Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
SCO CEO Defends $1 Billion Lawsuit Against IBM (CRN)
Computer Reseller News talks
with SCO CEO Darl McBride about the IBM lawsuit. "There will be
a day of reckoning for Red Hat and SuSE when this is done. But we're
focused on the IBM situation." (Found on Slashdot).
(Log in to post comments)
McBride using inflammatory language Posted Apr 23, 2003 21:00 UTC (Wed) by lseubert (guest, #4168) [Link] Aside from the content of McBride's arguments and assertions, which I don't buy; read thearticle and note the inflammatory rhetoric. What is up with that? Since when do CEO suits use such provocative language in interviews? I So why is McBride doing this? Is he out of control and frothing at the mouth, and this is a clue These rantings of McBride's are puzzling indeed.
Shut up and show us the code, SCO. Posted Apr 23, 2003 21:55 UTC (Wed) by cr (guest, #3685) [Link] Until then, this'll keep smelling just like pump 'n' dump.
Shut up and show us the code, SCO. Posted Apr 23, 2003 22:42 UTC (Wed) by NerdlyMcGeek (guest, #8453) [Link] >Until then, this'll keep smelling just like pump 'n' dump. They traded all of 7300 shares today hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha................................. More like dump n' dump. They couldn't pump this POS to save their retched lives. The only lawsuit involving these guys thats likely to fly will be from their shareholders once they figure out how badly they've been raped by these clowns.. These guys are like soooooo washed up. May as well just bite a shotgun right now and get it over with. Nobody will ever work with you monkeytards again....
Har har Posted Apr 23, 2003 22:02 UTC (Wed) by rknop (guest, #66) [Link] More like: there will be a day of reckoning for SCO *before* this current affair with IBM is done.-Rob
Sco Blows the monkey big time. Posted Apr 23, 2003 22:16 UTC (Wed) by NerdlyMcGeek (guest, #8453) [Link] McBride once again raises the bar for all monkeytards.His pathetic diatribe would indicate he could move up from imbecile to moron, but only if he tries really hard. These bozos will never see a dime from IBM or anybody else.
Sco Blows the monkey big time. Posted Apr 27, 2003 4:41 UTC (Sun) by Mrcelinho (guest, #10905) [Link] SCO is going to the curb... All he's doing is trying to get some attention...Ditadura Verbal!
SCO CEO Defends $1 Billion Lawsuit Against IBM (CRN) Posted Apr 23, 2003 22:41 UTC (Wed) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link] "We're either right or we're not. If we're wrong, we deserve people throwing rocks at us."This would be a great event to hold as a fundraiser at Linuxworld! :-)
SCO CEO Defends $1 Billion Lawsuit Against IBM (CRN) Posted Apr 23, 2003 22:56 UTC (Wed) by NerdlyMcGeek (guest, #8453) [Link] "We're either right or we're not. If we're wrong, we deserve people throwing rocks at us."This would be a great event to hold as a fundraiser at Linuxworld! :-) Count me in for this one but are we really limited to just stones?
SCO CEO Defends $1 Billion Lawsuit Against IBM (CRN) Posted Apr 23, 2003 22:55 UTC (Wed) by zonker (guest, #7867) [Link] Until McBride and co. turn up some proof of their allegations, I'm going to remain convinced that they're way off base. Is it common practice for a plantiff in a suit to refuse to provide evidence of their claims until trial? Seems like a big smokescreen to me.
Evidence Posted Apr 23, 2003 23:25 UTC (Wed) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] Not only are they not providing evidence, but their claims are just about as clear as mud. What code are they talking about? We don't even know if it something in the kernel or userspace.
Evidence Posted Apr 24, 2003 6:12 UTC (Thu) by ekj (subscriber, #1524) [Link] CRN: What components does SCO allege IBM donated to the open-source community?McBride: I can't answer that right now for legal reasons. It will be discussed in court. But we're not talking about insignificant amounts of code. It's substantial System V code showing up in Linux. Not very spesific, is he ? I strongly suspect that the reason that SCO claims 1 billion in damages while absolutely refusing to say what exactly IBM did wrong is that if they *did* publicise their claims, the claims would be ripped to shreds in minutes.
Evidence Posted Apr 24, 2003 11:32 UTC (Thu) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link] > Not very spesific, is he ? I strongly suspect that the reason that SCO> claims 1 billion in damages while absolutely refusing to say what exactly > IBM did wrong is that if they *did* publicise their claims, the claims > would be ripped to shreds in minutes. Maybe, but silence does not help SCO much. What only counts is how IBM is
SCO CEO Defends $1 Billion Lawsuit Against IBM (CRN) Posted Apr 24, 2003 0:37 UTC (Thu) by dwalters (guest, #4207) [Link] Am I the only one who is worried about SCO's lawsuit? I, like almost everyone else who has posted comments about this case on forums such as LWN, Slashdot etc, do not believe that this case truly has merit. However, has that stopped miscarriages of justice from ocurring in the past? If, heaven forbid, SCO succeeds in suing IBM (or to a lesser extent, even if there is an out-of-court settelment), this will be a very dark day indeed for users of GNU/Linux everywhere. It would probably ultimately render all use of GNU/Linux anywhere where SCO's IP has jurisdiction effectively illegal unless royalties are paid to SCO. I am concerned. Shouldn't I be?
SCO CEO Defends $1 Billion Lawsuit Against IBM (CRN) Posted Apr 24, 2003 3:53 UTC (Thu) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link] I think you are wrong about the potential downside in case of an SCO win. Theworst case scenario would be a few particular modules of code needing to get re-written, possibly using some other technique. SCO doesn't hold IP on the UNIX API or on fundamental OS algorithms. Their case rests on convincing the court that some not widely known technique found its way from their source to Linux source by way of IBM employees who had source code access. Since IBM has only contributed to relatively modular bits of the kernel relatively late in the game, and not contributed all that much in user land, it's pretty easy to bound the worst case effects even if SCO won.
SCO CEO Defends $1 Billion Lawsuit Against IBM (CRN) Posted Apr 24, 2003 14:38 UTC (Thu) by bryn (guest, #1482) [Link] The initial material damage may not be substantial. However, an SCO win against IBM could act as a strong deterent aainst other companies investing and/or adopting linux and other open source projects.The untested integrity of open source against patent and copyright laws must stand as one of the most significant barriers against its adoption within industry. I think this is important, as I would like to see a shift to industry employing people to sustain and improve OSS.
SCO CEO Defends $1 Billion Lawsuit Against IBM (CRN) Posted Apr 24, 2003 15:00 UTC (Thu) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link] I think you are mixing two distinct issues. The scenario described would not bea test of open source licenses or software; the situation would be almost exactly the same if IBM had violated someone's IP with their contribution to a different proprietary product. If you are saying that psychologically the stereotypical "business manager" might be confused and make some overgeneralization about all open source, my response is that I would expect your prediction to be wrong on empirical grounds. Business managers are narrow, not stupid. They gravitate towards stuff that helps them make/save money, without all that much ideology involved one way or the other.
A bit of history Posted Apr 24, 2003 10:33 UTC (Thu) by MortenSickel (subscriber, #3238) [Link] Wasn't it caldera that aquired SCO and afterward changed it's name? It makes the interview in issue 65 of Liunx Journal quite interesting... Seemes that they belived in Linux back then...Interview: Caldera's Ransom Love Morten
A bit of history Posted Apr 24, 2003 14:34 UTC (Thu) by erat (guest, #21) [Link] As a former employee of Caldera (started in '96) as well as a former employee of SCO (left in November '03), I can say with no hesitation that Caldera != SCO or vice versa, and that your comment about Caldera believing in Linux is correct. I'm sure people who don't know any better will reply to this post with anti-Caldera rhetoric just like they've been doing for years. That's okay, I can't thrash folks for not knowing the truth about Caldera when the truth was only really known by insiders (if management were only better at interfacing with the public... Caldera never did a good job of that). Just so long as they remember that the Caldera that I worked at is not the company suing IBM, no matter how much people want to believe it's true. That Caldera is gone.
A bit of history Posted Apr 24, 2003 14:35 UTC (Thu) by erat (guest, #21) [Link] I actually don't live in a time warp, trust me. I meant to say I left in November '02, not November '03.My bad.
Which patches exactly? Posted Apr 24, 2003 21:05 UTC (Thu) by utoddl (subscriber, #1232) [Link] Aren't all the patches that have been applied to the kernel since, oh, woolly mammoths were last hunted still available online somewhere? Exactly which patch/patches contain $1 billion worth of SCO's IP?This sounds like a suit StrongBad would file: "I don't have a billion dollars; obviously somebody prevented me from getting it. I write software for a living, so does IBM. It must have been them. Guess I'd better sue them!" Am I missing something? Like, oh, maybe ... a fact? Wake me up when this suit is over (unless IBM loses or caves of course).
|
|
||||||||||||