|
| Authored by: PM on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 12:59 AM EST |
Is the advertisment aimed at prospective applicants or is it to impress the
likes of Laura Didio, Dan Lyons, Deutche Bank etc?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:06 AM EST |
Sounds like the want to open a one-man telemarketing department. The
whole thing really sounds like they have a lot of confidence that their IP
license is going to earn them BILLIONS of dollars.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:06 AM EST |
In other words:
They want a telemarketer to pitch their "Linux stole our IP" scam to
clueless middle managers. And if the telemarketer does well, they get to keep
their job and SCO will hire more telemarketers!
Only one problem: Who in their right mind would take this job (or keep it for
more than a few days, assuming they didn't know what they were getting into
initially)?
Every call will be met with wild laughter and a -*click*-[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: jkondis on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:13 AM EST |
"...sales will be generated from outbound phone calls..."
So The SCO Group has decided to take up telemarketing, eh?
Cold calling. That does it; I no longer have any respect for Caldera/TSG
whatsoever. The deceitful behavior, delaying tactics, and libelous accusations
against the Linux community were understandable but now Caldera/TSG has gone too
far. ;)
I sure hope they have a copy of the do-not-call list handy for when they call
U.S. phone numbers!
...J[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: RedBarchetta on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:16 AM EST |
I'd demand a $25,000 signing bonus, 6 weeks annual
vacation (upfront),
pizza Fridays, my own office with
door locks (to keep The Darl at arms length),
brand new AMD 3200+ multi-media PC, expense account, stock
shares with no
vesting period... and finally,...
... no contracts to sign!!!
(would you sign a contract
with SCO??? didn't think so... :-P ) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- ME! ME! ME! - Authored by: Scriptwriter on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:24 AM EST
- ME! ME! ME! - Authored by: gvc on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 05:50 AM EST
- ME! ME! ME! - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 02:26 AM EST
- ME! ME! ME! - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 02:31 AM EST
- ME! ME! ME! - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 05:03 AM EST
- ME! ME! ME! - Authored by: meat straw on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 09:03 AM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Scriptwriter on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:16 AM EST |
a Director of Financial Reporting (since December 8th)
an Internal Auditor (since November 23rd)
and a Software Engineer (since November 8th)
Two months and they haven't filled the Software Engineer job. Maybe word is
getting around that The SCO Group is not exactly what you want on your resume.
---
He who sells what isn't his'n is headed for some time in prison.
irc.fdfnet.net #groklaw[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:16 AM EST |
Hey PJ did you see the post (in last discussion):
Attention PJ and IBM lawyers
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 13 2004 @ 10:29 PM EST
According to what Stowell is quoted by Bob McMillan of IDG as saying, if quoted
correctly and read literally, SCO did not give complete answers to 1 or 12.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Hey PJ - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:26 AM EST
- Hey PJ - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:52 AM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:17 AM EST |
I can see the calls coming now..
"So.. I've got you down for two Linux licenses, $1200 dollars.. now could
I interest you in some new aluminum sidings?
Or perhaps you're looking for a new long-distance provider?"
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: OK on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:17 AM EST |
I cannot stand LISTENING to the "offerings of the SCO Groups IP license
strategies", even less "communicating" them myself.
I guess I have to pass...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: stdsoft on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:28 AM EST |
Can you imagine? Inside sales for SCOSource. Oh my god... unemployment would
have to be above 20% to fill a job like that. I can't even imagine a college
student taking on something this uncomfortable.
SCO has yet to bring in a single dollar, not even $1 in relation to their IP
protection program. The only reasonable quota for this program is $0. The only
context in which this job makes sense is to keep up pretense that SCO is still
playing the IP extortion game.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: jtsteward on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:33 AM EST |
Just when you REALLY think you have seen EVERYTHING from SCO there is to see
....
I may actually miss the entertainment when they are gone
---
-------------------------------------------------
Darl needs more bullets, he keeps hitting his foot but he won't go down[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:44 AM EST |
Ok, I have an order for a Linux server with a side of clients. Did you want
fries with that?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: belzecue on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:59 AM EST |
Omigod, do you all realize what a perfect opportunity this is to get a
linux/pro-FOSS inside SCO? Heck, they *asked* for an insider, didn't they?
CALLER: Hello, I'd like to purchase a SCO linux IP license...
SALES GUY: You don't need a license for SCO IP.
CALLER: I, uh, don't need a license...
SALES GUY: You will grow your business with Linux and without fear of SCO.
CALLER: We will grow our business with Linux...
SALES GUY: Have a nice day.
CALLER: I will have a nice day. Uh, thank you. <CLICK>
...
DARL: Sooo, new guy, how are the licenses selling?
SALES GUY: Sweet, dawg.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 02:00 AM EST |
Sorry, I just have a hard time believing that SCO has anything to sell. Sounds
like a job of cold-calling and then sending nonresponses to the Legal team.
"You won't buy our product? Then let me get your name and number, and
I'll fax this to our legal team. Hello? Hello?"
On a...serious note, what kind of sad-arsed salesman would take this position?
The company has negative growth, has pissed off not only their customers, but
their partners as well, and derives virtually all of their income from misguided
handouts from the likes of MS and greedy, clueless banks hoping to make a buck.
Even if you "earned" a commission, from the way the CEO and friends
approach ethical business practices, you're not likely to see a dime of it. In
addition, they want you to somehow rebuild their Unix/Linux industry? You're
basically doomed to failure, no matter how you play it, no matter how good you
are.
So, despite some of the posts, I think taking a job at Wal-mart might be a
better career move in the long run... :)
If I was forced to take it, and by that I mean Darl had my family held hostage,
I'd demand upfront cash for even CONSIDERING the position. Not that working
for SCO will doom you forever, just that it will be a fairly long time before
other companies trust your motives before they hire you.
Remember, virtually all of SCO's board are former Novell employees. If they
can try to screw over the very company that gave them a leg up in the first
place, it's only natural that companies view people that join with full
knowledge of the situation, as the same kinds of folks.
And when I mean upfront cash, I mean enough to live the good life for the next
ten years or so, because it's unlikely you're going to find a similar job
within that time-frame. It's one thing to work for a bad company, it's
another to work for a company that intentionally breaks the law, it's a whole
other animal to work with a company like SCO.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: shareme on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 02:03 AM EST |
What is the Sarbanes-Oxley Act mentioned in the accounting position?
Sorry its been awhile since I was in acounting or building accoutning systems
for that matter..
---
Sharing and thinking is only a crime in those societies where freedom doesn't
exist.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 02:09 AM EST |
| Monday's response included no examples of copyright violations, Stowell said.
"We've not introduced copyright infringement as part of our case with IBM. We've
tried to make it clear that it's a contract issue."
http://ww
w.infoworld.com/article/04/01/13/HNscoshowscode_1.html [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Mecha on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 02:10 AM EST |
"Then there's that "Initially, the sales manager will also be
responsible for generating the revenue as a stand-alone sales
entity...""
What do they really mean by stand-alone?
If you decide to send an invoice via mail, you didn't work for us??? or Darl -
I cannot sully my name any further, I cant sully IBM's name, can I sully
someone else who is unsuspecting?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 02:27 AM EST |
Okay, so how do they then transfere the 95% of those revenues to Novell ???
Wasn't there something like this in their contracts ???
Please some one correct me but if this is still true then should'nt Novell be
getting some of M$ and Sun's money too ???
Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me, maybe Darl's memory is too ...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: coolmos on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 03:43 AM EST |
They don't need a salesman.
The job is about bringing SCO to the people and showing them their valuable IP.
Groklaw does a perfect job at just that.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 04:09 AM EST |
I worked for a CRM software company in tualitin, OR (not ACT! either) and it was
pretty standard to do the entire operation with inside sales. If critical, an on
site visit can be arranged by the travelling rep, they usually work in pairs.
not so much cold calling but rather calling in on leads. they used to have kids
filter the leads by calling them first before handing them over to the actual
rep to work it.
SCOG probably never had a real inside sales department but rather guys who
tracked the VAR Channel.
this job is most likely an attempt by SCOG to look like they are
"serious" about selling licenses. whether they book any sales, time
will tell. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Electric Dragon on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 05:33 AM EST |
At first I misread this as "SCO has posted a job opening for an Insider
Trades Manager."[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 05:49 AM EST |
An interesting job description, this:
"Applicants should have the ability to communicate the offerings of the
SCO Groups [sic] IP license strategies in a manner that is successful in
generating revenues."
In other words, the conversation over the phone would (possibly) go something
like this:
"Hello, I'm calling on behalf of SCO. We wondered if you'd like to buy a
license from us to continue using Linux? No? Er... right. Um, how's this then?
Unless you buy a licese from us, we'll force you into court, sue you for every
penny you have and then move onto your children. Excellent, sir. So how many
licenses will that be then...?"[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: PeteS on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 06:12 AM EST |
| This just goes to prove that my previous post
about Quantum SCO was correct !
---
Artificial Intelligence is no
match for natural stupidity [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: lnx4me on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 06:31 AM EST |
Just think, here is an opportunity enter on the ground floor and grow the job
into a VP for Enforcement!
Bob
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: lpletch on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 06:45 AM EST |
SCO forgot to put in the part about:
Involvement with Organized Crime and Extortion a plus.
---
lpletch@adelphia.net[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: crythias on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 06:45 AM EST |
[Smiling, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain] Hey, everyone, switch
to BSD instead of Linux! :-P
According to SCO's IP license
FAQ:41. I am running BSD. Am I required to purchase a
license?
No, you do not need to purchase a SCO IP license to run
BSD.
Since Linux binaries can run (almost natively) on BSD, as
well as SCO binaries, ... Oh, never mind. And it isn't to start a "who's better"
war. I'm only presenting it as an "in case you didn't know" type thing. Also,
Apple's current OS's run on BSD, as I understand it, which means that Apple is
as well not facing the wrath of SCO.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Alan Bell on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 07:03 AM EST |
well I am sure a lot of people who are sane(i.e. don't want to throw their
career away by working for a bunch of criminals) but are qualified to apply for
the job and get an interview. In an interview you are asked questions about
yourself and invited to ask any questions about the prospective employer. This
could be interesting, like "what is this stuff I would be selling?"
"what are the revenue targets?" "how do I respond to people
who ask for evidence?" etc. etc. perhaps we could put together a list of
relevant questions anyone applying for a such a job would be advised to ask.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 07:34 AM EST |
How about the angle of "Hire whomever you can to drain the cash before we
expire"? It couldn't be any worse than having Darl brother doing the
casework...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: blacklight on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 07:48 AM EST |
An inside sales manager to sell the SCO Group IP? I can't wait to hear the
sales script that he is going to have to cook up - And hashing that script is
going to be a task from hell. And since the guy is supposed to work as a
standalone and do cold calls, I gather that we have a boiler room operation in
the works. A thought just crossed my mind: is the SCO Group doing some out of
the box thinking and looking into scamming our nation's senior citizens? After
all, the SCO Group is definitely looking for targets who can't fight back.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: pooky on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 07:58 AM EST |
Great, now we all have to look forward to a telephone campaign from SCOG to
harass us?
Here's the real question: Are they replacing someone or creating a new
position? Some of the language used in the posting seems to suggest it might be
a new position but that is never actually stated. Did someone quit SCO and
refuse to go forward with this?
-pooky
---
Veni, vidi, velcro.
I came, I saw, I stuck around.
IANAL, etc...
Remember, just because SCO says it's so doesn't make it so.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 08:04 AM EST |
I am from New Jersey, and, you know, employment has been very tough lately for a
regular stand-up family guy like me, what with most of the bosses locked away
and the docks having layoffs again. Sometimes you just have to take the jobs
that are available. With a background in "enforcement", and as a
recent graduate of the Gotti school of persuasion, perhaps I could find like a
new career as their "inside sales" guy? Batta bing.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: jmc on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 08:09 AM EST |
Another question to consider is - why are they only concerned with selling this
stuff in North America?
The SCO UK people have explicitly said that they are only looking for this
"IP Revenue" in the US.
If their case stood up, surely they'd go global with it?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 08:12 AM EST |
I despise SCO's miscreant leadership and dirty deeds as much as the next sane
fella, but please don't knock Utah, its a great place to live, especially if
you ski. It also has some other incredible oportunities for those who like the
outdoors.
There are plenty of very good legitimate IT and financial businesses located
there. It is childish to participate in exploting petty stereotypes which have
no basis in fact.
Death to SCO, but give Utah a break.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: jrc on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 08:33 AM EST |
On 20 December, there were 4 open positions in finance, now there are only
two. Investor relations has been staffed. Curious.
On 20
December:
- CFO (R.
Bench)
- INVESTOR
RELATIONS
- Director, Investor
Relations
(open, posted 21 Nov
2003)
- Executive Assistant, Investor
Relations
(open, posted 27
Oct
2003)
- AUDIT
- Internal Auditor
(open, posted
21 Nov
2003)
- CONTROLLER
- Controller
(M.
Olsen)
- Director of Financial Reporting and
SEC/GAAP
Compliance
(open, posted 8 Dec
2003)
Today:
- CFO (R.
Bench)
- AUDIT
- Internal Auditor
(open, posted
21 Nov
2003)
- CONTROLLER
- Controller
(M.
Olsen)
- Director of Financial Reporting and
SEC/GAAP
Compliance
(open, posted 8 Dec 2003)
- VIP of
Sales, IP Division
- SALES
- Inside Sales
(open,
posted 09 Jan
2004)
They just don't seem to be able to
get a software engineer, even in this market. I wonder why? ;-). Maybe it's the
.Net experience they are seeking...
---
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 08:34 AM EST |
Is is possible that scox is not really trying to fill this position? Scox knows
that groklaw, and yahoo message board posters, watch scox's every move -
including job postings. Maybe scox is trying to make people think that scox is
really really going after scosource revenue.
We all know that scox won't actually sell you a "linux license" if
you begged them. Scox started saying they will only sell those licenses to
fortune 1000 companies, but there is no evidence of any real F1000 sales either.
Maybe scox wants "investors" to think that scox will have a revenue
stream, that scox really won't have. Q1 may be a dissaster for scox, scox needs
to do something to justify deutsch bank's insane forward guidance.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 08:53 AM EST |
| Here is the text from the SCO web site and as PF posted:
"The inside
sales manager will be responsible to implement a successful campaign of
generating daily revenue from selling IP licensing in the North American
market. Initially, the sales manager will also be responsible for generating the
revenue as a stand-alone sales entity with the goal to grow the department
revenue to justify additional sales resources. All sales will be generated from
outbound phone calls and incoming phone call leads based upon the SCO Group's
IP campaign." (all emphasis mine)
Correct me if I am wrong, but
didn't Tibbits say that IBM case was not about copyrights? If that is true, one
has to wonder exactly what IP SCO has to sell. Their IP campaign thus far
borders on extortion since they have not proven they own anything they are
complaining about.
The job they are advertising appears to be a call for a
"Designated Felon" when things go bad and they have to return the money for the
bogus licenses sold.
RDH [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: meat straw on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 08:59 AM EST |
I would rather gargle shards of glass, but thanks for asking. Seriously, this is
just PR to make SCO's game-plan appear to be that they are in this for the long
haul.
As opposed to stock pumping. It is also good for spreading propaganda.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: PSaltyDS on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 09:06 AM EST |
I'll do it! I want minimum wage, 1 day off a week, 2 days of vacation a year,
one paperback book on holistic medicine for a medical plan, and one tube of
Crest for a dental plan... and I want to see the infringing code in Linux
without signing an NDA. Sign me up! :-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 09:18 AM EST |
... if you're an investor. ``Wow! SCO must be doing OK if they're hiring
in this economic climate.'' OK, OK. An investor who's had their head
in the sand for the past nine months. But, IMHO, it appears there's no shortage
of those based on what we see in SCOX's daily trading. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 09:24 AM EST |
Some people here should apply and if they get in they should sabotage SCO from
the inside by telling people the truth, or just telling their potential
'customers' (or up and coming lawsuit victims as I call to them) to goto
groklaw.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 09:26 AM EST |
Hey, your all missing the point here! This is a fine opportunity to
<b>actually get some money out of SCO!!<b>
OK, you'll have to be on the phone and pretend you're really trying to
sell their IP, but my guess is that they won't even blame you if you don't
sell a single license.
Any dollar away from Darl's War on Linux is a Good Thing!
Pity I'm in living close to Amsterdam (Europe), not Utah ...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: cadfael on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 09:27 AM EST |
For those following the personel stories, they have a new Vice President of
Engineering and a new Chief Technologist. Both appear to have ties back into the
history of USL and Novell.
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040114/law047_1.html[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 09:39 AM EST |
| "communicate the offerings of the SCO Groups [sic] IP license strategies in a
manner that is successful in generating revenues."
Yes sir, you can feel
confident you are making the right move with your purchase of a SCO license. You
will be doing your part in supporting agressive corporate capitolism.
And
let me tell you about the attractive license package.
Each license comes on
a one inch square stamped stainless steel tag attached to an attractive
collar.
The collar fits loosly and is very comfortable, unless there are
license violations percieved to be taking place by SCO. The collar can then be
tightened until choking sounds ensue.
Hello, hello.... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 09:42 AM EST |
The best way to sell SCO licenses is if you had a fully operational Death Star
parked in orbit. "What's that? You don't think you need an IP license?
Well, just take a look out your window at the neighbor's building."
SHHHHHPHOOOOM! "They didn't think they needed a license either. So, how
many can I put you down for, or do I need to move on to my next call?" [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 09:50 AM EST |
"Lead campaign" LOL... How long before the first SCO spam run:
Subject: Re: L.i.n.u.x I.P l1cense yffgdsskkk
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Captain on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 09:51 AM EST |
| SCO takes Linux licenses
global
Companies outside the United States that use Linux now face
the threat of legal action from the SCO Group, following the announcement on
Wednesday that SCO's licenses are available worldwide. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Sunny Penguin on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 10:23 AM EST |
Now that we know about the MSFT and SUN deals from Novells point of view, will
SCO restate their earnings from last quarter?
If SCO had to subtract 9.5 Million (for Novell) from the last quarter what
would their losses be?
Novell wants more information on both of these contract changes, These were not
new licenses.
---
SCO directly to jail, do not collect two hundred dollars.
BTW - I never have been mistaken for a Lawyer.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 10:25 AM EST |
Another SCO press release;
SCO Names Wolf Bauer As Vice President of Engineering, Scott Lemon As Chief
Technologist
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040114/law047_1.html
--
An interested bystander[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: pooky on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 10:59 AM EST |
So, essentially this persons job is to convince people they need to buy the
license, and why SCO doesn't need to prove their claim in court as a
prerequisite. Convince them why the GPL doesn't actually apply to Linux and why
we should believe a company who's representatives continuously change their
minds and contradict themselves in public.
They would have better luck running the UNIX Psychic hotline, 1-900-CALL-SCO.
-pooky
---
Veni, vidi, velcro.
"I came, I saw, I stuck around."
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: darthaggie on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 11:09 AM EST |
| Vunet is reporting that "SCO
lines up UK-based targets" and [Chris Sontag] told vnunet.com that the firm
expects to begin legal action against Linux users in the next couple of weeks
and confirmed that UK-based multinational companies were in SCO's sights.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 11:26 AM EST |
For example, The p*ss bucket boy in Mel Brook's History of the World Part I.
Hmmm...that's all that comes to mind, though...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: John Horn on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 11:31 AM EST |
I see only two possibilities here...
1) They really believe they have a case and can salvage the company by
generating revenue from users of an open source OS (Linux).
2) They have to, at the very least, convince the court that they believe they
have a right to collect a 'tax' on the use of Linux (described as license
fees, royalties or whatever).
I suspect the second option is closer to the truth, else why hire only one sales
person to persuade tens of millions of Linux users to send them money. I think
what they will discover is that it will take an army of sales people pestering
one Linux user to get him/her to send them money.
---
-------------------------------------------
In a world without fences, who needs GATES?
-------------------------------------------
found on a 'Linux Journal[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: RealProgrammer on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 11:45 AM EST |
Maybe the salesman they should be looking for is the one from Novell who sold
them, uh, what was it they bought?
---
(I'm not a lawyer, but I know right from wrong)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: RedBarchetta on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 11:51 AM EST |
I thought I'd torture myself for a few minutes by visiting
www.sco.com.
There's a link buried somewhere in that mess
of a website to a "shop" option.
Clicking on the link
yields:
An error occured while
loading https://shop.caldera.com:
Timeout on server
Connection was to shop.caldera.com at port 443
I guess they
must be updating their page to reflect their
latest product line. (snicker,
tee-hee)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: surak on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 11:52 AM EST |
According to this story
at Geek.com, Microsoft is going to make its
Services for Unix product, formerly $99, free, in a attempt to compete with
Linux. Why am I not surprised? Perhaps this is part of why Microsoft paid SCO
for a license?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Frihet on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 11:55 AM EST |
Definition:
EXTORTION
\Ex*tor"tion\, n. [F. extorsion.] 1. The act of extorting; the act or
practice of wresting anything from a person by force, by threats, or by any
undue exercise of power; undue exaction; overcharge.
2. (Law) The offense committed by an officer who corruptly claims and takes, as
his fee, money, or other thing of value, that is not due, or more than is due,
or before it is due. --Abbott.
3. That which is extorted or exacted by force.
Syn: Oppression; rapacity; exaction; overcharge.
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
OK, I'm not accusing anyone, mind you, but to my IANAL mind this seems to
pretty well define SCO's present business plan. Knowing this, if I took the
job, would I be a co-conspirator when the day of reckoning comes? Also, if SCO
is not engaged in extortion, why is this not so? If they are, why has someone
not brought criminal charges? That would certainly add spice to the daily
blather.
---
Frihet
Repeal the Digital Monopoly Conservation Act.
Write your congress folks![ Reply to This | # ]
|
- SCO's crimes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 04:43 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 11:57 AM EST |
| http://news.com.com/2100-7344_3-5140761.html [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 11:58 AM EST |
SCO Salesman on phone: "Hi, this is Josh at The SCO Group!"
SCO Salesman
hears: buzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
SCO Salesman dials a new number.
SCO Saleman
on phone: "Hi, this is Josh at The SCO Group!"
SCO Salesman hears:
buzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Ad infinitum.
No torture in hell could be as bad as
this. ;)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Utah on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 12:08 PM EST |
Of course, you have to live in Utah.
Hey! That's a perk!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 12:13 PM EST |
We've set a record for punchlines for a single article, I think.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 12:26 PM EST |
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/?http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/news_story.php?id=52382
GOES INTERNATIONAL
SCO says it is extending its invitation to Linux end users to sign up to its IP
licence for Linux on a global platform.
Previously, the company had targeted top Fortune companies, but now the licence,
and the associated litigation against those that resist, will extend worldwide.
Chris Sontag, Senior VP at SCOsource, told us: 'Appropriate action will be
taken worldwide to enforce our IP rights'. However, Sontag would not comment on
whether SCO's legal team, Boies, Schiller and Flexner, would be privy to the
same 20 per cent cut of settlement monies it enjoys in the US.
LINUX RESELLERS *MUST* OFFER - Note: SCO is not reselling/selling Linux, so they
must mean other company's resellers!
Sontag said that resellers should inform users of the licence and by not doing
so could find themselves embroiled in the affair. 'All resellers should make
end users aware of this SCO licence,' he said. 'It is much better value than
the HP or Novell indemnification offerings and there is liability on resellers
not passing the information on, as by not disclosing it could be considered as
warranting the product.'
PRICING
The licence will continue to be priced at SCO's int
ADVERTISEMENT
roductory offer of $199 per desktop and $699 per server processor as it has
since July, but this is now standard pricing. An annual licence has also been
introduced. '$699 dollars is now the fixed one off price for a single CPU
server,' Sontag told us. 'However, there has been a new pricing structure
introduced whereby users can purchase an annual licence for $149 dollars for a
single CPU server.'
CLAIMS GREAT SUCCESSING IN SELLING IT
Sontag is confident of a good reception for the licence outside the US -
possibly a greater than 50 per cent take-up. He told us: 'To date there has
been limited and selected availability with a 30 to 50 per cent adoption rate.
We can't name names at this stage, but would expect this figure to rise now the
licence is available worldwide.'[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Chris Cogdon on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 12:36 PM EST |
| Why is 'hires' in quotes ? ...
Firstly, the article comes from Yahoo's News
Service. SCO have announced that they've signed on a new VP of Engineering
and a new Chief Technologist to look after ongoing development of their UNIX
devision and products.
People have been saying for a long time that SCO is
turning into a litigation company, and their actual UNIX products will stagnate.
So... this is seen as a very good thing for SCO. However... have a look at the
text:
The SCO Group (Nasdaq: SCOX - News) today announced the
appointment of Wolf Bauer to the position of vice president of engineering, and
Scott Lemon to the position of chief technologist. Bauer and Lemon are
currently members of the SCO Group executive
team.
(Emphasis added). So... all they've really done
is to pick two members of their existing staff, give them 'new roles', and then
announce the fact. SCO get some engineering-related PR without actually having
to hire, and pay for, any new staff. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: wvhillbilly on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 12:40 PM EST |
From the SCOSource IP license FAQ:
5. Hasn't SCO already
indicated that it's okay for its code to be distributed by distributing this
code itself that is now in question? Haven't they essentially GPL'd their code?
During the period that SCO distributed Linux, SCO was unaware of the
copyright violations. ...
How the thunder could SCO,
distributing their own IP under GPL, which they most likely put there
themselves, be unaware that they were violating their own copyright (if such a
thing is possible)? Sounds like a very lame excuse to me.
IANAL, but I
know stupidity when I see it.
---
What goes around comes around, and
it grows as it goes. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 12:46 PM EST |
I believe that I know why SCO did the holiday document thing (saying they missed
the court order beacuse of the holidays).
What they will do, is dump some documents on IBM right before the hearing.
SCO will say, sorry Judge, we missed the date on a few documents, but we've
given them all to IBM now.
They hope IBM will be unable to properly respond at the hearing, because IBM
won't have had time to review the documents.
Thus SCO will claim if IBM says SCO's production is inadequiate, then IBM is
acting in "bad faith", as IBM will not be including the latest
production.
Alternatively SCO might hope IBM might ask for a continuance (more delay) to
review the late produced documents.
Alternatively SCO might hope IBM and the court will take it on SCO's word, that
SCO's production, though belated, is now complete.
Additionally, I think in SCO's mind, they think they were ambushed by IBM
giving them Dynix code just before the last hearing (the number of times that
they mention this in news stories, suggests that they might really feel that).
So they want to ambush IBM back. (Of course in the real world, SCO were not
ambushed, the court was not going to order IBM to produce anything on Dec 5,
regardless of what IBM had or had not already produced).[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: alasmi on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 01:28 PM EST |
I have just been looking at the Amendment No. 2 to the Asset
Purchase Agreement on SCO's website. I notice that it hasn't been signed by
Novell only by SCO. Now I would have thought that if SCO had a signed copy then
they would show it. Novell claims the the amendment "is not
present in Novell's files" Maybe that's because they never did sign it and
just filed it in the rubbish bin.
If (and it's a big IF) that is the case
then the original list of excluded assets still stands ie "all copyrights and patents except
for the trademarks UNIX and UnixWare" (last page).
Just a thought
(which may be wishful thinking :-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 02:38 PM EST |
The sales position should be easy to fill, because everyone is clamoring to
license SCO's IP, according to Sontag:
'To date there has been limited and selected availability with a 30 to 50 per
cent adoption rate. We can't name names at this stage, but would expect this
figure to rise now the licence is available worldwide.'
(Source:
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/?http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/news_story.php?id=52382)
Can't name names? Wonder why... Perhaps there are none. 30% of zero is zero.
(So is 50%, explaining the wide range in his numbers.)
My question to groklawyers is what sort of liability this statement causes for
SCO. They have sent out 1500 letters, so the 30-50% number means they should
habe 450-750 corporate clients, each of whom owns thousands of computers. At
the low-end, this implies a revenue of
450 * 1000 * $699 = $314,550,000
Why didn't this appear on their income statement? The big lies are
inconsistent, so it is clear that investors are being misled.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 03:01 PM EST |
Why does SCO need a Sales person to make outbound "sales" calls? Do
you suppose that SCO Group's "IP campaign" is not working? Why
would SCO need to make outbound calls if it were working? Do you think DiDio
(and her ilk) are smart enough to pick up on that? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 04:23 PM EST |
| http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5140700.html [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 04:43 PM EST |
I see huge lots (36,000 and almost 15,000) being bought at ridiculosly high
prices (30 cents above closing). I presume Google announcement is to follow...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 05:04 PM EST |
| Informative post at Slashdot:
http://yro.
slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=92867&cid=7978092
Sorry to burst
your bubble but this started a couple of weeks ago. We got back from the
Christmas break to find one of the letters from the SCO Group asking us to
verify that we had not copied any code from our SCO servers into Linux
machines.
As our last SCO server went into the trash a couple of years ago
legal told us to ignore the letter and that's exactly what we did. Our three AIX
machines continue to run as do our two Linux clusters, the only thing that's
changed is the FUD from SCO.
Ed Almos
Budapest, Hungary
This links
into the pronoucement a few days ago from Sonntag IIRC that only customers of
SCO that use Linux are at risk at the moment. They are going through their
customer database going back years and seeing who might be stupid enough to tug
at the bait. Then they plan to sic this new hire on the guys who sounded
promisingly worried/stupid.
Gives the phrase 'customer service' a whole new
angle.... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: jbeadle on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 05:17 PM EST |
From CES in Las Vegas. Courtesy of The Register(tm):
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/34878.html
"A second bit of comic relief comes to us from Jean-Baptiste Su of La
Tribune - a good friend of El Reg.
He found none other than SCO's Darl McBride on the CES show floor. Su noted
that McBride was "pretty dressed down" and without his usual
bodyguard. This made it easier to blend into the crowd, McBride told the
reporter.
It's nice to see that McBride is able to take some time away from his vigorous
IP pursuits. He was at the CES show with son, enjoying all the gizmos like the
rest of us.
And you thought your dad was embarrassing."
No doubt looking for SCO's next target(s)...
John[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: lpletch on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 05:35 PM EST |
Does anyone have a copy of an older SCO Group
Corporate
Profile.
I am curious about, when they stopped claiming UNIX, and If
anything happened around that time to make them stop.
Although they do claim
'...SCO's purchase of all UNIX intellectual property and copyrights from
Novell." in this report.
SCO Names Wolf Bauer
As Vice President of Engineering, Scott Lemon As Chief
Technologist
---
lpletch@adelphia.net [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Darl O'Assbag on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 07:58 PM EST |
I would wager that the Iraqi Information Minister would be considered "too
inexperienced" to provide the spin (read: Believable Fairy Tales) that SCO
is looking for.
"Can we agree that from now on, films have to be made by film
makers?"[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 14 2004 @ 10:25 PM EST |
So tell me, is it true that the second 'm' in 'mormon' is
silent?
Judging from Darl's actions (a supposedly devout mormon)
I'm inclined to think so.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
