|
SCO's UNIX Timeline Chart Goes Poof |
|
Monday, July 26 2004 @ 08:50 AM EDT
|
If you visit SCO's SCOsource page, you will find their "UNIX System Development Timeline" link now points you not to their edited version but to the original Eric Levenez chart. Their "personalized" chart has gone bye-bye.
So you can replicate, go to the SCOsource page, and click on the link. It's on the right, in the blue column, under "SCOsource License".Then, for old time's sake, go to the archived SCOsource page on Wayback and click on the same link, and presto, chango, their chart is before your eyes once again, in all its incorrectness. Or for the impatient, it's here. Get it while it's hot, though. That's my advice.
Regulars will recall that Groklaw's talks_to_birds noticed that SCO's chart seemed to be making a connection between UNIX to Minix to Linux in its chart, a connection which Levenez himself, as well as UNIX historian Peter Salus, promptly shot down in an article on Groklaw on June 20. And now the chart has gone poof, also first noticed by talks_to_birds. Is it a tacit acknowledgement that the prior chart was inaccurate? If so, why do SCO's most recent documents also imply a connection between UNIX, Minix and Linux? Inquiring minds want to know. For example, in their MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO IBM's MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON ITS TENTH COUNTERCLAIM FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT, they put it this way:
"9. Linux was first created in 1991, when a Finnish college student named Linus Torvalds began developing Linux as a hobby after studying an operating system that one of his professors had based on and derived from UNIX. IBM Statement ¶ 2; SCO Linux Introduction Version 1.2 § 1-5 (2002) (Exh. S-7)."
Samizdat, the ill-fated Ken Brown book also attempted to make such a connection, which led to the book being ridiculed and contradicted. And just to show you that it's a small world after all, up pops another AdTI guy, urging us all to buy SCO stock, using Ken Brown's language about "hybrid source" and how open sourcers are a bunch of haters of the Most Holy IP. Those who bought SCO stock in the past based on that chart might not be in a such a hurry to do that again, though. You think? Of course, Gregory Fossedal doesn't tell you in the UPI article, "Bottom Line: Hard buy, Soft sell", that he is with AdTI. Here is Mr. Fossedal's message encouraging you to part with your money and give it to SCO: "And 'Bottom Line' still likes SCO Group, despite the lumps the position has taken in recent months. SCO is the one proprietary software company that is gamely challenging the hybrid-source, hardware-maker-led termite attack on intellectual property by suing IBM. Its chief counsel is sharp, tough, and has won nine-figure awards from Microsoft and others in the past; bet on IBM to settle, if it's smart, and lose a 10-figure judgement if it goes to a jury. . . ."Cover your shorts on the open source movement for a last-gasp rally, but put the puts back on after a rally -- and stay in Sco group that has more than a David's chance of defeating IBM's Goliath." Well, and who is Mr. Fossedal and what is his interest, if any? Mr. Fossedal is identified like this at the bottom of the article: "Fossedal manages international investement [sic] research for Emerging Markets Group in Washington, DC. His clients may (and usually do) hold long and short positions in many of the investment securities and opportunities mentioned in his reports. 'The Bottom Line' is compiled from sources we believe to be reliable, but no representation is made that they are necessarily accurate or complete. Investors should perform their own due diligence and consult their own professional advisor before buying or selling any securities. Mr. Fossedal's opinions are entirely his own, and are not necessarily those of UPI or EMG. Futhermore, they are subject to change without notice." The AdTI website makes it hard to find out much about Mr. Fossedal, because the page on their employees seems to have gone poof too. Didn't there used to be such a page? Now, if you want to know about his connection, you can click on the picture of a book he wrote that they are pushing on the web site's home page, and then you can click to find his somewhat dated bio. Back in February of 2003, he was listed as "chairman of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution". By December of that year, he was listed as "a senior fellow at AdTI and its former former [sic] chairman, manages international investments for Emerging Markets Group." His bio lists him as still chairman and "also the president and chief investment officer of the Democratic Century Fund, established in 1998." If you visit the Democratic Century Fund, you find out it is a hedge fund: "The Democratic Century Fund - Thank you for your interest in the Democratic Century Fund, LLC, a hedge fund investing in emerging market countries. DCF is managed by the Emerging Markets Group, with offices in West Lebanon, NH, and Washington, DC."
And on the About page, they add this: "The Democratic Century Fund, LLC, is a hedge fund that manages investments for its clients in emerging market countries around the world.
"We offer the opportunity for competitive rates of return on investment, but can manage funds only for qualified individuals and institutions who appreciate the potential and risks inherent in dealing in these markets." And who are the principals? Fossedal, of course, who is the Chief Investment Officer, and guess who is the Director and VP? Kenneth Brown.
Now I know nothing about stocks, so I never give advice about that. But I do wonder about that old chicken and egg thing. For example, we have SCO alleging that there is a connection between UNIX and Linux via Minix. We have a "think tank" alleging in Ken Brown's book, Samizdat, that Linus may have copied from Minix. We have a chart on SCO's web site showing a purported connection between UNIX, Minix and Linux. And now another member of the "think tank", Fossedal, turns out to give stock tips, and the author of Samizdat works there too, and Fossedal is pushing SCO stock and telling us his "clients may (and usually do) hold long and short positions in many of the investment securities and opportunities mentioned in his reports." Oh, and Microsoft encouraged BayStar to invest in SCO, and they also have funded AdTI. And now BayStar is fighting with SCO over SCOsource. And the chart has disappeared.
|
|
Authored by: MathFox on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 10:42 AM EDT |
SVP is French for please
---
When people start to comment on the form of the message, it is a sign that they
have problems to accept the truth of the message.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Corrections here SVP - Authored by: fb on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 10:45 AM EDT
- Corrections here SVP - Authored by: AntiFUD on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 10:55 AM EDT
- Corrections here SVP - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:00 AM EDT
- S'il vous plait - Authored by: aaron_tx on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:07 AM EDT
- S'il vous plait - Authored by: Ted Powell on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:23 AM EDT
- S'il vous plait - Authored by: rand on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:12 PM EDT
- S'il vous plait - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:59 PM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:13 PM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: J.F. on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 01:19 PM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 01:26 PM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 02:39 PM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 04:01 PM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 04:49 PM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 06:48 PM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 27 2004 @ 04:44 AM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 27 2004 @ 05:04 AM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 27 2004 @ 12:07 PM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, July 28 2004 @ 03:42 AM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 27 2004 @ 11:49 AM EDT
- Get a life t_t_b! - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, July 28 2004 @ 03:38 AM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, July 28 2004 @ 04:10 AM EDT
- Completely OT - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 27 2004 @ 05:29 PM EDT
- S'il vous plait - Authored by: Marc Nadeau on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 08:02 PM EDT
- Fossedal is consistent on one thing - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:15 AM EDT
- Corrections here SVP - Authored by: jasonlotito on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:27 AM EDT
- Truth from SCO? - Authored by: PSaltyDS on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:26 PM EDT
- Corrections here SVP - Authored by: stashu on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 01:00 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 10:44 AM EDT |
Please put your OT posts and Links here. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OT Links etc - Authored by: WhiteFang on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:14 AM EDT
- Analysis of Harrop's declaration - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:31 AM EDT
- BPI attempts to extend music copyrights beyond 50 years in UK - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:32 AM EDT
- Frank Hayes at ComputerWorld definitely gets it - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:18 PM EDT
- New SCOX 8-K, 2004-07-26 - Authored by: Boundless on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:34 PM EDT
- Can't logon in FireFox??? - Authored by: PSaltyDS on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:52 PM EDT
- Loophole for GPL section 6 found by Sveasoft? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 02:10 PM EDT
- Making Open Source Software Pay - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 03:36 PM EDT
- OT Links etc - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 04:14 PM EDT
- OT Links etc - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 06:47 PM EDT
- Fossedal connection deserves it's own story! - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 04:20 PM EDT
- BBC story about EFF patent busting - Authored by: Dormouse on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 04:52 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 10:53 AM EDT |
According to the Upcoming Legal Events thread IBM would have
filed responses to SCO's Renewed Motion to Compel and SCO's Rule 56f motion last
week. Perhaps there was something in there that precipated this chart
disappearing?
OT: I also have some about the Gupta
affidavit.
Quatermass
IANAL IMHO etc[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: miss_cleo_psy4u on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 10:53 AM EDT |
Is this sort of behavior, wearing one hat to advise
investment in SCOX (or even offer it) on the strength of
material ADTI touts, in which, under another hat, he is an
key officer, something which could jeopardize the nonprofit
status of the ADTI? If there isn't a law against this, there
should be. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: MikeA on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 10:55 AM EDT |
:P
---
Change is merely the opportunity for improvement.....
but I can't think of a better signature yet.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: sander123 on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:00 AM EDT |
Hi,
Just a few quick question on the GPL.
Suppose I make modifications
to a GPL program. But I release only the diffs between my version and yours. I'm
very carefull that my diff doesn't include any of your code. I put some evil
license on it.
Why would the GPL forbid me do that? I'm only releasing code
that I have the copyrights on. And since the GPL is a license and not a contract
I'm not bound by its conditions anyway. And in turn anyone who obtains my
modifications, can apply them himself to the official GPL version, without
breaking any laws. (As long as he does not redistribute the end
result.)
This reminds me of the release of an
alternate soundtrack
for that Harry Potter film:
Sander. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:16 AM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:22 AM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:29 AM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:32 AM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:33 AM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: stend on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:40 AM EDT
- Derivative work - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:07 PM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:18 PM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: Simon G Best on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:18 PM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:32 PM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: DaveAtFraud on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:35 PM EDT
- Test: created w/o ref. to original? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:59 PM EDT
- Not (necessarily) a GPL issue - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 02:29 PM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 03:07 PM EDT
- Trick Question Alert!!!! - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 03:10 PM EDT
- How to legally... - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 05:26 PM EDT
- diff or context diff? (schemes are self-punishing) - Authored by: BitOBear on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 05:32 PM EDT
- e.g. PINE license OT: GPL questions - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 06:08 PM EDT
- OT: GPL questions and Harry Potter - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 07:24 PM EDT
|
Authored by: MarkusQ on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:00 AM EDT |
This reminds me of how you take pictures in the dark. It may be pitch
black, but there are still a few photons bouncing around. So all you have to do
is open your shutter and wait.
Pretty soon a photon will wander in to your
camera, and there's a reasonable chance that you now have a picture of blackness
with a tiny dot on it somewhere. Then another photon comes in from a different
angle, and then another, and another...after a while, an image begins to form,
dimmly.
If you wait long enough, you might even be able to see something (or
someone) you'd recognise. With patience, and a steady hand, pictures taken in
the dark can be as clear as those taken in broad daylight.
-- MarkusQ
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: aaron_tx on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:04 AM EDT |
I wonder how much M$ has invested in Emerging Markets Group? I wonder if
Baystar or Canopy has assets invested in Emerging Markets Group. In a clean
room/perfect world situation, all of the folks would wind up in jail and owing
the little guy investors that got caught up in their scam. Snake Oil and
Medicine Shows have made a comeback once again...After the bust of 2001, this is
kind of like the con men who romance hard-up ladies out of their bank accounts
and leave them holding the credit card bill
out[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:05 AM EDT |
One analysis (of recent events) might be that Fossedal likes to kick Linux, and
is doing this because of a pro-MS bias.
However if you go back to
October 2002 (incidentally soon after Darl arrived at Caldera), you will find
that
- Fossedal used to love Linux. (He even used his favorite
"termite" analogy to support Linux)
- In fact, at that time, he
recommended buying SCOX stock because they were pro-Linux
- At
that time, he thought Microsoft was "becoming a good short" i.e. he viewed their
stock as likely to decline)
For example
http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/wed/cy/Ubottomline-commentary.RYDL_DO3
.html
Sun and Oracle remain good shorts, as they have for
more than a year. Microsoft is becoming a good
short, too;
at these levels, it is already time to start nibbling. On the buy side,
there are dozens of
feisty young companies -- Red Hat,
Sco Group, and VA Software -- that are already taking advantage
of the new global paradigm.
In other words,
Fossedal's position can be summed up:
- October 2002: pro-SCOX pro-Linux
anti-MS
- 2004: pro-SCOX, anti-Linux, pro(?)-MS
The
only thing that seems consistent in Fossedal's position is that he is
pro-SCOX
And the reasons why he is pro-SCOX have changed
radically in the last 2 years. In 2002, he was pro-SCOX because they were
pro-Linux. In 2004, he is pro-SCOX because they are
anti-Linux.
Quatermass IANAL IMHO etc.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- When Fossedal loved Linux - Authored by: MikeA on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:15 AM EDT
- When Fossedal loved Linux - Authored by: blacklight on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:39 AM EDT
- Fossedal - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:21 PM EDT
- Fossedal - Authored by: whoever57 on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 02:17 PM EDT
- Fossedal - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 02:35 PM EDT
- When Fossedal loved Linux - Authored by: darthaggie on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:25 PM EDT
- So your saying he's the John Kerry of software? - Authored by: Franki on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 02:48 PM EDT
- Relook at the date...October, *2003* - Authored by: SteveS on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 03:57 PM EDT
- Fosseldal/Brown - Likely SEC violation - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 08:28 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:08 AM EDT |
from an English major. Where did Mr. Fossedal get his investment acumen? From
AdTI? His advice, I'm sure, is great for Ken Brown and himself, but not for his
'clients'. BTW the blurb said that they (clients) 'held positions long and
SHORT'. I wonder if he is giving them the same advice as those not paying for
it. *Sounds like a SCO ploy* I believe he should have stayed with English -
his work was voted with 'honors' by the Dartmouth faculty. Ken Brown and
Gregory Fossedal, what a pair.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: DebianUser on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:18 AM EDT |
I seem to remember some investment banks getting in
trouble for insufficient distance to their brokerage advice
operations.
The distance between certain investment shills and
well-known astroturf/FUD manufacturers could stand a little
scrutiny, I would think. Yet again, maybe it is just standard
operating procedure in that arena, and my surprise is misplaced. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:25 AM EDT |
Well, I still see SCO lawyers dealing with hemorrhoids -- treating
them without admitting they have them. They have to figure out
a strategy that (a) doesn't abandon their client and (b) keeps
themselves from being sanctioned.
On the other hand, Fossedal doesn't have to worry about the truth.
We've seen since SCO file suit, and from notable other companies
as well, that the truth is not a valued commodity in the corporate
world.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Dan M on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:33 AM EDT |
There was an article and discussion, back in November, here:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031128151001514
about SCOs UNIX timeline chart, and its' self-serving rewrite of history, that a
Mr Puffer was using as the basis of, with reference to Mr Levenezs' chart, the
Groklaw Timeline project.
The SCO chart appears to be here in toto.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: MikeA on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:38 AM EDT |
I don't think they issued enough press releases this morning to properly bury
Friday afternoon's little discrepancy.
Volume of 96,000+ shares so far this morning.
---
Change is merely the opportunity for improvement.....
but I can't think of a better signature yet.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Lev on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:40 AM EDT |
And just to show you that it's a small world after all, up pops
another AdTI guy, urging us all to buy SCO stock, using Ken Brown's language
about "hybrid source" and how open sourcers are a bunch of haters of the Most
Holy IP.
Ken Brown somewhere mentioned that "hybrid source" was a
term coined by Gregory Fossedal, so it's the other way around.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Jude on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:42 AM EDT |
...of this little notatation down in the lower left corner:
"Original UNIX history chart created by Eric Levenez. Copyright ©
1996-2003, Eric Levenez. January 2, 2003. Used with permission."
IANAL, but perhaps SCO decided they were asking for trouble by claiming their
bastardized version was Eric's work.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Thomas Frayne on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:44 AM EDT |
Yesterday, in a letter to the editor, I responded in detail to the paragraph you
quoted that was in the Bottom Line article.
I argued against about five errors I found in the paragraph. I even objected to
the term "SCO", which should be "SCOG".
I gave permission to publish, with my name, address, and telephone, but I don't
have much hope. However, if they do it again, I'll try to get one of UPI's
competitors to document UPI's failure to correct errors in its articles.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: red floyd on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:57 AM EDT |
The Ministry of Truth has been moved to Lindon UT.
Thank goodness for the Wayback Machine.
---
The only reason we retain the rights we have is because people *JUST LIKE US*
died to preserve those rights.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: wvhillbilly on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:58 AM EDT |
Are you sure this is the original, unaltered Levenez chart? It appears to show
Minix coming from UNIX time share and Linux coming from Minix, just like the SCO
chart from Wayback, only without the fancy formatting of the latter.
---
What goes around comes around, and it grows as it goes.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: John M. Horn on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:01 PM EDT |
PJ wrote:
"Now I know nothing about stocks, so I never give advice about that. But I
do wonder about that old chicken and egg thing. For example, we have SCO
alleging that there is a connection between UNIX and Linux via Minix. We have a
"think tank" alleging in Ken Brown's book, Samizdat, that Linus may
have copied from Minix. We have a chart on SCO's web site showing a purported
connection between UNIX, Minix and Linux. And now another member of the
"think tank", Fossedal, turns out to give stock tips, and the author
of Samizdat works there too, and Fossedal is pushing SCO stock and telling us
his "clients may (and usually do) hold long and short positions in many of
the investment securities and opportunities mentioned in his reports." Oh,
and Microsoft encouraged BayStar to invest in SCO, and they also have funded
AdTI. And now BayStar is fighting with SCO over SCOsource. And the chart has
disappeared."
Well, I think that Microsoft must be very, very careful about any
interactions they have with the SCO Group. In general, there are likely a
variety of interests within Microsoft that are interested in locating funding
for TSG in support of Microsoft's corporate agenda (and of course, in support of
Microsoft's fiduciary duty to their stockholders which likely, to Microsoft,
means the hobbling or elimination of FOSS).
By funding an Alexis De'Tocqueville Institute (sic?) program of FUD and
simultaneously having AdTI, through its various public faces, encourage
financial support of TSG by cheerleading and encouraging public investment in
TSG stock and other means of support, Microsoft's agenda will continue to be
served.
These entities know no other way to play ball. In their world I think, even
tolerating FOSS is virtually unacceptable and is an act of desperation and
absolute last resort.
IBM on the other hand, has been around much, much longer. IBM has the
accumulated wisdom of nearly a century of business acumen. IBM can tolerate
FOSS, even, to the utter revulsion of Microsoft, support and encourage FOSS
while learning how to make money in the computer industry of twenty first
century. Microsoft has much to learn from IBM and, I suspect, IBM will be
delighted to teach them a thing or two by recapturing some decisive level of
influence over the business operating systems market on Intel architectures.
My $0.02...
John Horn
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:07 PM EDT |
Article in the British weekly newsmagazine The Economist on
Unix.
Unix's
Founding Fathers
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:22 PM EDT |
When I follow the link to the archived version of SCO's creative version of the
timeline, the portion that would show the 'birth' of linux (page 3) is missing?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: rand on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:25 PM EDT |
SW_Bobcat over at Yahoo/SCOX
found the missing chart in Darl's own litle corner of caldera.com...of course,
it's locked out now.
I checked at least shallowly, and Darl's copy looks
identical to the Wayback aka SCOG's original timeline.
--- carpe
ductum -- "Grab the tape" (IANAL and so forth and so on) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: tintak on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:28 PM EDT |
SCOG
timeline
--- Darl's folly.
"Somebody said it couldn't be done, and he knew it. So he tackled this thing
that couldn't be done,... and he found that he couldn't do it!" [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:52 PM EDT |
I think the simple answer is that he used to own SCO stock, and he still owns
SCO stock. Hence the attempt to rise it.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- simple answer - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 12:59 PM EDT
- simple answer - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 27 2004 @ 10:45 AM EDT
|
Authored by: jog on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 01:16 PM EDT |
not here [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: tz on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 01:18 PM EDT |
to get people to not believe in conspiracy theories?
Here they aren't even competent. The FUD backfires. The lawsuits aren't even
well crafted not to diss a judge by their very structure. They can't seem to
get a straight story their investors, and now their stock is heading for the
pink sheets. Now documents are disappearing from websites (and I wonder if the
same shredding team Arthur Andersen hired has found a new client).
Don't worry about big brother. Little Sister is watching. Along with tens of
thousands of other eyeballs.
I wonder if Bill Gates thought he could create a real conspiracy. Maybe he
tried, but if he did it has the same quality as Windows.
This wouldn't even make good fiction - you have to have a believable bad guy,
one with some intelligence and a clue.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: frk3 on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 01:21 PM EDT |
The cock roaches of FUD scurry away and hide when the light of truth is shown
upon them.
Additionally, it seems to me, and I could be wrong, that the
connection of Mr. Brown and Mr. Fossedal to the investment companies and the
activities of, at least, Mr. Brown at AdTI, would seem to be quite a conflict
of interest (minimally) when it comes to the utterances regarding open source
and recommendations to purchase (or otherwise invest in) TSG. Seems to me this
is something the SEC should be interested in.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 01:27 PM EDT |
Darl Was featured on the front page of Fortune, May 17th.
SCO's genius CEO was draped in a long printout of that Unix timeline, an d the
feature article was named "Corporate Enemy #1.
http://www.fortune.com/fortune/technology/articles/0,15114,632036,00.html
I think you need the paper version to get the picture[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 01:33 PM EDT |
SCOX is cratering. As of about 1 pm est, they are at a new 52 week low, and are
dangerously close to breaking below $4. Somone on the yahoo boards
commented that there hasn't been a trade in SCOX for an hour, and was inquiring
into whether trading was halted. Someone else posted a link to a real-time
trade on ECN that shows the new 52 week low.
Is there something
happening in a court room with fiaSCO right now? Other than the double whammy of
the Daimler case being thrown out and the fiaSCO of we settled with Bayster, no
you didn't, yes we did?
With all the short interest, I can't believe
there isn't short covering at this new low. That shows (imho, and my
unprofessional opinion) that the shorts are a very large majority of
institutional holders who can afford to risk missing a close out of their
position, and can afford to lose some serious money if there is a court opinion
in the short term that rockets fiaSCO up.
Institutional short holders
can afford to take some real serious beatings on some positions because they
simply roll it over into another stock, and it evens out later on. Small time
traders (and in this case I'm including traders with a net worth in millions)
are the ones that can't afford unlimited upside risk, and are the first ones to
close short positions. This isn't happening at a price level where it should be
happening.
This beats anything hollyweed can dish out.
As a
side note, I took a look at the yahoo site on fiaSCO to check on news on them.
One news item was a release by fiaSCO that they have released a new version of
their server software. Two observations. It increases usability by relying on
Java, Postgres, Mozilla, and other FOSS applications. I hope Postgres evaluates
carefully whether to support this company or not. I'd like to see them come out
with an announcement that they won't provide support to fiaSCO users. The other
FOSS projects should do the same. fiaSCO is trying to kill FOSS, by killing the
GPL. Even though Postgres, and some of the other FOSS apps don't use the GPL as
a license, they still have a lot to lose if fiaSCO succeeds, and the longer
fiaSCO stays alive, the longer Microsoft gains market share, and Sun continues
to stay viable and push Solaris and give away "Java Desktop" for a hoped for
later conversion back to Solaris.
It's time for the FOSS community to
band together and drive a stake through the heart of this litigation entity
masquerading as an OS company. This is in the hands of the FOSS projects now,
and they must individually decide to drop all support of fiaSCO users, or
continue to support a company that is trying to put them out of business. Wake
up Postgres team. Wake up Mozilla team. Wake up Bind team. Wake up Squid
team. Wake up Perl team. Wake up OpenSSH team.
And wake up to the
government workers and the military who are using fiaSCO software in critical
systems. There already is pressure from fiaSCO backers to drop everything and
go 100% litigation. Don't be fooled. fiaSCO knows if their only salvation is
the lawsuits. Continuing development is just a front to make them the
beleagered little guy against the goliath to the jury in a Utah court room.
That's it. They are otherwise a broken shell of a company. Microsoft has tens
of thousands of developers. GNU/Linux has hundreds of thousands. IBM, HP,
Fujitsu, and the other big players also have tens of thousands. There's no way
fiaSCO can compete on this level. McDonalds? McDonalds in Europe is moving to
GNU/Linux. Hopefully McD's in the US is doing the same. The writing is on the
wall. Hopefully government workers aren't squandering money on
fiaSCO.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 01:46 PM EDT |
That's what I get when I see the first page:
http://www.sco.com/scosource/
With the green tree and the text saying "protection". The text saying
"ACTIONS TO ***PROTECT*** SCO IP" ...
the link saying "purchase license"
it smells rotten, all of it. I was kind of "satisfied" (satiated?)
with the recent boom of good news, but this page is enough to make your blood
boil again...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 02:16 PM EDT |
Fossedal's and Brown's fund manager Daniel Mahony left NYC in disgrace
after he got caught in a voter fraud in the middle of running for Lt. Gov. on
the Conservative ticket.
EVERYONE must read the NY DA press release on the indictment of Daniel
Mahony. The report of the parking ticket scam is *priceless* political theatre.
http://www.manhattanda.org/whatsnew/press/2002-10-22.htm
Daniel Mahony aka Daniel F. Mahoney, Dan Mahony, Jr.
Born 7/9/55
Dartmouth class '77
Director of a conservative alumni association with Gregory Fossedal,
"Ernest
Martin Hopkins Institute"
Y199x's--Unsuccessful conservative candidate NY City
Y2000--Advisor to conservative Jersey City mayor Brent Schundler
Y2001--Managing Principal in "Lexington Research Partners,"a NYC
investment firm.
Author of a much reprinted op-ed on 9/11 and Concealed Weapons.
Y2002-- Selected by Republican dirty tricks operative Roger Stone to run as
NY lieutenant governor on the conservative ticket. Internal scandal due to
name similar (Mahoney) as the Conservative party founder.
August 2002--Disgraced when double voting revealed, withdraws from race,
"moves to Southport, Connecticut"
September 2002 to 2004 continued failure to repay $500K campaign loan
from millionaire Conservative candidate Tom Golisano. Political gossip sheets
discribe the loan as hush money to get disgraced Mahony off the ticket.
Oct 22, 2002--Indicted for vote fraud, NYC.
June 30, 2003--Mahony pleads guilty two misdemeanor vote charges,
sentenced to 150 hours community service, and fined $1,500.
2004-- A certain Daniel Mahony newly listed as Chairman of EMG Fund
Management, at DCFund.net
+++++++
Sources
Campaign LOANS: http://tinyurl.com/yrz4h
INDICTMENT: www.manhattanda.org/whatsnew/press/2002-10-22.htm
PHOTO, Lexington: www.dawneden.com/2002_04_01_archive.html (other
pages in blog too)
LG Race: politicswny.com/readNews.asp?ID=78
GUNCONTROL: www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/mahony1.html
www.timesunion.com/aspstories/storyprint.asp?storyID=66795
www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0ICQ/2002_June_3/90389808/p1/
article.jhtml
http://www.rochester-citynews.com/gbase/Gyrosite/Content?
oid=oid%3A1437
ALUMNI: ww.angelfire.com/nh/emhi/meetus.html
http://www.rochester-citynews.com/gbase/Gyrosite/Content?
oid=oid%3A1437 [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 02:18 PM EDT |
http://www.mentalhygiene.com/kernelnotes.html
Kernel Notes:
comments and notes by Linus Torvalds included in the Linux Kernel
(version 0.01)
from errno.h:
/*
* ok, as I hadn't got any other source of information about
* possible error numbers, I was forced to use the same numbers
* as minix.
* Hopefully these are posix or something. I wouldn't know (and posix
* isn't telling me - they want $$$ for their f***ing standard).
*
* We don't use the _SIGN cludge of minix, so kernel returns must
* see to the sign by themselves.
*
* NOTE! Remember to change strerror() if you change this file!
*/
Linus sounds stressed when writing this and reverts to his native Swedish in one
place.
Hardly sounds like copying does it. If the numbers are from Minix then the rest
of the code is not likely to be copied from yet another version. The comments
must surely be original.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: earthforce_1 on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 02:45 PM EDT |
My suspicion, is that someobody was offended enough by SCOGs use of the doctored
chart, that they had their lawyer send them a nastygram threatening action.
Either that, or their own laywers clued in enough to realize that since the
alteration did not pass unnoticed, it could and would be used against them by
IBM or (most likely) Novell.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 04:20 PM EDT |
UPI's credibility went into the toilet when the Unification Church bought it out
of bankruptcy. Now they still carry news reporting, interspersed with right-
wing vitriol - and from what I can see the ADtI is one of the producers of
such.
Which is probably why UPI would carry that article in the first place...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 04:28 PM EDT |
Just somebody fixing an error? Hmm. SCO execs claim past execs weren't
diligent about protecting IP and facts; are we to believe they do better now?
Does Stowell run the web site? Isn't he (and execs) responsible for glaring
false version (pay somebody to modify it, and give info to Adti)? Isn't the
site in same offices as Tibits / Yarrow / McBride? Ie attorneys and execs know
about this fraud?
This is probably incomplete but looks like:
1) Evidence tampering: they quote material similar to in the (tampered) chart in
the court case. By proximity, the execs *knew* or should have known the
"evidence" was false and *by their own hand* at that.
2) Fraud: probably BayStar agrees. Perhaps no more to say. Now SCO getting
sued, the evidence needs to disappear more than need it for the IBM case - Adti
can be used for that.
3) Stock Manipulation? Analysts hide connections to a company paid to produce a
known false "report" (Samizdat) with stock implications? Brown /
Fossedal maybe linked in more ways than one! A weak "disclaimer"
doesn't pass muster IMHO; payment to Brown for Samizdat and connection to SCO
execs during creation of (purposely false?) report probably as a work for hire,
imply more than just holding stock in companies they talk about - it seems a
direct connection and conflict. Or are Brown / Fossedal going to be the SEC
fall-guys in this, to protect Gates?
4) Perjury? Did the 56(f) motion include the references? Isn't 56(f) by an
attorney required to check facts or have personal knowledge of them? How do
they get past it: either they knew the material on the website and the fact it
is questionable or false (thus at least as "incompetent" as their
predecessors), or they misrepresented contents and implications as *fact* in a
SWORN court filing. Either way (known false, or unchecked "facts"),
isn't it perjury?
5) Copyright violation? The tampered-with web page claims it is used "with
permission" of the author. Does that seem plausible given the emphatic
denial and correction the true author was forced to publish to correct SCO? Did
SCO tell him they were going to seriously modify (and maybe use as
"evidence") the original work? Is that "fair use" under
copyright, or will somebody at SCO just try to claim it was "parody"
of the original?
This just keeps getting filthier and stinkier. What does it take to be a SCO
employee a complete lack of ethics? Total stupidity? A penchant for payoffs?
The guys appear to be playing the judge for a fool. (Or, based on his recent
acts or lack of, maybe they just think he's overqualified for that role?). Is
it "justice"? Hope he doesn't - but doesn't pull a Judge Jackson
either.
Meanwhile, the SEC sleeps away, FBI doesn't check possible violations of
Computer Crime laws, Postmaster doesn't check possible mail or wire fraud,
judges delay action, Senators meddle, analysts and attorneys probably lie - all
with a possibly church connection behind the scenes.
Slimy, very slimy.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: blacklight on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 05:10 PM EDT |
"And 'Bottom Line' still likes SCO Group, despite the lumps the position
has taken in recent months. SCO is the one proprietary software company that is
gamely challenging the hybrid-source, hardware-maker-led termite attack on
intellectual property by suing IBM. Its chief counsel is sharp, tough, and has
won nine-figure awards from Microsoft and others in the past; bet on IBM to
settle, if it's smart, and lose a 10-figure judgement if it goes to a jury. . .
." Greg Fossedal
Let's see YOU back up this investment advice of yours with YOUR own cash,
Greg!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 07:33 PM EDT |
Came across some great from SCO CEOs past and present. In 1999 ex-CEO Doug
Michels, in an interview with ComputerWorld said, "The last thing [major
companies] want is some kid from Norway to sue for $100 million for
misappropriation of intellectual property."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/04/27/sco_boss_blows_stack_over/
In 2002, new CEO Darl McBride in an interview with DesktopLinux.com says:
"DL: Do you remember how you first heard of Linux?
McBride: When I was at Novell, Ransom Love had a team working on it. So I
eventually hooked them up with Ray Noorda (founder and former CEO of Novell, now
Canopy Group). I was running our NetWare Embedded Technology Group. I heard
about Linux and Mosaic at the same time. The thing that captured me more at the
time was the browser, to be honest, because I'd never seen one before. What
impressed me about Linux was Open Source.
DL: Did you understand Open Source at that time, or did the concept come later?
McBride: I did understand it because I was pretty close to Ray when we did the
acquisition of USL (Unix Systems Lab) in 1993. It wasn't a new notion, but they
way they were approaching it was unique."
also
"DL: When you leave SCO, what's it going to look like? What's your vision?
McBride: Part of the reason we went back to SCO is that I looked in
BusinessWeek. They had an article on the top 100 brands, and my vision is that
in a few years, we'll be one of those top 100 branded companies. ... So how did
Intel become one of the top brands in the world? They got there through a lot of
marketing and branding. So we have to move out of being a technology-only
company."
http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT3224314245.html
Out of technology and into litigation. Is being in the top 100 most-maligned
companies the same as being in the top 100 branded?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Hilarious Quotes - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, July 27 2004 @ 12:38 AM EDT
|
Authored by: acebone on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 08:06 PM EDT |
Read about the Alexis de Tocqueville
Institution on wikipedia.org [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 10:56 PM EDT |
From UPI's "article":
"... such as Sco Group, the Unix operating system provider that is a major
competitor to and antagonist of the open-source movement."
Antagonist I agree with. "major competitor" though, that's just
laughable. Linux has outsold SCO's products for at least the last half decade.
That's SALES, i.e. not including open downloads like Debian, Gentoo, and Fedora.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: inode_buddha on Monday, July 26 2004 @ 11:39 PM EDT |
Re-posted from an earlier comment of mine More financial digging here (finance.yahoo.com), here (sec.gov), here (Pearson tearsheet from Forbes), and here
(contracts.onecle.com).
The behaviors that I noticed overall include how many
people's names are in
common to all companies, and how often they seem to sit on
both sides of the
bargaining table. Some of the dates are interesting too, IMHO
especially with
the MTI and Altiris deals. And let's not forget Vultus. Does
anybody see a
pattern here? Note also that Angel Partners seems to have bailed out in 2002. An
important date, when Darl was hired IIRC. --- "When we speak of free
software, we are referring to freedom, not price." -- Richard M. Stallman [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|