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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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
SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 07:10 AM EDT

Remember bullies in school? My memory from seventh grade is that they'd torment you with a gleam in their eye until something threatened them, upon which they'd suggest shaking hands and stopping. Maybe the teacher got wise, or a bigger kid took your side, and suddenly the bully wanted to let bygones be bygones. My super logical brain always found that suggestion insulting, because why would I want to stop just as *they* were about to get *theirs*?

I have always found bullies oddly funny, although decidely not fun, both in swagger mode and in their fear, but their behavior, when they are worried they might suffer a little teeny bit themselves, is the hilarious part. Bullies, I always found, have a low pain threshold themselves, despite nonchalantly dishing out pain to others. So when the pendulum swings, and it always does sooner or later, I find their worried backing away strangely comical.

Thus the news coverage from SCOforum of the current state of mind of The SCO Group made me smile. It seems SCO would like to muffle all that litigation talk. It's hurting business, don't you know. So now that the rape-and-pillage-litigation business model looks to be falling flat on its face, they'd like to drop the talk of litigation, and its consequences, and talk about business, actual tech business, instead. You know. Like having customers for actual products someone might want to actually buy and stuff.

What does that tell me? That maybe they have no confidence their litigation has a chance of succeeding, they see water flooding into their ship, and so they are scurrying about with Plan B, in hopes of staying afloat? That they think we are stupid?

How's this for a headline: "SCO CEO: Even if court bids fail, we will survive," by IDG's China Martens. Sounds like bully flop sweat to me. Has SCO ever before admitted losing could happen? If so, I must have been dozing off. What I remember McBride telling us was that it was win or go out of business and that they'd win. Um...now that I think of it, doesn't the latest quarterly mention going out of business as a real possibility if it loses against IBM? So... which is it? I can't keep up. Personally, I tend to believe they tell the truth more so to the SEC, because of the jail time and all if they don't.

Here's why they say they can survive, because "SCO's Unix business is profitable and the company is due to shed its heavy financial burden from legal fees come January 2006." The legal cap is going to keep them in business. And I'm so sure their legal help will be simply outstanding once the law firms are no longer being paid. (Look for Darl McBride's brother to shoulder a heavier load.) I suspect this new message isn't because they suddenly got nice. I think they are trying to reassure their existing customers that they will still be around:

"When we started this and people asked me that question ['What happens if you don't win in court?'] I said, 'As a company, we're screwed,'" Darl McBride, SCO CEO and president said in an interview Friday. "Today, I don't believe that to be the case. We've got a cap on our legal expenses and our Unix business is profitable. If you put that together, you've got long-term sustainability."
Long-term. Let's define our terms. Does "long" mean to the end of time? For a decade? Five years? Or just until IBM and/or Novell and/or Red Hat bleed them dry when they prevail in the litigation and collect damages? That's an appropriate legal term, don't you think? Damages? After all the damage SCO caused? If SCO loses and has to pay all their intended victims damages, will SCO still be in business? Just asking.

That article also gives me the impression that so few were expected to show up this year in Las Vegas, they decided to have many mini-forums, to camoflage the low numbers. They tell it the opposite way, of course. The article puts it this way:
SCO is trying something a little different with the Forum this year, according to McBride. "We're not trying to drive everyone to Vegas," he said. Instead, SCO will take the reseller event on the road as what it calls "geoforums," making stops in Europe, Asia-Pacific and South America after the U.S. event. McBride expects the Las Vegas Forum to likely attract 300-plus attendees, he said.
There was indeed a smaller attendance than last year or the year before, according to Robert Dutt's report:
The show is much smaller affair than the last two because the company says it is making this Forum primarily a North American event, although vice president Jeff Hunsaker did note that 20 countries are represented here, "although in smaller numbers."
Yeah. Right. I remember the newsletter offering free software and a free room if we'd just please go to Las Vegas. Well, maybe not me, personally, but the rest of you would have been welcome. McBride insists SCO isn't anti-Open Source, by the way. His Open Letter yesterday trash talking Linux must have been a mirage in the Nevada desert, then. He clarifies:
"The roots of SCO are tied into open source," McBride said. "My position is very clear, we're not anti open source, We’re just against someone taking our products and putting them into open source [software] without our permission."

How do McBride and SCO deal with the odium the litigation has generated within the open-source community? "I’ve become very hardened," he said. "At one level, you have to be tough enough to take a lot of verbal shots." He speculates that the goodwill OpenServer 6 is generating in the market might eventually rub off on SCO itself. "It would be nice," he said.

Ah. A wistful bully. Is there anything sweeter? Of course, it would be difficult to be anti-Open Source, when your company depends on it so heavily, something SCO's Erik Hughes tries to justify:
Despite the company's public objection to open source operating systems, Erik Hughes, the company's senior director of product management and strategic alliances addressed the company's controversial inclusion of many open source applications with its operating systems. Indeed, the company somewhat paradoxically includes "hundreds, if not thousands" of open source applications with its operating systems, including Web browsers, database software and graphical environments. But Hughes said there's a difference in the way SCO offers those applications, and the way most Linux vendors offer those applications.

"The important thing is that we support it, we stand behind and we will take a call and deliver fixes where they are needed," Hughes said. "We stand behind it as a complete offering, from the kernel, all the way up to the app server and database server. Our open source strategy shouldn't be a surprise to anybody."

And that is different from Red Hat or Novell how? IBM doesn't offer support? Who are these people talking to? Who is listening? McBride in his Open Letter made it sound like using Linux is like paddling your own canoe upstream, with no reliable support. Remember McBride comparing Linux to volunteer firemen -- sometimes they aren't there? Since when is Red Hat or Novell or IBM, for crying out loud, not there? Are the SCO guys stupid, or do they just think the rest of us are?

Remember that name, Erik Hughes, by the way. We have excerpts from his deposition. It's a job pulling it all together from the paper exhibits, but hopefully soon you'll get to read it.

Jeff Hunsaker shows up, and he is honest enough to admit that the lawsuits hurt them as a tech company:

General manager Jeff Hunsaker of SCO's Unix division acknowledged however that sales have been hurt by the lawsuits. "We can't mix innovation with litigation. The noise that has arisen because of us suing IBM over this issue has been damaging to our core business," Hunsaker told vnunet.com."

Mr. McBride would like some of Windows' business, as he says in this Vnunet interview, and he goes on to suggest a solution instead of litigation:

McBride: We've got a good part of the solution [with SCO's OpenServer 6.0]. But it appears that we are going through this big death match for another few years now. I believe that the people we are competing against – even though they put out press releases to the contrary -- know that we have intellectual property problems. They are trying to mask those problems with massive PR campaigns. We are ready to go fight it out, but there probably are other ways to go at this.

Question: What do you mean?

McBride: In terms of the problems we have vis-à-vis Linux, if the other side would sit down and recognise what these problems are instead of just gloss over them, we would come to a resolution much quicker.

Question: What would such a resolution look like?

McBride: We think we have been damaged pretty severely with respect to our intellectual property. One opportunity is for the people who are out there pushing Linux to sit down and work with us, see how we can get a resolution.

Short of that, we are set to go to the full conclusion. The case is not winding down, it is gearing up. In the mean time we are focused on enhancing and developing the next generation of Unix.

That's clearly a message to IBM/Novell to do a deal, to pay SCO something to make it all stop. But why should they, when they are winning? I have a suggestion. If you would like Linux to recognize a problem, how about showing Linux folks the allegedly infringing code? No? Well, just show it to a judge then, any judge. 1

And as for massive PR campaigns, when was the last time you heard IBM quoted at all about the litigation? The only massive PR campaign I recall is the SCO PR machine. Remember Mr. McBride bringing his scrapbooks of news clippings proudly onstage at the first SCOforum after the IBM lawsuit was filed?

That article is titled "SCO softens its tone". Nah. I remember him talking exactly like that many times before, particularly in the early days. Just give him some money, honey, and he'll go away quietly. Otherwise, it's litigation up your kazoo. Nothing changed there. The usual bully routine.

McBride claims something has changed, in this ComputerWorld article by Todd R. Weiss, "SCO Forum 2005: CEO pledges to focus on innovation":

Even as detractors continue to label SCO as dead in the IT waters because of its two-year-old legal attacks on alleged Unix code infringement inside Linux, CEO and President Darl McBride pumped up his company's core resellers with the message that SCO will prevail.

"There's a lot of folks out there trying to say that SCO's claims are not even alive," McBride told a crowd of several hundred here in the convention center at the MGM Grand Hotel. "Until we get into the courtroom, you're going to continue to see the spread of FUD [fear, uncertainty and doubt] about SCO's legal case and our viability as a company." . . .

But with those legal fees now capped in a deal with its attorneys, SCO's financial picture is brightening, McBride said. "This is a sustainable model at this point," he said. . . . "We do look forward to having our claims heard in that case."

There's a photograph of McBride, by the way, in the Todd Weiss article, and he looks like he's put on quite a bit of weight. I eat when I am stressed too. Another interesting tidbit from that Infoworld article is that SCO hasn't yet done the deposition of IBM Chairman and CEO Sam Palmisano. And there is some very funny McBride baseball bluster talk in response to the Novell counterclaims, with McBride saying Novell is "swinging wildly." More like aiming darts at SCO's eyeballs. Dan Kusnetsky is quoted in the article too, saying that customers rarely mention SCO any more. They are "slipping off the radar."

Eben Moglen was asked to comment, also, and he told Martens:

They ruined a company that had a business and customers that cared. It was a vulgar and selfish thing that has no basis in law and no basis in fact. It's clear to everyone that the whole thing's a sham and a failure."
The last point I noticed is that, according to Darl, their engineers are supportive of their litigation. On page two of the Vnunet interview, McBride says this:
When we pulled back from the war of words, it was hard and it still is hard some days. Even today some of our key engineers look at us and say: "That is ridiculous, false, why are we not fighting this?"
Next time I hear that a SCO engineer is having a hard time looking for a job, I'll feel less compassion, then. As for SCO pulling back from a war of words, I beg to differ. What they did, from my perspective, is outsource most of it to journalists and other SCO-friendly passersby.

Speaking of engineers, Sandy Gupta has been promoted again, according to a new 8K:

On August 8, 2005, the Company promoted Sandeep Gupta to the position of chief technology officer. Mr. Gupta will receive an annual salary of $140,000. Mr. Gupta will continue to be eligible to participate in the Company's 2005 employee incentive bonus program for a maximum target bonus of up to 40% of his base salary, and he may receive an additional bonus for specific product deliverables in addition to the bonus he receives pursuant to the employee incentive bonus program.

The Company also intends to enter into, with Mr. Negris and Mr. Gupta, the Company's standard form of indemnification agreement for executive officers and directors, the form of which has previously been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 18, 2005, as Exhibit 10.36 to the Company's Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Form S-3 on Form S-1.

Heaven knows what he may say at trial, remembering his discredited declaration, but whatever he says, he's indemnified now.

As a pitiful coda, McBride, asked about SCO's customers' reactions to the litigation, said this:

"Generally speaking, our customers are very loyal, some even wish us good luck . . ."
"Some" even wish them good luck. Only "some" of their own customers, folks. They need some luck. That is for sure, because now that the pendulum has swung, none of SCO's victims is likely to stop, now that it's SCO's turn to -- finally -- get theirs.


1Groklaw's ine left the following comment, and it's so funny, I wanted to add it here, so you don't miss it. He answers McBride's call to sit down, recognize the problem, and resolve it:

Dear Mr McBride.

We are sitting down.

We have recognised the problem.

It's you.

Signed: the other side.

PS: still awaiting evidence for your claims ... any evidence, with "specificity" (ask your lawyer to explain that word to you).

PPS: Oh, and bring along the proof of ownership of Unix copyrights, while you are at it.

PPPS: Novell sends their regards and asks if you could bring along any outstanding Unix licence fees, in "full" (your lawyer can probably explain that word to you as well).

Looking forward to the meeting so we can "come to a resolution much quicker".


  


SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject | 276 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
OT here please
Authored by: jplatt39 on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 07:20 AM EDT
You know the drill. Use the preview button liberally, please.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections here please
Authored by: jplatt39 on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 07:22 AM EDT
if any.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 07:33 AM EDT
Well said. Indeed very well said.

The are retreating to that dark corner where they hope they won't be noticed.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I wonder IF Novell
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 07:44 AM EDT
I onder if Novell can pull their franchise from SCO for their non performance.
The FUD from that would really be interesting........

;-)

[ Reply to This | # ]

How SCO might survive
Authored by: dyfet on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 07:45 AM EDT
I imagine if they replace their entire executive team, and the new management are active in investigating wrong doing and providing state evidence for possible criminal actions, and persue civil proceedings, against the current management and Bois, it could become possible to find some form of settlement with IBM, RedHat, and Novell, that would fall short of materially harming SCO's ability to actually continue in business.

Given such a change in management, I suppose I could imagine such a settlement confirming SCO does not have Unix copyrights, perhaps even "returning" Unixware back to Novell, probably acknowledging the public nature of Unix and perhaps even finally fully "freeing" unix itself. Certainly it would be used to settle any and all potential issues over the free posix's now and forever. Perhaps it would only involve legal expenses incurred up to that point. Perhaps, especially I think depending on how dilligent the new management would be in persuing the current ones.

What form such a Darl and Yarro-free SCO might take is hard to say. They have already driven many of their best people away. Perhaps it would become the "free unix" company?! Perhaps it would become another miscellaneous "Microsoft Enterprise Partner". Who knows, nor do I care. What I do believe is that the conditions for any settlement/end of litigation that involves SCO continuing business in any form does not exist under their present management.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 07:51 AM EDT
McBride finally tells the truth:

"Some of our customers wish us good luck."

Preceeded by saying we will not be renewing our license for SCO OpenUnix nor our
ScoSuit I mean ScoSource license.

Followed by "Have a nice day." or "Have a nice life."

[ Reply to This | # ]

If the Other Side Would Sit Down
Authored by: tuxi on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 07:57 AM EDT
ROFLOL
Question: What do you mean?

McBride: In terms of the problems we have vis-à-vis Linux, if the other side would sit down and recognise what these problems are instead of just gloss over them, we would come to a resolution much quicker.
If the other side would sit down? We're still waiting on specificity of any claims. And BTW what claims of SCOX's are legitimate??

---
tuxi

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 07:58 AM EDT
Isn't this just rich? lol

BTW:

Does SCO's current talk of making a go at their UNIX business means they'll be
ok to put the money they owe Novell into the trust Novell asked for? I mean, if
the Unix biz is doing so well, then complying and setting aside the money they
owe Novell should be easy, no?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: Kaemaril on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:00 AM EDT

"SCO's Unix business is profitable and the company is due to shed its heavy financial burden from legal fees come January 2006."

Just out of interest, but if Novell prevails what Unix business will they be left with? Surely Novell will use SCO's naughtiness to pull out of every agreement they possibly can, leaving SCO with ... um ... er ... well, what?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: snorpus on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:16 AM EDT
It seems to me that SCO's only chance of resurrecting their Unix business would be to spin it off as a separate corporation, leaving Caldera/SCO as a litigation holding company.

At this point, I doubt even that would work, but it might have a chance.

---
73/88 de KQ3T ---
Montani Semper Liberi
Comments Licensed: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: ine on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:25 AM EDT
Dear Mr McBride.

We are sitting down.

We have recognised the problem.

It's you.

Signed: the other side.

PS: still awaiting evidence for your claims ... any evidence, with
"specificity" (ask your lawyer to explain that word to you).

PPS: Oh, and bring along the proof of ownership of Unix copyrights, while you
are at it.

PPPS: Novell sends their regards and asks if you could bring along any
outstanding Unix licence fees, in "full" (your lawyer can probably
explain that word to you as well).

Looking forward to the meeting so we can "come to a resolution much
quicker".

[ Reply to This | # ]

The long term
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:30 AM EDT
I've lots track of when SCO has to answer Novell's latest filing. Anyway, they
answer that, we get some discovery on the Sun and Microsoft contracts, the judge
rules that SCO has to give Novell all their assets (or the assets have to go in
a trust pending), SCO goes bankrupt, the creditors come to an amicable
agreement, the trustee goes along with it, the Unix business goes back to
Novell, criminal charges ensue ...

The long term could be measured in months. What have I missed?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:32 AM EDT
Might just be me, but I think hassling the guy about his
weight is a little unnecessary, even after the horrible
things they've said and done. No need to sink to their
level...



[ Reply to This | # ]

Good luck
Authored by: gibodean on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:35 AM EDT
I often wish people good luck.

For instance, at work today one of the other programmers wanted to try to do a
modification to some software that I knew wouldn't work. He said he was going
to do it anyway. I said "good luck".

My mate said he was going to ask his wife if he could go to a footy game instead
of going to her parent's place for lunch. I wished him "good luck".

Darl keeps using that phrase. I don't think it means what he thinks it means.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Another bully is about to succeed :-(
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:40 AM EDT
PJ, this article reminds me how pathetic this whole situation is.

If these litigations keep on and on, SCO gets to throw mud at Linux, the GPL and
what not. And this will get much more coverage in the press than the victories
of IBM, Novell, Redhat and co. When that happens, in the (distant) future.

Now if Novell manage to put a stop to all this and put SCO out of business, as
may be the case, then it feels like we lose anyway. What will History remember
of all this ? Because you can be sure that in the Press, the Big Bad companies
will have pullied the poor small SME out-of-business. And mud will have stuck on
them and on Linux and the GPL.

What we need is for IBM to get their case moving fast so they can reach a
jugement on key issues. What we need is a judge who cuts the crap and makes
things go forward. Otherwise SCO as a puppet will have succeeded. Interests
behind SCO will have succeeded. And we will have been framed...

PJ (and others), many have mentioned that these trials might implicate
personally some key actors within SCO (McBride, some key shareholders, etc.). It
would be very interested to know how realistic this is, and what it would take
to have those people behind the scene have personal responsibility in these
cases. Any chance McBride would be forced into paying back part of his salary to
SCO to cover damages asked by IBM ? What about Canopy as a company ? The Canopy
executives ?

Regards,

Stephane

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:43 AM EDT
"There's a photograph of McBride, by the way, in the Todd Weiss article,
and he looks like he's put on quite a bit of weight. I eat when I am stressed
too."


Yikes!

He use to look like a cocky jerk, now he looks like a tired Gary Busey. It
could just be an unflattering picture, but the bags under his eyes are suspect.

But he has reason to look bad. Not many people get the chance to create such a
fantastic blunder during their lives. The whole fiaSCO, I'm sure, was quite an
experience to live thru, especially for those on the inside. It's an experience
I'm sure most people would care to live without, but Darl, Chris (we haven't
forgotten you), and company have achieved to create a life experience most of us
will never get to know or to personally understand like they are.

Congradulations, and here is my recommendation for the Darwin Award.

[ Reply to This | # ]

FUD from the masses
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:49 AM EDT
"Until we get into the courtroom, you're going to continue to see the spread of FUD [fear, uncertainty and doubt] about SCO's legal case and our viability as a company."

I have to say this is priceless. Can you imagine the FUD that a Linux user, or IBM, or Novell could spread about this case?

"Watch out or we're going to show you just how much you don't owe SCO!"
"Warning: Use SCO software and you will still be able to use Linux if you want..."
"Install SCO software and you'll see just how much open source software you can use with it!"

I know that Darl baby didn't mean this but if you examine his statement carefully, you'll notice he didn't identify who would be spreading the FUD...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Doesn't the legal cap only cover the IBM case?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:52 AM EDT
If so, SCO will still have ongoing legal costs at least for the Novell case and
perhaps for Autozone and Red Hat as well.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Most SCO Engineers still deserve compassion
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:53 AM EDT
When we pulled back from the war of words, it was hard and it still is hard some days. Even today some of our key engineers look at us and say: "That is ridiculous, false, why are we not fighting this?"

Remember, these words are coming from Darl. It doesn't mean any SCO employee, key or otherwise, actually said this. No doubt there are some who feel that SCO's claims are valid, but I would wager you could count them on three fingers myself.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO hyperbole always makes me laugh
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:53 AM EDT
I used to be an SCO reseller. I qualified by taking a 50 question multiple
choice test on their web site. (To be fair, this was before Darl & Co.) As
a reward, I got free copies of OpenServer and UnixWare.

I did it because I had customers who ran OpenServer as a platform for
"vertical market" apps. One was a Hospice, another an auto parts
store. Open Server was a pain to work with, clunky and mostly outmoded.
Drivers for new hardware were hard to find, since most vendor's focus was
clearly on Windows. SCO's support, even back then, was minimal. I can't recall
ever getting fixes for any of the problems I opened with them. I just worked
around them. The marketing folks were very pleasant and helpful though.

I spoke to one of the application developers about the issues I was having with
OpenServer, and he was sympathetic. When I suggested Linux, he dismissed it. A
year or two later, I spoke to him again, and he told me he'd started looking at
moving his app to Linux.

All of my SCO customers have moved to either Linux or Windows now, and the SCO
boxes gather dust on my shelves. (I still have all of the license certificates
though, just in case anyone asks.) I suspect what will happen is that someone
will buy what's left of SCO after it's all over, and they and Novell will
release the UNIX core software under something like a BSD license. That will
end the matter once and for all, and everyone can get back to doing useful work.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: algorythm on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 08:57 AM EDT
"The roots of SCO are tied into open source," McBride said. "My position is very clear, we're not anti open source ..."
No, they're not anti open source, they're just
" ... firm in our belief that the unchecked spread of Open Source software, under the GPL, is a much more serious threat to our capitalist system than U.S. corporations realize."

Dear Congress: GPL threatens capitalism

[ Reply to This | # ]

Issues with "free".
Authored by: Jaywalk on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 09:02 AM EDT
"The important thing is that we support it, we stand behind and we will take a call and deliver fixes where they are needed," Hughes said. "We stand behind it as a complete offering, from the kernel, all the way up to the app server and database server. Our open source strategy shouldn't be a surprise to anybody."

This is SCO playing both sides of the fence. Linux vendors give away the software for free, but charge for support. SCO tries to have it both ways, first by referencing the supported version with the claims that Linux isn't free. Then they reference the free version when they say Linux isn't supported. I always wonder who buys this sort of marketing to the uninformed.

---
===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====

[ Reply to This | # ]

Is there ANY chance of criminal investigations?
Authored by: Reven on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 09:03 AM EDT
SCO might be on the verge of getting what it deserves, but I find that even that
cheery thought just isn't enough. In my mind the real perpatrator isn't SCO as
a company, it's the people holding the reins. I think that Mr. Mcbride et al
have done should be thoroughly criminal. I would like to know if there is any
chance of criminal investigations resulting from this? What potential foci
could there be for such investigations?

It's doubtful that Mr. Mcbride left any helpful "I know we don't own these
copyrights, but can we make it look like we do" emails around. All I can
think of myself is that once SCO has no hush money left to pay to those
employees that know that some of them might come forth. If it can be shown that
Microsoft did indeed pay SCO to slander Linux, could that potentially lead to
criminal investigations?

Anyone know enough about criminal law to cheer me up?


---
Ex Turbo Modestum

[ Reply to This | # ]

Shrinking SCOG - Fewer than 200 employees.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 09:04 AM EDT

McBride insisted that within SCO, the vast majority of its employees are focused on the company's technology, not its litigation. He estimates the company employs under 200 staff ..... from the Infoworld story

Brian S.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Where did all the friends of the bully go?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 09:13 AM EDT
After the Davidson email and the Novell counterclaims in tSCOg's Slander of title law suit where are all the usual culprits hiding? Haven't heard much from the following lately regarding tSCOg:
  • Rob Enderle - who gave the 2004 SCO Forum keynote address Free Software and the Idiots Who Buy It
  • Lauro DiDio - tell me more about why idemnification is important again please
  • Daniel Lyons - Forbes expert on the crunchie crowd
  • Ken Brown - from the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution claiming that Linus didn't write Linux
Looks like the last true friend of tSCOg still around is Maureen O'Gara who makes a big deal over tSCOg hiring Tim Negris and some secret project being worked on.

In a sick way I'm going to miss tSCOg and its friends when this is over. Will we ever find out what was in the Blepp's briefcase? What about that missing MIT spectral analysis deep dive?

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Didio - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 02:58 PM EDT
SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 09:15 AM EDT
All I can say is I hope Novell, IBM, and Redhat just eat them alive and spits
them out into the sewer to which Darl and company belong.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 09:19 AM EDT
Wouldn't be suprized if darl would do the following.

1 Get bullied away by Sontag.
2 Start a company that makes a "revolutionary" OS nobody has ever seen
before.
3 become CEO of some movie/animation company.
4 return to SCO and discontinue half it's products.
5 introduce Open Unix pinnapple/Grapefruit flavor.

Oww no, been done before by a true visionairy.

Retep Vosnul

PS. (ot)
what about that nutzwerk vs FFII mess !
Any thoughts ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Linux claim is back, I see.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 09:22 AM EDT
"We’re just against someone taking our products and putting them into open source [software] without our permission."

Didn't SCO say a while back that the whole lawsuit was just a contract issue with IBM? Are they going back to their original (false) claims about Linux and UNIX code? Ive lost track of it all, but is the IBM counterclaim to this (was it the 10th) still on the go?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sports innovation
Authored by: oneandoneis2 on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 09:23 AM EDT

"It's a little bit of a tennis match ... Novell's two strikes already on the last two attempts, now they seem to be swinging wildly."

That's where SCO is going to innovate next! They've invented a new sport! I can see it now:

"We now return you to the SCOtennis grand final. The score is 30-love, the bases are loaded, and. . . STRIKE!!!"

[ Reply to This | # ]

What's the value of an indemnity if SCO goes out of business?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 09:31 AM EDT

From my understanding of the law, Gupta is still liable as the party being sued
for everything he does. He may be able to sue SCO or join SCO as a third party
to the proceedings, but if SCO goes out out business and can't indemnify Gupta,
Gupta is still in for a world of hurt!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Good luck?
Authored by: ijramirez on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 09:56 AM EDT
Funny quote. So even some customers wish SCO good luck? Most people wish others
"good luck" when they are partying ways. I can picture IBM, Novell,
Red Hat, AZ and Chrysler telling SCO "Go ahead sue me .. good luck".
It sounds hillarious that he would say such a thing .. but oh well, it's Darl,
what can you expect? He has a history of quoting out of context. As one of my
history professors is college used to say used to say; "Context is
everything, it's all about context"

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Good luck? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 10:41 AM EDT
SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: Mecha on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 10:16 AM EDT
Darl McBride: "When you buy SCO Unix, you're ready to run. When you buy
Linux, get ready for high maintenance."

Excuse me?

1. When you buy Linux you get a pretty darn good support contract. Otherwise
you must support it yourself with the vast knowledge that has been posted in the
message boards.

2. I have dealt with a M$ VPN solution on ISA Server and a Linux VPN solution
running PopTop. Guess which one I had problems with and they both saw a fair
amount of use. As a matter of fact I only had one issue with POPTOP and that
was because of a PIX Configuration issue and not the Server. Other than that, I
basically only touched it to add/remove users. M$ I had to manually remove
sessions and reboot every once and a while. (this is similar to my experience
with IIS/Apache and SQL Server/MySQL servers as well). High maintenance
doesn't equal Linux but Windows.

I never used SCO Unix and am never going to when I know there is a cheaper and
better supported Linux solution out there.

---
************************************************************

I am not clever enough to write a good signature. So this will have to do.

*****************

[ Reply to This | # ]

300 in Las Vegas?
Authored by: Benanov on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 10:30 AM EDT
My company does trade shows. A lot of them are in Las Vegas.

Projected 300 in attendance is LAUGHABLE. When Darl can promise--and deliver
30,000...then I'll have respect.

But I doubt you can even find 3,000 customers who believe in SCO's litigation
program these days.



---
That popping sound you hear is just a paradigm shifting without a clutch.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Distributed modifications
Authored by: Dan M on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 10:39 AM EDT
"The important thing is that we support it, we stand behind and we will
take a call and deliver fixes where they are needed," Hughes said. "We
stand behind it as a complete offering, from the kernel, all the way up to the
app server and database server. Our open source strategy shouldn't be a surprise
to anybody."

Does this not mean that they are required to offer the source modifications to
any GPL'ed app that they modify and distribute?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Tim Negris
Authored by: geoff lane on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 11:01 AM EDT
Tim Negris has worked for Sybase, Oracle, IBM, Blyth Software, OMNIS Software, Raining Data Corp, Equinom and ioLogics.

(actually Blyth became OMNIS and then Raining Data)

ioLogics is an interesting company concidering the legal fights initiated by TSG. The company has a product called ioSentry which "is a transparent network software service that uses patent-pending technology to automate the protection and prosecution of patents, trade secrets, business and product plans, contracts and other confidential information in the form of documents, messages or web pages." You can read more in a SYS-CON report by Maureen O'Gara. ioSentry is a "hardened Linux software appliance."

Raining Data Corp was formed by the merger of OMNIS and PICK. Raining Data has business partnerships with both TSG and Redhat.

Bloor Research Ltd. calls Negris an "IT guru".

Equinom (which should be at www.equinom.com but isn't) seems to have been some kind of start up trying to develop the "Peer Services Data Model", creating closed source peer to peer software.

Maureen O'Gara claims in an article that "Tim Negris, the guy who coined the phrase "thin client" when he was a VP at Oracle."

Negris seems to have worked with the best, so why on earth is he working for the worst?

(It cannot possibly be a coincidence that O'Gara seems to have written about Negris in the past and Google finds three recent articles by her about the new job at TSG.)

---
I'm not a Windows user, consequently I'm not
afraid of receiving email from total strangers.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Massive PR Campaign?
Authored by: Observer on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 11:06 AM EDT
Methinks he is referring to Groklaw... ;-)

---
The Observer

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: blacklight on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 11:15 AM EDT
"Next time I hear that a SCO engineer is having a hard time looking for a
job, I'll feel less compassion, then" PJ

If the standard is whether Darl the Snarl tells the truth, then Darl the Snarl's
word is not worth the paper it is printed on. I suggest that we not rely
exclusively on the word of a proven liar like Darl the Snarl and show compassion
to those lower level SCOG engineers who are looking for another job - until the
facts show otherwise.

[ Reply to This | # ]

About volunteer firemen
Authored by: Ilssear on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 11:21 AM EDT

McBride shows, once again, his misunderstanding of human nature and volunteer activity with his unsupportable remarks about "volunteer firemen." Please take note of the chilean firemen department (completely dependant on volunteers) or this unit in the Czech Republic (in Czech, but shows how even in countries with professional firemen you can still have all-volunteer units.)

Moreover, even in the US, the first all volunteer firehouse was founded by Ben Franklin in Philly in 1736, and there were no professional firemen paid full-time until 1850. Nowadays, professionals and volunteers work side by side, and there is even an organization for volunteer firemen, the NVFC

For more facts on volunteer firefighters and how they are , in reality, the backbone and largest group of firefighters worldwide, please visit wikipedia's "firefighter" article (especially the information on specific countries and their mix of volunteers vs. full-time paid firemen.)

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: inode_buddha on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 11:21 AM EDT
Actually PJ, you're not the only one with memories like that. I used fists and
feet instead of litigation, however,

---
-inode_buddha
Copyright info in bio

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

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO engineers...?
Authored by: Groklaw Lurker on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 11:27 AM EDT
"...When we pulled back from the war of words, it was hard and it still is
hard some days. Even today some of our key engineers look at us and say:
"That is ridiculous, false, why are we not fighting this?..."

What engineers? I've been told that most of SCO's best and brightest engineers
left for greener pastures some time ago. They used to have a number of Phds on
their engineering staff in years past, now I'm told there are only a very few
left, if indeed, there are any at all. There are Internet sites dedicated to
ex-SCO employees where they console each other and try to provide whatever
assistance they can those in the greatest need.

These ex-SCO employees are NOT delighted with the direction their ex-employer
has taken. I have heard a couple of the ones I know refer to themselves as the
most 'hated' or most 'despised' engineers in the country. They are not grateful
for being unemployed and do not now and have never agreed with what SCO
management has chosen to do in court. They have never believed that there was
any significant SCO code in Linux, if there was even any SCO code at all in
Linux or any other FOSS package for that matter.

SCO has only a skeleton sized engineering staff left to field support calls that
require a look at their kernel sources or other software components. It is
barely enough to handle their support needs, much less enough to develop a new,
innovatively engineered operating system. In fact, it has been nearly a decade
since the release of OpenServer 5. It took SCO over nine (9) years to develop
and release OpenServer 6, while new versions of Linux have sometimes appeared in
less than a year, much less a decade.

SCO is history. Period. Soon, their name will be remembered only on the Wayback
Machine and in obscure footnotes in one of Dr. Salus's brilliant books on
computer industry and networking history.

Just my $0.02...


---
(GL) Groklaw Lurker
End the tyranny, abolish software patents.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Question about the Cap
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 11:50 AM EDT
I was wondering if the Legal Cap applied to all cases or only to the IBM case.
It
would appear that with the Novel response that the Legal expenses with the
Novell case will be getting a lot higher what with discovery, motions etc. If
the
Cap applies to both does this mean that SCO's legal representation in both cases

will deteriote. I do not believe these lawers will do much if the Cap is
exceeded.
Maybe PJ can do an article about possible ramifications etc.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: wvhillbilly on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 12:00 PM EDT
I believe that the people we are competing against – even though they put out press releases to the contrary -- know that we have intellectual property problems. [My bold]
Darn right Darl & company has IP problems--they don't own the copyrights they're claiming open source is infringing, have no proof of ownership, and no proof of any infringement.

Yes, I'd say SCOG does have IP problems, and it's their problem, not anybody else's.

Just my opinion.

---
What goes around comes around, and the longer it goes the bigger it grows.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Profits?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 12:07 PM EDT
Anybody know how SCO is accounting for non-payment of amounts due Novell? Does
listing liabilities to Novell as revenue overstate the profits just a bit? Is
this called "cooking the book?"

Inquiring minds want to know

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Profits? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 12:49 PM EDT
Darl fattening up...
Authored by: kawabago on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 12:15 PM EDT
Mmmmmmm, bully roast!

---
TTFN

[ Reply to This | # ]

I love it: "bully flop sweat"
Authored by: Totosplatz on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 12:19 PM EDT

I am actually amazed that Darl is perceptive enough to begin to realize that the jig is up and that it is his turn to sweat a little "bully flop sweat".

This whole drama is of the same basic stuff as the political scene these days. The world could use a lot of "bully flop sweat" from some of its many bullies.

---
All the best to one and all.

[ Reply to This | # ]

vnunet interview and Tommy Hilfiger
Authored by: jto on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 01:18 PM EDT

In the interview with Darl on vnunet he is quoted as saying:

There is a story in the Wall Street Journal today in which the CIO of Tommy Hillfiger said: "We are bailing out on Linux because of predictability problems and a lack of reliability." So they are going back to Windows. Those kinds of deals should be going to Unix on Intel.

In fact that is not (suprise) what the WSJ article said. The WSJ said (in relation to Tommy Hilfiger (sp):

"In a way, Linux is now perhaps turning the corner," says Eric Singleton, chief information officer at retailer Tommy Hilfiger Corp. His company had been running its Web shopping site, Tommy.com, on Linux -- but recently switched it to Microsoft software. He calls Linux "a great product," but adds, "it's got to get the final tier of reliability and predictability that I'm going to bet a multibillion-dollar corporation's future on."

...

Sharing code with software developers working with Tommy Hilfiger played a role in the company's decision to shift its Web store to Windows. "They are a lot more liberal -- quietly liberal -- in releasing chunks of their code to the developer community," says Mr. Singleton of Tommy Hilfiger, who said he has greater confidence in a single vendor in controlling the evolution of its products. "They jumped through a lot of hoops to help us out."

I think that he is referring in code sharing to the application software (they were using a web commerce product running on Linux and moved to Microsoft's commerce product, as he can't be referring to Linux itself!

tommy.com was on Solaris until February 2005 when they switched to Linux (according to Netcraft), so they are not going "back to Windows" and I expect this had more to do with a deal MS offered for their commerce product than with any real issues related to Linux!

---
Regards, JTO

[ Reply to This | # ]

Capped legal fees?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 01:47 PM EDT
If they think their fees are capped, in the case of a loss, so they have no
worries then they are not counting the bill they are going to receive from other
quarters.

Tufty

[ Reply to This | # ]

What Would DMcB Do?
Authored by: BrianW on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 02:01 PM EDT
A shipwreck has left you stranded on a desert island with one other person.
Your first priority is to:
a) Build a shelter.
b) Build a fire.
c) Find water.
d) Draw up a contract that gives you exclusive rights to the book deal if anyone
ever wants to buy the story of your shipwreck.

You win an Oscar for best actor. In your acceptance speech, you thank:
a) Your mother.
b) Your wife.
c) Your fellow castmembers.
d) Your lawyer.

You see an audience crying at the end of a touching movie. You marvel at:
a) The complexity of the human spirit.
b) The capacity of human empathy.
c) The poignancy of a compelling story.
d) Why nobody has every thought of “monetizing” tears.

You read an article about a doctor using embedded Linux in artificial limbs for
indigent patients. You think:
a) How wonderful it is that the GPL makes such benefits affordable.
b) That the possibilities are endless for benevolent applications of open
source.
c) That you should perhaps contribute in some way to this wonderful technology.
d) That this is a niche market without deep pockets, and therefore not worth
taking to court.

You’re caught trying to hijack an entire industry for your own personal gain.
You:
a) Come clean and admit your mistake.
b) Apologize.
c) Make restitution to those who have been harmed by your actions.
d) Or not.


---
//Brian
#define IANAL

[ Reply to This | # ]

Running on Air
Authored by: sproggit on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 02:06 PM EDT
If like me, you grew up as a fan of those 3-minute cartoons from Warner Bros,
you will have fond memories of watching Road Runner triumph over the endless
attempts of Wile E. Coyote to snag him for supper.

Reading this piece and the various links included reminded me powerfully of
those cartoons. In particular I found myself visualising the various moments
when Coyote runs past the edge of a cliff, to find himself pedalling furiously
in mid air. We watched, chortling, as first he remained ignorant of the error,
then furiously tried to run back to safety of the clifftop. Next came that
moment of awful realisation when he looked at the camera, swallowed hard, before
finally hurtling downwards and out of sight.

I think Darl has about reached the point of realisation at long last, finally
admitting to himself that this partucular ruse is over.

What we'll see following in the next few weeks and months, is going to be
interesting. Darl's options pose him some tough decisions. Firstly, he's got the
threat of counter-suits to deal with. I love the fact that although he's got to
the point of realising that he might actually *lose* his attempt to litigate a
payout from IBM, he doesn't yet seem to grasp the fact that when IBM, Novell et
al line up for damages, his business model with it's "long term
sustainability" is going to remain about the same length of time that
Coyote used to levitate. Not long.

But then we have a new problem - one that I'm not sufficiently aware of US law
to comment on. Assuming that SCO still has any customers left after the
conclusion of all outstanding legal actions, what are the chances of shareholder
lawsuits - and I note this indemnification tactic, but figure a good lawyer can
work around that - to go after individual directors and officers of the
company.

It's going to be interesting...

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: We really want more sales...
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 03:06 PM EDT
... because we're outta business without more of them.

Seriously, if you exchange the words sales and innovation in the press releases,
it makes more sense. I hear this sales speak all the time in the engineering
job I'm in, and it's always funny seeing through the sales blurbs.

A way of looking at this is that where ever the CEO/CFO types of SCO go, at
least ya know to keep your 401k away from it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I agree with the sentiment ...
Authored by: tanstaafl on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 05:29 PM EDT
... when U say "[n]ext time I hear that a SCO engineer is having a hard
time looking for a job, I'll feel less compassion," but keep in mind where
that comment is coming from. Our Buddy Darl has stretched the truth mightily
about most things, so I wouldn't be too sure he wasn't doing the same thing when
he says SCO engineers are pleading with him to "strike back." Bullies
like to spread the pain around, so long as they don't have to deal with any
("Gosh, folks, I'm only doing it at the request of my staff!").

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOforum: A Bully Would Like to Change the Subject
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 09 2005 @ 07:58 PM EDT
"he looks like he's put on quite a bit of weight"

I know how they attacked PJ personally, and I understand she has strong feelings
against these people. But mentioning Darl's weight was just as wrong as Maureen
O'Gara's article about PJ. It's personal.

Let's keep the discussion on the issues, not on people's appearance, please.

[ Reply to This | # ]

tSCOg and UNIX - a one liner
Authored by: dmarker on Wednesday, August 10 2005 @ 06:57 PM EDT


"tSCOg's actions nailed the lid on the coffin of vanilla UNIX"

- To me this is a pity as they have done irrepairable harm to a product that
helped changed computing

- They have diminished the work of some great people by tarnishing the name and
word UNIX

- tSCOg have helped put IBM's Linux strategy on the plate of many IT execs

- tSCOg showed what happens when avarice & greed infect an otherwise good IT
vendor

- tSCOg indirectly helped formulate a new way of explaining complicated legal
matters to the layman as well as a new approach to researching & publicising
legal related material


Doug Marker
(perhaps good stuff can come out of muck)

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO: a growth company?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 14 2005 @ 02:20 AM EDT

Quoting Daryl from the Todd Weiss article:

"... We want to grow. We want to turn into a growth company."

Well, my, my. Doesn't everyone?

So far, though, Daryl has confused growth with malignancy.

[ 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 )