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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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 Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:29 PM EST

Robert McMillan reports that SCO announced today that they will announce their first end user lawsuit target tomorrow:

"The SCO Group on Tuesday will launch its first lawsuit against a Linux user for alleged violations of SCO's intellectual property, SCO Chief Executive Officer Darl McBride said Monday.

"After consulting with its law firm, Boies, Schiller and Flexner, SCO has narrowed down its list of possible targets to a 'handful' of the world's 1,000 largest corporations, McBride said. 'We're going to file it tomorrow. It's sort of come down to a couple of complaints we have prepared,' he said.

"McBride declined to offer more details other than to say that the companies being considered were neither Internet Service Providers nor technology companies and that they all had recognizable names.

"Speaking at the Software 2004 conference in San Francisco later Monday, McBride said that other lawsuits would follow. 'I don't see hundreds and hundreds of lawsuits like the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) did, but I do see more than one,' he said, referring to the lawsuits the RIAA has filed against online file-swappers.

"Launching lawsuits against large corporations will do little more than speed up SCO's demise, according to Bruce Perens, a founder of the Open Source Initiative. 'If you shake down a company that way, especially a Fortune 1000 company -- a company that has a good many more lawyers than SCO -- that tends to blow up in your face,' he said. 'SCO can confuse as many people as they want. They're still going to eventually go out of business. They can't win these suits.'"

We'll see. This is an announcement about an announcement. How weird is that? Is this the week they announce their financials or something?


  


SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow | 608 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:42 PM EST
They really mean it this time!

--andy richter

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: brenda banks on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:46 PM EST
you mean they really really mean it this time


---
br3n

irc.fdfnet.net #groklaw
"sco's proof of one million lines of code are just as believable as the
raelians proof of the cloned baby"

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:46 PM EST

I guess we'll get to figure out what TSG thinks an Internet Service Provider and/or a technology company isn't. Does this, or does this not, mean that Google is, or is not, a target?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:48 PM EST
you mean they really really really mean it this time

[ Reply to This | # ]

..the EV1.net???
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:48 PM EST
..I mean, the idiots did sign.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:49 PM EST
I think he really does mean it.

He's scheduled to come out with his quarterly non-earnings report the following
day. He needs something to draw attention away from the fact that SCO is going
out of business. Otherwise the stock price will take a dive. That's why we're
getting so much FUD this week.

Of course, SCO stock may take a dive anyway . . .

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: belzecue on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:55 PM EST
"The SCO Group on Tuesday -- or at the very least, no less than a week --
will launch its first lawsuit against a Linux user..."

:-)

Is it possible that they have finally found a complicit (i.e. let's pretend you
sue us and we roll over out of court) licensee in the ranks of the Fortune 1000?
Seems unlikely, but you never know (e.g. Everyone's Internet's 'seemed like a
good idea at the time' license).

[ Reply to This | # ]

Didio, Enderle and Lyons will love it
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:56 PM EST
And Skiba will raise his SCO target to $300.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:58 PM EST
"This is an announcement about an announcement. How weird is that?"

SCO Chief Executive Officer Darl McBride also said Monday that, "SCO will
also be addressing the decision to announce soon the decision to mention the
future date of the announcement regarding the announcement of the decision to
disclose the announcement about the press release regarding the announcement of
the decision to announce the contents of the announcement of the documents
containing the announcement of the infringing Linux code".

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: MarkT on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:01 PM EST
Does this mean that they want to give us something besides their financials to
talk about on Wednesday?

I'm guessing that the story will be along the lines of "don't worry about
where we are now, this next phase of IP enforcement will reinforce the value of
the company"

But hey, I'm just guessing. LOL

[ Reply to This | # ]

Song and Dance
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:05 PM EST
Is the SCO dog and pony show finally going on the road? Of course the
intellectually overdrawn mind of SCO seems to change faster than the weather!

[ Reply to This | # ]

WalMart
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:07 PM EST
My guess is WalMart. They've been selling computers with Linux (Lindows,
Lycoris, and Mandrake, to name a few distributions) for some time. WalMart
therefore sells Linux to end users, but is not a Tech company nor an ISP.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Their stock is on a downward spiral
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:09 PM EST
...so Darl makes a public announcement attacking someone, like always.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Just cite Novell's copyrights
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:09 PM EST
Nothing has changed -- Novell still stands in the way.

But I assume it's not illegal to sue someone for using your property, even if
its ownership is clearly in dispute. Is there any other country besides the U.S.
where that's legal?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Stock Pumping - plain and simple
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:10 PM EST
There was an earlier post that tracked press releases and stock price... In the
early stages, to pump the price, and now to reduce the decline of the stock.

Guess which this one is?

I didn't invent logic, I just USE IT.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:11 PM EST
This should be ...um... interesting. They're doing so well managing all the
cases in front of the courts already, being timely about providing full
discovery and the like, that a couple more cases shouldn't be too difficult for
their elite legal eagles to handle.

Maybe we'll see Boies after all.

Anyone wanna make bets it's a drug company... one that's a major supplier to
them?

...D

P.S. Yes, it's sarcasm.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Guess the target - all can play!
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:13 PM EST
The "EV1 uses microsoft" publicity was arranged by public relations firm Waggener Edstrom. Just look at this web page. See the contact address at the bottom?

If you go and poke around the Waggener Edstrom website you'll find their client list prominently displayed. What do you think the chances are that one of these companies will be the one that SCO picks to sue tomorrow.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Tomas on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:18 PM EST
I personally suspect that SCOsource will try to steer away from an
"Internet Service Provider and/or a technology company" for the simple
reason that those companies could present a tougher victim than a company not as
"up" on the nuances.

The easiest targets are likely to be companies who use computers in the
background as tools to accomplish some job rather than companies who's primary
job may be computer use and knowledge.

---
Tom
en.gin.eer en-ji-nir n 1: a mechanism for converting caffeine into designs.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: cadfael on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:20 PM EST
I'm sorry, I have lost count of the lawsuits.

1. IBM
2. Novell
3. RedHat
4. Australian litigation
5. SCO Germany agreement

What have I missed? How many lawyers can these guys afford? Ignore any validity
of any lawsuit for the moment, but that many drains of cash with decreasing
revenues (unless EV1.net wrote a HUGE cheque) limits their ability to maintain
viability. For the US lawsuits, is it all Boies et al?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: grouch on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:22 PM EST
"Is this the week they announce their financials or something?"

It's the week SCO ran like cowards from an opportunity to finally show evidence.
A German court and Uninvention told them, in essence, put up, pay up, or shut up
with the claims. The SCOundrels tucked tail, weaselled a settlement, shut up,
and ran.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Glenn on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:22 PM EST
I wonder just how long it will take a fortune 1000 company to file a motion
for dismissal citing the Novell claims as primary amd also referencing the Red
Hat suit?

Glenn

[ Reply to This | # ]

How the lawsuit will go?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:32 PM EST
SCO: You are infringing our copyrights, see we have these copyright registration
certificates (and don't worry about Novell)

Victim: What specific aspects of your copyrights are we infringing?

SCO: It's in this huge mound of 100,000,000 paper documents, somewhere

Victim: Where?

SCO: We need discovery from you before we can say

Victim: You are the one who said that you are infringing our copyrights, so you
should know what your allegations are.

SCO: Not telling

Victim To Court: They need to tell us what their claim is

SCO To Court: We need need more time to respond to Victim's last statement

SCO To Court: We just gave them some more bogus documents, so the court should
ignore the victim's last statement

Victim To Court: They still haven' told us what the case is about

(A few months later)

Court To SCO: Tell the victim what the case is about.

(A few months later)

SCO To Court: We need more discovery from the victim before we can say. Oh and
BTW, can we change the whole basis of our law suit. It ain't about Linux, it's
about AIX. Yeh that's the ticket

[ Reply to This | # ]

What SCO hopes will happen?
Authored by: whoever57 on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:33 PM EST
SCO will have to show their cards if they initiate a lawsuit. Since we are
talking copyright, the stalling they have used in the IBM case wil not work as
well (surely a defendent could file for dismissal if SCO presents no evidence?)

So, if this would bring about the beginning of the end, what's SCO's play here?
My speculation is that they are hoping that the defendent will put the whole
thing on the slow track by pointing at Novell's copyrights and demand that that
trial is concluded first.

This then seems to meet SCO's goals: publicize a lawsuit, present no evidence,
delay and more delay.

Any thoughts on this? Am I wildly wrong?


---
-----
For a few laughs, see "Simon's Comic Online Source" at
http://scosource.com/index.html

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: capn_buzzcut on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:45 PM EST
Won't this action by SCO bring about a bunch of lawsuits against them by Linux
kernel contributors? I thought that's what Eric Raymond more or less said in
his open letter to Darl a few months back.

[ Reply to This | # ]

How to speed up the SCO court cases?
Authored by: kh on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:47 PM EST
If someone who has contributed to the kernel gets an injunction to stop SCO distributing their code unless SCO agrees in court to the GPL then:
If SCO doesn't agree to clase 5 of the GPL they can't distribute the kernel and I think this could make them want to hurry things along a bit.

If SCO does agree that would infuence it's other court cases (by estoppel?).

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: In a nutshell ?
Authored by: Thomas An. on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:51 PM EST
Hi everyone,

There are a couple of frients that I wish to introduce to this SCO vs IBM etal
phenomenon.

***Is there a summary page that offers the entire story in a nutshel ?
A page writen very simply (like child's version of the bible) that someone can
read and be able to grasp the general idea (and the injustice involved) before
they decide if they want to delve into the archives/databases to dig out the
rest of the details.

What would you recomend for people who are really pressed for time but they
still want to get a general idea?

Thanks
Thomas

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:54 PM EST
Am I the only one who finds it odd when you do a google.com search for Ev1 you
get their web page and right below, their participation in Microsoft case
study(if you can call it that with no hard data) which seemed to somehow find
windows faster in some regard to linux. Yes, Ev1 seems to have snuggled up to MS
for I'd say a fair drop in their cost of Windows. I of course could not do
anything but to suggest that perhaps Ev1 under blessings? from MS decided to pay
SCO some money. This of course could be construed as a precident. It avoid MS
from looking directly involved. Ev1 soepena coming soon?
Tyme

[ Reply to This | # ]

Maybe it will be an AIX or Dynix user?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:54 PM EST
Has it occurred to anybody that it might an AIX or Dynix user?

After all, according to SCO, using these operating systems is a copyright
infringement too.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Class Action countersuit ??
Authored by: Night Flyer on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:55 PM EST
I have been wondering...

If SCO launches a suit against a Linux user and they have made it clear that
they plan to sue others... which affects the credibility of all corporations and
individuals that use Linux...

Is this a legitimate basis for a class action counter lawsuit? Defamation of
character, loss of business ...

Where do I sign up?

-------------------------
My Clan Motto: Veritas Vincit: Truth Conquers

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: Novell case
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:57 PM EST
From Novell case:

3 - Memorandum by Novell Inc in support of [2-1] motion to dismiss (blk) [Entry
date 02/10/04]


So it's been 20 days so far - any sign of a SCO reply?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Don't they need a copyright to sue over copyright infringement?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:01 AM EST
I still don't understand. If SCO sues an end user for copyright won't it go
something like this:

Victim: Your honor, SCO doesn't own the copyright to Linux, Linus and a few
hundred others do. SCO needs to settle the copyright matter with them. The GPL
can't make me responsible for someone else's criminal act. If there is Unix
code in Linux then the party that currently holds the Linux copyright on those
files is responsible and is the only party SCO can have issue with.

If SCO really had a case they would be doing the following:
1. Identify what exactly is theirs.
2. File suit against the parties that contributed that to the Linux code base.
This suit would (in theory) also include contract claims since the party that
contributed it would also have to have access to Unix.
3. Notify the Linux community and work with them to remove their IP from Linux.

At no time does an infringement create a business opportunity like SCO is trying
to create. You can sue for damages from whomever put in the code, but it's
absurd to think you can create a new business revenue stream based on the
theft.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • How they will do this - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:22 AM EST
    • Won't work - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:16 AM EST
Place your bets...
Authored by: kuwan on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:02 AM EST

OK everybody it's time to place your bets. While I'm not going to try and guess which company they're going to sue I would put money on it being a current customer or licensee. They'll either go after someone with a Unix System V source license, an OpenServer/UnixWare customer, or a company that has both. Remember what SCO said about contracts (fourth quote) before:

Copyrights and patents are protection against strangers. Contracts are what you use against parties you have relationships with. From a legal standpoint, contracts end up being far stronger than anything you could do with copyrights.

They'll put some nonsense in the complaint about how they are in breach of their System V source license or OpenServer/UnixWare EULA because they use Linux (they like to read stuff into their contracts that doesn't exist, just as in the IBM case). I wouldn't be surprised if it's one of their current customers that is moving away from SCO's products in favor of Linux.

Anyway, if I'm right it will go further to prove my theory that a contract with a Canopy company makes you a future legal target.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will NOT "Run Out of Money"
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:03 AM EST
People here are saying SCO will eventually run out of
money and go away. Wrong. Until the courts unequivacally
throw out any claims that they have they will not go
away. They have the virtually unlimited cash funds of
a very rich company at their disposal - remember that SCO
is only a sock puppet, and that you need to focus on the
puppeteer.
As that other Anonymous poster keeps saying, "Follow the
money".

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:05 AM EST
Maybe they will sue PJ and groklaw?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Common barratry?
Authored by: fgoldstein on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:09 AM EST
Isn't there an obscure, seldom-invoked crime known as common barratry, which is
committed by a lawyer who knowingly brings a false suit? I should think by now
that Boies & Co., as well as Darl's brother, should know enough that their
case is specious, and thus be liable for it. The lawsuit victim just might have
reason to file such a complaint.

Their other countersuits will be interesting to watch too.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Best way to deal with this?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:16 AM EST
If SCO sues one of 1500 companies they sent a threatening letter to...

Isn't the best way for the other 1,497 (all except Lehman Brothers and
Ev1servers.net) to file for declaratory judgement that they are not infringing
SCO's copyrights.

[ Reply to This | # ]

It's a sales pitch - no suit pending?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:26 AM EST
I just realized, all of us, including me have been duped.

It's a sales pitch, no suit pending.

I bet they are trying to close another licensing deal, and this is more pressure
they're attempting to lay on, to close it.

If they close the deal, no need for a suit.

If they don't close the deal, they can always say they are still in negotiations
with the intended suit victim.


bobn, spotted the give away in an earlier post. To quote him:


My bet: There will be no suit tomorrow or any other time. SCOX cannot afford
to have a suit thrown out, which is a likley result of trying to sue an
end-user
under current circumstances.

Look at their wording: "SCO has narrowed down its list of possible targets
to a 'handful' of the world's 1,000 largest corporations, McBride said."

They're filing *tomorrow* and they still don't know who? Yeah, right.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: blacklight on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:27 AM EST
I am not saying anything substantial until we find out who the SCO Group is
suing and more importantly what the alleged torts are. We will retaliate, but
retaliation is most effective when it is not merely savage but knowledgeable,
methodical and relentless.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Prediction
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:28 AM EST
I predict that the target will be one of the vendors that SCO complained about in its lawsuit against IBM (Sherwin-Williams, Papa John's Pizza, Auto Zone). And the lawsuit will have nothing to do with code in the kernel, but rather use of SCO's UnixWare or OpenServer libraries under Linux.

This will be more a test of "shrink-wrap license" v. "first sale doctrine" than SCO v. Linux.

[ Reply to This | # ]

EV1Servers.Net paid more than one million plus for SCO license?
Authored by: mikeca on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:32 AM EST
The last sentence of the Robert McMillan article says:
The company, Houston-based EV1Servers.Net has purchased site licenses from SCO for its two data centers for an undisclosed seven figure sum, according to SCO.
This seems hard for me to believe. Does the seven figures include the cents as well as the dollars? Could it be some sort of kick back arrangement where very little real money changes hands? Perhaps M$ kicks back enough money to EV1Servers.net to cover the license?

If it is not a kick back arrangement, you got to wonder about EV1Servers.net management.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:33 AM EST

Is this the week they announce their financials or something?

Several posts on slashdot claiming SCO's quarterly earnings report is due Wednesday. (yeah, yeah, "real authoritative source" :)

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • More fool you - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:40 AM EST
Fortune 1K and multiple distros...
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:35 AM EST
Just a puzzler to me... since IANAL. Many large companies that I encounter
actually run more than one distribution of Linux, often a combination of SuSE
and RedHat, with a mixture of others. So... let's say TSG files a copyright
infringement suit for the use of Linux. Ignoring the fact that the claim could
be stacked behind Novell, et.al., how would a lawyer proceed in this? Call in
all the distributions, or ask TSG to identify which distributions specifically
are infringing? If they say "all" and the customer has multiple
distros, each providing indemnification, how would that work?

The other question is, how is TSG sure that a company is a Linux user? What's
the valid input to their list of potential victims...er...targets?

...D

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • IANAL - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 03:04 AM EST
OT: Ev1 - no refunds, ever
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:37 AM EST
McBride said the arrangement with EV1Servers.net is perpetual and that SCO
doesn't offer companies their money back if courts later find SCO's claims
baseless. It will bring in revenue that will be material to SCO's financial
results, he added.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I thibnk it's going to be about a contract issue
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:42 AM EST
You are forgetting that in the past SCO always said they would sue over
copyright and contract issues. They know that until the Novel issues are
resolved, they can't get away with a copyright only lawsuit. So I suspect they
will pick one of their customers and get them on some breach of contract based
on the audit they held a couple months back.

They most likely will add some copyright item in the complaint to help their
stock price, something like the copyright issue they added to the IBM suit.

[ Reply to This | # ]

My bet - Sherwin Williams
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:03 AM EST
Fortune 1000 rank - 326. They will accuse them of copying SCO Unix library
files to Linux. Note, it has nothing to do with any SysV code being present in
Linux.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SEC filings -- SCO missing deadlines?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:09 AM EST
On the Yahoo! Financials forums people were talking about SCO not filing with
the SEC today, thus missing a deadline which could cause their RBC PIPE to
mature early. Does anyone know any more about this?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Narrows down to Two???
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:21 AM EST
Fayjar reports in an earlier post news.com article here which is an updated article that states:
The first target will be a company that has a Unix license from SCO already, giving SCO some contractual leverage in the case. McBride said. In addition, the suit will involve copyright infringement claims.

Also, wouldn't it be such sweet justice if Judge Wells just happens to release her ruling Tues or Weds? By: (a not logged in) NastyGuns

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT - EV1.net *deserves* Windows
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:33 AM EST
LOL!!!! EV1.NET has been setting up their Linux servers using .... wait for it
folks - stiffies!!! Even down here in "dark" Africa we have discovered
CDROMs and self- installing ISO's. As somebody else put it the other day - Open
Source doesn't give you a blanket license to be incurably STUPID. For outsiders
this doesn't that inspire confidence in EV1.NET's general IT capabilities and
perhaps theyare better of using Windows.

From
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/casestudies/CaseStudy.asp?CaseStudyID=14464

"EV1 Servers.net personnel knew how to deploy a Linux-based server quickly.
They had script-filled floppies ready to go, and on a moment's notice they could
slip a floppy into a bare Dell PowerEdge 1600SC and walk away. Forty-five
minutes later, that server would be fully configured with Red Hat Linux and the
popular Ensim WEBppliance control panel. By pushing floppy after floppy into the
drive of a bare metal server, EV1 Servers.net's data center team could easily
meet the demand for 1,000 new servers per week. Unless they could find a way to
bring that level of automation to the deployment of a Windows-based server, they
saw no way to meet a similar level of demand for Windows-based hosting
services."

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: dodger on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:10 AM EST
Manana - Why can't SCO announce the suee today? Every time it is tomorrow.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Stowell - I can't be specific
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:11 AM EST
http://www.internetwk.com/breakingNews/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=18201405

Darl C. McBride, SCO president and chief executive officer, announced the
lawsuit at the Software 2004 conference in San Francisco Stowell said.

"I'd love to be more specific," Stowell said, "but,
unfortunately, I can't be. That news is being saved until Tuesday."

[ Reply to This | # ]

Speculation just as fun as analysis!
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:23 AM EST
It could of course be another suit against novell, redhat or ibm. They didn't
specify it was sombody new...

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: minkwe on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:32 AM EST
They said "lawsuit *tomorrow*" not "lawsuit on tuesday March
2nd".

Which means they have chosen a deadline that can not be missed. "Tomorrow
never comes".

---
Just my 0.02€ contribution to the floccinaucinihilipilification of SCO.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: SCO Australia - Stop picking on us
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:42 AM EST
SCO Australia:

1. Stop picking on us

2. Pay up, or we sue

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/0,2000061733,39116390,00.htm

[ Reply to This | # ]

About EV1
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 03:04 AM EST
Weeding through the noise at Yahoo, I found this from one of the dependable
regulars:

About EV1
by: korbomite
Long-Term Sentiment: Strong Sell 03/01/04 09:36 pm
Msg: 100568 of 100685

EV1 has become famous as a porn hosting site:

http://hosts4porn.com/profiles/ev1.cfm

and

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/archive/thread/140124-1.html (hint why they
changed their name from RackShack--their IP address was blackholed for porn
spamming)

and

From Wired Magazine:

QUOTE
Since mid-September, numerous myNetWatchman participants have received repeated
probes on port 135 from a handful of Internet protocol addresses assigned to
Everyones Internet (EV1.net), an Internet service provider in Houston, according
to Baldwin. The numeric addresses translate into "NetBIOS machine
names" that begin with WEBPOPUP and that have appeared in several recent
ads, he said...EV1.net officials, who did not respond to interview requests, are
investigating the issue, according to Baldwin...Now that spammers have pioneered
the Windows Messenger technology, worm writers may be next to target the
service, according to Harlan Carvey, a security engineer with a financial
services firm..."I'm sure we're going to see spyware or malware that makes
use of this," Carvey said.
ENDQUOTE

from
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,55795,00.html

and

http://jdo.org/hamas.html (That's right: Hamas and the al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade
terrorists use EV1 as their ISP and hosting provider)

and

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/10/02/1064988318651.html (hackers and
Trojan writers)

k

#END

Truth is definitely stranger than fiction. It would seem that both companies
figured that they could get some mileage out of the license deal if they spun it
the right way (and the truth and backroom dealing would only stay quiet). After
all, reports have it that Marsh and McBride were pal-ling around in California
during the past week at a trade show.

Dan M

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: Robert Marsh of ev1servers comments
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 03:05 AM EST
Robert Marsh of ev1servers comments

http://forum.ev1servers.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42270

Interesting, sounds almost like damage control.

Could it be that he thought being "SCO IP Compliant" might be a
selling point for his company, and now he's starting to realize he may have made
a $1m mistake?

And more significantly why does InformationWeek report that he is attending a
conference with Darl McBride of SCO?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 03:23 AM EST
You know, you would THINK that with SCO's copyrights in question - and no
established SCOIP in Linux - that this type of suit would not even be
entertained by the US courts.

That says something both for the need for changes in laws and the behavior of
SCO.


If SCO does have real IP - they're fighting hard to prevent any Linux user from
removing it. They don't WANT you to _not_ infringe. They want everyone
infringing - because they want you to be _forced_ to pay. Regardless of whether
or not you CHOOSE to use their IP.

It's like watching someone vandalize your car on a security camera. On one hand,
it's funny - because they're simply stupid, you KNOW they're going to get caught
- you've got them on record [video]. Though, on the other hand, that fool
scratched your car!

In the end, he is caught and ordered to pay restitution. You file on your
insurance, pay your deductable, and get your car fixed. After a few years you
finally receive your restitution. And the criminal will pay for his crime to the
city/state/federal.

But, regardless - you are harmed. Your vehicle was damaged, and you had to deal
with the inconvenience of it being in the shop, as well as, the cost of your
deductable.


In every crime there is a victim. We are the victims here, and Darl and SCO
don't care that WE are the ones who have to pay for their crimes right now.

Though, there is a great deal of satisfaction in knowing that SCO and Darl are
looking right into that security camera - and their debt to the world will be
paid in due time.

One of these days Microsoft is going to stop babying you, Darl, and when you are
left on your own you will pay for your crimes.

When that day comes, may God be with you.

No one else will.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT : EV1 and other SCO Extortion victims
Authored by: Greebo on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 04:09 AM EST
There is a LOT of talk on EV1's Bulletin board and the cusomers are not happy.

What got me thinking though was one comment that quoted HeadSurfer as saying that 'Other companies had also bought the SCO IP License', but just hadn't made public announcements.

So the question is this... Don't SCO have to declare this income in it's SEC filings and announce where the money comes from? When do they file the next SEC filing, and how do i get a copy of it?

Cheers,

Greebo

---
-----------------------------------------
Recent Linux Convert and Scared Cat Owner

[ Reply to This | # ]

Google
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 04:30 AM EST
I mean:If it's only a marketing measure, and just to be on the media, who could
be a bigger high profile target linux user than Google?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: gbl on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 04:52 AM EST

Are we trying to be too clever here. There are a couple of large companies that are obvious targets - Sun and HP.

Both have Unix licenses, both have a Linux based product range, both are Fortune 1000, neither is an ISP.

HP famously offered to to indemnify Linux customers and Sun has made the usual mumbling noise they make whenever they have to make any public statement about Linux support.

---
If you love some code, set it free.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 04:56 AM EST
What is wrong with the legal system in the USA ?!!!!

- this stinks and the courts just sit around twiddling their thumbs?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 05:36 AM EST

So this is what they plan to talk about in their conference call tomorrow...

I think I'll listen in on the web.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What can we (Linux users) do against TSG?
Authored by: TiddlyPom on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 05:58 AM EST
I do confess at starting to get a bit fed up with TSG and their continuous
campaign against Linux and Open Source Software. If this had been a slander
against an individual (like Darl McBride for instance) then the court would have
dealt with it much quicker but the case seems to be dragging out forever despite
the evidence mounting up against SCO.

As a Linux newbie (or relatively so), what is the general opinion as to what to
do? (i.e.)

1) Just ignore TSGs rantings
2) Start a campaign for an end user lawsuit against SCO
3) Give up and pay SCO's extortion fee (just kidding)
4) Advertize everywhere and refute the M$ and SCO FUD?

I (personally) have no intention of either giving up using Linux or paying TSG
for 'old rope'.

---
"There is no spoon?"
"Then you will see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself."

[ Reply to This | # ]

Go for a settlement?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 06:13 AM EST
I suspect SCO will choose a company that it considers will most likely settle.
Hence not a technology company that understands IT law. Someone big who doesn't
need the hastle/publicity. Then they could use this settlement to wave about the
stock markets.

[ Reply to This | # ]

LAWSUIT LAUNCHED ... and the mystery target is ...
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 06:22 AM EST
According to this article, they've ALREADY LAUNCHED their lawsuit. However just to make the whole thing even more surreal, the target of the lawsuit is STILL not identified. This is just getting ridiculous! Is this for real or just a lazy news website jumping the gun.

[ Reply to This | # ]

It's all over for you - from Bro Darl (Written by Bro Kevin)
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 06:23 AM EST
<sarcasm>

Hi folks, Bro Darl here.

Just wanted to let you Linux lovers know that I am burrowed in like a tick and I
will not go until one of us dies.

My brother assures me that I have a great legal case against you guys, and you
just can't see it because it is based literally upon nothing! Thats right, the
copied code is there for anyone not to see.

Don't you get it? The copyrighted code that we claim is all of the duplicated
blank lines, tabs, and spaces in all Linux files. Here are the types of copied
lines:

1) Lines that begin and end with a line-feed. (Yes, by bother taught me to say
line-feed)

2) Lines that contain only spaces and a line-feed.

3) Lines that contain tabs, spaces and then a line-feed.

4) There is another I swear, but, I forgot what they told me to say. I'll have
to ask my BS what I was supposed to say.

Yep, it's in there, you can't take it out, and just to be sure I don't get this
wrong, I am announcing that I am looking to buy some tiny nearly dead company
that owns a submarine patent on using blank lines, tabs, and spaces, to make
code more readable. It's all over for you. All your code are mine and my
brothers.

Nice knowing you,

Bro Darl

</sarcasm>

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: PeteS on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 06:42 AM EST
How appropriate for a (ex) Software Company that tended to be late with everything to give a new meaning to Real Soon Now

---
Today's subliminal thought is:

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 06:50 AM EST
According to this article the lawsuit has already been filed. If that's the case, then shouldn't it be possible to find out who the target was from court records ? Or is ComputerWeekly talking BS ? One would think they would have at least asked SCO who they sued, but apparently journalists no longer care about minor details like that...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Prediction on how this will turn out in court.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 06:51 AM EST
SCO> Random Linux user is using our IP without our say so.

Linux user> But I do have a licsence to use it, The GNU GPL.

SCO> That licsence isn't vaild.

Linux user> Then why do you distrbute 'your' IP to your customers under the
the GPL?

SCO> No we don't!

Linux user> yes you do, you distrbute linux kernel updates to your customers.
Your on record as saying your IP is in the Linux kernel. By the terms of the GPL
we can therefore use SCO's IP.

SCO> The GPL is not vaild!

Linux user> I see, well then. Your honour we've submited patches to the Linux
kernel when we fixed up some bugs we found in the course of using it. If the
court finds the GPL not to be a vaild lisense our work reverts back to basic
copyright law. As such, we'd like to beat SCO over the head with a big clue
stick now.

Judge> Proceed.

SCO> Oh crap.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO sells license to EV1.net - BOYCOTT time
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 07:19 AM EST
Per the Robert McMillan Report EV1.net purchased SCO Linux licenses. I have just
notified 2 people I know that use them for their websites. They will be
confirming with the company tomorrow if the report is true. If it is they are
going to pull their websites. We need to pass the word for every SCO customer
that buys one of these goofy licenses and it is confirmed, we need to start a
boycott. These client probably mean well but they are agents of FUD by buying
licenses.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 07:21 AM EST
I suppose what bothers me the most is that SCO seems proud of suing. While I
understand the need in some cases to protect a companies assets, SCO has no
viable case and the proof is still non-existant. Suing people or companies isn't
good no matter how you look at it and in my opinion gives a black eye to
whomever does the suing. This is rediculous and I hope when all this is said and
done, that SCO pays the price for their rediculous claims. They lie,cheat, and
steal. Then they turn around and sue. I'm not sure how the laws are set up in
other countries, but here in the US, if you have the money to pay the lawyers,
you don't even have to have a real case. Proof and evidence sometimes means
little, and the law allows the unjust to go without penalty many times.

Have enough cash to lie,cheat, and steal. Then pay your way out of it. Sad.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 07:30 AM EST

SCOX stock is hovering around $12.00 per share, they had to start spewing something, anything, to try to pump it up before the house comes crashin down around their ears.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: Next step in IBM-SCO case?
Authored by: maroberts on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 07:56 AM EST
What's the next court event (or likely event) in the IBM case now, and how long
do we have to wait for it?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 08:04 AM EST
I can not believe that any judge will accept such a case.

IANAL, but as I understand the GPL, it is NOT a transfer of copyrights. It is a
license.In my opinion, the alleged SCO-IP in Linux is an integral part of Linux
and a derivative work.

Section 5 of the GPL clearly states that distribution indicates acceptance of
the GPL.I.o.w. they - by distributing the code together with the rest of the
Linux kernel *after* the alleged discovery have effectively GPLed it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What did EV1 license?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 08:15 AM EST

EV1Servers.net CEO Robert Marsh posted a response to all the criticism about the SCO deal on their user forum. In it he states:

"We did not license a linux distribution or any software covered by a referenced EULA from SCO. We did, however, license certain IP from SCO." (emphasis mine)

If the license did not cover any software which could be interpreted to fall under SCO's vague EULA, what did it cover? Did EV1 license the use of UNIX documentation, or the right to display an SCO logo? Being mysterious about exactly what the license is for, and the actual cost which may ultimately be passed on to its customers, does not make sense as a strategy for reducing customer anxiety and uncertainty.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: old joe on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 08:18 AM EST
Statement by EV1's head surfer http://forums.ev1servers.net/showthread.php?s=dcd881a4266698d9ae9188c0aa20bab2&a mp;threadid=42270

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 08:39 AM EST
And the winner is ...

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO may have a dangerous (to users) strategy
Authored by: dkpatrick on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 08:39 AM EST
The news release makes it sound like SCO will sue a Linux user on IP issues.

SCO apparently has dropped the IP issues from the IBM suit and is only dealing
with copyright issues.

I believe that SCO knew they couldn't win the IP issue in the IBM suit. IBM had
the deep pockets, access to all the code, etc. etc. But SCO couldn't just say
"we made a mistake" so with a big fanfare they "added" the
copyright issues which are ultimately not a big deal.

Now SCO turns around and says "We're going to rake some user over the coals
on IP issues." SCO never admitted they had no proof of IP theft so now the
burden is thrust on a much less capable company of defending the IP charges.

Yes, it's all BS but what will the average company do? They don't have the legal
talent IBM does nor do they have the technical ability to force the issue with
SCO as IBM does.

SCO's strategy COULD force companies to settle and the IP issue never gets
resolved! They will not pick a Red Hat user, a SuSE user or a user, a HP
customer, or an IBM customer. In those cases the vendor has either indemnified
the customer or demonstrated the willingness to fight the good fight.

Let's say they pick a Lindows user, or Mandrake, or a user that simply
downloaded the distribution and did it themselves. Who will support their
defense?

Assuming SCO does as they promised and file suit, the identity of the target is
going to be crucial.

---
"Keep your friends close but your enemies closer!" -- Sun Tzu

[ Reply to This | # ]

Two press releases are better than one
Authored by: sjgibbs on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 08:50 AM EST

Overall the stats show that press releases encourage stock gains over 7 days,
but soem graphs I have put together (can't publish Yahoo copyrights are
involved) show that another affect of a press releasde is to slow big drops.

Thus announcing the announcment - statistically - is beneficial for share
holders. By about 10 cents IIRC (i don't have OO with me here)

Simon

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: perpetual_newbie on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 08:59 AM EST
Something just hit me here... I remember being in college and watching one guy
continually proposition one woman after another and continually get turned down.
When I asked him why he did such a foolish thing, his response was, "If I
ask 100 women, maybe one or two will go along with it... and that's success to
me!"

I can't help but wonder if that is the strategy they're going for.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:00 AM EST
March 1st, 2004: EV1 gives SCO $1 million plus in "protection"
money.

March 2nd, 2004: SCO files suit against EV1's competition?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Notice the timing of this?
Authored by: mnuttall on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:03 AM EST
No sooner do Red Hat file their Reply in Support of its Motion to Supplement the Record with "additional evidence to demonstrate that an apprehension of suit was indeed reasonable when Red Hat filed its Complaint" than SCO announce to the press, We're really going to sue some Linux users now. Red Hat might have found such press statements useful in their filing. Coincidence?

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: EV1, headserver and linux
Authored by: gbl on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:04 AM EST

Netcraft have an interview with Robert Marsh who is CEO and "HeadSurfer" at EV1. There's no date on the article but it can't be more than a couple of months old.

The Yahoo SCOX board has some interesting theories, including the possibility that MS, EV1 and SCO could arrange a mutual agreement about licenses such that $1M moves from MS -> EV1 -> SCO. Silly of course as Marsh has already stated that they consider that they paid a "small amount" for the SCO IP license. If $1M is a small amount for EV1 then they really must be pulling in the profits.

---
If you love some code, set it free.

[ Reply to This | # ]

McDonalds?
Authored by: nickieh on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:06 AM EST
Mickey-D's probably SCUMX's single biggest customer, and they're testing SuSE in
their German stores. I'm sure with the Novell/SuSE/IBM deal, Big Blue's
lobbying for the US business, which would gut what remaining operating income
SCOG has coming in.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • McDonalds? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:07 AM EST
SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
Authored by: T. ProphetLactus on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:08 AM EST
From: Additional Headsurfer Comments Regarding SCO Contract (EV1 server forums)

"We did not license a linux distribution or any software covered by a referenced EULA from SCO. We did, however, license certain IP from SCO."

Has anyone been able to discover just WHAT "IP" they licensed from the scogs? With specificity?

I hope someone points out that "scog IP" is not something you license, its something you replace. Once you can figure out what it IS.

TPL

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOG Is Scaring People Into Buying Undefinable IP
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:13 AM EST
All SCOG has to do is keep announcing an impending lawsuit every few
weeks. After all, this is FUD. There is NO infringing code.

This is marketing via threats like organized criminals. SCOG intends to scare
people into paying money for protection. Where the heck is the FTC?

If SCOG really does sue an end user, their game is over and SCOG knows it.

Growlaw'ns need to relax and loosen up several notches. This fight is over the
long haul. Conserve your energy and keep your powder dry.

Be very aware of trolls, shills, and paid flunkies. I smell patrolling rats on
occasion. M$ pays a large number of people to patrol. Communist China pays
30,000 people to patrol the Internet and M$ has provided the commies with
M$ SW to quickly identify Internet users.

[ Reply to This | # ]

    OT - trade secrets
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:19 AM EST
    an interesting remark by Chris Sontag about
    the dropping of trade secret violations in
    the IBM suit. He says:

    Commenting on the amended lawsuit, Sontag said that the
    trade secret violation claim was "probably the least
    significant allegation, and it will allow us to focus on
    the most significant complaints".

    I wonder if there are quotes from SCO about how
    extremely important the trade secrets part of the
    suit is. It would be fun to compare.

    (the quote is from http://www.vnunet.com/News/1153187)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:26 AM EST

    Sorry, but this is the picture I get of TSG:

    We really mean it this time! (hands on hips)

    Someone is in big trouble, mister! (points finger menacingly)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:33 AM EST
    "The SCO Group on Tuesday will launch its first lawsuit against a Linux user for..."

    Which Tuesday? :)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    WHILE loop would handle nicely
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:39 AM EST

    while (any_media == will_listen)
    {
    spew = FUD;

    SCOprintf ("n%s, we really mean it this time!", spew);
    }

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First SCO LICENCED End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: 106ja on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:46 AM EST
    It seems that they will sue some SCO user for breach of contract with some
    copiright added

    ---
    Don't judge me by my english. My native langue have no X's or Y'es

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO v IBM Amended Complaint Available
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:58 AM EST

    http//pacer.utd.uscourts.gov/images/203cv0029400000108.pdf

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    conference call -11am EST-
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:02 AM EST
    sco conference call!

    http://ir.sco.com/conference.cfm

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: zjimward on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:04 AM EST

    They've also started new PR on their web site.

    Have a look at this Five Reasons to Choose UNIX® Instead of Linux®:

    http://www.thescogroup.com/5reasons/

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Here is what needs to be done.
    Authored by: Sir_Chancealot on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:07 AM EST
    Been lurking here for quite a while, and finally wanted to respond. SCUM^H^HO
    needs to be hung with their own rope.

    Here is how to do it. First, someone with GPL code included in SCO's
    distributions needs to file a COPYRIGHT suite against SCO, saying in essense
    that SCO is distributing their code without a license. Sco HAS to respond that
    they have a valid license (the GPL), thus we would make SCO DEFEND the GPL, or
    they would have to admit willful copyright violations. You use all of SCOs
    arguments against them, even the one about the GPL being unconstitutional. They
    would have to defend each and every argument. (And they would win.) Now, you
    have forced them to set the very precedent that would be used against them by
    IBM, et. al.

    Very slick, very clean, quite ironic, and poetic justice at it's finest.

    The attorney for one of the open source groups hinted at this when he was
    talking how a GPL copyright infringement case would go in court.

    It should garner quite a bit of news. Now only if I had some copyrights in any
    of the open source code that SCO is distributing...... finding the money to fund
    a suit would be easy! ;)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Needs IBM Discovery First
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:11 AM EST
    In order to successfully sue a Linux user, they first have to convince the judge
    in the IBM case to give them all of the AIX source. Without that, they cannot
    prove any copyright violation, since it is the IBM and Sequent created code that
    SCO now claims ownership of. This is at the heart of their claims of copyright
    infringement. Their problem is, without the discovery from IBM, they don't know
    what it is they are claiming to own, and have no evidence to present. The Sys V
    claims are just a smoke-screen giving them time to crack into IBM's code vault.


    How they are going to delay discovery in the new case until they can win
    discovery in the IBM case is beyond me. This is probably why they didn't file
    the lawsuit back in February. My prediction is that they're going to sue one of
    their own customers that are using both SCO and Linux. That may give them
    something to sue about if they fail to get AIX code.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Maybe they've found someone still using their libaries
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:16 AM EST
    If they believe they have identified a company running some SCO application on
    Linux using binary libraries from SCO they might actually have a case. It
    wouldn't really be about Linux (or actually relevant to the IBM case), but it
    could be a win they could announce publicly.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Choking hazard!
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:30 AM EST
    SCO's Australia/New Zealand head (the story link was kindly posted here by
    someone else). Luckily, I wasn't eating when I read this!

    "I feel that many of the comments that have been made in publications,
    print media, online and in press releases&#8230; have been factually
    incorrect," he said.
    http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/0,2000061733,39116390,00.htm

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • Translation - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:46 AM EST
    • Close... - Authored by: bobn on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:54 AM EST
    • Choking hazard! - Authored by: pooky on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:39 PM EST
    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:43 AM EST
    Its Tuesday. Will there be a live Web-cast of the event?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:53 AM EST
    The best defense is the attack

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Timing
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:10 AM EST
    Assuming they actually do it, when today? Either right before the markets
    open (which didn't happen) or right after they close.

    By doing it right after market closing (which is vastly better than doing it
    while the market is open because the SEC might really have a problem with
    that) they get a whole day of market speculation driving up the price.

    Expect a big block sale right at 3:59:59 cashing in.

    Then, the news is out prior to the Wednesday earnings announcements --
    just in time for the evening press cycle, and nobody gets to respond to it for
    12 hours. Then, they can come up with disappointing financials (but plenty
    of "legitimate" excuses).

    They'll announce sometime after 4pm EST and before 6pm Utah time.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • Timing - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:24 AM EST
    Halloween VII
    Authored by: capitalist_pig on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:17 AM EST
    Has anyone mentioned the Halloween VII documents on here yet? (Someone probably
    has, but I haven't seen it...)

    Anyway, they mention "concrete action" against Linux.

    http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween7.php

    I wonder if this might be the "concrete action" they are talking
    about?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    I'd like to make a prediction
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:18 AM EST
    I'd like to make a prediction.

    SCOG won't "merely" sue a Fortune 1000 company over copyright violations. There's always some little twist to their lawsuits, like suing Novell for Libel of Title instead of straight contract violation. It never works, but like Wiley Coyote, they're always trying (maybe that's what happens when you buy your lawyers from Acme Corp. ;-)

    For example (I don't have a devious legal mind, but I'll give it a shot), they'll sue one of their Unix or UnixWare licensees for vague contract violations and throw in some vague copyright violations to boot. Just enough possible contract violations so it won't be laughed out of court, but enough copyright violations so they can announce, "See, we've filed our first copyright lawsuit".

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO says it will be an SCO customer
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:24 AM EST
    This article claims Darl indicated that the first target will be an existing SCO customer in order to give SCO "contractural leverage."

    Obvious industry-wide solution: don't be an SCO customer!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    It's a hoax?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:37 AM EST
    The point has already beeen made previously - could it be a hoax, and Darl's mouth ran away with itself again?

    What about Stowell? Well we know how he seems to like responding to questions on the fly. I wouldn't be surprised if a journalist calling him to ask about tomorrow's (now today's) lawsuit was the first he had of the imminent deadline

    http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/gov ernment/legalissues/story/0,10801,90686,00.html

    After consulting with its law firm, Boies, Schiller and Flexner LLP, SCO has narrowed down its list of possible targets to a "handful" of the world's 1,000 largest corporations, McBride said. "We're going to file it tomorrow. It's sort of come down to a couple of complaints we have prepared," he said.

    McBride declined to offer more details other than to say that the companies being considered were neither Internet service providers nor technology companies and that they all had recognizable names.

    We're supposed to believe that 24 hours before filing a law suit, they don't know who they are going to sue?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • It's a hoax? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:46 AM EST
    • It's a hoax? - Authored by: pooky on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:31 PM EST
    Don't bother discussing an enduser Lawsuit
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:51 AM EST
    We should be concentrating on any filing comming
    from SCOG on the Novell motion to dismiss.

    This should be out any day now.

    The result of the Novell v SCOG suit will have a
    cascading effect on all other Law suits.

    Hopefully, the courts will have a ruling for us
    before christmas 2010.


    HAL9000

    just the facts jack, just the facts.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    How stupid can they be?
    Authored by: nickieh on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:58 AM EST
    If it's a business of any size, they're using a commercial release of Linux. Most of the commercial releases are offering coverage. Then the OSDL legal fund is available, and at this point they're probably all chomping at the bit to drag Darl & Co. into a courtroom and whomp on them like the Narn Bat Squad.

    Then there's the minor issue of showing any grounds to go after end-users vs. the distributor.

    Then there's the issue of showing they actually have the standing to bring suit, given the Novell case in progress.

    So what do they hope to gain from this, other than a "look at the silly monkey" diversion from the earnings report on Wednesday?
    Oh wait, this is SCO, never mind...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO's copyright claim - against IBM
    Authored by: Thomas Frayne on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:06 PM EST
    I sent PJ the OCR'd Doc-108 in RTF format. I am saving it in searchable PDF
    format, and will send it when the save completes.

    To whet your appetite, here is the copyright claim from the document.



    FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Copyright Infringement)
    173.Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges paragraphs No. 1-172, above.
    174.As set forth above, SCO is the successor in interest to the IBM Related
    Agreements and the Sequent Agreements.
    175.Despite termination of such Agreements, IBM has continued to reproduce,
    prepare derivative works of, and distribute UNIX software, source code, object
    code, programming tools, and documentation related to UNIX operating system
    technology, and has induced others to do the same.
    176. SCO is the owner of copyright rights to UNIX software, source code, object
    code, programming tools, documentation related to UNIX operating system
    technology, and derivative works thereof. These materials are covered by
    numerous copyright registrations
    50
    issued by the United States Copyright Office (the "Copyrighted
    Programs"). These registrations have been obtained by SCO and its
    predecessors in interest and are owned by SCO. For example, included among such
    registrations (attached as Exhibits H toU) are the following:


    Title
    Registration Number
    Registration Date
    H
    UNIX Operating System Edition 5 and Instruction Manual
    TXU-5 10-028
    March 25, 1992
    I
    UNIX Operating System Edition 6 and Instruction Manual
    TXu-51 1-236
    April 7, 1992
    J
    UNIX Operating System Edition 32V and Instruction Manual
    TXu-5 16-704
    May 15, 1992
    K
    UNIX Operating System Edition 7 and Instruction Manual
    TXu-51 6-705
    May 15, 1992
    L
    Operating System Utility Programs
    TXu-30 1-868
    November 25, 1987
    M
    UNIXWARE 7. 1.3
    TX 5-787-679
    June 11,2003
    N
    UNIX SYSTEM V RELEASE 3.0
    TX 5-750-270
    July 7, 2003
    O
    UNIX SYSTEM V RELEASE 3.1
    TX 5-750-269
    July 7, 2003
    P
    UNIX SYSTEM V RELEASE 3.2
    TX 5-750-271
    July 7, 2003
    Q
    UNIX SYSTEM V RELEASE 4.0
    TX 5-776-2 17
    July 16, 2003
    R
    UNIX SYSTEM V RELEASE 4.1ES
    TX 5-705-356
    June 30, 2003
    S
    UNIX SYSTEM V RELEASE 4.2
    TX 5-762-235
    July 3, 2003
    T
    UNIX SYSTEM V RELEASE 4. 1
    TX 5-762-234
    July 3, 2003
    U
    UNIX SYSTEM V RELEASE 3.2
    TX 5-750-268
    July 9, 2003
    177.SCO and its predecessors in interest created the Copyrighted Programs as
    original works of authorship, and, as such, the Copyrighted Programs constitute
    copyrightable subject matter under the copyright laws of the United States. The
    Copyrighted Programs were automatically subject to copyright protection under 17
    U.S.C. § 102(a) when such programs were fixed in a tangible medium of
    expression. Copyright protection under 17 U.S.C. § 106 extends to derivative
    works which are defined in 17 U.S.C. §101 to include
    51
    works based on the original work or any other form in which the original work
    may be recast, transformed, modified or adapted.
    178.Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §410 (c), the certificates of copyright registrations
    for each Copyrighted Program constitute prima facie evidence of the validity of
    the copyrights and of the facts stated in the certificates. SCO and its
    predecessors' registered copyrights in the Copyrighted Programs are entitled to
    such statutory presumptions.
    179.IBM's breaches of the IBM Related Agreements and the Sequent Agreements and
    its post-termination actions have infringed, have induced infringement of, and
    have contributed to the infringement of, copyright registrations of SCO and its
    predecessors. Such actions have been willful and have been done with knowledge
    of the copyright rights of SCO.
    180.SCO has been damaged by IBM's conduct and has no adequate remedy at law.
    IBM's conduct has caused, and, if not enjoined, will continue to cause,
    irreparable harm to SCO. As a result of IBM's wrongful conduct, SCO is entitled
    to injunctive relief pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 502 and SCO's actual damages and
    IBM's profits as a result of the infringing acts pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504
    (a), statutory damages to the extent applicable pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504 (b)
    and enhanced damages, together with attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 17
    U.S.C. § 505.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO sue in Spain
    Authored by: Marc Duflot on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:08 PM EST
    http://www.noticiasdot.com/publicaciones/2004/0204/2802/
    noticias280204/noticias280204/noticias280204-10.htm

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO vs. Novell new document in Pacer
    Authored by: beast on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:29 PM EST
    Noted in the Yahoo SCOX message board: pacer.utd.uscourts.gov/images/204cv0013900000009.pdf It's gone now.

    Plaintiff The SCO Group ("SCO"), by and through counsel, and Defendant Novell, Inc., by and through counsel, hereby stipulate that SCO may have up to and including March 5, 2004 in which to file a memorandum in opposition to Novell's Motion to Dismiss. The parties further stipulate that SCO will not file any further pleadings in the matter until it files its opposition memorandum as set forth herein.

    ---
    Delay is the deadliest form of denial. - J. Northcote Parkinson

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • Doh! - Authored by: beast on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:27 PM EST
    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: kberrien on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:37 PM EST
    Once again, SCO makes this country look like a bunch of fools.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Tomorrow is here
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:39 PM EST
    Today's the day. Where's the SCO annoucement? It hasn't appeared on PR Newswire yet.

    And it's been almost a month since Judge Wells took the discovery motion under advisement. What's going on there?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT: rather personal and vicious attack on PJ
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:43 PM EST

    One of the responses (about the 8th one) to Halperin's article (http://www.linuxinsider .com/perl/story/32990.html) is by someone who identifies themself as "harlan_", and is a very personal and vicious attack on PJ, IMO. Does anyone know anything about this? I'm assuming that is from a troll, rather than the Harlan that posts here frequently.

    Wally Bass

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Class Action . .. ... ..... .......
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:54 PM EST
    Or perhaps there could be a fund setup to take action on behalf of all Linux
    contributors copyright holders.

    Another one from under the bridge.

    I realize I'm only the help here but I don't do Windows.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: Ares_Man on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:56 PM EST
    Wow, there are many replies to this topic so far. What topic has ever had the
    most number of replies?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: photocrimes on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:00 PM EST
    Anybody want to bet that SCO would of made their Feb deadline if EV1 had not
    bought a license?

    I think they were the "lucky" winner and it dragged out past Feb
    because they were "talking" about resolutions. I think if EV1 had not
    given the impression that they would go both ways, we would of had our suit
    filed in Feb.

    Now, it's on to the next one on the list. Many speculate it could be
    Sherwin-Williams, but I doubt that. They are a very strong company with a lot of
    lawyers, I know, I've dealt with them. I think they will stick with a regional
    ISP that has recently expanded and may have a tight budget.

    They want to pick on someone in a weak defensive stance. There are looking for a
    lame duck.

    ---
    //A picture is worth a thousand words//

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:10 PM EST
    Is it sad that im am eagerly waiting to find out who they have decided to sue? I
    mean, I cant wait to find out who gets to kick their ass next...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    EV1 License
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:27 PM EST
    Is EV1 a publicly traded company? Their financials and/or SEC filings may give
    a clue to who or what is behind their "decision."

    lvteacher

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT: March makes hay from being SCO compliant
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:34 PM EST
    It's a bit sad to see on Ev1servers board, that people are saying "poor
    Marsh/Ev1servers" being pressurized by SCO (the main discussion appears to
    be about whether it was right/wrong to cave to SCO).

    I think all those people are working on some flawed assumptions.

    InformationWeek has already reported that Marsh and McBride attended a
    conference, together, yesterday. That doesn't make it sound like Marsh was a
    victim, it sounds like a co-conspirator.

    Marsh appears to have chosen "SCO Compliance" because somehow he
    thinks it will help him sell hosting, or beat on his hosting competitors.

    Then we discover, Marsh has some PR coming up based on his newly achieved
    "SCO compliant" status. Again this makes it sound more an more like
    co-conspirator, rather than victim.

    http://thewhir.com/marketwatch/ev1030204.cfm

    Ryan Elledge, president of iNET Interactive, said in a post on
    webhostingtalk.com today that a pre-recorded interview with Robert Marsh will
    air on WHTRadio.com on Wednesday, March 10. Elledge said topics for discussion
    will include the SCO licensing issue and the opening of a new EV1Servers data
    center that is slated for later this week.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: lvteacher on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:34 PM EST
    IANAL.

    Whomever gets sued by SCO should ask to have the suit stayed until the RedHat
    suit is settled. This action will put the suit in limbo and SCO will not be
    able to collect any "IP license fees."

    lvteacher

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:44 PM EST
    And so it seems they have: <a
    href="http://thewhir.com/marketwatch/sco030204.cfm">http://thewhir.
    com/marketwatch/sco030204.cfm</a>

    But they're not saying who.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:55 PM EST
    Didn't SCO mentionned that their PR statements are just free
    speech and have no commercial connotations? IIRC, SCO wrote
    such things in their legal documents (vs. RedHat and vs. IBM).
    But now, doesn't the fact that they tout the "linux legal liability"
    as one of the 5 main reasons to run Unixware just contradicts
    their affirmative defenses?

    IANAL, just my 1 cents

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow - We should try and help those people
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:00 PM EST
    When these suits are announced I hope that someone (in a
    calm and professional manner) will inform those
    companies/individuals of the resources available for their
    information (and defense?) at groklaw.net. As well as urge
    them not to settle out of court, but take on the fight
    with SCO - also some information about the various legal
    defense funds and various vendor indemnification programs
    might be in order.

    Someone should write a (sane, non-flamable) letter with
    all the above information (PJ ?) and keep it ready to send
    it (by email, and certified mail possibly - at least
    regular mail as well as email) to the
    companies/individuals that get sued.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    New statement from SCO: "Late this afternoon".
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:08 PM EST
    Internetnews.co m has a new statement from SCO:
      Company spokesperson Blake Stowell told internetnews.com the announcement would be made "late this afternoon," but likely before most businesses go home for the evening. Details until then, however, would be under tight wraps.
    That's not much of a statement, but it's a statement.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: Ares_Man on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:16 PM EST
    We need an article discussing SCO's "5 Reasons to Choose UNIX over
    Linux"

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Stowell claims more licensees
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:20 PM EST
    http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_title=SCO_To_Sling_a_Lawsuit_at_a_Us
    er&story_id=23277

    "We haven't publicly disclosed the specific number, but I can say that a
    handful of Fortune 1000 companies have taken out a SCO IP license," Stowell
    told NewsFactor. "Also, a handful of small and medium-sized businesses have
    purchased the license as well," he noted.

    SCO is pleased, thus far, with the level of acceptance the license has received,
    Stowell said. Of course, not all companies SCO has contacted have chosen to take
    out a license, he added, "which is why we have decided to file a
    lawsuit."

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT. Developers ignore SCO Linux claims
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:46 PM EST
    Article on vnunet...

    http://www.vnunet.com/News/1153183


    ...D

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: izzyb on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:51 PM EST
    What are you willing to bet that SCO will wait until the stock market closes for the day to anounce their "victim". The suspense is killing me, but it seems to be having the desired effect on their stock price

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Could it be another lie?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 03:07 PM EST

    You would think that they may really, really, really mean it this time --
    really....

    It's 3 PM on the right (East) coast and those lefties (sort of) haven't done
    anything yet.

    Let's face it, Toevarisches, proprietary software is the true and official State
    Approved type of software.

    Development of Open Source software must be regarded as a hobbyist activity of
    the oppressor burgeoise who intend to alienate workers from the profits they
    generate.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    how can you sue someone anonymously?
    Authored by: SaveDrury on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 03:13 PM EST
    i don't understand... did they or did they not file legal papers to sue
    company/person X? And if they did, are these documents not public?

    I'm suing someone tomorrow for billions - but i'm not telling you who i'm suing?
    how does that work?

    ianal

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO Will Announce First End User Lawsuit Tomorrow
    Authored by: arrg on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 03:15 PM EST
    It's 3pm and nothing yet. It really floors me that this company can get away
    with using our legal system to manipulate the stock price. This seriously is
    crossing many lines for me as a consumer.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Our Guess
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:39 PM EST
    Just in case its right....

    Does anyone know if eBay runs Linux? It was a guess here but we dont know if
    they are a legit target, whatever THAT means....

    Mike A.

    [ 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 )