| |||||||||||||
Novell sold to AttachmateNovell sold to AttachmatePosted Nov 22, 2010 17:25 UTC (Mon) by daniel (subscriber, #3181)In reply to: Novell sold to Attachmate by stumbles Parent article: Novell sold to Attachmate
When the Elliott Associates unsolicited buyout was announced shortly after SCO's definitive defeat in court I immediately suspected Microsoft but my search for evidence of this at the time came up blank. Now it would seem the clammy hand of Microsoft was indeed busy pulling the strings, just concealed from view effectively enough to defeat a casual web search.
I would tend to think that once again, Microsoft treads near the border of illegal trust making activity, on the wrong side of it.
(Log in to post comments)
Novell sold to Attachmate Posted Nov 23, 2010 5:55 UTC (Tue) by Tashlan (guest, #17277) [Link]
I've suspected for some time the SCO case was simply to flush out who legally owned the UNIX copyrights so Microsoft could purchase them either directly or by proxy.
$10 million for the setup.
SCO / UNIX copyrights ... Posted Nov 25, 2010 1:38 UTC (Thu) by kmself (subscriber, #11565) [Link]
... except that much of the rest of what emerged in the case 1) threw very significant doubt over the strength of the copyright (particularly through the unsealing of the AT&T v. BSD lawsuit), over the applicability of any such copyright to Linux, and of the very willing participation in Linux by multiple putative copyright holders (principally Novell and SCO) under the terms of the GNU GPL.
The copyright angle is dead.
The purpose of the SCO v. IBM suit was to sow FUD. From conversations I had at the time with at least some tech execs (not particularly clueful ones, but then, that's probably the majority), it was at least somewhat successful.
I continue to give strong kudos to IBM for defending the case as strongly as it did, this has been a huge benefit to all of us in the Free / Open Source software communities.
|
|||||||||||||