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
Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 11:50 AM EDT

"This is the screwiest thing I've ever seen. SCO has turned into a roller coaster ride, and the outcome is less predictable now than it ever has been."
~ Laura DiDio

Breakthrough, breakthrough! Reality is calling. At last. You think maybe SCO won't be realizing billions and gazillions of dollars from a Linux tax after all?

Bob Mims has more on the BayStar story, where reality is also rearing its ugly VC head. Mims says RBC is still deciding what to do.

SCO declined to comment on Red Hat's Motion for Reconsideration, Mims reports. Red Hat asked the DE court to lift the stay or enjoin SCO from any further lawsuits. After reading Red Hat's wonderful memorandum in support of its motion, can you blame them? Red Hat has painted them into quite a corner, where nothing SCO can say is going to help.

This just isn't SCO's week:

"As for BayStar's now week-old demands, spokesman Bob McGrath would only say that the San Francisco hedge fund company would 'act appropriately, in due time' relating to return of its investment. The past week's developments had industry analysts buzzing. George Weiss of Gartner said: 'No surprises . . . I wrote some time back about the financial challenge SCO would face [from expensive litigation] and this helps confirm it.'"

Sounds like BayStar will sue, if they don't get satisfaction, as they say in the movies about godfathers and such. Venture Capital people generally win. If they want management out, they get management out. No wonder Darl has been looking so haggard. Money talks to folks that care first, last and only about money. Evidently BayStar doesn't want to make *Darl* rich. They would like to get a return on their money for *themselves*. Stephen Shankland got them to put into words just what kind of return they are looking for:

"BayStar asserts SCO's Unix products business doesn't hold long-term value for shareholders, McGrath said. SCO reported $9.7 million in Unix products revenue and $1.6 million in Unix services revenue in its quarter ended Jan. 31.

"'We think there are limited prospects of that business ever generating growing and significant revenue,' McGrath said. 'And we believe it is diverting resources from going where they would have the most value--the intellectual property process.'"

So they want longterm, growing, and significant revenue. Good luck, dudes. From *this* IP? They need to read more Groklaw. No? Try the Motley Fool, then. They give this IP a less than 10% chance to win.

Hardcore VC folks are chilling, aren't they? I was offered, back in the late 90s, a few million to do a web site. Well, who wasn't, back in the business-plan-on-a-napkin 90s? I talked it over with my dad, who was still alive then and was nobody's fool, and he told me something that made me decide to decline the offer. He said, "Nobody offers you $5 million dollars without strings attached." Words to live by. Words to live by. So I looked more carefully at the offer, and I could see that the plan was to make money for themselves by killing my business, after which they would cut and run, richer than they started out, but with me holding a dead dream. It also made me realize the dotcom bubble had to burst, which saved me a world of grief. I've always been grateful to my dad for that. It's also why I haven't let anyone talk me into "monetizing" Groklaw, by the way. It's no wonder so many corporate guys can't grok the GPL. You have to be nice to understand it.

Rupert Goodwins asks the real question, which is, if Darl's reign is over, who toppled him? He says Groklaw did it because every time Darl said anything, Groklaw answered him. The last thing you want when you are building a "house of cards", as he puts it, is public scrutiny:

"Each florid pronouncement from Darl and his henchmen has spawned a new thread in Groklaw and hundreds of nit-picking replies. Each statement provokes a scurry back through the archives for context and rebuttal: each little Darling grain is swiftly turned into a pearl. . . .

"Not so good for Darl, who is currently looking down the barrel of Baystar's corporate Magnum, but the result has been great for the rest of us. We've enjoyed a free first-class education in the esoteric world of intellectual property and corporate shenanigans. This is the planet on which the major IT wars of the 21st century will be fought -- before SCO, few of us knew this, let alone had much chance of getting a map of the place. We've learned once again that the online community can inherit the traditional power of the press to battle the biggest monsters -- again, mapping out the shape of things to come. . . .

"Baystar knows all this too, and doesn't appreciate our schooling at its expense. It's almost certainly too late to fix SCO, but by killing its management and keeping the IP claims on life support, something may be retrieved -- even if it's only face, an invaluable commodity in the venture-capital community. That it would be forced to make this move in public, a sanction that is indistinguishable to SCO from the threat of a massive legal fine and the judicial removal of its officers, marks an exceptional moment in modern capitalism.

"The rules of the game for future players are now ice-clear: anything you say will be taken down and analysed for thousands of hours by people with access to all the resources of the Net. You better be right, or you better keep quiet: justice, free software style. Today is the day the law went open source."

Shucks. I'm really flattered, and while I believe that public scrutiny is indeed a powerful force and that Groklaw's news coverage has been instrumental in shining the light of truth on SCO (it was Groklaw, after all, that first pointed out early in January that SCO failed to list the Novell copyright dispute in its SEC filings as a business risk factor, something SCO corrected a little over a week after our report), I have my own theories as to what may be motivating BayStar. First, it was Eric Raymond who courageously published the Anderer memo. And IBM is forcing S2 into the lawsuit as a result of that bombshell, and that has to be making the money men mighty nervous indeed. Can you imagine what it feels like, once you have gone to the trouble of setting up a PIPE deal, which is perfect for investors who *don't* want to be publicly known, to get a subpoena or to read that S2 has been asked to produce every scrap of paper or email between you and them? I doubt BayStar (or the investors behind them) expected anything like that when they signed on the dotted line, and they may not like it one bit, especially because they know I'm going to put all those exhibits up on Groklaw, given half a chance.

There is one more possible element. Reading this article by Larry Greenemeier makes me wonder if there is finally a recognition that the DMCA-based dreams of money from suing end users is never going to work? BayStar's Goldfarb is a lawyer, I understand. He has mentioned that he bought into the David-Boies-can-pull-this-off-before-a-Utah-jury fantasy. But he bought into the IBM case, not the novel DMCA idea, evidently. Boies is known for his creativity. Maybe Goldfarb isn't so keen on taking such chances, especially after it became clear that this strategy was based on those rickety ABI header file claims or the even more fragile BSDi settlement copyright notices tomfoolery. Now, maybe he just wants Boies and all his helpers to quit with the creativity and get back to the one case he thinks they have a shot at winning or at least getting some money from IBM to go away. The one clear impression I see is, they don't want the FOSS community hating their guts. They didn't expect we would be able to fight back effectively and they want it to stop.

By the way, don't be thrown by Pacer's notation "S2 - Party Added." They haven't been added as a co-plaintiff or co-defendant in the counterclaims stuff. They are listed that way only because they put in their Objections to Subpoena Duces Tecum, and that makes them a movant in the case, so the notation reflects that and only that.

Oh, and one more thing. If BayStar imagines that Groklaw will stop because of a change in SCO management, they haven't grasped our purpose. Groklaw isn't after Darl at all. It's the IP claim BayStar bought into that has to be defeated. If that is what BayStar was imagining, I hope they realize that Groklaw has no interest in who is running what. We care about GNU/Linux and the freedoms of the GPL and that is what we are working so hard for. Continuing to push their tired and discredited IP claims, Darl or no Darl, will result in continued scrutiny and pushback from Groklaw and everyone else in the community. Just so they know.


  


Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This | 421 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections Here Please
Authored by: PJ on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 02:22 PM EDT
Please record all my mistakes here, so I can correct them. Thanks.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 02:29 PM EDT
I don't think Laura DiDio was ever confused. If she's changing her tune, it's
probably because she has done a lot of damage to her employer (Yankee Group) and
may be facing unemployment.

I doubt that Darl will ever be fired simply because he's a loaded gun. The last
time I saw a video of him, he looked like a badly beaten man. I seriously doubt
that this game is his doing. If he get fired, he may turn and testify against
Yarro and friends.

BayStar and RBC probably deserve to lose their money for being stupid enough to
invest in SCO in the first place. Even if BayStar sues SCO, that money may be
all gone by the time their case is heard in court.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hurrah for open source legal review!
Authored by: miss_cleo_psy4u on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 02:33 PM EDT
Groklaw's impact going to be debated for years to come.
It will just be a matter of how great an impact. I
imagine there'll be Ph.D disertations written on this
socio-economic-politcal-technical confluence of passionate
Linux supporters and the mountains moved.

Oddly, after the plethora of adverse news, today SCOX
jumped up nearly 20% from the 6 range to 8 range.
Speculation on Yahoo finance appeared that this might
benefit the exiting Robert Bench who will be wanting to
cash in his sheaves of SCOX as he enters 'retirement'.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Did BayStar do due diligence about Darl?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 02:38 PM EDT

I find it hard to believe that BayStar would be caught by surprise about Darl's
management style. BayStar came on board in October -- that's seven months after
Darl started running his mouth.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Darl may be hard to get rid of
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 02:40 PM EDT
I suspect that Darl and company can make it very hard for Baystar to get any of
their money back. Given that SCO is eventually toast, Baystar's threat to
bankrupt them isn't too scary. They're not worried about the future. Baystar
can sue and SCO can delay. The money will be gone by the time the case is
over.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
Authored by: Nick_UK on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 02:43 PM EDT
Congratulations Pamela. You have truly inspired and channelled (or created a
channel) whereby FOSS/OSS users can help.

I think we can all thank you as much as we can thank RMS, Linus, and all the
other Guys/Gals involved in GNU/Linux/GPL software and the like.

In otherwords, where would we be if it wasn't for Groklaw?

Nick

[ Reply to This | # ]

Toga party, anyone...
Authored by: glchisum on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 02:54 PM EDT
personally, i hope that SCOX wastes every dime of the investment of the two
rogue investors, Baystar and RBC. maybe a toga party ala Tyco or giving good ole
Darl and all of the staff gold plated bmw's.

you make an investment that is stupid and a long-shot on the face of it, you
deserve to lose. SCOX may have a good point, they may not have to give the money
back.

me bitter, naaaaah... just realistic

keep up the good work PJ and all who help her!

POWER TO ALL OF UP PENGUINS!!!!

GARY

---
What doesn't kill you, only makes you stronger!!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Fair Warning
Authored by: the_flatlander on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 02:55 PM EDT
Continuing to push their tired and discredited IP claims, Darl or no Darl, will result in continued scrutiny and pushback from Groklaw and everyone else in the community. Just so they know.
They can not say they were not warned....

The Flatlander

Of course, it was obvious anyway, but now that PJ has pronounced their doom, even a fool could not claim surprise.

[ Reply to This | # ]

An example
Authored by: inode_buddha on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 02:58 PM EDT
of the IP company/litigation gristmill here. I don't know if PJ is familiar with the PanIP cases, but it sure seems to be similar.

---
"When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price." -- Richard M. Stallman

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • An example - Authored by: J.F. on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 05:27 PM EDT
Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
Authored by: tyche on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:01 PM EDT
Pamela,

If there are any PHD's being given out concerning Groklaw and the effect it had
on law, then the least that a school could do is offer you an honorary PHD for
creating a whole new form of "Legal Aid". The work that you and your
supporters have done here is tremendous, but it started with YOU: you deciding
to start a web site; you deciding to document the antics of SCOG; you keeping
rein on the site and keeping it on track. Bravo! PJ.

Craig
Tyche


---
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of
knowledge."
Stephen Hawking

[ Reply to This | # ]

Goldfarb is the new Darl
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:05 PM EDT
Just as greasy looking in the NY Times article.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Thank you PJ...
Authored by: stephenry on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:07 PM EDT
Thank you PJ,

You've helped defend the rights and freedoms of every one us here (and more);
freedoms that our governments have long since abandoned.

Steve

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw isn't after Darl at all.
Authored by: hardcode57 on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:08 PM EDT
Now PJ, don't pretend you won't be at least a little pleased when his scalp is
nailed to your tentpost!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Maybe Microsoft, Too?
Authored by: allthingscode on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:09 PM EDT
With PJ's success against SCO, and all of the other Open Source challenges so
far, I wonder if there should be similar sites set up for other issues. The
most obvious one is Microsoft. What if there was a website geared toward not
only archiving the things Microsoft says and publishes, so that it can be
searched, people with PJ's skills can translate it for the rest of us. That
way, when it is translated from legalese to English (or Geek) the rest of us can
finally go "That's not right" and contribute to telling the truth.
Example: prior art on Microsoft patents.

I'm sure there are plenty of other issues that could benefit from this setup. I
do think though, that you could easily overwhelm one site, or even one person,
trying to keep up with all of this in one place.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Honor among thieves
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:10 PM EDT
What is that old saying about "honor among thieves"? It's great to
watch the thieves go at each other!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Stock risen 22% today
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:14 PM EDT
Ok, their stock has seen a huge drop last few days.

But why has it risen $1.51 (22.21%) today???? On what news
could that be based?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Darl is being pressed - so Baystar can get it's money
Authored by: dodger on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:16 PM EDT
Baystar says 'we want our money'.
Stowell and McBride say 'What - are we surprised - why do you want that? We'll
fight that.'
Baystar says 'Oh. and we want new management.'
end of discussion.

Looking for fighting an IP war is not what a Baystar would want, especially if
they read Groklaw. They want their 20 Million. If they can NOT LOSE money, they
have a chance to keep face. If they lose it all, how are they going to attract
investors. Better show that they have the muscle to write good contracts and
that they can get out of a bad thing.

What's it worth?

20 Million, and not losing face.

[ Reply to This | # ]

BayStar keeping SCO pieces?
Authored by: rsmith on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:19 PM EDT
It's almost certainly too late to fix SCO, but by killing its management and keeping the IP claims on life support, something may be retrieved -- even if it's only face, an invaluable commodity in the venture-capital community.

I doubt BayStar would manage to keep SCO's nebulous IP claims, without running into IBM and Novell. And I can't imagine they want to as long as it is tainted like that. Even if SCO sinks, the successor in interest will be left holding a hot potato (or rather a piece of highly poisonous radioactive waste).

I'd think that both IBM and Novell realize it is much better and cheaper to slay this dragon now than do it later and have it's shadow hanging over their business.

A question for the lawyers out there; Is there a way for BayStar to quickly kill/bankrupt/chapter 11 SCO and scuttle the lawsuits? And if so, are there ways for IBM/Novell/Red Hat to say "hang on. we've got some business to finish with these guys first"?

---
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

[ Reply to This | # ]

ZDNet got PJ's name wrong
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:20 PM EDT
If anyone bothers to read the ZDnet article, you'll notice that PJ is called
"Paula Jones". My question to PJ is: "when did you change your
name?"

Otherwise, the article was a masterpiece!

[ Reply to This | # ]

look for "resignations" at SCO
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:28 PM EDT
IMO, within a week or two, Darl and others (BS) will be announcing their
resignations. And the best evidence of it is their current denial, saying that
the Board is behind management.

It will be sad (in a way)to see old Darl go away. It was always so entertaining
listening to his dribble.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Who is buying SCO's stocks ?
Authored by: tizan on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 03:48 PM EDT
SCO's stock is shooting up ...who is buying it.

Who are these people...they should invest it in something more useful...
They could have given it to me instead of wasting it !



---
tizan: Knowledge is shared

[ Reply to This | # ]

Baystar demands
Authored by: wvhillbilly on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:00 PM EDT
One thing I can't quite figure out. Why does Baystar want SCO to drop their
Unix business when their alleged Unix IP is the whole basis of their litigation
blitzkreig? Or am I missing something?

---
What goes around comes around, and it grows as it goes.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What the heck is a "PIPE"?
Authored by: zapyon on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:02 PM EDT

I have been reading this "PIPE deal" or "PIPE dream" phrase so often recently -- and I think I understand what it is -- but I never saw an explanation of the "PIPE" Acronym. Can anyone please help to enlighten a non-native speaker! ;-)

Thanks

Andreas

[ Reply to This | # ]

Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
Authored by: jlar on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:04 PM EDT
"Can you imagine what it feels like, once you have gone to the trouble of
setting up a PIPE deal, which is perfect for investors who *don't* want to be
publicly known, to get a subpoena or to read that S2 has been asked to produce
every scrap of paper or email between you and them?"

I find this observation particularly interesting. Has anyone got an idea how
likely it is that the PIPE investors will be revealed (why do I think of Star
Wars and the hidden emperor to be?:-)

[ Reply to This | # ]

As the saying goes
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:06 PM EDT
You better be right, or you better keep quiet: justice, free software style.
Hasn't Darl heard the old adage: better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Crazy salary
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:12 PM EDT
Just doing a little math here, and you gotta realise just how skewed the reality
of Mr. Darl is.. If he was paid 1mil last year- and you break that down to a 40
hour work week... (salary).

Heres the math:
1,000,000 in one year
thats 83,333 a month
thats 20,800 a week
thats 4,166 a day

thats $520.00 an hour

Before taxes ofcourse.. Not to mention he lives in utah which has a very low
cost of living.

what is the excuse that someone needs to make that much?

It seems to me like the corporate world is just one big pissing contest to see
who has the biggist salary. And whats worse is it looks like these people feel
the need to *shake things up* to justify their positions.

Disgusting.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Cost of Freedom
Authored by: ka6sox on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:14 PM EDT
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -- Thomas Jefferson

---
Tom

[ Reply to This | # ]

GrokLaw - another disruptive Technology
Authored by: tz on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:16 PM EDT
Most business people don't understand the GPL. How it works to create a
commons. You can play and prosper under those rules.

They also have trouble with the internet and how it routes around blockages and
tends to be self-healing and reinforcing.

Now Groklaw. If sunlight is the best disinfectant, we now have a huge solar
collector. Just as Linux allows thousands to contribute their bit, here is
where we apply it to the legal/pr/stock/etc. space.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Exit Strategy -
Authored by: jcr6 on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:21 PM EDT
Fact or Fiction?

  • Darl gets away scot-free because he is fired. He isn't held responsible for stock manipulation because he didn't profit from it. "We would have won", or so he could say.

  • SCO can now safely fold the case up and blame it on Darl: "It's all Darl's fault."

  • Darl can come back and sue SCO for wrongful termination. He's done it before, so he still gets to cash out!

  • This is all part of the exit strategy. The only people who really get screwed are the lawyers.
    BTW, IANAL. (If you couldn't guess.)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: tgnb on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:28 PM EDT
    "This is the screwiest thing I've ever seen. SCO has turned into a roller
    coaster ride, and the outcome is less predictable now than it ever has
    been."
    ~ Laura DiDio

    Well actually she's wrong again. To me the outcome now seems to be MORE
    predictable than it has ever been.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Finally Someone Crazier Than SCO
    Authored by: dmscvc123 on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:33 PM EDT
    Baystar would have been better keeping their mouths shut - maybe they've been
    around Darl too long.

    Their comments both damage SCO's legal case as well as their own accusations
    against SCO. They damage their cases against Unix customers by saying that the
    Unix market is dead no matter what, so that makes it hard to get the damages
    SCO/Baystar would want to get and Baystar damages themselves by saying they sent
    that letter to basically get a management shake-up at SCO - not that SCO had
    actually breached the agreement.

    If Darl gets canned at SCO, he'd probably fit right in at Baystar. Goldfarb et
    al seem about as clueless on the law as Darl does. It's pretty straightforward
    that if you want to claim billions of dollars in lost sales, you're not going to
    help your case by saying the size of the market is only a few tens of millions
    of dollars if that.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Groklaw is not Confused
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:39 PM EDT
    "...the outcome is less predictable now than it ever has been."
    ~ Laura DiDio

    Actually it is now more predictable that it ever was.

    With light comes clarity, with clarity comes understanding, with understanding
    comes knowlege, with knowlege comes freedom.

    We know who is in the dark and who isn't....

    Keep up the awsome work PJ and freinds

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: drtr on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 04:45 PM EDT
    Mark Evans of The Financial Post (Canada) has a nice column on RBC and SCO on
    2004-04-22.

    Royal Bank embroiled in Linux code fight.

    The last paragraph reads:

    "The bottom line may be that Royal Bank is doing what it needs to do, but
    it - and SCO's attack on Linux - still stink.

    The complete column is available at nationalpost.com to dead
    tree subscribers.

    Deid Reimer

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT: SCOX break 1M shares in volume
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 05:01 PM EDT

    I'm almost positive that I haven't seen this since the company changed their name to SCO. Though there was probably some heavy activity when they did their IPO (as CALD), this is quite a change from normal volumes for SCOX. I wonder if this isn't some major run up of the stock before it begins its final plunge. Part of me hopes so, while the rest of me hopes they stay alive long enough for IBM to put a stake through their heart.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: stephenry on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 05:03 PM EDT
    May I suggest to everyone that instead of calling Darl McBride "Darl"
    we call him "McBride". It may seem insignificant but I think calling
    him by his first name, like a friend, is too respectful for a man of his
    calibar.

    Steve

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Mottley Fool inserts stake in SCO
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 05:04 PM EDT
    http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2004/mft04042226.htm?source=eptyholnk303100&log
    visit=y&npu=y

    Enjoy

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Deep Thoughts, by RoboDarl
    Authored by: BrianW on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 05:08 PM EDT
    Well, if this is the beginning of the end of Darl McBride’s public
    grandstanding, I, for one, will miss him. So it is with great sadness that I
    have, perhaps for the final time, tweaked my Artificial Intransigence program
    (aka RoboDarl), which has thus produced the following (purely speculative and
    for entertainment purposes only) “Deep Thoughts, by RoboDarl” (with deepest
    apologies to Jack Handey):

    “Everything I need to know in life, I learned in Second Grade. That’s when the
    smaller kids start bringing lunch money to school.”

    “My first job was a paper route. Having a paper route taught me a lot about
    business. For instance, I learned that seventy percent of my customers would
    rather pay a bill that was ten dollars too high than argue about it.”

    “People say that a true friend is a friend for life, but I don’t think that’s
    true, even with a contract.”

    “I don’t know why, but pyramid schemes just seem really cool to me.”

    “In my personal life, as in business, I surround myself with people who are
    smarter than they need to be. For instance, the gardener pulling weeds in my
    back yard is an MIT mathematician, and the painter on my front porch is a
    spectral analyst. When I asked the young man who cleans my swimming pool why
    the pool’s water was green, he said he was a NASA rocket scientist and that he
    was conducting an experiment in photowhatchamasys. Like me, they are all
    incredibly smart. I still belittle their work and pay them next to nothing,
    though.”

    “Once, when I was a kid, my brother didn’t like what I had done with his diary.
    But I just can’t help it. Monetizing is what I do.”

    “I didn’t understand the secret to life until I learned the following words:
    ‘Heads, I win; tails, you lose.’”

    “My dad told me it would be good to have a lawyer in the family, so he wanted
    me to become a lawyer. But instead of becoming a lawyer, I licensed the job to
    my brother. To this day, my brother thinks I’m collecting his monthly fee our
    father’s behalf.”

    “I love the U.S. Constitution. Especially the part that promises me a lot of
    money.”

    “I believe that deep down, people are basically good and kind. I’m particularly
    amazed at the number of complete strangers who are kind enough to ask how I
    sleep at night.”

    “Million, billion, trillion, quadrillion… I wonder what comes after fifty
    quadrillion dollars?”

    “My ultimate goal is to have a business that really rakes in the dough, but
    without any products, services, employees, or customers.”

    “Getting something for nothing is a lot more work than getting something for
    something, but I somehow find it much more rewarding.”

    “A good leader never says anything in public that can be verified or
    corroborated by a third party. That way, nobody can disprove what you say, so
    it looks like you’re always telling the truth.”

    “My lawyer says that judges decide matters of law, and juries decide matters of
    fact. But the law is a fact. Really. Think about it.”

    “If making more enemies than I can count and becoming the most hated man in an
    entire global industry is what it takes to run a successful business these days,
    then I’m the man for the job.”

    “A good minion is worth a thousand engineers. Aw, who am I kidding? A really
    good minion is worth, like, about a billion engineers!”

    “Who needs a product when you can just sell licenses that don’t specify any
    rights or privileges? I mean, come on! How much easier can it get? KA-CHING!
    KA-CHING!”

    “I think I’ll have the legal department draw up some boilerplate contracts that
    replace the words ‘SCO’ and ‘Licensee’ with the words ‘Plaintiff’ and
    ‘Defendant’. I figure it will save time.”

    “Lawsuits? Check. Letters to Congress? Check. Now if I could just somehow
    get the Executive Branch involved…”

    “Why do people always laugh at me when I show up at a chess match? It’s not as
    if I don’t bring my own deck of cards.”

    “Have you ever said something in public, only to have it thrown back in your
    face by your sworn enemy in a court of law, resulting in onerous court orders
    that interfere with your business strategy of keeping your closing stock price
    above $10.50 at least once every twenty business days? Me neither.”

    “Who says a mouth has only two sides?”

    “I want to do everything I can to enhance and maintain national security, even
    if it means charging a license fee for every single Linux installation on the
    planet.”

    “A court of law is like a collection agency for customers you don’t have yet.”

    “A good leader commits to a plan and sticks to it, no matter what. Contingency
    plans and exit strategies are overrated.”

    And finally:

    “You can’t succeed in business without a great idea. Anyone’s will do.”


    ---
    //Brian
    #define IANAL

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 05:11 PM EDT
    "....It's no wonder so many corporate guys can't grok the GPL. You have to
    be nice to understand it....."

    I think you have hit the nail on the head, this is at once OSS's strength and
    its weakness. Its a superb defence against corporate guys (they cant target us)
    but a perceived weakness when selling to or dealing with them. They cannot see
    what is in it for them, for many thats all they care about (whether its
    politik's, advancement or straight $).

    regards

    Thing

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: blacklight on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 05:12 PM EDT
    "No wonder Darl has been looking so haggard"

    The chickens tend to get upset once they know and understand that their chicken
    farm is a lot more than a happy time vacation resort for chickens: their sense
    of entitlement to the good life evaporates along with their innocence shortly
    before their lives hit da bump.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Could someone please explain...
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 05:26 PM EDT
    ...why the Yankee Group, or Laura DiDiot gets ANY press whatsoever? I'm
    genuinely confused here...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    DiDio's insights come a year too late
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 05:27 PM EDT
    "This is the screwiest thing I've ever seen. SCO has turned into a roller
    coaster ride, and the outcome is less predictable now than it ever has
    been."

    About a year ago when SCO started its noisemaking, it was "the screwiest
    thing I've ever seen". Didio is a bit late coming to this realization.
    For the last several months, it's alternately been the most pathetic thing I've
    ever seen or the most irritating thing I've ever seen.

    The outcome seemed unpredictable to me until the SCOforum disaster last year,
    since which time it has been abundantly clear to anyone who spends more than an
    hour digging into SCO's antics, that their chances of winning are statistically
    insignificant. Particularly after more than 6 months of challenging SCO to
    produce its evidence and getting nothing but FUD in response. Even after a
    motion to compel was granted against them, SCO still hasn't produced any
    evidence of wrongdoing of any kind by IBM.

    Exactly where and when the roller coaster will collapse isn't known, and we're
    getting lots of entertainment value out of SCO in the meantime. But at this
    point, only a fool would believe they have any chance of prevailing in court.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ditch the *Nix Business?!?!
    Authored by: stevem on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 06:03 PM EDT
    Oh my, how did we all miss this gem.

    Baystar essentially telling SCO to drop the various Unix lines they have.

    Translation: All you SCO UNIX programmers; Documentation writers; Help Desk
    staff etc etc etc. You are one and all officially redundant. One of your major
    investors no longer wants any of you around.
    Baystar wants SCO the company stripped down to the bare minimum to support it's
    legal claims.

    Way to go to ensure an absolute TORRENT of new leaks from inside the system.
    Morale at the exec level would be shaky, but morale for the actual workers must
    have just hit an all time low.


    PJ, these are guys aren't just nasty, this is sheer appalling viciousness on an
    incredible scale!


    - SteveM

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    royalbank.ca on Netcraft
    Authored by: rcbixler on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 06:05 PM EDT
    If you go to
    "http://uptime.netcraft.co.uk/up/graph?site=royalbank.ca",
    you will find that they use (wait for it):

    AIX IBM_HTTP_SERVER

    Isn't that a hoot?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Don't want to be a wet blanket...
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 06:22 PM EDT
    Great work PJ, DrStupid and everybody else who contributes...

    I don't want to be a wet blanket but TSG has not stopped kicking yet. I know we
    won't let go of this sucker and maybe TSG has started to fall apart, but let's
    keep some focus. I'll party when I can dance on TSGs grave without the ground
    moving around under me.

    Jaydee (not logged in).

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 07:03 PM EDT
    It's also why I haven't let anyone talk me into "monetizing" Groklaw, by the way. It's no wonder so many corporate 쳫Aœ•ð›Ò,'1û4ÛîÖÁe« ì

    P.J., I don't want you to "monetize" Groklaw. I just want to be able to buy a Groklaw T-SHIRT!!! I need one! Pleeeeze?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT : Any US Software Developers Out There? [Patents]
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 07:07 PM EDT
    Hi there, we in Europe will no doubt soon be faced with Software patents and I
    wanted to ask something that you guys may have experience of.

    If you work freelance, do you have to be aware of all patents granted in your
    field of technology, for fear of being sued. [Impossible for a one man
    endeavour!]

    When software patents are introduced in Europe, I fear that Freelancers will be
    driven from the market, but maybe I am barking up the wrong tree altogether,
    they still exist in the US dont they? I doubt that having insurance would be
    appropriate.



    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This: Darl turns tail
    Authored by: webster on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 07:14 PM EDT
    Congratulations PJ, this recognition is well-deserved. This sounds like a gross
    understatement. It is hard to be swimming with the tide since for months we
    have been fighting the dark.

    Baystar is going to make Darl our bayStar witness! If they knock him out, he
    may be motivated to tell someone what BayStar must know about MS or what MS did.
    He was movin' like the King making millions out of threats. Now they want to
    sacrifice him like a pawn. He may even leak to Groklaw.

    ---
    webster

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Brilliance as an afterthought
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 07:23 PM EDT
      Oh, and one more thing. If BayStar imagines that Groklaw will stop because of a change in SCO management, they haven't grasped our purpose. Groklaw isn't after Darl at all. It's the IP claim BayStar bought into that has to be defeated. If that is what BayStar was imagining, I hope they realize that Groklaw has no interest in who is running what. We care about GNU/Linux and the freedoms of the GPL and that is what we are working so hard for. Continuing to push their tired and discredited IP claims, Darl or no Darl, will result in continued scrutiny and pushback from Groklaw and everyone else in the community. Just so they know.
    Brilliant. Defining. Memorable.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: Glenn on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 07:24 PM EDT
    "This is the screwiest thing I've ever seen. SCO has turned into a roller
    coaster ride, and the outcome is less predictable now than it ever has
    been."
    ~ Laura DiDio

    Of course it is unpredictable to Ms. Didio. She seems not to have had a clue
    from the very beginning. But actually SCOG's outcome is all the more predictable
    if Baystar and RBC both pull their funds from SCOG or have them frozen. The
    SCOG's demise is more certain and all the sooner.
    As for Baystar and RBC, I don't really care if they lose their entire
    investments. It seems, at least as far as Baystar is concerned, that its only
    reason for investing in the SCOG was the litigation prospects. It wants the SCOG
    to abandon its Unix business entirely and concentrate only on litigation.
    Methinks this is even worse than the SCOG.
    Baystar's lawyers must be of the same caliber if not the same as that of the
    SCOG. How many I.P. lawyers have we read about that are enthusiastically
    endorsing the SCOG's chances in court?
    I still feel that Baystar must have some kind of safety net backed by
    somebody they trust in order for them to throw money at such a risky company.
    The fact that Baystar is pushing the SCOG to more agressively pursue its
    litigation efforts (more user lawsuits anyone?) really reeks, at least to me, of
    some strings being pulled somewhere else along the line. Else, Baystar's
    comments and actions make little sense.

    Glenn

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    What are BayStar really up to?
    Authored by: AdamBaker on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 07:24 PM EDT
    They claim that they want Darl to spout of less about the litigation - he's
    quietened down substantially on that front, other than the Harvard Jolt thing he
    has said very little, the recent Blepp incident can't have helped but I think it
    really was the case that Blepp wasn't supposed to say what he did.

    They claim they want SCO to stop working so hard on old Unix products - there
    hasn't been much evidence that they are doing more than the minimum necessary to
    meet their obligations to the customers who have support contracts - there are
    no substantial new features planned that aren't essentially ports of GPLed
    software - if the company stays in business they can't totally kill this off
    without facing breach of contract claims from existing customers.

    They claim they want the litigation pursued more effectively - I don't believe
    they haven't now realised that the strategy of relying on Boies performance in
    front of a jury won't work if IBM can get summary judgements on many of the
    issues so they must know this plan is significantly weakened.

    The most likely option to me looks to be that the NY Times article is a cover
    for what they are really up to - they just want to keep SCOX afloat long enough
    to get an injunction against them for failure to redeem. I don't know where that
    would placeBayStar relative to IBM in the creditors list but it is certainly
    better than being preferred stockholders.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: fxbushman on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 07:47 PM EDT
    The most important aspect of recent events is that more roads are beginning to
    lead to M$, the new Rome of corporate malfeasance. This may well be the first
    chapter of the decline and fall of Microsoft. Since the crash of Enron and the
    steady pace of revelations of turpitude in the executive suite, corporate greed
    is beginning to get a bad name among the general public. M$ exemplifies this
    quality more than any other company I know. It may well be that BillG's friends
    in the DoJ may not be able to save him from himself the next time around.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Award for best headline
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 07:54 PM EDT
    The Register:

    "Bigmouth McBride turned us off SCO, says investor"

    That has it all, bigmouth, the implication that this is merely what they
    "say" possibly, and SCO being a turn off

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Why BayStar changed their tune - speculation
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 08:12 PM EDT
    This is speculation, but I think I know the likely reason why Bay Star changed
    their tune.

    First look at the sections of the contract referenced (by the way the duplicate
    2(viii), one should (vii)).

    These sections are all about disclosure, truthfulness, representations and
    warranties, etc.

    When you read these sections ,the obvious thought is that BayStar felt that SCO
    lied or didn't disclose something to them that they should have.

    Today, we get BayStar telling us it's about Darl's big mouth and focus on UNIX
    business. Lots of people thing, hmmm, how can that fit?

    The answer I think comes from looking at BayStar's option. Suppose BayStar want
    to get out what can they do:

    (1) They can try to redeem with SCO's consent
    - They tried this and failed already with the letter mentioned in the earlier
    SCO press release. So this option is dead.

    OR

    (2) They can litigate to try to redeem enforcing contractual rights against
    SCO's wishes, but with the court's consent.
    - They could try this but it may take a long time, SCO may be dead, and the
    money gone long before this happens.

    So I doubt this is a very attractive option to them...

    OR

    (3) They can convert their A1 preference shares to common stock, now, or at some
    point in the future, and sell them on the open market. If the SCO stock price
    never recovers to the $17 range, they will take a bath, but not nearly as bad a
    bath as if the SCO stock price collapses.

    Additionally they can't dump millions of shares on the market in one go without
    collapsing the price. They need to sell gradually over an extended period of
    time.

    So, if they were pursuing this option, it would be in BayStar's interest not to
    do anything to undermine the stock price.

    And, as they don't want to undermine the stock price, they would want to
    (a) Play down the significance of the letter asking for redemption
    (b) Not pursue litigation against SCO, as this would probably collapse the
    price.
    (c) Not go round telling everybody that SCO lied to them, or SCO has no case, or
    SCO didn't disclose properly.


    So, my thought, is today's media appearances by BayStar, are an indication that
    you aren't going to see immediate litigation between them and SCO, and that they
    may even continue to say relatively pro-SCO stuff.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and Microsoft I.E. not required.
    Authored by: Fractalman on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 08:17 PM EDT
    Okay, I'm confused too. SCOX went up 21% today!!

    Some one mentioned here that Microsoft showed a video indicating Windows will not work without I.E. I screwed up my dual boot WinXP/Linux and had to reload the restore CD to get back XP. Since I was sending that machine off to my wife's work, I was not sure how to register Windows. After reading one of the EULA thingys, I decided, nuts, I'll let them deal with it. So I declined the agreement. And low, the system went on to install without I.E., Outlook, Mediaplayer, etc. In fact, the only icon on the desk top was the trash bin. (That is funny too.) The file browser was hot keyable, but no I.E. to be found.

    I then installed Netscape 7.1, Mozilla, Openoffice, a few text editors, burn4free, etc. These worked fine. I surfed the web, edited documents, burned a Linspire ISO, - - such freedom. Hated to part with it. Yea, right. :-)

    Now if I could just figure out these permissions on my FAT32 hard (2nd) disk and the USB jumpdisk. I hate jumping into root user to do anything with them. ((Using PCLinuxOS on a new machine.)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused - me too
    Authored by: om1er on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 08:20 PM EDT
    Dudley Moore had a comedy skit where he played classical music on a grand piano.
    The funny part was that it sounded like the song was ending, but continued to
    another ending, and another, and so on. As an audience member, you were
    confused, and didn't know how it would turn out.

    That describes this SCOG story so far, for me anyway. I have clapped in glee at
    SCOG's end so many times, and then they kept playing their song, ....

    I believe that is also the trap that Ms. DiDio has fallen into. When will this
    masterpiece be over?

    My one prediction that I am fairly certain of though is that Darl and his
    merrymen will be very sorry that they started all this. One day. Possibly real
    soon now. (Claps in glee.)

    ---
    Are we there yet?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    M$ wins if unix dies
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 08:28 PM EDT
    My take on things is that M$'s proxie(Baystar), is working to kill off Unix at
    the same time as GNU/Linix. M$ would love to see work on Unix halted, and at the
    same time pickup what's left of Unix IP at a fire sale. I think I read somewhere
    that when everything go's balls up there's a clause that one of the investers
    get's first dibs at the Unix IP.
    Or maybe I need a better grade of foil for my hat.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Bets Anyone?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 08:52 PM EDT
    At the start of their fight, I thought SCO would either be bought off or die
    inside of six months. I couldn't figure out how they kept going until the info
    on the Baystar deal came out.

    Clearly, they are reaching the end of their money, and their rope. They could
    be pumped up again, but I doubt anyone will want the publicity that would bring.
    And they aren't going to win. So, any bets one when they come apart? I doubt
    it will be more than six months more. Pure guess, I'll take August of 2004, with
    Daryl out in June.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    It all would have work if only.........
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 09:54 PM EDT
    And I am sure DiDio got paid well to make a fool of
    herself.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Conspiracy theory
    Authored by: tizan on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 10:27 PM EDT

    I am not one who believe in such athings usually but MS et al...i am changing my
    mind

    What if ?
    What if Baystar pulling the rug is all so as to prevent a court ruling.
    The reason might be simple...the case looks bad. and if one or more courts make
    pronouncements favoring FSF Gnu license...it'll be
    precedence that can not be overturn for ever (or at least harder to achieve
    after that).

    So for now kill the SCO and Darl cabal....and wait another day in another court
    with another case to get a better case against GNU license.

    After all thisd pain at least we want a statement now that GNU License is legal
    and is enforcable.




    ---
    tizan: Knowledge is shared

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 10:49 PM EDT
    "'We think there are limited prospects of that business ever generating growing and significant revenue,' McGrath said. 'And we believe it is diverting resources from going where they would have the most value--the intellectual property process.'"

    Qs for the legally inclined: How far along this path can Bay Star go, without entangling themselves in the lawsuits? Could IBM pursue a claim of barratry against Bay Star for funding the lawsuit, and pressuring SCOX to put all their resources into litigation at the expense of their only ongoing product line? I suspect the Nazgul will answer these questions in due time...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SEC Edgar: 7, form 4 & 1, form 3 filed tonight (nt)
    Authored by: jog on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 10:50 PM EDT
    jog

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    It seems to me. . .
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 10:55 PM EDT
    That should Baystar force a redemption and should the Royal Bank of Canada do
    the same, the actions of both could liquidate SCO Group's cash assets. If so it
    then becomes possible that SCO Group may, just may, need to seek bankruptcy
    protection.

    Bankruptcies, from the old english phrase "broken table," are very
    complex undertakings. Yes, all assets of the debtor must be listed. That,
    however, does *not* necessarily mean that creditors will end up with any, some
    or all of the debtor assets.

    There is a process called "ring fencing" which, if setup correctly,
    protects the assets of the debtor from creditors. It is a legal manuver. How
    it is put together I don't really know. But I do know this, when Pacific Gas
    and Electric Co. (PG&E) of California declared bankruptcy a couple of years
    ago, all of their assets were protected by this manuver. Hence, the creditors,
    in that case, thus far, have received nothing.

    I just wonder if Baystar and RBC are going to try and squeeze the purported SCO
    Group IP assets via forcing SCO Group into bankruptcy.

    I further wonder if SCO Group and/or Canopy has ring fenced the assets.

    This situation may become quite interesting.

    krp

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    I hope someone is connecting the dots...
    Authored by: Eric Damron on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 11:03 PM EDT
    This seems very obvious to me but let me spell it out to be perfectly clear.
    Given the following statment from BayStar:

    "'We think there are limited prospects of that business ever generating
    growing and significant revenue,' McGrath said. 'And we believe it is diverting
    resources from going where they would have the most value--the intellectual
    property process.'"

    I would hope that the Anti-Trust people are connecting the dots... Microsoft
    introduced BayStar to SCO not as a legitimate investment but for the sole
    purpose of allowing SCO to implementing a lengthy litigation process designed to
    destroy its greatest competition. Linux.

    Could it be any clearer the ONLY solution to Microsoft's perpetual
    anti-competitive practices is to break the Corporation into at least three
    separate companies?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    2003-12-15 PIPEs Report: Golfarb already talked about redeeming
    Authored by: sth on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 11:36 PM EDT
    In this document Goldfarb already talked about the possibility of redeeming in Dec 15, 2003:
    BayStar, RBC amend SCO deal terms (PDF)

      Should SCO fail in its lawsuit, investors are still "pretty well protected," he [Goldfarb] says. "Our investors are in a very good position in that their downside is protected. We can redeem the note and get our money back in stock and cash." Subsequent to announcing the new terms in an amended filing of its 8K, SCO delayed its earnings release and investor conference call, originally set for December 8, to December 22 so it could determine how the transaction should be treated for accounting purposes. [emphases added]

    The last paragraph of that report is also a funny one:

      The SCO lawsuit is slated to go to trial in a Utah federal court in April 2005. The court, however, recently ordered SCO to provide detailed information regarding the company's claims that IBM violated its contract; in addition, the judge suspended all discovery motions until SCO provides that information. Until SCO complies, the lawsuit effectively is stalled.

    However can a court be so frivolous to ask for detailed information to prove the plaintiffs case? And where does that April 2005

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    What is "ka-ching"?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 22 2004 @ 11:39 PM EDT
    Anybody can explain what "ka-ching" means? I've seen this word several
    times before in the IT media, but no clear explanation ever followed.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 23 2004 @ 01:00 AM EDT
    RBC and Baystar will be remibursed for any losses to me sure. After all we all
    know this is MicroSoft's show anyway.

    Darel is a fool and just now realizes the bad advice he has taken is going to
    kill SCO and his carrer, not to mention the executives at Microsoft that wish he
    and the Microsoft connection will go away. They never expected that Darel would
    act so stupidly. And let's face it he is a fool ... How could have Microsoft
    have known there bought and paid for Linux gunman was a loose cannon who would
    start shooting at everybody? Ops

    There (Microsoft's) new path seams to be, mend fences, and act nice. Maybe there
    little court battles have convenced them the court is not the place to fight
    this out. The open market, and compentition is the only game to play.

    Anyway, if nothing else the Open Source community has informed everyone we are
    here, and if you don't play nice. Bad things will happen. We will fight back and
    we do have the resources to make a very good show of it. I think that has become
    crystal clear to everyone.

    SCO will die shortly. Most likly at IBM's hands or maybe Microsoft will buy it
    and Baystar is helping drive the price down. Who knows ... but there is a lot
    going on here that just is not right. I have worked for a Finance Company that
    made loans not unlike Baystar's. It is very strange they would call a note in
    such a way to cause such damage to the very company there money is invested in.
    It just is not done that way. It has no rime or reason to it. Unless Darel has
    just completly lost his mind. Maybe?

    I am just woundering if this is just part of a well though out ballout of
    Microsoft in this deal, and Baystar is playing the middle man.

    At the very least Microsoft has eliminated the only IP Unix company that could
    compete with them, and damaged Linux in the process. Granted the harm done to
    Linux is slight, however SCO being gone and the fate of UNIX grim is not a good
    thing for Linux in the long run. Hopefully Novell has tainted UNIX status to the
    point there will be few takers .... and somehow all of UNIX will end up in the
    OpenSource community. Seams a lot of SCO's Unix may already be OpenSource. Hum
    ... Bet Darel did not see that one comming.

    Anyway I think SCO's end is fast approaching.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Focus on Microsoft
    Authored by: davcefai on Friday, April 23 2004 @ 01:18 AM EDT
    The focus on Microsoft may need to be on 2 levels.
    1. The legal aspect - what Groklaw is doing excellently.
    2. The Technical aspect. I call it "Moving towards a MS-Free World."

    As time goes on MS are creating a lock-in situation. It's too much to expect a
    rapid, mass migration out of Windows.

    BUT we need to reduce the use of, and dependance on, MS software, both at home
    and at work. Staroffice, not MSO. Savant or Apache, not IIS. SmartDraw, not
    Visio.

    I fear that if the MS problem is not approached in this way, then, no matter how
    good the legal work is, MS will have the world in its iron grip.

    Those of us who want to "do something" about MS should not simply cry
    out "Use Linux". We need to do the job more subtly and
    incrementally.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Is Reuters the owner of the Yankee Group?
    Authored by: ABM_rulez on Friday, April 23 2004 @ 02:33 AM EDT
    And who is owning Reuters then?

    Somenbody pointed out above that the newsagency Reuters is the owner of the Yankee Group and therfore the real employer of Laura DiDio. Has anybody any proof about that?

    If one of the major news agencies is supporting FUD this would be quite another level of global disinformation.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Is Reuters the owner of the Yankee Group?
    Authored by: ABM_rulez on Friday, April 23 2004 @ 02:53 AM EDT
    And who is owning Reuters then?

    Somebody pointed out above that the newsagency Reuters is the owner of the Yankee Group and therfore the real employer of Laura DiDio. Has anybody any proof about that?

    If one of the major news agencies is supporting FUD this would be quite another level of global desinformation.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Firing Darl -- master plan???
    Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 23 2004 @ 09:28 AM EDT
    What if firing Darl was always part of the plan? Darl (and other C-level) get
    fired and cash out stocks at current, artificially high level. SCOX investors
    left holding the bag. Baystar/M$ create Linux turmoil and eliminate a competitor
    (SCO)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Ms. DiDio is Confused, and More on Why BayStar Is Doing This
    Authored by: Griff on Friday, April 23 2004 @ 10:09 AM EDT
    Just a crazy thought -

    If the SCO Group collapses, would the lawsuit then have to be dropped? If that
    is the case, would it not then be in IBM's best interest to find a way to prop
    up the SCO Group? This way they can continue the court case, win the case, and
    negate all future such litigation by SCO Group's successors.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    The Most Discouraging Part Is Reading The Optimistic Posters
    Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, April 23 2004 @ 11:20 AM EDT
    TSG executives are paid handsomely to behave as the do. These scoundrels
    are making a short term killing. They are not the dumb ones here. They
    know the damage they are causing and possibly laugh at the stupid posts.

    BayStar is guilty of the publicity stunts that BayStar accuses of TSG. Who is
    being conned here? Baystar intends to do whatever it takes.

    BayStar demands improvements of TSG, like fire all employees and shut
    down TSG UNIX operations and go stealth mode. BayStar does not care
    about the affected UNIX users!

    M$ and the forces of evil are watching and adapting to the outcomes of
    these early and indecisive battles. This is a planned war against Linux and
    the right to own free software. Instead of a thousand fold increase in the
    number of computers, we are facing a computer "dark ages" brought on
    by greed enabled by stupidity.

    No wonder Gates is able to crush the tech greeks. They eagerly anticipate
    more of the same treatment. They are in denial. I want them to find their
    voice and some backbone. This is a psychological weakness that the tech
    geeks must outgrow. In spite of wishing, these threats will not go away.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    PJ: Fancy making a map?
    Authored by: Chaosd on Monday, April 26 2004 @ 09:08 AM EDT

    This quote shone out to me like a lighthouse on a stormy night:-

    We've enjoyed a free first-class education in the esoteric world of intellectual property and corporate shenanigans. This is the planet on which the major IT wars of the 21st century will be fought -- before SCO, few of us knew this, let alone had much chance of getting a map of the place. We've learned once again that the online community can inherit the traditional power of the press to battle the biggest monsters -- again, mapping out the shape of things to come. . . .

    (emphasis added)

    I propose that the members of Groklaw undertake a public audit of international corporations and businesses. I don't know exactly what we would collect, or what we would find - but a kind of joined up 'who's who' and 'what's what' with 'where and how' (but obviously never quite why) thrown in for good measure.

    This is a huge job, but also a hugely beneficial one - think sourceforge but with legal docs and tools. Imagine hearing about the Yankee Group (for example), and being abel to look up their SEC filings, public statements, IP claims etc - with discussion and analysis. Imagine being able to find a company mentioned in a Yankee Group statement, and check out their details.

    "Impossible" I hear you cry - to which I'll reply that I kind of fancy breakfast at Miliways< /p>

    Anybody interested?

    ---
    -----
    There are no stupid questions

    [ 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 )