decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

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


User Functions

Username:

Password:

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

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go private - Updated
Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:04 PM EST

Here's the press release, titled "The SCO Group Announces Reorganization Plan to Include $100 Million Financing by Stephen Norris Capital Partners".

It seems Stephen Norris Capital Partners "and its partners from the Middle East" have fallen in love with SCO's "vast range of products and services":

"We saw a tremendous investment opportunity in SCO and its vast range of products and services, including many new innovations ready or soon to be ready to be released into the marketplace," said Stephen Norris, managing partner for SNCP. "We expect to quickly develop these opportunities, and to stand behind SCO's existing base of customers and partners."

Hahahaha. Maybe this is the key?

SNCP has developed a business plan for SCO that includes unveiling new product lines aimed at global customers. This reorganization plan will also enable the company to see SCO's legal claims through to their full conclusion.

That's code, I think, for "this will enable the company to continue to attack Linux".

Update 3: A collection of news articles here on ComputerWorld.

The press release is a bit coy. Here's more detail:

Mr. Norris acted as a principal financial advisor to Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal Al Saud of Kingdom Holding Company, in structuring and negotiating the re-capitalization of Citibank, which returned over $15 billion in profits on about $590 million of equity invested....

Since 1997, Mr. Norris, and certain members of his team, have worked on a number of investments including real estate investments in Europe and the United States. They were involved in amongst others the privatization of Thompson CSF, the recapitalization of Suez, the acquisition of portions of Credit Foncier's real estate portfolio in Paris by the German firm of IVG, the formation of Nomura's (London) bid for a Dutch mortgage bank, the offer by a major Saudia Arabian investment firm for Lamborgini in Italy, and the formation of a bid by Leucadia International's for the Labouchere Bank in Holland. He also negotiated and structured investments in Synxis Corporation, which was backed by George Soros and Mr. Norris, and MARC Global Holdings.

Update: It seems Bill Gates has a friend in this picture. The two announced another deal last year, according to this IHT article, "Four Seasons Hotels agrees to bid from Gates and Alwaleed":

Gates and Alwaleed have collaborated for at least two years. After attending a dinner at Gates's home in Bellevue, Washington, in early 2004, Alwaleed agreed to explore ways to assist Microsoft's expansion in Saudi Arabia.

So, there's Waldo.

SCO has now filed a number of documents in bankruptcy court. The Memorandum of Agreement on the new proposed deal is the one you want, and it's #346 Exhibit A. If anyone has the chance to OCR it for me, I'd appreciate it. Here are all the filings:

343 - Filed & Entered: 02/13/2008
Motion to Amend (B)
Docket Text: Motion to Amend Debtors' Motion (1) to Amend Order Authorizing Payment of Accrued Benefits; and (2) for Authorization to Pay Accrued Benefits to Employees Terminated After Entry of Order Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. Hearing scheduled for 3/7/2008 at 02:00 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. Objections due by 2/29/2008. (Attachments: # (1) Notice # (2) Proposed Form of Order # (3) Certificate of Service and Service List) (O'Neill, James)

344 - Filed & Entered: 02/13/2008
Motion to Authorize (B)
Docket Text: Motion to Authorize Debtors' Motion for a Determination that Incentive Bonuses for Quarter Ending October 31, 2007 were Paid in the Ordinary Course of Debtors' Business and for Continuing Authority to Pay Ordinary Course of Business Incentive Bonuses Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. Hearing scheduled for 3/7/2008 at 02:00 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. Objections due by 2/29/2008. (Attachments: # (1) Notice # (2) Exhibit A # (3) Proposed Form of Order # (4) Certificate of Service and Service List) (O'Neill, James)

345 - Filed & Entered: 02/13/2008
Motion to Seal
Docket Text: Motion to Seal. Debtors' Motion to Present Evidence and Testimony Related to the Debtors' 2007 Incentive Program Under Seal [Related Docket No. 344] Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. Hearing scheduled for 3/7/2008 at 02:00 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. Objections due by 2/29/2008. (Attachments: # (1) Notice # (2) Proposed Form of Order # (3) Certificate of Service and Service List) (O'Neill, James)

346 - Filed & Entered: 02/14/2008
Motion to Approve (B)
Docket Text: Motion to Approve Debtors' Motion To Approve Settlement Compensation Or Sale Compensation And Expense Reimbursement to Plan Sponsor Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. Hearing scheduled for 4/2/2008 at 02:00 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. Objections due by 3/26/2008. (Attachments: # (1) Notice # (2) Exhibit A # (3) Proposed Form of Order) (O'Neill, James)

347 - Filed & Entered: 02/14/2008
Operating Report
Docket Text: Amended Debtor-In-Possession Monthly Operating Report for Filing Period December 2007 for SCO Operations, Inc. Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (Werkheiser, Rachel)

348 - Filed & Entered: 02/14/2008
Certificate of Service
Docket Text: Certificate of Service Regarding Debtors' Motion to Approve Settlement Compensation or Sale Compensation and Expense Reimbursement to Plan Sponsor (related document(s)[346] ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Werkheiser, Rachel)

It may take a couple of minutes for all of the documents to resolve. It looks from this 13G filing that the Cayman Island folks, Chesapeake Partners Management, have made their exit. And Maureen O'Gara is now reporting that the goal is to tax Linux, including aggressively pursuing the AutoZone case:

We’re talking about people who can buy all the legal talent in the world who’ve looked at SCO’s evidence against IBM and Novell and Linux and think that – despite all the monumental setbacks – the case is still eminently winnable – and if not the case that’s filed then a new case they’ll file.

People who, if they do win, won’t just take IBM and Red Hat and Novell to the cleaners, they won’t have a bit of compunction or an ounce of political correctness about demanding a SCOsource tax from every Linux user on the globe....

SCO going private will give the Groklaw crowd one thing it’s always wanted – SCO CEO Darl McBride out.

Although McBride reportedly put this deal together, he’s too much of lightening rod to stay once the deal is done. He’s unlikely to go far; he knows too much. Maybe he’ll spend his idle hours sussing out who Groklaw really is.

Has the system really become this corrupt? Incidentally, she is quite wrong about Groklaw yearning for McBride to be out. He was a lot of fun to write about. And the meanness isn't on this side. So, don't dump him overboard on our account. I would greatly prefer that he remain at the helm. For us, it's never been about McBride. The article is here, http://dotnet.sys-con.com/read/502009.htm if you must.

Update 2: Remember the York deal? The headlines all said it would fly, but it didn't. This is a proposed deal, one that must be approved by the bankruptcy court. That may or may not happen. Given the O'Gara piece and the friendship/business connection to Microsoft, I suspect the EU Commission might even be interested. So let's just wait and see. Meanwhile, this is the funniest comment I've seen so far, from Slashdot:

Only thing left... (Score:5, Funny)
by WarJolt (990309) on Thursday February 14, @04:53PM (#22426592)
After a nuclear holocost the only thing left will be cockroaches, twinkies and SCO. If you chop off the heads of SCO lawyers they continue to live for a week. Just when you think they're dead those tiny little litigating arms start moving again.
Update 4: A bit more on the the Prince, including a picture, on Forbes.

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

The SCO Group Announces Reorganization Plan to Include $100 Million Financing by Stephen Norris Capital Partners

Investment Designed to Take SCO Private and Positions it to Emerge from Chapter 11 with a Strong Financial Future for SCO Customers, Partners and Resellers

LINDON, Utah, Feb. 14 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The SCO Group, Inc., traded over the counter in the (Pink Sheets: SCOXQ - News), a leading provider of UNIX® software technology and mobile services, today announced that Stephen Norris Capital Partners ("SNCP") and its partners from the Middle East have agreed to provide up to $100 million to finance a plan of reorganization for The SCO Group Inc. ("SCO"). As part of the financing, SNCP will take a controlling interest in the company, while taking it private. As a result, SCO is poised to emerge from Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the coming year. The Board of Directors of SCO has unanimously determined that this financing and plan of reorganization is in the best long-term interest of SCO and its subsidiaries, as well as its customers, shareholders, creditors and employees.

"Not only will this deal position us to emerge from Chapter 11, but it also marks an exciting future for our business," said Jeff Hunsaker, President and Chief Operating Officer of SCO Operations. "This significant financial backing is positive news for SCO's customers, partners and resellers who continue to request upgrades and rely upon SCO's UNIX services to drive their business forward."

SNCP has developed a business plan for SCO that includes unveiling new product lines aimed at global customers. This reorganization plan will also enable the company to see SCO's legal claims through to their full conclusion.

"We saw a tremendous investment opportunity in SCO and its vast range of products and services, including many new innovations ready or soon to be ready to be released into the marketplace," said Stephen Norris, managing partner for SNCP. "We expect to quickly develop these opportunities, and to stand behind SCO's existing base of customers and partners."

About SCO

The SCO Group (Pink Sheets: SCOXQ - News) is a leading provider of UNIX software technology and mobile services. SCO offers UnixWare for enterprise applications and SCO OpenServer for small to medium businesses. SCO's innovative and reliable solutions help customers grow their businesses everyday. SCO owns the core UNIX operating system, originally developed by AT&T/Bell Labs and is the exclusive licensor to UNIX-based system software providers. The Me Inc., product line focuses on creating mobile platforms, services and solutions for businesses and enhances the productivity of mobile workers.

Headquartered in Lindon, Utah, SCO has a worldwide network of resellers and developers. SCO Global Services provides reliable localized support and services to partners and customers. For more information on SCO products and services, visit http://www.sco.com.

SCO and the associated logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of The SCO Group, Inc. in the U.S. and other countries.

About Stephen Norris Partners

Stephen Norris & Co. Capital Partners, L.P. is a private equity investment partnership formed to (i)"co-invest" alongside well established and successful private equity and leveraged buyout firms, (ii) take advantage of the business experience and relationships of its Investment Committee, including Steve Norris' long-standing relationships and substantial private equity experience.

Mr. Norris co-founded The Carlyle Group, a private equity and LBO firm in Washington, D.C, where he served as a founder and managing director until 1995. During his tenure in the investment business, Mr. Norris has made, directed or participated in over 125 leveraged buyouts, venture capital and real estate equity investments totaling more than $6.0 billion, and yielding an average annual internal rate of return (IRR) of over 38%. Mr. Norris structured and negotiated investments over $1.0 billion on behalf of a prominent Middle Eastern investor in Citicorp, Euro Disney, and the Four Seasons Hotel Company. These investments have returned well over $10 billion. In 1990, Mr. Norris was appointed by former President George H.W. Bush and confirmed by the U.S. Senate as one of the five members of the $68 billion Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board. During his tenure, Mr. Norris successfully advocated for the right of Federal employees to allocate a greater portion of their savings to public equities.

Mr. Norris' partner, Mark Robbins has extensive experience in structured finance and private equity as co-founder and managing partner of Peninsula Advisors. Mr. Robbins has managed and originated over $1.2 billion in private placements. Mr. Robbins has developed and engineered structured investments, business valuation models and diversified financial products in excess of $10 billion. Mr. Robbins has served as Investment Director and lead negotiator with several leading financial institutions.

Forward Looking Statements

The statements contained in this press release regarding (i) the transactions contemplated in the memorandum of understanding and the Company's plan of reorganization, and (ii) the contemplated benefits of the Company's plan of reorganization for customers, partners, shareholders, employees, others, (iii) the Company's business plan regarding new products and services and the pursuit of its legal claims (iv) the expectations of SNCP with respect to the Company and its prospects (v) bankruptcy court processes and approvals respecting the company's plan of reorganization, and (vi) other statements that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements and are made under the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are based on management's current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties. We wish to advise readers that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from historical results or those anticipated in such forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to developments with respect to the negotiation of definitive agreements with SNCP, confirmation of a plan of reorganization, the outcomes and developments in our Chapter 11 case, court rulings in the bankruptcy proceedings, the impact of the bankruptcy proceedings or other pending litigation, developments in our litigation, our cash balances and available cash, continued competitive pressure on the Company's operating system products, which could impact the Company's results of operations, adverse developments in and increased or unforeseen legal costs related to the Company's litigation, the inability to devote sufficient resources to the development and marketing of the Company's products, including the Me Inc. mobile services and development platform, and the possibility that customers and companies with whom the Company has formed partnerships will decide to terminate or reduce their relationships with the company. These and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated are discussed in more detail in the Company's periodic and current filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the Company's Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, and future filings with the SEC. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which such statements are made, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update such statements to reflect events or circumstances arising after such date.


  


SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go private - Updated | 611 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections Here
Authored by: entre on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:08 PM EST
Where needed...

[ Reply to This | # ]

That was unexpected.
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:11 PM EST
I hope it's real money, Novell and IBM might get paid in that case.

---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.

"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk

[ Reply to This | # ]

17% interest against future awards
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:17 PM EST
The fine print says the financing is a 17% interest rate booked against future
wins in the lawsuits.

You can bet there is some big hand behind the curtain pulling the strings to
keep this going.

---
The $100M comprises: (a) $5M upfront, in exchange for a new series of preferred
stock. That should be sufficient to pay off all of SCO's creditors with
currently-liquidated claims. (b) a $95M line of credit from which SCO could pay
future judgments obtained by Novell/IBM/RedHat (and/or post bonds for appealing
those judgments).
---

[ Reply to This | # ]

Wonderful!
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:17 PM EST
I, too, am very interested in seeing SCO's claims proceed to their (inevitable)
conclusion.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Great news
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:18 PM EST
With an influx of "up to" 100 million dollars, IBM, Novell, Red Hat,
AutoZone, (have I missed anyone?) will be able to get some recompense from SCO
for SCO's harmful actions toward them.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Chrysler - Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 02:19 PM EST
  • Suze - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 05:28 PM EST
    • Suze -> Suse - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 11:05 PM EST
  • Great news - Authored by: JamesK on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 06:55 PM EST
  • Great news - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 12:30 AM EST
    • Great news - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 19 2008 @ 08:14 PM EST
  • Great news - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 04:05 PM EST
Is this real ?
Authored by: Latesigner on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:18 PM EST

The "castle in Spain" aspect of this is so great that it suggest a
break with reality.

---
The only way to have an "ownership" society is to make slaves of the rest of us.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Anderer's business partners sued Norris in 2006
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:19 PM EST
From a motion to dismiss in the GMG v. Robbins, Norris suit. That suit was a result of the Anderer blow-up in Realm Systems
Pacer should have lots more juicy info, unless the record has been sealed.
GMG CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
Plaintiff,
v.
MARK ROBBINS, an individual; ED DAVIES, an individual; STEPHEN NORRIS, an individual; and PENINSULA ADVISORS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Defendants.

Civil No. 2:06 CV 876 TC


7. In late 2005 in New York, GMG and Norris formed Stephen Norris & Co. Capital Partners, L.P. (the “Partnership”). Since its inception, the Partnership has conducted limited or no business operations, including any co-investment transactions. Norris Aff. at ¶ 7.
8. All discussions and negotiations involving Norris and pertaining to the Partnership occurred in New York, and did not include any relationship with Utah. Moreover, all documents forming the Partnership were drafted by GMG’s counsel either in New York or Pennsylvania. Norris Aff. at ¶ 8.
9. One of GMG’s attempts to raise working capital included contacting Robbins and Davies. In early spring 2006, Joe Gfoeller from GMG introduced Norris to Robbins in New York. Norris met with Robbins on one other occasion in New York in spring of 2006. The only other meeting between Norris and Robbins relating to GMG occurred in Dubai in spring of 2006. The first time Norris met Davies occurred in Dubai at this same meeting. This was Norris’s only meeting with Davies relating to GMG. Norris Aff. at ¶ 9.
10. In late spring 2006, Norris met with Robbins in Las Vegas, Nevada to discuss potential business opportunities. These discussions led to the formation of Peninsula Advisors,LLC (“Peninsula”), which was organized and later formed under Delaware law. Norris Aff. at ¶ 10.

[ Reply to This | # ]

This can't be right
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:19 PM EST

No financing company would invest $100 million without some form of due diligence. Once they look into SCO's lawsuits, they would realize that SCO is being sued for more than the finance company is investing. As such, the finance company stands to lose everything.

Finance people are notoriously risk adverse. They will either back out of the deal, or have a scheme to get rid of the lawsuits (limit liability), or both.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go p
Authored by: JamesK on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:20 PM EST
Why would anyone put up $100M, when they could buy the entire company for
(currently) $1.64M?


---
This space intentionally left blank.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Designed to Take SCO Private
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:23 PM EST

OOOppppss, P.J. appears to have gotten too much information from the filings with the SEC ;)

Looks like someone might be wanting to start pulling the research resources out.

Ah well... I guess we can start expecting to see even more filings sealed.

RAS

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic - Post Here Please
Authored by: complex_number on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:28 PM EST
In all the excitement about the news, the normal etiquette seems to have been
forgotten.

Anyway, you know the rules.

[ Reply to This | # ]

So IBM, Red Hat and Autozone will go to trial, maybe?
Authored by: tiger99 on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:39 PM EST
I trhink that these cases should be more than sufficient to divest the SCOundrels of their $100M in damages. IANAL, but I think that the Lanham Act damages that ought to be awarded in some of these cases will be much more than that.

It is nice of someone to throw away their money (or their upstream investors money?), just to keep SCO going until justice is done, and seen to be done.

Always assuming the BK judge allows this, of course. I don't know what legal constraints apply, but he must know by now that SCO as a business have no future. One profitable quarter in their entire existence....

Now who is going to be first to trace the money on offer here to its true source, and who will that source actually be? Could be very interesting! As always, enquiring minds need to know.....

[ Reply to This | # ]

Somebody set us up the merger
Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:40 PM EST
All your York are belong to us.

---

You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Brilliant chess move
Authored by: Laomedon on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 01:48 PM EST
What to do when your back is against the wall (due in court), with a gun to your
head (chapter 7)? Well, you remember what the purpose of your mission is and
your friends improvise ...

Goal: keep FUD going as long as possible.
Task: revive SCO.

Brilliant move: Take SCO private with plenty of money coming from some
unexpected, but friendly corner.

Voila, SCO rising from the near dead and no more public SEC filings AND years of
more FUD (litigation).

[ Reply to This | # ]

Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal
Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 02:02 PM EST
Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal has to be the link.

Bill Gates and Four Seasons

Citigroup

Euro Disney

---

You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go p
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 02:05 PM EST
This is *not* good news.

There are people in this world to whom $100 million is chump change. Anyone
giving this kind of money for SCO is not interested in any kind of commercial
return SCO is capable of ever providing. SCO has nothing of value in the product
space.

The only thing going on is the anti-Linux FUD campaign and it is clear that this
is the objective. All these court cases will continue as will a stepped up
campaign of FUD.

That's my prediction.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Terrorists?
Authored by: Sunny Penguin on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 02:20 PM EST
"Mr. Norris co-founded The Carlyle Group"

The Carlyle group includes the Bin Laden family (and Bush family)

When the Carlyle group was created in 1995 they were mainly used to funnel money
to Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. (to drive out the Russians)

I have heard Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal Al Saud was one of the credit card
holders who "unknowingly" financed the 9-11 hijacker's flight school.
I wonder if Mr. Norris was in charge of watching the prince's credit cards
during late 2000 and early 2001?

SCO keeps astounding me with the dubious quality of their associates.

---
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
-D. Adams

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO really sold their soul this time....
Authored by: Jamis on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 02:35 PM EST
Assuming that the organization had a soul to begin with. I predict that any
product development and support will be offshored. I predict that most company
employees left will be released. I predict that what is left of this company
after the law suits are done will be sold off piecemeal.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Has somebody got Valantine's Day and April Fool's day confused? n/t
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 03:06 PM EST
n/t

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off topic - trademark and domain names - help
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 03:52 PM EST
First I apologize for the off topic. I am a long time Groklaw reader. Really
need some help. I purchased domain tooldog.com in 01/2006 and created a website
tooldog.com in early 2006 selling tools on-line. The tooldog.com domain was
first created in 2002, I believe. On registration date of November 13, 2007
(Published for Opposition) August 28, 2007, someone registered a US trademark
(Reg # ) of a word mark of "TOOLDOGS.COM TUFF TOOLS FOR RUFF JOBS" and
a drawing mark. Today, this company sent me an email demanding that I shut down
my website of tooldog.com because his trademark contains the wording of
"TOOLDOGS.COM" and my website "tooldog.com" is too similar
to their trademark. The two website is very different and our website never has
anything close to the word mark in entirety or anything remotely close to their
mark drawing.

Any ideas whether their claim is valid? Why? I understand I am not seeking
legal consul here. Just want your two cents.

I don't want to give up my domain or website if possible. I am going to meet
with some trademark attorneys in next few days. But their rates is US$375/hour.
So, it is not cheap even if legally it is on my side. Plus, if anyone knows a
good trademark attorneys / firms in Atlanta, GA, USA area, would you please post
the firm name? Thanks for your help.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Would a judge really do that?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 03:54 PM EST
Would he allow more SCO litigation to be funded to go forward without first
requiring assumption of the liabilities up until that point?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Tremendous investment in what?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 03:56 PM EST
This is the part that rang the least true:

"We saw a tremendous investment opportunity in SCO and its vast range of
products and services, including many new innovations ready or soon to be ready
to be released into the marketplace," said Stephen Norris.

Sure, like we believe that.

If SCO owned anything valuable the people who actually make or service real
products would have offered them something for it by now. I mean, they could
hardly be more distressed than they were recently, so the purchase price for any
of the pieces could hardly have gone any lower. However, even the bottom
feeders don't want SCO's products, services, or innovations.

This deal is not about turning SCO into a profitable business, it is just a
facade for something else.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Novell must be very pleased the "partners from the Middle East" can pay for SCO's mistakes :)
Authored by: SilverWave on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 04:03 PM EST
what more is there to say...
except..

follow the *money*

I wonder..............

---
You don't need to use an Anti-Virus with Linux as thats mainly a windows thing
:)
But you can if you want to, its your choice.

[ Reply to This | # ]

in prevention of paranoia
Authored by: designerfx on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 04:15 PM EST
Just to make sure, has anyone checked ties to Microsoft via the "offering
company" either in the form of directly or through subsidiaries?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go p
Authored by: ExcludedMiddle on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 04:35 PM EST
Is there any legal way for this group to make this investment and keep the
proceeds protected from Novell and IBM?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Whither McBride?
Authored by: The Simulator on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 05:13 PM EST
Steven Vaughan-Nichols is reporting that Darl may be leaving SCO. Any truth to that?

---
---
Simulation engineers do it with models virtually every day!

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go private
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 05:26 PM EST
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but this is just a proposal to go private.

tSCOg can't actually do it without Judge Gross's permission, and Judge Gross isn't going to approve it unless the US Trustee gives their thumbs-up.

Moreover, Novell and IBM (and maybe others) are going to go over the proposal with a fine-tooth comb and I'm sure are going to object strenuously if there's any legal hanky-panky (both Novell and IBM (especially IBM) want the legal issues settled).

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Prediction: - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 05:54 PM EST
    • Prediction: - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 06:20 PM EST
    • Prediction: NOT! - Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 01:46 PM EST
      • Er... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 08:06 PM EST
  • Pay them off. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 07:59 PM EST
So simple
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 05:47 PM EST
This is not an investment in the normal, financial, sense. It is not an
investment which is expected to make a profit in the normal, financial, sense.

There are gentlemen in the world for whom $100M is chump change. There are a few
of these gentlemen in the Middle East and there are a few of these gentlemen in
USA (as well as other places). It is possible for these gentlemen to exchange
favours, or offer gifts, from time to time.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go p
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 06:03 PM EST
So they hand off the five million in cash, get the preferred shares, kick
McBride out, wait a year or eighteen months, refile for bankruptcy, declare
little or no assets for the company, wipe out the common shareholders, let the
preferred shareholders keep a stake in whatever comes out after bankruptcy and
*poof* they've bought the company for five million.

[ Reply to This | # ]

PIPE Fairy Dust
Authored by: webster on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 06:16 PM EST

PIPE Fairy Dust is all over this pretense. It is all so unreasonable and improvident as an investment that we are assuredly looking at an exercise in FUD and retaliation for not settling. It also may be a bluff designed to extend the litigation and stir up a settlement. The PIPE Fairy has deep pockets.

  1. [I have no time. There is nothing I would rather do right now than expound on this dramatic development. But V-Day has its demands and I am off to the Chinese carryout.]
  2. Most disturbed of all about this prospect are poor lawyers at BSF who must continue to shuffle their dueces and pretend this is a case. Their fees are capped and now in bankruptcy their cut of this deal, if any, of the proposed $100 million infusion of cash is up to Judge Gross. They are back in the line of claimants and creditors on any change of control or investment deal. How dreadful, they are looking at the prospect of appeal. There will be exhibits by the truckload.
  3. There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip. SCO adds a by-the-way-caveat to this shimmering press release:
    We wish to advise readers that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from historical results or those anticipated in such forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to developments with respect to the negotiation of definitive agreements with SNCP, confirmation of a plan of reorganization, the outcomes and developments in our Chapter 11 case, court rulings in the bankruptcy proceedings, the impact of the bankruptcy proceedings or other pending litigation, developments in our litigation, our cash balances and available cash, continued competitive pressure on the Company's operating system products, which could impact the Company's results of operations, adverse developments in and increased or unforeseen legal costs related to the Company's litigation, the inability to devote sufficient resources to the development and marketing of the Company's products, including the Me Inc. mobile services and development platform, and the possibility that customers and companies with whom the Company has formed partnerships will decide to terminate or reduce their relationships with the company.
    So there is an awful lot that has to happen before this plan takes place. Not much of it is up to SCO. They are in the hands of the judges. The Judges are going to take care of creditors before they are out of chapter 11. So between paying creditors and bonds for claims, not much of that money is going to be invested, or paid to shareholders. The PIPE Fairy may have to dig deeper with little prospect of return.
  4. The MOG article is bravado and propaganda. It is delivered with a tongue out
  5. If for one minute anyone thought this was a SCO project, it is now clear that the PIPE Fairy boosted this from the beginning, with guarantees. The true evaluation of the SCO situation is their market value. This also includes an assessment of their legal situation. The limitless Middle east oil money is either part of a bluff, or someone is in a death struggle. No expense is too much for survival. Now who exactly does Linux threaten?

~webster~


Tyrants live their delusions. Beware the PIPE Fairy.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Gabberflasted
Authored by: DaveJakeman on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 06:38 PM EST
A couple of days ago I got the spooky feeling SCO were going to pull something
really amazing out of the hat. Things were too quiet and looking too bad for
SCO. I had no idea it would be this though. Who'd have thought it? Never a
dull moment, eh?

These guys! If only they could put this much energy into something positive.
Darl's had plenty of practice at squandering millions, so it will be interesting
watching him waste it.

---
Monopolistic Ignominious Corporation Requiring Office $tandard Only For
Themselves

[ Reply to This | # ]

Confused about this transaction...
Authored by: chris hill on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 06:57 PM EST
I'm not sure, but isn't there a law about technology companies and the middle
east, especially with the anti-terrorism bureau?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go p
Authored by: tknarr on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 06:58 PM EST

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this sounds like another iteration of the York deal. That "up to" $100 million is the kicker. It sounds like this deal's structure so that SNCP get ownership in SCO and first crack at their assets, while at the same time avoiding paying anything up-front that could go to creditors. They get to make their "investment" over time, paying as bills come up to avoid SCO ever having a positive cash balance.

If I were a creditor, I'd object on the grounds that, while this may be a good deal for SCO, it's not in the interests of the creditors at all. It leaves them exactly where they are now: unpaid. The creditors would be better served by liquidating SCO's assets now, rather than letting SCO exit bankruptcy with their debts unpaid and their assets intact.

[ Reply to This | # ]

end of bankruptcy?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 07:06 PM EST
Does this mean SCO will withdraw its bankruptcy filing, and things will be back
where they were before re: the various court cases?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yahoo! Deal Connection?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 07:10 PM EST
My WAG...and rank speculations ;) ;) and parody.

It's Valentine's Day and Darl was feeling neglected by his friends in Redmond.
He's been playing out his hand, as dealt to him, but he couldn't stand that $44B
was set to go to Yahoo! and not so much as a bouquet of flowers for him.
Afterall, even Novell got "attention" and a separate payout.

Be sure of this, Darl has cards he's not showing, and he's been on the phone
today. I am betting that he only had to convince them that he is holding aces.
We may never see his cards, afterall, Linux left this game of
"hold-em" long ago. Fortunately for Darl there are other player's
which could still get drawn back in. Today's $100M "investment" says
Darl has at least got their attention.

WHG3: Sorry, baby. Here's some roses and a diamond ring. You know you're my only
flame, babe.

Why it may not be just a WAG...
These _particular_ "businessmen" are notoriously uncreative. They only
have so many tricks in their bag. If you can't milk a monopoly, then how can you
make money? To me, this bears a striking resemblance to the "100M lines of
Unix code embedded deep into Linux." Darl couldn't convince the Linux
community in 2002, but it looks like he had better success with his marks today,
and today's marks had deeper pockets. His marks were afraid that Darl might
have some item which was used as leverage. It certainly could be
"inconvenient" if some fact were to come out at the wrong time during
the $44B Yahoo! acquistion.

Darl in 2002: "Nice OS you got there. Shame if something were to happen to
it."

Darl in 2008: "Nice acquistion you got there. Shame if something were to
happen to it."

[ Reply to This | # ]

BillG was in Saudi at the end of Jan08
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 07:40 PM EST
He might well have mentioned the case to someone.
http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/exec/billg/speeches/2008/01-27GLFArabia.mspx

[ Reply to This | # ]

Will Novell et al get any money?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 07:56 PM EST
Suppose this deal goes through.
Further suppose the court rules that SCOX owes Novell $50M. SCOX uses the
"advance" money to pay Novell and dies.
Does Novell get to keep the money? Or, since it was technically
"advance", do they have to pay it back? If the latter is the case,
then this is nothing more than yet another smoke-and-mirrors deal.

[ Reply to This | # ]

But Novell owns the Unix copyrights
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 08:22 PM EST
Even with more money, SCO still has that dagger lodged in
its heart. MOG must be on some serious drugs if she
thinks SCO can extort much money out of Linux without
owning the Unix copyrights.

I don't think anyone has much to worry about from SCO
unless they can somehow get themselves legally declared
the Unix copyright holders, which seems utterly
inconceivable at this point.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Why can't it die?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 08:35 PM EST
This saga is a bigger scam than "wind energy", and I didn't think that
possible.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Very clever move...
Authored by: bigbert on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 09:09 PM EST
We all know that the SCOG allegations are groundless. However, if you want to:

a) Spread more FUD ("There just HAS to be something in their claims! Why
else would these clever businessmen want to INVEST $100M?")

b) Pump up share prices BEFORE the deal goes through

then announce such a deal. The deal may even go ahead; $100M is nothing for a
company that is prepared to spend $44B on a website.....

---
--------------------------
Surfo, ergo sum.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Only 100 million?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 09:51 PM EST
That will just cover Suse's claim. Seems like SCO is going to have to come up
with some more moola to satisfy Novell and IBM.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Vista advertising budget
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 10:02 PM EST
100 million spent advertising Vista would be money down the drain because the
world is already aware that it is ME2. IF XP and Vista is all you have to sell,
better to spend the money dissuading customers from buying the competition.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go p
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 10:03 PM EST
We can't sure until we see the detailed plan in bankruptcy court.

However, I would bet that the deal is structured in such a way that SNCP pays
only about $1 million for controlling interest in SCO and then only has to pay
as much as necessary to keep the litigation going on as an needed basis. The
will probably get the rights to own larger portions of SCO as the put up the
litigation costs. However, they will not put up any money that does not get to
be spent by SCO.

In that way, they will make sure that there is no money left for Novell, IBM,
Red Hat, Autozone or anybody else to get any of their investment. In short, I
bet that SNCP is trying to get all of the upside with only a limited amount of
the down side. They are not going to still $100 million into SCO if Novell or
somebody is going to be able to get their hands on it in court.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Text excerpts from the GMG v. Robbins and Norris case
Authored by: stats_for_all on Thursday, February 14 2008 @ 11:58 PM EST
From the original complaint Utah federal case 2:06-cv-00876

These excerpts make it seem like Norris and Robbins were scamming the deep pockets of GMG. Getting GMG to pay their living expenses, while they were setting up a con. Is Norris actually solvent? Note that GMG were in cahoots with Anderer on Realm and IPIQ, so who the con and who the mark is remains murky.

The case was eventually dismissed for lack of federal jurisdiction, since PLA Mock and DFT Robbins were both from Utah.

19. In June of 2005, GMG committed to raising the $2 million that Norris and GMG estimated was the necessary seed capital to make thier partnership a success. Raising such funds for a start-up investment was a substantial task, and GMG spent substantial time and money developing materials with which to market the fund and then marketing it to a number of its contacts. After much effort, in January of 2006, delivering on its commitment, GMG used its connections in the Salt Lake City business community to secure the needed financing from an investment group led by Mark Robbins and his father-in law Ed Davies. Davies is a high net worth individual and investor, while Robbins is an experienced private equity investor, who had solicited his father-in-law's support in raising the needed funds for Norris' fund.

20. Over the course of almost a year, GMG poured its efforts and substantial resources in pursuing the objectives of its partnership with Norris. These efforts even included GMG financing and participating in two extensive trips to the Middle East and Europe with Norris in November/December of 2005 (November 17th to December 2nd) and April of 2006. While GMG's principals labored in 2005 and the first half of 2006 on Norris' behalf, though, a shift was occuring behind the scenes: Norris, Davies and Robbins, in the winter of 2006, began to collude and concoct a scheme to cut GMG out of tlhe deal in order to take the partnership and merge it as a unit of another new investment vechicle, Peninsula.

21. By May of 2006, the scheme to usurp the partnership's creation was ultimately revealed and Norris, Davies and Robbins concluded it by communicating in writing their intent to exclude GMG from any further participation.

22 Defendants' machinations, however, were not limited to misappropriating the "co-investing" partnership fund. Beginning in November 2005, Robbins and Davies also induced GMG to create an entirely seperate investment-funding vehicle known as Realm Capital, LLC.

23. Relying on the representations of Robbins and Davies assuring their participation in the funding, ownership and management of Realm Capital, GMG and its professionals expended significant legal and business resources between November 2005 and May 2006 to develop and substantially complete the set up of Realm Capital, only to have the financing pulled on ita at the last minute (and, not coincidentalyy, at exactly the same time the "co-investing" partnership deal disintegrated -- early May of 2006) .........

32. GMG also paid Norris directly or advanced on his behalf over $1.4 million to cover his lifestyle and expenses

33 These funds were used to pay, for example, rental payments for apartments in New York City and Florida, reimbursements for Norris' monthly American Express bills (typically $20,000 or more per month), and first-class travel expenses all over the world. These expenses were necessary so that Norris was perceived as a "player" in the high-stakes, status conscious Investment community of the large private equity and buyout funds and of Norris' wealthy contacts in the Middle East.

....

43. Following the meetings between Norris and Robbins in New York City, Robbins continued to indicate that he and Davies were prepared to fund the seed capital, but also continued to find reasons for delaying the closing.

44. During this same period of time, the early part of 2006, Norris was continuing his efforts to actively recruit prominent individuals to serve on the partnership investment committee, by traveling across the country, overseas, entertaining and accomodating himself lavishily at GMG's expense.

45. Robbins also began repeatedly to make it clear that Davies was actually the final decision maker with respect to funding the partnership and other related important matters....

[ Reply to This | # ]

Valentine's day
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 12:28 AM EST
Guess this was the day for a real sweetheart deal! Some ppl send flowers,
others send chocolate. I guess Bill just sends cash ;)

[ Reply to This | # ]

April Fool's
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 12:30 AM EST
I think someone just flipped too many pages on their calendar.

[ Reply to This | # ]

York++
Authored by: elronxenu on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 01:32 AM EST
This deal looks like York++. I wonder if it will survive scrutiny - York certainly folded the moment scrutiny was applied.

I would hope that it ensures that Novell and SCO's creditors are all paid out. It is fundamentally prejudicial to creditors if SCO is allowed to continue to spend money attacking Linux without first paying its creditors full money.

If, after that, the deal still goes ahead ... I'm looking forward to the new cashed-up SCO continuing to get creamed in court.

Have IBM and Novell left open the door to claim their legal expenses from this "silliest lawsuit of all time"?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Re. the funniests comments
Authored by: Peter Baker on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 01:32 AM EST
I came across one that made me laugh:

"Yes, the writers strike is over!"

Shame I can't seem to find where it was, I'd love to attribute it. Short and
very much to the point :-).

---
= P =

[ Reply to This | # ]

No more SEC filings, I guess
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 01:33 AM EST
No more SEC filings, when they go private, I guess...

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO and legacies...:)
Authored by: drh on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 02:01 AM EST
Look on the bright side...

We all want a legacy we can pass down to our children, and our children's
children.

With this deal to keep the litigation going, we will all be able to pass down
Groklaw to those who come after us!


---
Just another day...

[ Reply to This | # ]

this isn't restructuring, it's an ownership deal
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 02:13 AM EST
Is this what constitutes "re-structuring a business"?

a change in ownership driven by a $5M bet, with a $500k termination fee mixed
with stupidly-optmistic expectations of litigation success? this constitutes the
changing of business activities to return the company it to a positive liquid
state?

huh?

Is there any evidence of restructuring the business in that plan?

zilch, nothing, zip, nadda, ...

It's the same business activity with extra emphasis on litigation that's doomed
to failure.

Surely the Trustee will be asking the obvious question "what about this
change will restore the business to a satisfactory state of liquidity and
likelihood of being able to meet creditor demands?" which should return the
obvious answer "none at all".

Charles from Oz.

[ Reply to This | # ]

"it's never been about McBride."
Authored by: ak on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 02:16 AM EST

PJ wrote:

For us, it's never been about McBride.

SCO is not simply an abstract entity. People exist who are responsible for the activities of SCO. Darl McBride is one of them.

I also doubt that Val Marie Kreidel would agree that it was fun to deal with Ralph Yarro.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Am extremely disappointed in conspiracy theories thus far
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 02:35 AM EST
Sorry, but they are simply too obvious. (OK, the RIAA one did show a little bit
of creativity, but how about some more where that came from?)

Could this be a setup by one of the other players?

Microsoft was not the only one to take out a SCOSource license (or whatever the
heck it was that they SCO paid for). Might the other licensees have had some
reason to get behind this?

And how about the other side? Mightn't this be some sort of strange
three-corner shot on the part of the Nazgul or one of the other parties to the
numerous SCO lawsuits?

C'mon, let's see some creativity out there!!! After all, what we fail to
foresee could hurt Linux and FLOSS.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hmmm... once again we are left to ponder...
Authored by: GriffMG on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 02:42 AM EST
You can't set up a $100m deal in five minutes, and the legal people will want to
have billed substantially for getting this 'wonderful' arrangement in place, so
why, why, why did tSCOg want 'extra time' to put forward a reorganisation plan?



---
Keep B-) ing

[ Reply to This | # ]

But: Linux doesn't threaten MS
Authored by: bradley13 on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 03:07 AM EST
I recently read a very interesting article (sorry, no clue where) that pointed
out that Windows may indeed be doomed. But in the end it's not Linux, or Apple,
or indeed any other competitor that will have done it.

Instead, it's the paradigm shift that Microsoft missed: as more and more content
runs in the browser, the operating system becomes increasingly irrelevant. It is
entirely possible that Aunt Minnie's next computer could have an embedded
operating system with no software beyond the built-in browser. At that point,
the operating system can be literally anything, and no one is going to be making
much money on it.

Meanwhile, their other cash cow, Microsoft Office, hasn't much life left in it
either - equivalent or better tools are available free on the Internet. Even
business services are available for not much money. And after the redesign
disaster that Office-2007 represents, well...

Microsoft may indeed be focusing on Linux - if so, it just shows that they
continue to misunderstand, or perhaps they desperately need to pretend...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Technically: How to morph into a private company?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 03:08 AM EST
I don't know who got all the SCO shares, but there are shares. Of course most
people will sell the SCO hot potatoes if they get little more then nothing for
it. But in the end, haven't they have to buy all or nearly all the shares to go
private?

I don't think that any investor will fire Darl. He is involved in it way to
much. As he was part of the UNIX Deal with Novell. He is a witness. You wouldn't
fire him not before the fat lady has sung.

As al-Walid ibn Talal Al Saud has 5% of the Apple shares, what's the connection
between Apple, SCO, Linux and Microsoft?

[ Reply to This | # ]

"The Old Rich Boy's Club ... Game" of taking a company private.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 04:18 AM EST

"The Old Rich Boy's Club ... Game" of taking a company private. Who pays? The USA's middle class taxpayers.

Private investment companies, organized as hedge funds or private equity firms, have recently grown into major economic forces in the U.S. economy. They mobilize capital, and often leverage it with borrowed funds, in order to accumulate a tremendous amount of assets under their management. These investments include leveraged buyouts; market-neutral investment strategies in publicly traded stocks and bonds, energy, and other commodities; various arbitrage strategies; as well as many lesser known and some entirely unreported transactions. Hedge funds are big players in the large corporate take-over activity that reached $3.6 trillion in 2006¸ and they are also responsible for a significant share of trading volume on the major stock exchanges and in some over-the-counter derivatives markets.

These private pools of capital are unregulated, or exempt from Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulation, under both the Investment Advisors Act and the Investment Company Act. While these exemptions were once justified on the grounds that such investment firms were small, closely held, and did not raise their capital in public capital markets, the exemptions are no longer consistent with today’s reality. Today these firms are huge, have a wide number and range of investors, and the Internet has blurred the distinction between public and private marketing.

In addition to being unregulated, these financial institutions also reap substantial benefits from special tax provisions that, like the regulatory framework, are no longer appropriate. The professional fund managers of these hedge funds and private equity firms are allowed to treat a substantial portion of their compensation as capital gains, meaning they are most likely taxed at 15% rather than the 35% rate that applies to ordinary income such as wages and salary. Such an exemption, however, makes little sense: in economic terms, the fund managers (also known as investment advisors) perform a professional service, much like lawyers or doctors, and receive remuneration for their labor.

$$$$$$$$< /a>

[ Reply to This | # ]

One way valve
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 05:19 AM EST
Nobody bets $100M if the possibility exists that it will immediately have to be
paid to someone else for no gain: you put a one-way valve in place. There's no
chance I can see that this capital is going to be available to IBM and Novell.
The investors will structure an agreement, such that they control the purse
strings and can shut off any flow if it is diverted out of the company.

That means that the agreement isn't as unremittingly positive for SCO as the
press release paints it. And it also means that the judge may decide that it's
not in the interests of the SCO creditors.

JeffV

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • SEC - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 05:27 AM EST
    • SEC - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 06:12 AM EST
      • SEC - Authored by: John Hasler on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 01:32 PM EST
This is madness!... unless...
Authored by: Ian Al on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 06:19 AM EST
I agree with all of you. Even if this is Bill Gate's parting gift to Microsoft
it makes no sense.

However, I wonder if the following is a possibility. If the reorganisation is
accepted before the Novell case is held then SCOG will leave Chapter 11 and all
the court cases will be unstayed. Most of the cases spell insolvancy for SCOG
and Chapter 7 bankruptcy. Notice that time is of the essence for the investors.

Here are the top five creditors (IBM and Novell are listed as being owed less
than $5k),

AMICI LLC Phone: (518) 434-6543 Trade Debt $500,650.73
80 State Street

BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP, $287,256.39

The Canopy Group, $139,895.00

GRE MOUNTAIN HEIGHTS PROPERTY, $132,502.00

MICROSOFT LICENSING, INC., $125,575.00

SUN MICRO SYSTEMS INC., $50,000.00

Let's say that part of the $5M is spent paying off all the creditors. That, at
least, keeps the lawyers sweet. Judge Gross is assured that the potential
creditors are protected by the $100M loan facility. He sees no reason not to
agree the reorganisation since all of the creditor interests are now covered.
Now lets say that SCOG, as a privately held company, ceases trading and closes
down. They refund the balance on the remaining support and licence terms, again
out of the $5M.

All the law suits close as SCOG the plaintif/defendant no longer exists. The
only recourse of IBM and Novell for their counterclaims, Suse for the
arbitration and Red Hat as plaintif would be to sue the former officers of SCOG.

None of the FUD goes away. Microsoft still have their friend Novell owning the
copyright and SVRx contracts that are the basis of the FUD. As with the patent
deal, Novell protestations will still be matched by Microsoft
misrepresentation.

There is a good chance that a good proportion of the $5M would still be left for
the priority shareholder to take back. As a gesture of good faith they might
even hand a golden reward to the other loyal majority shareholders; what was his
name? Yarro? Oh, and a golden parachute for loyal senior managers that helped
put the deal together. Why not? Nobody would see. It's a private company.

So, the extortionist, scamster, proxy fuddies get a soft landing and bucks in
the bank from their sponsor, the FUD goes on and the final cost is a couple of
million dollars. Sounds like a sweet payoff to me.

---
Regards
Ian Al

When nothing else makes sense, use Linux.

[ Reply to This | # ]

If there is anything I think we should have already learned ...
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 06:57 AM EST
... is never take an SCO produced document or court filing as gospel. Moreover
don't even give a lot of credence to it - wish to say 'take it with a grain of
salt'

Have patience and allow truth to surface.

This is not to imply that there may not be some seeds or elements of truth in
what we read, but discrimination is in order.

[ Reply to This | # ]

But What About the UNIX Business?
Authored by: sylvester on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 07:28 AM EST
From 346 exhibit A, the MOU:

"The Debtor and SNCP acknowledge and agree that a purpose and intended effect of the Proposed Plan of Reorganization is to maximize the Debtor's litigation recovery under the Pending Litigation."

[ Reply to This | # ]

states of confusion ..
Authored by: emacsuser on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 08:00 AM EST
"SNCP has developed a business plan for SCO .. will also enable the company
to see SCO's legal claims through to their full conclusion"

PJ, help, I'm confused here, what I would like to know is:

01. What is the current state of play in the SCO litigation? I thought they
lost?

02. Aren't Novell and others making counterclaims against SCO and isn't SCO
declared bankrupt. If so don't these third parties have claims on these new
funds.

03. Is it legal to finance a bankrupt company to further more bogus litigation
claims.

[ Reply to This | # ]

LIBOR + 1700 points ???!!!
Authored by: ruurd on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 09:32 AM EST
Uhm, who thinks that LIBOR + 1700 points is a reasonable
interest? I mean, come on, at the current LIBOR, that is
21% interest? And they start out with 5 million dollars
meaning they will have to pay a cool million dollars a year
for interest only over this bit only.

I think that this is a long shot. Either the investor is
making a lot of money (in case SCO wins their lawsuits) or
he runs the company in the ground quite thoroughly.

---
ruurd

[ Reply to This | # ]

Germany
Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 09:40 AM EST
Might I suggest the first court case the buyers appeal be the German one? You
remember, the one where they were supposed to detail exactly HOW Linux infringed
on their "precioussss" Intellectual Property? The one that resulted
in them being estopped from making such a claim again in the land of
lederhosen?

Good luck with that, witless ones.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Pity champerty is legal
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 09:51 AM EST
I would have hoped that funding another party's lawsuit like this would be
illegal, and remembered such issues were discussed in the early days of
groklaw.

So a little bit of searching revealed that the term I was thinking of is
champerty. It used to be illegal under common law, but apparently it's legal
now. Pity.

Still, is there any legal recourse you can (effectively) take against someone
like this?

[ Reply to This | # ]

And if you really go for consipiracy theories..
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 10:36 AM EST
Or, "It's a Small World After All"

The Chairman of the Carlyle Group is.........

Our old Friend from IBM

[ Reply to This | # ]

Lost in the MOG.....
Authored by: dromasco on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 10:36 AM EST
It's refreshing to see Maureen's sense of humour is as insightful (or should I
say 'inciteful') as ever; her description of McBride as "he’s too much of
lightening rod" is spot on (if you consider how well he's 'lightened' SCO's
coffers). Replenishing those funds at some 21% per annum is exactly the sort of
forward-looking management style that we have come to expect. I note that the
stock has skyrocketed to USD $.11 per share as I write this, an 83% rise in mere
days! Should they borrow more, I'm quite sure their value will increase
commensurately........

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go private - Updated
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 11:43 AM EST
Maybe there is a God, after all. What's that sound I hear? It's wailing and
gnashing of teeth. Finally IBM faces an opponent with deep pockets that is able
to fight back.

Hey, somebody forgot to tell the Writers Guild of America that intellectual
property is supposed to be free. Guess they never read "The Cathedral and
the Bazaar".

Think about it: script writers get paid royalties by the biggest sharks in the
corporate tank, whereas Linux developers give it up for free. The Grocklaw
groupies regularly get put on the casting couch by IBM--used to generate free
publicity and to collect intelligence on SCO--don't even get cab fare out of it,
and are vain enough and to feel flattered by the attention.

No "Uncle Tom" ever felt as happy about being exploited as the
self-appointed leaders of the "Linux community". Everybody makes
money from Linux except the developers who do the work. But UNIX was developed
by paid professionals and was never free.

Let's face it: Linux is just imitation UNIX--a less mature, less capable copy,
and one that abandonded standards. The real creative genius belongs to Dennis
Ritchie, Ken Thompson, et. al. Linus Torvalds was just an incompetent imitator
who couldn't even be bothered to conform to the System V user interface
standard. The Linux Emperor has no clothes!

Linux destroyed established UNIX standards and allowed Microsoft to enter server
and government markets where they were previously excluded. It undercut the
price on UNIX system software and put most of those companies out of business.
SCO was the last UNIX-on-PC company left standing.

SCO were jerks, but they happen to be in the right. IBM welched on its deal
with SCO to develop a 64-bit UnixWare (SCO and its OEMs were told to resell AIX
5L instead!). That's a fact. IBM's NUMA-Q subsidiary took source code from
UnixWare and put it in its BSD-basedDynix OS; the next step was to move it to
Linux. They were in a big hurry and there was no IP cleanroom and it was
"just get the job done". IBM
figured it could do anything it wanted, and with some help from Novell's tame
judge, use it's captive media and legal clout to bully its way out. (When IBM
set up this site, they must have been delighted to discover so many patsies
willing run flack for them.)

Well, looks like they've finally come up against somebody who can fight back.
It's about time. Now justice might just get done.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Could TSG become vapor before issues are settled?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 12:09 PM EST
The SCO Group (TSG) gets bought and the holding company decides that things are
just not working out. Can the holding company just write off it's
"investment" and TSG just stops existing? No more company, no more
lawsuits?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Chesapeake Partners Management bows out - SCO announces reorganization plan
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 12:24 PM EST
As of the time of the filing of the 13g, this part of the statment kind of stuck
out:

Common Stock, $.001 par value per share (the "Shares").

According to the SCOX.PK quote on Yahoo, it now shows between nine and eleven
cents. The par value is a tenth of that. Are we saying the stock is
over-priced by a factor of ten even now?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Value as FUD seems questionable
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 12:53 PM EST
As tempting as it is to see this as someone wanting to prop SCO up for the
anti-Linux FUD value, I can't quite see that working. It's been a while since
I've seen anything that resembles effective FUD come out of SCO. That is to
say, SCO emits the FUD, but it doesn't seem to go anywhere. It only gets
repeated in places like sys-con, which nobody pays any attention to. The
mainstream media, inattentive though they are, has been reporting that SCO is
getting thrashed in the court cases, with the implication that their claims have
no merit. So those who want anti-Linux FUD must see that SCO has no further
value in that department, indeed that reprts of SCO's failure generate more
confidence in Linux. They would probably if anything like to see SCO go quietly
into chapter 7 and disappear from the news, then go find some other avenue of
attack.

Unfortunately, I have no other theory to offer.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Others may seek to follow in SCO's footsteps
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 01:20 PM EST
SCO's success in reorganizing may well lead to others
trying to follw in their footsteps.

I can just see the emails now..............

"Hello Sir, Or Madame,

My name Hector G Bootie, my home Lagos Nigeria, I am writing you today because
my company 419 IP Inc
is currently in bankruptcy, but my company sue Big American Company many
dollars, all I need is small investment
from person of vision to reorganiz and continue sue BAC, if give me money now,
we all make BIG money later.

Sincerley
Hector Gotalatta Bootie
President 419 IP Inc"

[ Reply to This | # ]

Investment Designed to Take SCO Private and Positions it to Emerge from Chapter 11
Authored by: Yossarian on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 01:42 PM EST
So what is the game plan? I can see two possibilities:

1) Somebody believes that this turkey will lay golden eggs.
Two reasons why I don't believe it:
a) Novell has a solid case. And without the copyrights for
UNIX you can't blackmail Linux.
b) Why take SCO out of Chapter 11? Changing status costs money
and makes the appeal process more expensive. No reduced bond.

2) Somebody needs to hide something, desperately.
The reason I believe this one is that publicly traded
companies need to follow many SEC rules. "Creative"
accounting can send the management team to jail.
In addition, a bankruptcy court acts, de facto, as the board.
Whatever is said in court is public knowledge, and lying to
the court can send you to jail for perjury.

Taking SCO private, and out of bankruptcy, gives management
the ability to destroy evidence in the books without
facing criminal charges.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Constructive Trust?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 02:23 PM EST
If SCO comes out of bankruptcy, there is nothing to prevent Judge Kimball from imposing a constructive Trust, right?

With the constructive trust in place, SCO either goes back in to BK, or the shadow investors have to fill up the trust putting their money at genuine risk right?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Much like soilent green...
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 02:45 PM EST
Groklaw is people!!!

Is MOG so dim as to never ever get that?
/bowhead
/shakehead

[ Reply to This | # ]

M$ A Lot More Evil Than You Think?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 03:49 PM EST
Microsoft reportedly took this technique to an even higher level around the same time when it tried to buy Intuit, which at that point was primarily known for its Quicken home finance application. Microsoft wooed Intuit and won the company in 1994 with a $1.5 billion all-stock offer. Another reported incentive to Intuit was Microsoft's threat to throw $1 billion into development of competing products if Intuit didn't sell out.
Already in antitrust trouble with the Department of Justice, Microsoft eventually dropped the offer, paying Intuit a $46.25 million termination fee. But according to at least one Intuit techie who jumped to Microsoft shortly thereafter, the primary purpose of Microsoft's bid was actually to get information on Intuit's programmers, NOT to buy the company.
Unlike Borland, where Microsoft paid a PR penalty (and later scored a lawsuit) for sending limos to the parking lot and interviewing anybody who would get in, by entering a formal due diligence period with Intuit, Microsoft got access to many details, including Intuit’s product plans and employee records. By the time they bailed on the deal, Microsoft had a very good idea exactly which Intuit employees to recruit to both improve Microsoft Money and to hurt Quicken, QuickBooks, and TurboTax.
It is a testament to Intuit that the company survived.
CLIC KY

[ Reply to This | # ]

That's not a plan, it's a sale
Authored by: kh on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 04:44 PM EST
It doesn't have any way of generating money, which is what companies do isn't
it?

Going private would surely also affect the stock holders wouldn't it? That
would make them interested parties.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hmmm...
Authored by: GriffMG on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 04:47 PM EST
Let me see, we have a 'buyer' willing to cough up $5m to buy what is left of
tSCOg and offers an extremely competitive 21% interest loan of up to $95m as
well - with a few strings applied.

Now that's might look a bit better than the York deal, but is it actually that
good? Is it contingent on getting out of Chp 11 BEFORE the Utah thing is
settled?

Is it?
I can't tell

---
Keep B-) ing

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Hmmm... - Authored by: GriffMG on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 04:52 PM EST
If you are a multibillionaire...
Authored by: GriffMG on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 05:19 PM EST
How many wagers where you can bet (about) $10m against a $5billion pay day are
available to you?

Even if the odds are pretty remote, and the court has decided against you?

---
Keep B-) ing

[ Reply to This | # ]

More News Coverage
Authored by: Eeyore on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 05:33 PM EST
E-week has an interesting story on this....

What`s Behind the SCO Buyout - "primary purpose and intended results of the Plan, and the financing commitments provided under the MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) is to encourage and promote an early and favorable resolution of the Novell/(IB)M Litigation. Notwithstanding the August 2007 interim ruling by the Utah District Court in the Novell Litigation, SCO believes it has an excellent chance to prevail in the Novell/ IBM Litigation, including potential for an award of substantial damages in its favor should SCO prevail."

E-week is also linking to a couple of stories on this from Linux Watch.

SCO goes private, gets $100M to keep going - "Not only will this deal position us to emerge from Chapter 11, but it also marks an exciting future for our business."

SCO CEO Darl McBride is on his way out

[ Reply to This | # ]

IBM waiting....
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 05:44 PM EST
So, regardless of which troll is financing this saga, after SCO gets the verdict
of how much it owes Novell, it will appeal and get out of chapter 11. What
happens then?
Will IBM be able to move on with the final kill despite an appeal in the Novell
case or will it be on hold?
I'd like to see IBM put the final nail in the SCO coffin ASAP!
But I'm afraid the legal system will allow SCO to continue at snails speed
because the chair-throwing troll behind SCO wants this to go on as long as
possible.

Happy Ubuntu user

[ Reply to This | # ]

SNCP could actually make money here...
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 06:29 PM EST
... maybe.

It would require somebody else to invest in SCO after SNCP did, and SNCP bleeds
off that money by the high interest loan.

But who (else) would be dumb enough to invest in SCO? Well, there are two
possibilities. One is that SCO gets somebody who actually believes in them.
This isn't impossible - say that SCO appeals the Novell decision and the appeals
court finds something in Kimball's decision that they don't think is adequate.
So they send it back to Kimball for him to correct that point and re-roll the
case from there. Well, that doesn't necessarily mean that SCO won anything. It
might just mean that Novell has to work harder to finish them off. But you
could see someone who doesn't follow the case closely thinking that SCO is going
to win and make a lot of money.

The other option is that the new investor doesn't think SCO is going to win.
They are just gambling that they can find someone else - a third investor - to
make the second investor's investment pay off. This is kind of like the
"greater fool" theory of real estate investing. It actually works -
until the music stops. Then someone loses their shirt.

Someone is going to lose their shirt here, too. But it might not be SNCP. They
could come out OK, if they can find another sucker.

MSS2

[ Reply to This | # ]

MOU: LIBOR + 1,700 basis points
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 06:30 PM EST
LIBOR is one of the standard bases for Mortgage rates and basis points are absolute percentages. Each basis point is 1/100 of one percent. An interest rate of 5% plus 100 basis points is 6% (See Wikipeia ). The current LIBOR rate is between 3% and 5.36% (See Bloomberg). so the MOU lending rate is between 17% and 19.36%.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What about a bond?
Authored by: JamesK on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 06:34 PM EST
I seem to recall someone mention that if SCO wants to appeal, they have to post
a bond to cover what they have to pay. How does this fit in with this new
"deal"?


---
This space intentionally left blank.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Not a bad thing?
Authored by: GLJason on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 07:50 PM EST

SCO gets $5 million cash to pay off current creditors and keep alive with their current expenses for a while. They also get $95 million to pay to Novell and IBM when they trounce SCO in the courtroom. If they wish to appeal the upcoming judgements against them, they will have to borrow that money at 17% interest (not a bad rate considering the risk assumed by the creditor) from this investor. Novell and IBM (then RedHat and Autozone) will actually get some money back for their troubles and other companies will think twice about doing what SCO did. The company that is investing will be out $100 million.

The company will become the primary creditor of SCO and SCO will then file for chapter 7 I'm sure. Even if this company does get whatever "IP rights" SCO has, I would think they would be shy about rehashing the same lawsuits that had already cost them $100 million. If they aren't shy, then future targets of lawsuits can just point to the Novell, IBM, RedHat and Autozone decisions in their request for dismissal with prejudice.

Granted, I haven't seen the papers yet. However I see no downside to this deal with what I know unless someone is worried about SCO winning on appeal and hoped they would go out of business before that. I for one am happy that IBM and Novell will finally be getting their days in court after five years and that they will get some money to pay for the lawyers that have done such an excellent job.

In fact, if this would bring them out of bankruptcy then there would be no constructive trust issue to bring back to the bankruptcy court, Judge Kimball could decide the Novell case in its entirety.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Nothing compared to EU fines
Authored by: elhaard on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 08:46 PM EST
There have been a lot of comments about how huge an amount this is just for
prolonging the FUD.

But it's nothing compared to the fines that Microsoft gladly paid to EU instead
of revealing documentation for interoperability.

$100M is, what, less than two months worth of EU fines?

And it is certainly nothing compared to the overall MSOOXML bribes.

---
This comment is licensed under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 2.0).
Share & enjoy!

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO announces reorganization plan - $100 M from SNCP & "partners from the Middle East", to go p
Authored by: billposer on Friday, February 15 2008 @ 11:50 PM EST
Does anybody remember Darl's letter to Congress on how Linux is a national
security risk? I wonder how the sale of SCO and its putative interest in Linux
to someone with disturbing connections to Islamic terrorism will go over?

[ Reply to This | # ]

To quote WC Fields.......
Authored by: Stevieboy on Saturday, February 16 2008 @ 07:43 AM EST
"Never give a sucker an even break"

To Steve Norris and Partners - They saw you coming, dudes.

By the way Steve, are you any relation to the Steve Norris, one time Tory MP and
candidate for Mayor of London and who openly had 4 mistresses (he married the
last one)? I quite liked him and, if you are related, I wish you well but
advise you to drop this hot potato forthwith!

[ Reply to This | # ]

A question
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 16 2008 @ 11:48 AM EST
As I understand it, this deal is contingent on Darl's retirement as CEO. But if Darl leaves before SCO exits bankruptcy, then doesn't the bankruptcy court have to approve Darl's (substantial) retirement benefits? Which seems unlikely for a company in bankruptcy.

But if he tries to stay until SCO exits bankruptcy, the deal doesn't go though. Catch 22.

Or am I overanalyzing this?

[ Reply to This | # ]

What do they want?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 17 2008 @ 04:51 PM EST
Let's have a look at it in a different way:

SCO took a bad turn before judge Kimball and run into Chapter 11 to save the
money (and the IP) with some tricks.

In Chapter 11they failed, it went back to Kimball. No they tried to sell the IP
three(?) times without success. It's still there at SCO and Kimball on schedule.
What do to? How can you save the IP (FUD)?

Get out of Chapter 11, which became a dead end, and try to get private. As a
private company you can sell anything you like whenever you like to whomever you
like without a notice to anyone. Is that the next plan, the definite catch 22?

That brings me back to the question: How do you technically turn such a complex
shareholder company into a private company. If you have 51% you might do many
things, but you can't bleed out the company without the thread of being sued.
Haven't they said that they would like to go out of chapter 11 and turn it
private thereafter? Going private isn't related with chapter 11.

Isn't time another precious good that keeps running through their fingers? If
Kimball rules high enough, isn't it to late? If SCO owes Novell more as it's
worth + 5 million US-$, isn't SCO bankrupt? A credit over 95 million US-$
doesn't solve the debt.

[ Reply to This | # ]

McBride Out
Authored by: mobrien_12 on Sunday, February 17 2008 @ 05:13 PM EST
Maureen O'Gara: "SCO going private will give the Groklaw crowd one thing
it’s always wanted – SCO CEO Darl McBride out."

No, I think we truly would like to see him investigated by the SEC so that we
could see if he should be "IN" for a long time.

As "in prison."




[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO - conspiracy -
Authored by: hamstring on Monday, February 18 2008 @ 10:00 AM EST
SCO never updated their P.O.S and the market was taken over by Linux for the
most part, and bitten into by Windows. Now why on earth would SCO only go after
Linux and not M$, except that they have stakes with M$?

SCO was never a big enough company to take the legal challenges on their own.
Never in a gigabazillion years would a small business think they could take on
Big Blue, and win.. unless they had backing from someone really really big.

We all know this reeks of Balmer and Gates, but it's worth reminding people
sometimes....

I just wonder how much the M$ lobbyists are paying off people in DC not to run
them through the company shredder like they should, and did to Mah Bell.

The whole thing stinks, and funk slips in from all over the place. I smell a
lot of not only corporate corruption (which is not new, just much larger than we
normally see) as well as some government corruption as well.


---
# echo "Mjdsptpgu Svdlt" | tr [b-z] [a-y]
# IANAL and do not like Monopoly

[ 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 )