The Wrong Side [LWN.net]

The Wrong Side

Posted Dec 28, 2003 12:11 UTC (Sun) by dkite (guest, #4577)
In reply to: The Wrong Side by ncm
Parent article: IBM's Unpublished Cases (Groklaw)

The nature of an adversarial system demands that one uses all the legal
tools at your disposal. Lawsuits are truly a zero sum game. If I lose,
the other wins, and visa-versa.

If IBM looses this case, they have to write a check for $3 billion.

It is there responsability, and the judges expect them, to forward and
promote their side of the case as vigorously as possible. They will
minimize and disparage any evidence or argument that supports the other
side, whether or not in private they agree.

When the time comes to hire counsel, what you want is a lawyer who
doesn't hesitate to (figuratively) shed blood. What you want is your
opponent's blood on the floor, since the alternative is to bleed
yourself.

Whether one agrees or not with software patents, they are real. They are
part of the legal landscape. IBM is using what they have to defend
themselves.

Derek

(Log in to post comments)

The Wrong Side

Posted Dec 28, 2003 20:56 UTC (Sun) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]

> Besides the stench of software patents, there is another problem. If IBM wins this case, its only real use is to force SCO to settle. But, we don't want SCO to settle. We want them to lose, and lose badly. We want a court verdict that Red Hat can use against them. If they settle, and drop their claims, we all lose.

This is not necessarily how thing are going to play out. IBM is likely to win both cases actually (i.e. SCO have nothing). This patent case is likely to be used to force SCO to surrender all remaining Unix assets (if they actually own any) or for the company to go broke (similar effect). Can you imagine anyone giving SCO financial support once they lose the $3G case against IBM? Not likely. So, the the second case is going to be their final financial death.

IBM kills multiple birds with one stone here: SCO is gone, Unix IP issues are wiped out and a powerful message is sent to others that might have similar ideas about Linux. From what IBM have been telling us, they appear to be calm, decisive and deliberate in all their actions (haven't seen many press releases from IBM, only court documents). When they said: "We're going to defend ourselves vigorously", SCO better believe them.

I know it sounds a lot like a war - that's because it is.

The Wrong Side

Posted Dec 28, 2003 21:23 UTC (Sun) by dkite (guest, #4577) [Link]

Whether one agrees or not, patents are part of the law of property. The
uses of patents that we see today are not new, and patents and their
benefits are deeply entrenched in the economy and mindset of North
Americans. This isn't going to change.

The best way to win a lawsuit is to not have one to begin with. Linux has
potentially many IP issues, patents included. Anyone with a copyright and
lost market share can attempt what SCO has to try to get some money out
of the large market share that linux/gnu+everythingontop has.

IBM is saying that if you sue us regarding Linux (they are a target since
they have deep pockets) you will not only have the fight of your life,
but you will be put out of business. I rather like that. I want them on
my side.

Lawyers are many times a proxy to do the nasty stuff that I and probably
you find distasteful. IBM is filling that role right now for the FOSS
community. Let them win the case, or make SCO back down, or put them out
of business.

Remember, a great jurist said once that if justice is done within the
'justice system', it is purely coincidental.

Derek (no it doesn't make sense)

The Wrong Side

Posted Dec 29, 2003 14:42 UTC (Mon) by seasoned (guest, #18283) [Link]

DKITE. Software patents are NOT as old or entrenced as you claim. Patents are SUPPOSED to satisfy 2 criteria:

1. Inobvious to the industry that they are for.
2. NO PRIOR ART!

SCOs claims are BASELESS in BOTH cases! SCO supposedly got these "patents" in a round about way through AT&T. Most were COLLABORATIVE that AT&T had no right to. Others were freely given to
companies like BSD.

Software patents have gottenWAY out of hand. Next thing youknow, someone will be patenting addition!

As for no prior art? A LOT of this, ESPECIALLY collaborative stuff
has been CODIFIED by a THIRD party known as I.E.E.E Look it up in a
library some time under P.O.S.I.X.

UNIX stopped being an Operating System a LONG time ago. It has become more of a CLASS. AIX, MACOS, HP/UX, ULTRIX, SOLARIS, LINUX, etc... are ALL considered UNIX. Is one company.(especially SCO which doesn't seem tocare about UNIX, etc...) going to sue the hundreds of companies that have been allowed to useit for DECADES? How can the purchaser of rights deny rights granted to others by the copany it purchased the rights from?

As for microsoft providing a Linux/UNIX competitor! What a laugh! When Torvalds STARTED he had ONLY what M/S STILL hasn't gotten right. A VM manager. XENIX wasa laugh, and IT didn't havea decentVM manager either.

Steve

SCO doesn't have any patents

Posted Dec 29, 2003 18:17 UTC (Mon) by ctg (subscriber, #3459) [Link]

I think you need to do a bit more "research". It is a very confusing case
and with lots of FUD flying around, it has hard to focus on what really
has happened.

Check out groklaw (http://groklaw.net)