decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
SCO's PR Spin
Monday, November 03 2003 @ 08:15 PM EST

Public relations is not a crime, not in the legal sense of the word. And there is no doubt that the PR firm SCO uses has gotten the company's message out in an effective manner. But what is the message? How truthful is SCO being with the world, including the stock-buying segment of it? Let's take an example from today.

There was a SCO press release that went out over PRNewswire, "SCO Moves up in Rankings, and is Ranked Fourth Overall in the Enterprise Operating System category", which went to various business-oriented media, including Yahoo! Biz, where I found it, saying that SCO had moved up in the VARBusiness 2003 Enterprise Operating System annual report card.

Are you impressed? Thinking maybe you should buy some of their stock? Hold the phone, my friends. It's best not to read only the lead paragraph of a SCO press release. I would like to show you the fine print. First, note that they didn't include a link to the actual report card. Wonder why? Take a look for yourself. Just scan down the list, and you will see they flunked almost every category. Here's a paragraph further down the page in the press release:

"VARBusiness chooses only five companies in the Enterprise Operating System category to survey. This year's fourth place ranking is up from fifth place last year."

So, VARBusiness only tests five companies, Microsoft, Novell, HP, Sun Microsystems, and SCO. Of the five, SCO came in fourth. Last year, they were dead last, so it's true they have "moved up in the rankings" as the headline proclaims, from dead last to one step above dead last. Not quite the impression you formed from the headline, is it?

Yes, but at least all the information is included in the press release, except the link that tells the rest of the story, not that most people read more than the lead paragraph. The press release also has this sentence:

"SCO's reseller and developer channel is one of the most loyal in the industry because of SCO's reseller programs and emphasis on channel sales."

This isn't just a matter of spin. Take a look at this detail they didn't mention. They made another VARBusiness 2003 annual list -- the 2003 ARC Hall of Shame, and here is why:

"SCO should apply some of the money it's shelling out in legal fees in its suit against IBM and Linux users to its channel efforts. The company's ARC scores were a train wreck in the enterprise operating systems category. Who cares what line of code is buried inside some obscure Linux program that can trace its roots to IBM's Unix license dating back to the Partridge Family? SCO partners clearly don't appreciate the company's products. And if the folks at Sun who make and market Solaris are laughing, they had better stop--their scores were even worse."

A train wreck. Something isn't matching up here, is it, with the press release?

Meanwhile, Linux just keeps chugging along, picking up speed. VARBusiness has a nice article about it, as a matter of fact, called "Lining Up For Linux", and the article mentions some new companies who have just made the switch, following in the footsteps of trailblazers Google, Amazon, and Burlington Coat Factory, and it tells some of the reasons why companies are now going Linux:

"Customer spending on Linux is projected to increase from $80 million in 2001 to $280 million by 2006, according to researcher IDC. . . . Examples of this are increasing as Linux vendors report customer wins with businesses of all shapes and sizes for applications such as messaging, file transfers, testing and some productivity and infrastructure support. Case in point: Online video-rental company Netflix recently migrated from Sun's Solaris platform to IBM's hardware running Red Hat Linux software to increase Web performance, search and queuing capabilities for its more than 16,000 DVD titles.

"Other new IBM Linux customers include Marinalife, a small to midsize (SMB) partner that uses Big Blue's KeyLink systems to help boaters reserve dock space in marinas in the United States . . . and NYFix, which operates electronic-trading systems. . . .

"For example, NYFix switched to Linux from a mainframe-based structure because of the problems it had automating its operations on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. Today, the company runs some 1,500 booths that handle up to 1 billion shares per day.

"'We've been a Unix shop for years, but have been moving to Linux because we need advanced features to guarantee the availability of our connections,' says Jim Strasenburgh, NYFix vice president of systems. 'You'd think you couldn't bet your business on an entry-level Linux operating system, but the opposite has been true.' One of Linux's prime sweet spots is its ability to improve Web-site performance."

Also making the switch are online travel company Orbitz, which switched its 750 servers to Linux from Sun E4500 servers. They use it for their search engine and say they "can't find a server that rivals Apache's for these types of applications". They also mention cutting their cost by a factor of 10, while doubling their capacity, so it's really "a 20-times increase".

Systems integrator Ricis recently switched 900 email clients from Microsoft Exchange and Lotus Notes to SuSE Linux Open Mail Exchange for Ohio Caterpillar, which has 26 locations in the state, and they also use Linux for FTP and DNS applications, on 34 servers. It was "a little more work on the front end to get it up and running, but once you're done, it's rock-solid," they say. Ohio CAT systems administrator Eric Traub is quoted as saying that:

"Linux is much more stable than Windows, which, as we've found out in the past few months, is much more vulnerable. When it comes to firewalling, Linux just does it better."

The article ends by mentioning that Deloitte Consulting deploys Linux for VMWare productivity and testing applications on the East Coast, saving them $500 to $1,000 per box. Are you sitting down? They are "buying the SuSE Linux tools through HP and Lindon, Utah-based solution provider Altiris."

Well, knock me over with a feather. Not the Altiris that is under Canopy Group, by any chance? Why, yes. Yes it is. The very same. And here is a story from July about Altiris' decision to push Linux:

"In 2003, the Lindon, Utah-based IT management systems vendor has been aggressive in developing Linux-only solutions in the server deployment space, according to marketing and product strategy vice president Poul Nielsen. . . . 'We think that Linux will only help the market going forward, because its open-source nature will allow innovations to occur...'"

This is the same Altiris that just announced that they will be selling 5 million shares of common stock - of those 2 million shares on behalf of Canopy Group, by the by. They also recently announced their financial circumstances, including their dependence on HP and Microsoft, and listed this under their Risks section in their S3 last July:

"We expect that software product developers, such as ourselves, will increasingly be subject to infringement claims as the number of products and competitors in the software industry segment grows and the functionality of products in different industry segments overlaps. If third parties assert that our current or future products infringe their proprietary rights, there could be costs associated with defending these claims, whether the claims have merit or not, which could harm our business. Any future claims could harm our relationships with existing customers and may deter future customers from licensing our products."

Amen, brother. So, they know how the litigate-to-damage-your-competition-instead-of-competing-in-the-marketplace game is played in the proprietary world. Why would Canopy Group be interested in killing off Linux when it has so many Linux-oriented companies? It seems uncoordinated at best. But uncoordinated is what Canopy Group companies are not. They are positively inbred. Note this nugget from Canopy's Corporate Services page:

"Corporate Development -- Canopy Group provides a superior level of corporate support to its companies, allowing them to leverage Canopy's legal, financial and human resource services. Canopy legal is responsible for all in-house council, coordination of outside legal council, and assisting Canopy portfolio companies. An on site, team-based, approach allows us to maintain a high level of quality, speed, and integrity in developing and executing transactions."

Let's overlook the mispelling of counsel. Let's think pierce-the-corporate-veil instead, shall we? Who hired Boies, I wonder? And who later decided that SCO needed in-house counsel in addition? Perhaps when you visited Canopy's home page, you noticed that under the heading "Canopy News" the top story is "SCO® Announces Immediate Termination of IBM's Right to Use and Distribute AIX Software and Files for Permanent Injunction". That is Canopy news, eh? All in the Family.

Of course, IBM would say that whether SCO had the right to "terminate" their use and distribution of AIX depends on how you read the contract and is yet to be determined.

Speaking of litigating instead of competing, you might enjoy this story. The FTC has hopped on the cluetrain, and they say patents should be harder to get and easier to challenge. This is jaw-dropping wonderful. Let's implement their Eureka moment ASAP. I'm guessing SCO is not only on the same page, it is hoping this becomes the law of the land before 2005 and made retroactive. I, on the other hand, would like it to go into effect the day *after* IBM knocks SCO out with its four patents but before Microsoft decides to make like Attilla the Hun and sue Linus over some goofball patent they claim Linux is violating. We need to time this thing just right.


  


SCO's PR Spin | 32 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
HP is has Canopy brown on their big nose!
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 03 2003 @ 11:33 PM EST
HP doing the traveling road show thing for SCO is just HP trying to keep the
whole Canopy family happy.

Too bad for HP. Cause ya can't have your cake and eat it too! If, HP keeps up
it's treasured relationship with Canopy and Co - HP will wake up one day and
understand that that brown stuff on the end of HP's nose, that smells so bad,
is driving all others away! Did ya ever notice that when you stink, ya get used
to it... BUT, everyone else notices! HP needs someone to tell em that they are
stinking up the place and they need to DO SOMETHING in order to get rid of the
stench that surrounds them SOON!

Even RATS know when it is time to get off the ship!

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's PR Spin - blacklight
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 03 2003 @ 11:36 PM EST
Let's do some due diligence and put that SCO Group press release in context.
The link below is the link to the actual VARBusiness 2003 Report Card:

http://www.varbusiness.com/sections/apps/2003arc_results.asp?category=18

It is not to my credit that I cast aspersions on VARBusiness, before I saw the
Report Card - On the other hand, I made the effort to look for it. Note that the
SCO Group comes off as worst of 5 competitors in most categories. The SCO Group
came off tops in the reliability/robustness rankings, but this may very well be
due to the fact that the SCO Group's Unixware is use in very narrow niche
markets such as restaurant ordering a la McDonalds. In addition, Unixware is
viewed as stable/robust because it has not been improved in a long time - it's
a case of applying the principle "if it ain't broke, don't fix
it." On the other hand, Sun's Solaris is used in a much wider range of
application and given the range, customer dissatisfaction is probably more
likely. Customer dissatisfaction is also more likely if expectations are high as
they should be with Solaris. Conversely, the SCO Group's customers are not
looking for innovation or change and their expectations are low: as long as
Unixware runs the narrow band of applications thay are using, they are happy.

It is worth noting that the SCO Group's press release does not include a
hyperlink to the VARBusiness 2003 Annual Report Card: anyone who sees the Report
Card will immediately grasp why the SCO Group does not include such a hyperlink:
the SCO Group's scores speak for themselves. Juxtaposing the SCO Group's press
release with the Report Card is almost a controlled lab experiment on how far
the SCO Group deviates from actual, verifiable fact. In my estimation, the
experiment was successful in that it conclusively showed that the SCO Group
deviated to the point where it flunked the truth test. I will suggest the
obvious: if we can't trust the SCO Group to be truthful in the face of easily
verifiable facts, we should trust the SCO Group even less when the SCO Group
quotes anything we can't verify for ourselves.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Bogus survey - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 04 2003 @ 03:27 PM EST
Why did the stock jump?
Authored by: hamjudo on Monday, November 03 2003 @ 11:42 PM EST
When the stock price for SCOX starts to plummit, they put out a press release and the stock jumps up. This time the stock briefly went up about 75 cents. It only lasted about half an hour.

Do other stocks surge like that after meaningless press releases?

Did the press release actually cause the price spike, or was it just supposed to be a handy alibi for crooked traders? It's not price manipulation, they just bought then because they thought there was something to the press release...

Would anyone believe that? Why did the price go up? Who bought the shares? I'm so confused.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's PR Spin
Authored by: gnuadam on Monday, November 03 2003 @ 11:42 PM EST
Of course, IBM would say that whether SCO had the right to "terminate" their use and distribution of AIX depends on how you read the contract and is yet to be determined.
Actually, IBM would say that their SysV license is perpetual, irrevocable, and fully paid up.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Canopy Monopoly
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 03 2003 @ 11:45 PM EST

I live in Utah, and last week I had an interview lined up with a company (Vintela) in Lindon for a Software Engineering position. Then I found out they were part of the Canopy Group. I let them know the next day that I wasn't interested in working for them (even though they really wanted me to come in).

I asked about their connection with SCO and they told me that they are the engineers that SCO/Caldera got rid of when SCO dropped their Linux products. I.E., the Canopy Group kept the Linux group of SCO, and is still making money off of them.

We used to use Altiris products products at work; they sucked. Now we use systemimager (www.systemimager.org) which works better than the crap we had before. I went to school with an intern at Altiris who told me about how they knew that Microsoft was going to put them out of business in a few years. They should be gonners soon too.

Little by little people are going to boycott this beast of an organization, and people here in Utah are just as against them as everyone else. The Linux Users Group here HATE them and see them as the biggest embarrassment in the history of computing in Utah. They're going down, and we're going to make sure it's hard.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Interesting discovered link
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 04 2003 @ 12:16 AM EST
I have not verified it, and there is some speculation in the text, but interesting http://buffy.sighup.org.uk/sco /note02.html

Ralph Yarro is also a Trustee for the Noorda Family Trust. The NFT is famously secretive but owns a block of IP numbers and gives it's WHOIS address as 333 S 520 W Ste 300 Lindon, UT, the same as Canopy; which is just down the road from SCO at 355 S 520 W Lindon UT. An outside observer would be forgiven for assuming that the difference between NFT, Canopy and SCO existed purely in the paperwork...

(As another aside, the Noorda Family Trust web site is reported by Netcraft to be running Linux and to use an IP number from a block owned by NFT. If you follow the link on the Netcraft page you find that all SCOs, Canopys, Calderas etc etc web site IP numbers come from the same block...)

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's PR Spin
Authored by: CyberCFO on Tuesday, November 04 2003 @ 12:19 AM EST
Don't forget to mention that this award was actually given out in August. It
seems they either put this in the drawer for a day like today, or they just
couldn't come up with anything better when the stock started to head down this
morning.

Either way, it doesn't look good.

---
/g

[ Reply to This | # ]

Caldera in the REALLY old days - 1995 (?)
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 04 2003 @ 12:39 AM EST
This is from when they had 10 people (according to Ransom Love comment in the text)

http://www.networkco mputing.com/607/607hreport3.html

Caldera also has a distinctive business model--one reminiscent of the commercialization of TCP/IP. Th e goal is to piggy-back a fully supported commercial product on the voluntary innovation that is occurring around the Linux operating system on the Internet.

...

Caldera has also promised to return any changes made to the OSes kernel to the Internet community--its chief partner. Caldera is also aligning with a wide range of companies to address some of Linux's commercial weaknesses.


Note: According to http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=324945&jmp=indexterms&a mp;dl=GUIDE&dl=ACM there is a review of Caldera Network Desktop Preview 1 - in December 1995 issue of LinuxJournal. So I guess the article (based on it talks about the preview being available in future), must be before this, probably some time during 1995.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Historical documents etc
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 04 2003 @ 01:18 AM EST
Good one for the quotes database:
Caldera's IPO prospectus. I had a very quick browse through it, and it looks to me that a lot of IBM's comments about what SCO said about their business model, etc., seems that it might come from here. The wording appears surprisingly similar if this were not the case.

Good one for the quotes database:
Caldera letter to partners when they made the deal with Original SCO


And off-topic, but something I chanced upon, which I guess might be of interest to some people http://www.iposecuriti eslitigation.com/Caldera.pdf

[ Reply to This | # ]

A really good source on copyright
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 04 2003 @ 01:55 AM EST
http://www.eff.org/IP//20030905 _whenu.pdf

This is from a Summary Judgement in U-Haul v Whenu.com

Pages 13 to 17 (PDF numbering, forget the fax numbers at the top right of the page), deal with what constitutes a copyright infringement, derivative work, etc. citing lots of cases.

Quotes follow, references are in the pdf I linked:

To establish copyright infringement, a plaintiff must prove (1) ownership of a valid copyright, and copying constituent elements of a work that are original.

The term "copying" is interpreted broadly and encompasses the infringing of any of the copyright owner's five exclusive rights

A "derivative work" is a "work based upon one or more pre-existing works" which consists of "editiorial revisions, annotation, elaborations, or other modifications."

"[i]norder for a work to qualify as a derivative work it must be independently copyrightable" ... "A derivative work must incorporate a protected work in some concrete or permanent form."

and finally, slightly off-topic: "To make a prima facie case for contributory copyright infringement there must actually be direct infringement"



Conclusions

IANAL but I can't see how SCO can argue JFS, or RCU, or SMP, etc. is a derivative work of System V, if they can not find any of their code within them. (and further perhaps they can't claim derivative status even if they can - if the only elements of their code are not copyrightable elements).

I also can not see how they can make a claim of contributory infringement, etc., in Linus' policies etc., if they can't demonstrate actual infringement.

[ Reply to This | # ]

And why don't they place last?
Authored by: jobh on Tuesday, November 04 2003 @ 04:26 AM EST
I see that the reason they don't place last is that they get good scores in two
categories:

o Ease of doing business (beaten only by MS)

(tell that to the people trying to buy linux licences)

o Revenue/profit potential (beaten only by Novell)

So it seems that varbusiness believes SCOs current strategy is a good one.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's PR Spin
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 04 2003 @ 04:40 AM EST
I'm amazed someone's placed worse than SCO. What did Sun do, start throwing
puppies off the roof on live TV?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's PR Spin
Authored by: worldyroyster on Tuesday, November 04 2003 @ 05:09 AM EST
I'm guessing SCO (...) is hoping [the rationalisation of patent deliveries] becomes the law of the land before 2005 and made retroactive. I, on the other hand, would like it to go into effect the day *after* IBM knocks SCO out with its four patents but before Microsoft decides to make like Attilla the Hun and sue Linus over some goofball patent they claim Linux is violating. We need to time this thing just right.

Really, let's not be of the same moral fibre as the McBRides of the world, who live by the "If it's good for me, then it's good, if it's bad for my enemies, then it's good" rule.
I thought what distinguished "them" from "us" is principled positions, as opposed to using on one's own interest as a moral guide.

We're either for it or against it, or don't know. But you can't just pick your victims when it comes to the law.
It has to apply to everybody, or it's not the law.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Newswire: KILL KILL KILL SCO
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 04 2003 @ 03:45 PM EST
the most ironic press release concerning SCO, titled /KILL KILL KILL -- The SCO Group/ href=http://money.cnn.com/services/tickerheadlines/prn/lath126a.P 1.10162003171013.17230.htm

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )