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
Darl Speaks, Kind of, About BayStar and RBC
Friday, May 14 2004 @ 02:56 PM EDT

LinuxWorld has the first words I've seen from Darl McBride on the BayStar, RBC events:

"McBride claims he doesn't know any more than we do. He's had barely any contact with the bank and all he knows is that he got a letter from them last Wednesday outlining what it was doing, but not explaining why. He can't see how RBC has strenghtened its position, because they have nonvoting shares and are not on the board. A puzzlement.

"McBride also claims that he doesn't know what BayStar's about either."

He is nearly speechless when trying to describe what it's been like since SCO sued IBM:

"'This is like...,' he's said to himself, groping for an elucidating comparison, only to conclude, 'Nothing...Nothing compares to what's happened in the last year.'"

Maureen O'Gara's report goes on to mention that BayStar's website indicates that they also invested in Burst, which is suing Microsoft:

". . .Burst is the company, reduced to one or two people, that's suing Microsoft for a tidy packet. It's one of the private antitrust suits that Microsoft has yet to settle. . . .

"Burst has no other business outside its suit and evidently is the model BayStar wants SCO to emulate."



If you go to their website and find the page that lists the computer and software companies they have invested in, you will indeed find Burst on the list, and here is how they describe Burst:

"Instant Video Technologies, Inc. (now burst.com), headquartered in San Francisco, California is the leading developer of Faster-Than-Real-Time® and Burst-Enabled® video and audio delivery software. burst.com's Burstware® provides high-quality delivery of full motion video and CD-quality audio over any IP-based network. The company has built an international patent portfolio covering bursting, video delivery scheduling and rapid-casting. Burstware® is a registered trademark of burst.com, and Faster-Than-Real-Time® and Burst-Enabled® are trademarks of burst.com."

But they also list SCO, and if you read their description of the company, it's clear they were investing, or saying they were investing, not just in an IP lawsuit:

"The SCO Group, Inc. is a provider of reliable, cost-effective UNIX operating systems and software products and solutions to small and medium-sized business markets. SCO solutions include UNIX platforms, messaging, authentication, e-business tools, and services that include technical support, education, consulting, and solution provider support programs. The Company’s SCOsource division was formed in January 2003 to review and enforce its UNIX intellectual property rights. It is also developing Web-based applications, products, and services to facilitate connections to the Internet for its customers. SCO has a worldwide presence with representation in 82 countries. This infrastructure enables SCO to provide local support and dependable solutions to businesses around the world. Additionally, SCO has a channel of more than 11,000 solution providers, a developer network of nearly 8,000, thousands of direct account customers, and an installed base of more than two million systems."

Fair is fair, and it's obvious that it is BayStar, not SCO, that is trying to change the terms as to what kind of company SCO is or should be. Burst is clearly listed as a patent portfolio company, and SCO is listed as a provider of "reliable, cost-effective UNIX operating systems and software products" who also has a SCOsource IP rights program.


  


Darl Speaks, Kind of, About BayStar and RBC | 245 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections here
Authored by: bsm2003 on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:17 PM EDT
For PJ

[ Reply to This | # ]

Favorite part....
Authored by: kberrien on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:17 PM EDT
BayStar's lawyers, he said, still haven't told SCO's lawyers how SCO breached their contract. So McBride figures BayStar doesn't have a legal leg to stand on and won't be able to get its money back.

Nothing bothers me more than a hypocrate! If Baystar won't show their hands, they have nothing, yet if SCO doesn't show it hands..... arg

[ Reply to This | # ]

Darl Speechless??????
Authored by: jesse on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:26 PM EDT
how can that be possible.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Burst
Authored by: afore on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:28 PM EDT
Burst is headquartered in Santa Rosa, CA where I live. They sued Microsoft
because Microsoft stole their technology after being in negotiations with
Microsoft, modified it and put it into media player, and then made media player
incompatible with their burst technology. This seems to be a favorite ploy of
Microsoft.

Haven't we heard this before with other technologies?

Art

[ Reply to This | # ]

Links
Authored by: Woad_Warrior on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:29 PM EDT
Place your links here.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Confused
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:32 PM EDT
Am I the only person really confuse as to what BayStar
is up to? Do they have allies with large amounts of SCO
stock? Was RBC backing out so they bought the shares to
shore up their investment? Did RBC give them a really
good price?

Even when I put on the tinfoil. I still can't come up
with an explanation. Why would M$ want BayStar to do
this?

What are we missing?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Remarkable
Authored by: whoever57 on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:35 PM EDT
McBride claims he doesn't know any more than we do. He's had barely any contact with the bank

This seems remarkable. There is a change in stock ownership affecting about 7% of his company's shares. Wouldn't one expect him to be phoning Baystar incessantly to find out what is going on?

Of course Baystar may simply be not returning his calls, which in itself is rather telling.

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

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Remarkable - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:47 PM EDT
  • Remarkable - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 05:58 PM EDT
Darl Speaks, Kind of, About BayStar and RBC
Authored by: ujay on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:36 PM EDT
Baystar shows us what the future holds. In their own words
BayStar managing partner Larry Goldfarb, the guy responsible for the firm's investment in SCO, told the New York Times a couple of weeks ago that he wants SCO to drop its remaining Unix business, jettison its current management, husband its resources, focus on pursuing its IP claims and mind its Ps and Qs in what it says publicly.
...
Goldfarb told the Times and his PR guy told us - Goldfarb was reportedly out of the country when the news broke and couldn't speak for himself - that despite his disapproval with the way SCO is run he is convinced of the legitimacy of its IP claims and of its winning its case against IBM.

Venture Capitalists are prepared to support any dubious patent/copyright claim held by any tech company or patent holder. They have no interest in tech development except where it has the potential to get them money, and have no concern about the damage they will do to the tech sector and the economy.

Notice the quote

Burst has no other business outside its suit and evidently is the model BayStar wants SCO to emulate.

Don't forget the ambiguous patents filed by Mike Anderer, who is linked at the hip with this entire scam. We may win the skirmish with SCO, but until we get software patents eliminated, and copyrights amended in congress, we will be faced with a legal 'deja vu' over and over again.

---
Programmer: A biological system designed to convert coffee and cheesies into code

[ Reply to This | # ]

IBM Motion
Authored by: QTlurker on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:37 PM EDT
Isn't the IBM motion due today?
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040507015842518

[ Reply to This | # ]

Darl Speaks, Kind of, About BayStar and RBC
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:43 PM EDT
Instant Video Technologies, Inc. (now burst.com), headquartered in San Francisco, California is the leading developer of ...

There's that word again.

Weasel Words PLC is the leading provider of ambiguous terminology to corporate and government customers worldwide. Our creative semantics are enhancing the post-facto redaction potential of our customers' press releases, mission statements, annual reports and replies to the Opposition. Send us a statement of your needs and we will reply within a few days, or no less than a week.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT Extension for SCO in Autozone Case
Authored by: major_figjam on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 03:58 PM EDT
So many cases, so little time.......

They get a delay to May 24 to respond to the Autozone answer.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Burst technology
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 04:00 PM EDT
Burstware® provides high-quality delivery of full motion video and CD-quality audio over any IP-based network.

They've obviously never heard of RFC1149

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Burst technology - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 04:09 PM EDT
  • True, but with... - Authored by: jayfar on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 07:41 PM EDT
  • HEE - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 08:15 PM EDT
Sadly...
Authored by: Xenographic on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 04:03 PM EDT
They're right about the proper tactics for an "IP Vampire" as I call
them. IPVs should, ideally, have absolutely nothing that could infringe on
anyone else's IP, so as to get the maximum amount in settlements. You will note
that all of SCO's various contracts (especially the one where Novell can order
them to waive various rights) have seriously hampered their efforts (and yes,
this is a good thing for us!).

Unfortunately, what they don't seem to realize is the harm in abusing the system
like this. This only drives up the cost of actual innovation, but it's dominant
over the other strategies for monetizing IP, so it's going to stick around until
we do something about it :/

It's not the only way of abusing IP rights, either. People have discussed using
DRM to protect worms, spyware, viruses, etc. At least in theory, you could
copyright all music (thanks to some misbegotten precedent), and you could always
get some software or drug patents, release all the details to the public, but
deny ANYONE license to use your patent, ever, thus making it so that only those
without such patents could enjoy the benefits of your innovation...

Of course, these last few ideas are all mine, since I've started wondering
whether there is any way to use the bad laws to illustrate the harm they do
(without actually having to sue anyone or do anything bad) and thus to prompt
reform ... I was inspired to this by the fellow who patented using DRM schemes
to stop software piracy, ironically enough, though he was using it to restrain
some of the reasons companies might want to push DRM schemes upon us ... That
has merit, too, of course, but those patents are going to expire in not so very
long; it would help to have some reforms passed before then, to abate the
continuing harms we're suffering, which don't expire...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Some paranoia to get me throgh the day
Authored by: ujay on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 04:04 PM EDT
After reviewing my previous post, a very large tin foil hat appeared on my head,
and several thoughts occurred to me.

Is it possible that the entire SCO affair is a red herring, keeping our
attention on the publicity and anger surrounding SCO etc..., while those behind
the ploy are busy garnering support, 'in camera' as it were, with
governments around the world.

With Ireland pushing the patent monopoly interests in Europe, and some holding
the opinion that MS is actually behind the Irish push, is it too hard to
envision the US Gov't adopting a stronger position if the patent issue goes
ahead in Europe, simply to protect thier own interests.

Darl McBride et al seem to be quite thick skinned about the whole issue, and
their Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf style comments refuse to withstand scrutiny, so
why do they continue? We wait in breathless anticipation for the next release
of the IP SCOmic Revue, but what is happening elsewhere while our attention is
turned toward their ludicrous claims and comments?

Jack Valenti made a career out of allowing others to underestimate him. His
good ol' boy, aw shucks stance hides a prodigous intellect, and a razor sharp
legal brain; one takes him at face value at their own peril.

So SCO becomes a public joke, and while we do what we can to show the
dubiousness of their position at every turn, are we actually being taken in by
DM and others in the back room. I doubt that DM is a complete idiot, or he
would never have gotten to the position he's in now. He may be thoroughly
ethicless (?), immoral and dangerous, but he's no idiot. As a Canopy company,
there is no real loss to SCO here, as they were sunk anyway. If they go under,
Canopy picks up the pieces, or others will, and carry on the fine tradition of
tanking any innovation with their IP.


---
Programmer: A biological system designed to convert coffee and cheesies into
code

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: Red Hat
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 04:04 PM EDT
There are some new filings on the Red Hat docket

Anybody seen them?

[ Reply to This | # ]

RBC degrees of separation
Authored by: DL on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 04:19 PM EDT
This is one of those interesting coincidences, if you want to call it that.

A few years ago, RBC paid a big lump of money to put their name on a sports
arena, the RBC Center, located in Raleigh NC. Fine, nothing wrong a little
sponsorship. The RBC Center is home to the Carolina Hurricanes, an NHL hockey
team, and also the North Carolina State University men's basketball team. The
university owns the arena. Here's the funny bit. The university spans 2
campuses not that far apart. The first is an old, traditional college campus,
but the second is more like a high-tech industrial park with classrooms. The
university leases some of this space to various commercial interests, and one of
these companies happens to be...drum roll...Red Hat. 1801 Varsity Drive,
Raleigh, NC 27606. Look it up on your favorite map website. IBM also has a
major facility in Research Triangle Park, which is just down the road a bit from
Raliegh.

Let's see. Red Hat is suing SCO who received funding from RBC who sponsors an
arena owned by Red Hat's tenant.

NCSU alumnus, in case you're wondering. And, no I don't live in the area any
more.

---
DL

[ Reply to This | # ]

Microsoft sueing itself?
Authored by: PolR on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 04:23 PM EDT
According to BayStar's Web site, Burst.com is part of its portfolio. It's unclear what the VC's position is, but Burst is the company, reduced to one or two people, that's suing Microsoft for a tidy packet. It's one of the private antitrust suits that Microsoft has yet to settle.

--Thin foil hat on

Weird. This could be viewed as Microsoft suing itself if the theory that Microsoft has some control over Baystar is true.

Could it be that if Burst.com wins or settle, much of the money comes back to Baystar? Is this a case of by funding Burst, they make sure nobody else is funding them and the bulk of the money will stay between friends?

--Thin foil hat off

[ Reply to This | # ]

Litigation Business Indeed: If BayStar had its way…
Authored by: BrianW on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 04:32 PM EDT

Want us to sue someone? We can do that!

Want us not to sue you? We can do that, too!

Here at the SCO Group, litigation is our only business. And we’ll take money to sue, or not to sue. It’s your choice!

By transferring an aging asset into our custody, you can gain access to the profits of litigation without attending a single court session! We’re litigation experts! We can handle it for you!

On the other hand, if you want to avoid being on the losing side of a lawsuit with us, we’ll agree in writing to leave you alone for the one-time, low introductory price of $699. That’s right! For only $699, we’ll promise not to exercise our Constitutional right to drag you to court.

Take a look at these testimonials from our litigants and customers:

Yeah, we settled out of court. We had to. I mean, they had these four-color, glossy brochures declaring that they were the ‘Litigation Experts’ and all. Well, that, and we actually were trying to illegally monopolize the OS industry. ” – Microsoft

We bought a what from who, now? So they won’t what to us? Oh, so THAT’S what the settlement was all about. ” – Computer Associates

Having SCO sue Microsoft on our behalf is the best thing to happen to us since NetWare. ” – Novell

Having SCO sue us on Microsoft’s behalf is the worst thing to happen to us since NetWare. ” – Novell

We were pretty much blindsided. We didn’t see it coming. Very clever, those SCO people, using unanswered correspondence to a non-existent address as a guise for acting in good faith. I applaud their underhandedness. ” – Daimler Chrysler

Well, yes, I suppose it is technically true that The SCO Group hasn’t sued me since I took out a SCO-Source license, but if I had to do it all over again…” – EV1

Man, I can’t believe WE used to be the bad guys! These guys make our dark and evil days look like a day at the amusement park! ” – IBM

First, they help us migrate from UNIX to Linux, then they sue us for migrating from UNIX to Linux. With friends like that, who needs enemies? ” – AutoZone

Yes, you heard that right! The SCO Group can be your friend, OR your enemy! The choice is yours!

But they’re both going to cost you!

Operators are standing by! Call now! (Or ELSE!)

---
//Brian
#define IANAL

[ Reply to This | # ]

Darl Speaks, Kind of, About BayStar and RBC
Authored by: blacklight on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 05:29 PM EDT
"...since suing IBM. "This is like...," he's said to himself,
groping for an elucidating comparison, only to conclude, "Nothing...Nothing
compares to what's happened in the last year.""

At the risk of sounding anal, I must ask: what happened to the part of that
interview with El Pais, where he said he had become stronger?

"BayStar hasn't withdrawn its demand that SCO return its money and
BayStar's lawyers, he said, still haven't told SCO's lawyers how SCO breached
their contract. So McBride figures BayStar doesn't have a legal leg to stand on
and won't be able to get its money back."

Jumping to conclusions is like any kind of jumping: the higher the jump, the
harder the landing.



[ Reply to This | # ]

Why is Ireland supporting EU software patents
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 05:34 PM EDT
We learn in this message that none other that Microsoft is placing their thumb on Europian politics by sponsoring their very own candate for Presidency of the Europian Union.
    Now we note that, Microsoft officially sponsors the Irish presidency of the European Union . According to Olga Zrihen, member of the European parliament Belgian socialist party, "We have the right to question this situation: the presidency of the EU, which is a central element of the European legislative process, and is supposed to obey the democratic principles, accepts to be sponsored by a private company whose economic interests are directly put into cause by a legislative proposition on the agenda of the Council! Furthermore, knowing that the "compromise" proposal emanating from the Irish presidency rejects all of the European parliament's first lecture amendments, which corresponds to the demands of Microsoft, there is a feeling of great worry."

[ Reply to This | # ]

What goes around, comes around.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 05:45 PM EDT
I guess little Daryl now knows what happens when you fling poop into a rotary
oscillator. May it cover him completely before it's all said and done.
Hopefully, he will be so completely and throughly blacklisted in the western
world that he will have to go to Iraq to find a job.

[ Reply to This | # ]

    Darl Speaks, Kind of, About BayStar and RBC
    Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 06:10 PM EDT
    "...and SCO is listed as a provider of "reliable, cost-effective UNIX
    operating systems and software products" who also has a SCOsource IP rights
    program. "

    I can't tell if BayStar is lieing or just delusional, but it must be clear by
    now that they didn't do their homework before they handed over the cash.


    [ Reply to This | # ]

    baystar/burst/microsoft/baystar...
    Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 06:23 PM EDT
    Wait, I thought Baystar is controlled by Microsoft.
    But if Baystar invests in a tiny litigation company whose sole business is to
    draw money out of Microsoft then I start wonder ing if this is a kind of money
    laundering scheme (just a wild guess), or Baystar isn't really controlled by
    Microsoft.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Litigation bubble
    Authored by: tizan on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 06:46 PM EDT
    I'm wondering if people are investing in litigation just like they were
    investing in
    '.com' ...just because they can make money...
    But make money out of what, one asks...what is the product or the service ?
    So similar to '.com'...those with no valid product died....i suspect here too we
    will witness this...but sadly we can expect a rise of such companies before the
    burst.



    ---
    tizan: What's the point of knowledge if you don't pass it on. Its like storing
    all your data on a 1-bit write only memory !

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Darl Speaks, Kind of, About BayStar and RBC
    Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 06:57 PM EDT

    This simply jumps off the page:

    "Additionally, SCO has a channel of more than 11,000 solution providers, a developer network of nearly 8,000, thousands of direct account customers, and an installed base of more than two million systems."

    To munge an old cliche, "If SCO has an installed base of two million systems, then I'm a monkey's uncle," or possibly, "SCO will have an installed base of two million systems when Richard Stallman formats his box and installs Windows 98."

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Both Baystar and Canopy appear to be parasitic
    Authored by: kawabago on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 08:34 PM EDT
    Their investments indicate their sole purpose is to abuse the patent and
    copyright system to tax productive organizations. Maybe it would be a good idea
    to start asking both houses of the US government to review the situation, since
    this IP abuse does not encourage innovation or compensate artists.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT: the immediate M$ threat is users of Windows!
    Authored by: bbaston on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 09:38 PM EDT
    Though FUD has been suppressed somewhat, a large block of the public still
    remains, much to my chagrin, and are harming the entire world every day, by
    damaging the Internet.

    The average Jane/Joe Public who use M$ products (now renamed Jane and Joe
    Windows) have been so massively mislead by the IT and mainstream press in the
    past, that they still accept runaway popups, BSOD, and other weirdness as
    'normal'. Also, these Windows users see no connection between themselves and the
    reports of "billions of dollas in damage" to the economy of the
    world.

    Jane/Joe Windows don't yet have a clue that their very own Microsoft-powered
    computer is the SOURCE of all that spam in their email boxes, and the SOURCE of
    the spread of the damaging virus attacks they read about. So, naturally, there
    is also no sense of responsibility for contributing to the problems of the
    Internet. There is no sense of taking precautions to avoid their computer
    becoming a spam zombie, or of patching the inferior product that they choose to
    use.

    My very strong feeling is that, if Joe/Jane Windows choose to be an M$ customer,
    they also must accept the overhead cost in time and money in being responsible
    citizens of the world by protecting the Internet resource from their choice of
    operating system.

    Mr./Ms. Windows, you should spend the time required to download those Windows
    updates, many times a month, even when it takes hours every day. If you don't,
    you damage the Internet, which affects the entire world. Whenever you say,
    "They should do something!", it is only fair to let you know that IT
    IS YOU, Jane and Joe Windows, and other M$ customers, who are aiding and
    abetting the attacks on the Internet through your neglectful lack of knowledge
    and inaction.

    Jane/Joe Windows, you should blindly accept the additional restrictions put on
    you by the EULA's that are part of every update, because you need that update in
    place IMMEDIATELY and don't have time to read it, much less do the proper thing
    and consult your lawyer about the rights M$ is taking from you. In that case,
    only you are being damaged.

    Jane and Joe, you MUST spend the additional MONEY to buy and keep up to date, a
    threat detection software package. An antivirus package like Norton Antivirus,
    is NOT sufficient; the attacks today have surpassed antivirus technology!

    Mr./Ms. Windows, you MUST SPEND the TIME it takes to download updates to that
    threat protection package as they become available, as well as the time it takes
    to install them, and then SCAN your entire computer to detect and (hopefully)
    remove those threats. If you don't, you damage the Internet, which affects the
    entire world negatively in many ways.

    Now, Jane/Joe Windows, claiming ignorance of the pandora's box you have let
    loose can no longer be an excuse. Neither should you site lack of skills to
    apply and use these threat removal tools and M$ update procedures. You are
    causing damage, so you must live up to the social responibility of taming the
    beast you bought!

    "Well," says the newly enlightened M$ product user, "I should sue
    Bill Gates for bringing this guilt and shame upon myself, on my family, on my
    friends, on charitable organizations everywhere, and on my company by
    fraudulently telling me this Windows is a useful and fun product!"

    Sorry, Mr./Ms. Windows. Remember those EULA's you never read? They specifically
    say the products you bought have no indemnification, may not suit your needs,
    have no quality warranty, and, especially, that you forever waive the right of
    bringing charges against Microsoft, even if the damage is so broad as to damage
    your freedom and the economy of the world. They also say that you agree to let
    Microsoft transfer content and run programs on your computer, whenever they
    want. Don't you remember, you clicked on I AGREE without taking the 20-page
    printout (you DID print it out?) to your lawyer for acceptability. So, this
    social disease has no insurance!

    If you don't do all of the above, M$ product users, you damage the Internet,
    which affects the entire world negatively. Please, don't be irresponsible, every
    HOUR more damage is done by YOU, by running Windows without protection.

    --------
    Casual sex without protection spreads AIDS. Casual use of Windows spreads
    Internet catastrophies that drain BILLIONS OF DOLLARS from the world economy.

    And that, folks, is not FUD.

    ---------
    Shame on you, the Mainline and IT Press, for not recognizing or reporting on
    this catastropy. All it takes to fix is money and time, repeated daily for the
    rest of our lives.

    Well, there is another choice. We could decide to change operating systems on
    home and desktop computers. Lets see: there is Apple, based on a BSD, UNIX-like
    operating system. It works pretty good. Then, there is that one the National
    Security Agency of the United States of America recommends. What is it? Oh yes:
    Linux is its name, with mostly GNU software, GNU/Linux, and the whole system is
    free, as in freedom, control by the user, liberty. Its cost is also a little
    less than normal: $0.00.

    Are we the people ready to take back control of our intellectual tools? We have
    experienced Redmond's solution. Time is running out on freedom of the computer..

    ---
    Ben
    -------------
    IMBW, IANAL2, IMHO, IAVO, {;)}
    imaybewrong, iamnotalawyertoo, inmyhumbleopinion, iamveryold, hairysmileyface,

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Color me stupid, but ...
    Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 10:46 PM EDT
    SCO's claims WRT Baystar are not credible.
    Baystar's claims WRT SCO are not credible.
    Together, these tell me the actions taking place are not what
    these incredible sources make them out to be.

    If one conjectures thusly, then I think that what we are seeing
    is an endgame designed to bring all the litigation to a close
    *without* a definitive resolution. Under duress or whatever,
    SCO will close up the lawshuits and have the results sealed.
    Thereafter, the cloud over Linux remains. Proprietary
    software vendors will position their products against Open
    source with comments about how it "may" include proprietary
    codes and they "may" get sued if they choose to run it and
    can they afford to take the chance when the proprietary
    stuff is really so much better and ... ad naseum.

    For whatever it's worth, is there any way that the Linux
    Community can join the lawsuits to prevent them from being
    settled and sealed?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT - SCO-IBM discovery
    Authored by: wvhillbilly on Friday, May 14 2004 @ 10:50 PM EDT
    Has anyone heard anything on the allegedly infringing code in Linux SCO was
    ordered to detail "with specificity" to IBM some weeks ago? Was it
    ever delivered, was it what IBM asked for, was it satisfactory to them, or did
    SCO just give them the same old song and dance they've been doing all along? Or
    did SCO dropping the copyright claim moot the matter? I have neither seen nor
    heard anything on this from anywhere.


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

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    OT: 8000... 4000... try 10000 developers!
    Authored by: belzecue on Saturday, May 15 2004 @ 12:19 AM EDT
    Woohoo, I win the "find the most outrageous claim for SCO's developer network" prize!

    PRODUCT EXPO 2003 EXHIBITOR PROFILES

    Based in London, Utah, SCO has a worldwide presence with offices in 18 countries and representation in 82 countries. This infrastructure enables SCO to provide local support and dependable solutions to businesses around the world. In addition, SCO has a channel of more than 16,000 solution providers, a developer network of nearly 10,000 software application developers and an installed base of more than two million systems.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Does anyone else see the irony ?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 15 2004 @ 12:47 AM EDT
    Does anyone else see the irony?

    We (including me, actually) applaud the Open Source for designing a competent
    operating system around the proprietary Unix and Microsoft Windws operating
    systems copyrights and patents, which is undercutting them by Linux vendors
    giving it away "for free".

    But we denegrade Microsoft for taking Burst.com's software, designing around the
    copyright and giving it away for free.

    "And since apparently M$ stole the core of their
    [Burst's] business and gave it away in Windows
    Media Player (kinda hard to compete with "free")..."

    ?????????????

    (Posted anonymously for obvious reasons)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Darl Speaks, Kind of, About BayStar and RBC
    Authored by: brian-from-fl on Sunday, May 16 2004 @ 08:22 PM EDT
    From a recent quote: "That leaves BayStar as the last wooden leg propping
    up SCO’s mega-billion-dollar lawsuits. Considering that the venture capital firm
    has publicly expressed concerns about SCO’s management team, I can’t imagine CEO
    Darl McBride is feeling too cozy right now."

    The trouble is that BayStar doesn't think Darl is bad, they think that he's not
    bad enough.

    I do think that open source software as typified by Apache and Linux ang gcc
    will always suffer from the onslaught of the legal system no matter how wrong or
    demented that legal system is. Just as they say you should never pick a fight
    with people who buy ink by the barrel (the print media), so you are up against a
    terrible foe when you are up against people who make the laws (or who own the
    people who make the laws).

    Groklaw is our only focal point for any hope of fighting back.

    [ 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 )