernaut (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The Juggernaut (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The Juggernaut (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:better and better (Score:5, Funny)
santa cruz operation
no longer laughing
Legal DDoS attack? (Score:5, Interesting)
Note that SCO did that to themselves: they are shooting their mouth off every which way and opened themselves up to dozens of ways of litigation. I'd say: hand it to them now, draw them into court for any case which has a good chance of winning (if they win the cases it'll only help them publicitywise, and for SCO publicity is boosting shares which equals money).
It'd be nice if the FSF could join the fray for copyright infringement (do they still distribute Linux? since their Linux License invalidates the GPL they'd be violating the copyrights of any kernel-developer out there).
Re:better and better (Score:5, Informative)
Re:better and better (Score:4, Informative)
SCOX and shorting (Score:5, Informative)
This is not investment advice.
I finally found out why there are no shares of SCOX to short. As most everyone knows, shorting is the process where you sell a stock with the intent to buy it back later at a cheaper price. In other words, it is the opposite of buying a stock. Therefore, if the stock goes up in price, you are losing money; if it goes down you are making money... many /.'ers figure that SCOX will fall due to a variety of opinions.
In order to short a stock, there has to be some supply of the stock somewhere somewhere that can be sold... this supply of stock normally comes from stock used as collateral on a margin... somewhere, someone is borrowing money to buy more stock than they have money for, and using stock as collateral.
The problem being is that SCOX stock has climbed too quickly too fast and was once very recently a penny stock... thus brokers are unwilling to take SCOX as collateral... bingo, no SCOX stock available to short!
Just thought /.'ers would find that interesting.
Remember, this is not investment advice.
Re: SCOX and shorting (Score:5, Funny)
> Another method used in shorting is "Borrowing." This is where an investor can sell someone else's stock, buy it back later at a cheaper price, and give back to the person who originally owned it.
Yeah, sometimes I do that with other people's cars, on weekends.
Finally (Score:5, Funny)
Sco is going down like Justin Timberlake at a Nambla meeting!
Re:Finally (Score:5, Interesting)
Unfortunately for them, right now is the time between the close of last quarter and the official annoucement of results. The SEC generally frowns on insider sales during this time period. Gotta love Red Hat's timing.
Re:Finally (Score:5, Funny)
Oh yeah. Been waiting for this, the official "other shoe," to drop for months.
Seriously, what was SCO expecting? On a ranking of groups not to piss off...
999,934,953,021: PETA
999,934,953,020: FSF
127:GNAA, San Quentin Prison Chapter
2: Colombian cocaine cartels
1: IBM
Shoulda seen this coming.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Novell Still in play? (Score:5, Informative)
If so, then Novell certainly has the right to overrule SCO in a large variety of matters relating to those licensees.
Re:Novell Still in play? (Score:5, Interesting)
Didn't you pay attention? (Score:5, Interesting)
Kjella
Re:Novell Still in play? (Score:5, Informative)
From Groklaw [weblogs.com]
Litigate 'till CSO runs out of money? HAH! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Litigate 'till CSO runs out of money? HAH! (Score:5, Interesting)
sPh
Re:Litigate 'till CSO runs out of money? HAH! (Score:5, Interesting)
This is true, according to the book "Big Blue: IBM's use and abuse of power".
Baxter finally dropped the suit (Regan adnimistration) due to "lack of merit". Lack of merit? Then why did they spend 10+ years litigating this?
Re:Litigate 'till CSO runs out of money? HAH! (Score:5, Informative)
sPh
Re:Litigate 'till CSO runs out of money? HAH! (Score:5, Funny)
I believe it [the IBM anti-trust case] was settled by Nixon appointees early in the Carter administration. "ran out of money" is of course facetious
Don't remember the Carter years too well, do you? "Ran out of money" isn't that bad an exaggeration!
:-) Couldn't help it
Re:Litigate 'till CSO runs out of money? HAH! (Score:5, Informative)
Check out the history of the steel industry, the banking industry, the phone companies, power generation, the oil industry, the tobacco industry, etc. etc.
Re:Litigate 'till CSO runs out of money? HAH! (Score:5, Funny)
Another article,SCO can't respond to the bitchslap (Score:5, Informative)
In its 45-page complaint, IBM claims SCO Group's products violate four IBM patents and claims SCO Group doesn't have the right to revoke IBM's Unix license. IBM also claims SCO Group has violated the general public license, or the GNU GPL, under which Linux is distributed.
The Armonk, N.Y., computer giant seeks unspecified monetary damages and an injunction requiring SCO Group to stop violating IBM patents and refrain from misrepresenting its intellectual-property rights.
It also says that a spokesman for SCO wasn't immediately available to comment, I guess they haven't recovered from being bitch-slapped yet. I suppose that this means we'll also have the obligatory conference call tomorrow, or soon after, where Darl will blow some more hot air out of that ass that sits on his neck.
Re:Another article,SCO can't respond to the bitchs (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, part of my really is saying:
"FSCK DARL MCBRIDE AND SCO! KICK 'EM WEAR IT COUNTS, IBM!"
Re:Another article,SCO can't respond to the bitchs (Score:5, Interesting)
IBM can't use the patents against the Linux kernel anymore than SCO can -- as IBM points out in its own brief, distribution of the source under the GPL prohibits you from certain legal tactics... like licensing. You are implicitly licensing any IP (copyrights, trade secrets, patents) that you may own that are applicable to the source you distribute. Don't like it? Don't distribute. Also don't use GPL code in a distributed product, since doing so requires distribution of the source.
Of course, one day a patch could come along that IBM doesn't like and it would cease to provide newer kernels including that patch in order to preserve its rights... but that's a battle that would have to be fought when that time comes. Most likely IBM would inform the relevant people of their rights and their intentions, and the code wouldn't be integrated into the kernel. I'm not saying that this is a good thing, or that software patents are a good thing, just pointing out how it would work.
Re:Another article,SCO can't respond to the bitchs (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Another article,SCO can't respond to the bitchs (Score:5, Informative)
My understanding is that IBM's Linux distribution policy is specfically crafted to make sure IBM doesn't lose the right to enforce it's patents, at least not on code they don't explicitly release.
Specifically, IBM doesn't actually distribute Linux, it partners with Suse and RedHat who do that for them. Sure they produce patches, but that's all you'll get from them, not the whole kernel.
So IBM has decided to give up the right to enforce the patent on, for example, RCU. They distributed the RCU patches as GPL. But if, for example, RedHat contributes some code to the kernel that contains IBM patented techniques, IBM can still enforce those patents because it never distributes non-IBM code.
Re:Another article,SCO can't respond to the bitchs (Score:5, Interesting)
Back in '95 I used to be both a contractor for IBM and a member of TeamOS2. At the 95 Atlanta COMDEX (Which I attended on my own dime to do OS/2 advocacy and provide installation support to the team,) one of their marketing guys demoed the latest neat stuff for the operating system. At the presentation, he mentioned that IBM's vision was to provide the same OS across the board. It was to be OS/2 on the laptop (PDA? Notebook? hah!) OS/2 on the desktop and OS/2 on the big blue iron. This would result in a significant decrease in training costs because the employees would always know the platform no matter how big the iron was that they were running on.
8 years later their vision has been realized. Sure the OS has changed, but a single corporation-wide OS deployment is now possible. The radical learning curve necessary to use their big stuff has been smoothed out. The search for that last 90 year old guy who knows how to administer MVS has been eliminated. A much deeper talent pool (of people who know UNIX) can now be tapped.
At the moment it looks like the IBM/Open Source Community relationship is pretty stable. Of course we should be wary -- a corporation can turn on you in a heartbeat if it'll make them a buck. Right now this relationship is making IBM a buck, so I don't see that happening in the immediate future.
First time GPL as part of a court case? (Score:5, Interesting)
Will this be the first time that the GPL has actually been used as part of a court preceeding? As far as I am aware all companies, who did not orginally comply, have felt that their public image was more important than a challenge of the GPL, and respected the contract of the GPL, even if it did take the FSF or public pressure.
Not the first GPL appearance in court (Score:4, Interesting)
See this earlier Slashdot story [slashdot.org] for details on the lawsuit, though I can't find any reference right now to reports of the judge's attitude toward the GPL, but I remember having read of them somewhere. Does that make me like Darl and his super-secert code? I hope not!
Oooh, the front page. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oooh, the front page. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oooh, the front page. (Score:4, Funny)
You should have patented the idea.
SCO Check (Score:4, Funny)
And finally, a company is selling SCO Check...
I'd be more than happy to sell my own de-SCO-ifier program for a mere $699 per license.
SELL SELL SELL (Score:4, Funny)
(i am not a lawyer and any advice given here is purely to take the piss out of everything and everyone, i will not be held responsible for anything, even my own actions)
Unspecified? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm guessing that in the end, this will be a big number, but perhaps IBM will go for a settlement that involves SCO execs, bricks, and deep water.
Seriously, if anything this whole fiasco is probably as much good publicity for IBM as it is bad to SCO. IBM gets to lay on the smack-down, and they end up looking very much like a hero in the eyes of the linux users/developers.
Re:Unspecified? (Score:5, Insightful)
SCO's been pretty pretty careless with the libel. The damages could add up to a lot.
Seriously, if anything this whole fiasco is probably as much good publicity for IBM as it is bad to SCO. IBM gets to lay on the smack-down, and they end up looking very much like a hero in the eyes of the linux users/developers.
IBM has realized that karma whoring is an effective business practice. Good for them.
De-SCO (Score:5, Funny)
I recommend you all buy the utility, the website is http://www.caldera.com/ [caldera.com]
Re:De-SCO (Score:5, Funny)
It's about time. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
Big guns (Score:5, Interesting)
For once, a corporate behemoth on our side...
Re:Big guns (Score:5, Insightful)
y'know, I never really thought of it this way. IBM has enough stake now in Linux that they are defending the principles it is built on. This is a serious milestone for the open source movement.
Re:Big guns (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I just don't think they buy any of the ideals. They think that this lawsuit is more cost effective than any advertising they could ever buy, and they're right.
Re:Big guns (Score:5, Insightful)
When SCO dies... (Score:5, Interesting)
Who has more cash floating around than most?
M$... and that could get messy quickly.
SCO responds (Score:5, Funny)
No Mr. McBride, your attorneys are already dead
Claim to be SCO Free (Score:5, Insightful)
SCO really can't dispute that claim without offering proof, and once they offer proof, the distro can issue a patch removing the code from the system, assuming that there really is problem code
Good tactic.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Wow, that's enough to keep SCO's lawyers busy until the money runs out :)
Haha (Score:5, Funny)
I, too ... (Score:5, Funny)
What's not in IBM Counter claims (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyone know of an online copy of the filing yet?
Re:What's not in IBM Counter claims (Score:4, Informative)
From the CNET article:
Wow (Score:5, Funny)
Hmmm.... this wasn't in the plan! (Score:5, Funny)
I don't think IBM is going to buy your company!
This isn't working out like you wanted, is it?
If I were at IBM, I would have seen to it that we mentioned four patents are being infringed, but SCO will have to agree to our terms to find out what they are.
1. Sue IBM
2. ???????
3. Run for your life!
Multiple Fronts . . . (Score:5, Interesting)
Considering the fact that Redhat recently filed a lawsuit, it looks like the "Linux Allies" are mobilized and are opening multiple fronts. What is interesting here is IBM's fighting for GPL, which means a team of highly paid attorneys will argue the viability of GPL. If this makes it to court, then GPL will have its test.
On another point, perhaps IBM holds the patent "process of suing other companies for patent violations as a means of revenue." If so, SCO is definitely in violation.
Re:Multiple Fronts . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
If the GPL isn't a viable license (for reasons I cannot fathom, since the copyright holder gets to determine the conditions of its copying), ownership of the code reverts to the original copyright holders. This means SCO would still have no legal right to charge money for the Linux kernel since most (all?) of the code isn't theirs to sell.
Burn SCOX Burn! (Score:4, Funny)
If the theroy holds, that every negative thing that causes SCaldera stock to fall prompts an even MORE bizzare release from SCO to get it back up, I wonder what we'll get by this evening?
SCO claiming that because AT&T once owned Unix that everyone with a phone owes them $700 for a license?
the Kuro5hin instructions (Score:5, Informative)
"cd
mkdir silly_sco
wget ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/updates/OpenLinux/3.1.1/Ser
rpm2cpio linux-2.4.13-21S.src.rpm > sco.cpio
cpio -i --file sco.cpio
bzip2 -d linux-2.4.13.tar.bz2
tar -xf linux-2.4.13.tar
You'll find the license agreement in linux/COPYING
Compile, install, enjoy."
This answers the big question (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that Novell specifically, explicitly forbade SCO from revoking the AIX license, and the fact that SCO ignored this (despite knowing that they were contractually obligated to respect Novell's orders on this issue) shows that there was never an expectation that this would lead to a payout. This is all about the FUD. Case closed.
Glory Hallelujah, finally some good news. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the beginning of the end for SCO. You could argue that the end began when they first made their claims, but that was just a prelude. There's no story here, of course; We go right from ONCE UPON A TIME straight to THE END. But somehow we still get a bunch of fun implied drama.
So, who shorted? (Score:5, Interesting)
So the big question; who shorted the stock? What was the price point and when do you plan to cash in? C'mon, fess up. We're all rooting for you to make a killing from SCO's flameout as we get the pleasure of watching Darl's FUD machine go crashing into the sea.
Probably not the best... (Score:5, Funny)
SCO: Oh shit.
Re:Probably not the best... (Score:5, Funny)
IBM: No, Mr. McBride, I expect you to die...
SCO stock plummets. (Score:5, Informative)
Why no injunction against FUD? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why, oh why, don't they seek an injunction against SCO contacting organizations and demanding royalties while this is pending? This is a no-brainer. They have alot more than they need!
Poor Darl (Score:5, Funny)
Heh.
This lawyer has some good perspectives on the issu (Score:5, Interesting)
http://lamlaw.com/ [lamlaw.com]
Monty Python where are you? (Score:4, Funny)
Seems reasonable enough to me.
McBride as The SCO Information Minister (Score:5, Funny)
"There are no IBM patents in SCO. Never!"
"We have them surrounded in their servers!"
"Let the IBM infidels bask in their illusion!"
"We will own them all...most of them!"
IBM's orders to the sales troops (Score:5, Interesting)
Of EXTREME interest is the "IBM is seeking ... an injunction requiring SCO to refrain from misrepresenting its rights, and to cease further infringement of IBM's patents." part. An injunction would shut down SCO's sales of any of the identified infringing software.
We need to start planning now to buy SCO (Score:5, Interesting)
Their market cap before this was $25M. I suspect it'll be 1/10 that after this is done. It's not much money spread among all of us.
Michael
Let's Put SCO Behind Bars (Score:5, Insightful)
While the lawsuits being defended by IBM [sco.com] and filed by Red Hat [redhat.com] are likely to put an end to The SCO Group's [sco.com] menace to the Free Software community, I don't think simply putting the company out of business is likely to prevent us from being threatened this way again by other companies who are enemies to our community. I feel we need to send a stronger message.
If we all work together, we can put the executives [sco.com] of the SCO Group in prison where they belong.
If you live in the U.S., please write a letter to your state Attorney General [naag.org]. If you live elsewhere, please write your national or provincial law enforcement authorities. Please ask that the SCO Group be prosecuted for criminal fraud and extortion.
It makes me very sad to write this, because I lived in Santa Cruz for fifteen years. Sam Sjogren, a close friend from Caltech [caltech.edu], was one of SCO's first programmers, and for a little while my only friend in town after I transferred to UCSC [ucsc.edu]. Many of my best friends used to work for SCO either writing code or doing tech support. I even used to sit in the company hot tub with my friends who worked there from time to time. I used to dance to the music of SCO's company band Deth Specula [deth.com] at parties around the town.
Before I ever installed my first Linux distro - remember Yggdrasil Plug-n-Play? - I was a happy user of a fully-licensed copy of SCO Open Desktop on my 386.
You wouldn't think the SCO Group of today is the same company that once had to tell its employees that they shouldn't be naked at work between 9 and 5 because they scared the visiting suits from AT&T. That's because it's not - the SCO Group got its name and intellectual property from SCO through an acquisition. I don't think any of the friends I once knew at the company are likely to still be working there. The SCO Group is in Utah. SCO was originally called The Santa Cruz Operation, a small father-and son consulting firm named for a beautiful small town [cruzio.com] between the mountains and the ocean in central California. The Santa Cruz Operation was once as much a bunch of freethinking hippies as any Linux hacker of today.
Yes, it makes me sad. But I digress.
It seems that SCO is asking a license fee of $699 [slashdot.org] for each Linux installation. Take a look at SCO's press release [sco.com] announcing the licensing program. That's just the introductory price - if we don't purchase our licenses before October 15, the price will increase to $1399.
I have three computers that run Linux. That means SCO claims I must pay $2097 today, or $4197 if I wait until after October 15. SCO says their fee applies even to devices running embedded linux, many of which were purchased by their owners for far less than SCO's "license fee".
My response is that SCO is guilty of criminal fraud and extortion. I didn't violate SCO's copyright or acquire their trade secrets through any illegal means, and it is fraud for them to claim that I did. It is extortion for them to tell me I must pay them money to avoid a lawsuit.
Even if SCO's claims are true, it is not a violation of their copyright for me to possess a copy of their code. Instead, any copyright infringement was committed by the vendors who supplied me with the Linux distributions I use.
SCO's license is actually no license at all - if it really is found that the Linux kernel contains any infringing code, the GPL forbids everyone who possesses a copy from using it at all. No one would be allowed to con
Understatement... (Score:5, Funny)
From SCO's quarterly report [sec.gov]:
This, Ladies and Gentlemen, has to be the understatement of this century, if not of this millennium.
Let 'em duke it out in true Geek style (Score:5, Funny)
I say forget the legal process. It's too slow. Let's get each company to build their own BattleBot [battlebots.com] and go on Robot Wars [robotwars.com] to settle this whole mess. Just imagine: "Big Blue", a huge flipper bot flinging "SCObot" through the air while a big red bowler hat smashes into SCO at every opportunity. Chunks of metal flying, flames licking up from dismembered metallic remains.
Ah I love the smell of burnt electric motors and battery acid in the morning!
damn! (Score:5, Interesting)
June 27 2002
McBride becomes CEO of Caldera.
Stock price around $0.60
March 7 2003
SCO sues IBM
Stock price up from $2.21 to $3.10 but falls back to mid $2.00 range
March 18
SCO stocks hits low of $2.07
Jeff Hunsaker (VP Worldwide Marketing) gets 100,000 options
Reginald Broughton (Senior VP International Sales) gets 50,000 options
Michael Olsen (VP Finance) gets 50,000 options
Robert Bench (CFO) gets 100,000 options
Darl McBride (CEO) gets 200,000 options
Can anyone fill me in on what happened between 3/14 and 3/17 that caused the
price to drop from $2.64? And how did the executives know that $2.07 was the
lowest it would go?
April 8
Robert Bench sells 4100 shares at $2.90 each for $11,890.
April 23
SCO issues warning to Red Hat and SuSE
Stock is up to $3.10
May 2
IBM responses to lawsuit, denies claims
SCO claims they have proof
May 14
SCO stops selling Linux, sends out letter to 1500 large corporations
suggesting that they stop using Linux.
Stock has been steadily rising, now at $3.55
May 15
SCO offers to show proof under strict NDA to journalists only
Stock shoots up to $4.55
May 16
SCO changes name to SCO Group Inc.
Board of Directors gets 10,000 options each at $4.75
May 19
SCO announces that Microsoft has given it cash, and that M$ is
not the first company to pay it off. Rumours are that the other
company is Sun. Total revenue from both licences: $8.25M.
Stock price starts to really take off.
May 28
Novell issues press release challenging SCO
SCO states that they may end up suing Linus
Stock plummets from $8.71 to $6.60
June 3
Opinder Bawa (VP Global Services) pancis and sells 15,000 shares at a paltry
$6.00 each, making $90,000.
June 5
O. Bawa exercises 7916 in options at $1.20 each and sells them for
$6.60 each, netting himself just over $42,000. He really should
have waited a day.
June 6
SCO announces discovery of ammendment to Novell contract
Share price shoots up to $8.52
Giddy with glee, Jeff Hunsaker (VP Worldwide Marketing) sells
5000 shares for $44,500.
June 8 SCO announces that they have shown 80 lines of code to some
doofus. This is a Sunday.
June 9 The day after this announcement, shares are up to $9.38.
Robert Bench (CFO) celebrates by selling 7000 shares, making
over $64,400.
June 11 SCO gives IBM until Friday the 13th to settle.
Shares drop to $8.65. Believing that the end is near, Michael
Olsen (VP Finance) sells 6000 shares, earning $51,720.
June 13
IBM's deadline passes and SCO is still alive. The stock price shoots up
to $11.21. Darl buys 7003 shares for one tenth of a penny each. In an
interview, Chris Sontag (Snr VP OS) says that SCO may own BSD
as well.
June 16 SCO announces that they are revoking IBM's AIX license. IBM
announces that they don't care. Shares dip.
June 17 SCO decides that they actually want three billion from IBM and
elaborate on what technology they think IBM stole from them.
June 18 Sun launches ad campaign trying to get Linux and AIX customers
to use Solaris instead. SCO criticizing Linus in a court document.
June 20
Reginald Broughton, needing some weekend money, sells 5000 shares when the
stock price goes over $11, making almost $55,500. The price closes at $10.77.
June 23 SCO says that they won't sue their own Linux customers.
June 25 With the stock
Someone needs to rein in Perens (Score:5, Interesting)
In other words -- again -- Perens started shooting off his mouth about possible bad intentions from IBM before even discussing it with IBM. That's just plain bad form, since it means Wladawksy-Berger was caught off-guard by an unexpected question from a reporter. That's not a good way to treat people whose cooperation you desire.
I hope that someday, the Open Source/Free Software community will have spokespeople who comport themselves professionally instead of brilliant but socially-impaired people with a tendency to ill-considered public tantrums. You can get away with that as a developer, at least sometimes, but when you get into the PR business, basic manners are a fundamental requirement of the job.
If Perens had talked to IBM at length and gotten nowhere, it would have been acceptable to say, "We talked to IBM at length and got nowhere." Just calling the press and saying, "IBM hasn't spontaneously stepped up to the plate and I'm starting to have paranoid fantasies," doesn't cut it.
Wow, Gartner Group has made the U-turn? (Score:5, Interesting)
"What I'm getting a sense of now is there is an effort to counterpunch," said Gartner analyst George Weiss, who has warned clients to take SCO seriously. "What I thought the (Linux) community should be doing is shift the initiative away from SCO and throw them off balance into a defensive posture. Until Red Hat started its counterclaim, all the initiative was with SCO."
This has really suprised me. I mean, I'm not shocked at corporate opportunism of course - especially analysts and people who think of themselves as visionaries, being opportunistic is practically their job description.
But the thing is: I always took for granted that Gartner is just an MS marketing branch, and now they turn around and say that they always thought the Linux community should really take countermeasures, and stuff like that! Wow...
To the paranoid conspiracist mind this can only mean that MS must have realized that there is not much substance behind SCO's claims and that their activities in the fraudulent extortion department didn't go over well at all in the industry.
Probably something like this happened:
SCO: Hey, guess what, we can prove that Linux is just a pirated copy of SCO Unix!
Microsoft: Wow, cool, that would make Linux illegal and discredit the whole open source community?
SCO: Yeah, you bet. Only, if someone could give us credibility.
Microsoft: NP, we'll announce that we honor your Unix rights and pay for your initial lawyer fees with some Unix license, OK? Additionally we will buy some studies and news articles that lend credibility to your claims.
SCO: Thanks, we feel much better now, that really helped. Initiating FUD and extortion campaign now.
Microsoft: What? Uhm, your going to prove your thing in court soon, will you? You know, revealing the evil that is Open Source for what it really is?
SCO: Yah, sure.
Microsoft: SCO? You're making us all look bad.
SCO: We know, but "the software business is binary", remember? Gotta do what keeps us alive!
Microsoft: There is no proof, is there?
SCO: We're still kinda working on that, sir.
Microsoft: OK, that's it, we're bailing out. Steve, call Gartner and tell them they can switch modes from "MS fantasy sales pitch" to default "echo the public opinion" mode. Farewell, SCO.
Re:SCO Stocks Tumble... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I choose the wrong job! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:K5 mirror, per request (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Whoop! (Score:5, Interesting)
You could assume that, or your could RTFA:
The patents cover a data compression technique, a method of navigating among program menus using options arranged in a graphical tree, a method for verifying that an electronic message was received and a method for monitoring computing systems linked in a cluster.
The infringing SCO software, IBM said, is its UnixWare and OpenServer operating systems, its SCO Manager remote administration tool and its Reliant HA package for letting one computer in a cluster take over if another fails.
BTW- Don't you just love how general all of those sound? I'd love to see patent numbers, but it sounds like almost any OS might infringe on one or two of those.
Re:SCO has replied (Score:5, Insightful)
You gotta love it when a company that has posted multiple million dollar losses for the last 5 years, can't find a market for their product, and admits in it's sec filings that it's current actions will alienate it from it's market and customers says IBM has a flawed business model.