Possible Link to SCO Source licensing? [LWN.net]

Possible Link to SCO Source licensing?

Posted Nov 28, 2006 17:54 UTC (Tue) by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501)
In reply to: Possible Link to SCO Source licensing? by tjasper
Parent article: Who is being divisive?

Ye$. Plea$e $tick to the $tandard Engli$h Alphabet.

SCO made some silly accusations. Microsoft supported them (finacially, through buying a useless license they didn't need) in an attempt to scare off competitors.

This has failed.

Microsoft is not throwing 400 Milion dollars to save the 50 Milion Dollars or so it has already spent on SCO.

So please leave both that language and those theories to GrokLaw.

(Log in to post comments)

Possible Link to SCO Source licensing?

Posted Nov 28, 2006 20:12 UTC (Tue) by tjasper (subscriber, #4310) [Link]

And my theories and typographical conventions are less valid than yours because......

Possible Link to SCO Source licensing?

Posted Nov 28, 2006 21:14 UTC (Tue) by felixfix (subscriber, #242) [Link]

Please stick to standard English spellings if you wish to criticize others'.

SCO made some silly accusations. Microsoft supported them (financially, through buying a useless license they didn't need) in an attempt to scare off competitors.

This has failed.

Microsoft is not throwing 400 million dollars to save the 50 million Dollars or so it has already spent on SCO.

Possible Link to SCO Source licensing?

Posted Nov 29, 2006 9:55 UTC (Wed) by k8to (subscriber, #15413) [Link]

Pettier defeats petty? Maybe it was meant as a lesson by example, but I wish we'd all refrained.