SCO's case gets clearer (CNN) [LWN.net]

CNN looks at the SCO case from an investor's point of view. "SGI's code comparison gave observers their first glimpse of how much infringement there actually is. Granted, SGI's tests don't carry the same weight that a neutral party's might (SGI is due to lose its SCO Unix license on Oct. 14 unless the companies can reach an agreement), but the 200 lines of infringing code SGI found is a far cry from SCO's claim of 119,130 infringing lines. In SCO's suit against IBM, it claims 'over a million' lines of infringing code."

$215M market cap?

Posted Oct 8, 2003 16:15 UTC (Wed) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link]

I presume when the author says:

this relatively small ($215 million market cap) company

he's talking about SCOX's current market capitalization, at that $16.40 price. If you believe (as I do) that its pre-February-15th valuation reflects reality, then 215 / 16.4 * 0.78 = $10.2M is their real capitalization.

SCO's case gets clearer (CNN)

Posted Oct 8, 2003 16:18 UTC (Wed) by sab39 (guest, #2185) [Link]

While this article is far from perfect and still grants SCO's claims far more credit than they actually deserve, it's nice to see that some mainstream financial press is picking up on the idea that there's at least a reasonable doubt that the claims have much likelihood of success.

Looking at the tail end of the stock price graph on the article, it looks like others are getting the idea, too...

Norwegian Blue

Posted Oct 8, 2003 17:45 UTC (Wed) by StevenCole (guest, #3068) [Link] (1 responses)

From the article:

... these individual vendor code comparisons will just serve as canaries for investors trying to gauge the safety of entering the deep, dark SCO coal mine.

And SCO will be seen by investors as a Norwegian Blue.

... definitely deceased, and when I purchased it not 'alf an hour ago, you assured me that its total lack of movement was due to it bein' tired and shagged out following a prolonged squawk.

Norwegian Blue

Posted Oct 8, 2003 17:48 UTC (Wed) by StevenCole (guest, #3068) [Link]

Oops, sorry. The real link to Norwegian Blue is here: http://members.tripod.com/~xellos/parrot.html.

SCO's case gets clearer (CNN)

Posted Oct 8, 2003 18:19 UTC (Wed) by jre (guest, #2807) [Link] (3 responses)

It is reassuring, in an odd way, to see such a positive reaction to a flawed article. When I read that SGI's "strategy" is to

"Examine the code closely, admit some wrongdoing, and quickly fix it."

my first instinct is to say "Not so fast! SGI did not admit anything of the sort! Those 200 lines were likely in the public domain, and there is no evidence that SCO had any legitimate claim to them anyway, and ... [continue rant]"

But, like other LWN readers, once I caught my breath I realized that this article is actually a pearl of objectivity compared to what we have gotten used to in the mainstream press, and especially in the mainstream financial press. The wind is changing, and not in SCO's favor.

Now, let's have some follow-up on the "pump-and-dump" story.

SCO's case gets clearer (CNN)

Posted Oct 8, 2003 18:21 UTC (Wed) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (2 responses)

"Now, let's have some follow-up on the "pump-and-dump" story."

How about this? We're currently trying to figure out just who Royce & Associates is, and why they would want to buy over 10% of SCO - 20% of the shares in circulation...

SCO's case gets clearer (CNN)

Posted Oct 8, 2003 18:39 UTC (Wed) by csm1975 (guest, #15864) [Link]

http://www.roycefunds.com/

"Well-respected as one of the pioneers of small-cap investing, Chuck Royce enjoys one of the longest tenures of any active mutual fund manager."

'nough said!

Untapped value of Unix patents.

Posted Oct 8, 2003 19:46 UTC (Wed) by StevenCole (guest, #3068) [Link]

Here's what Business 2.0 says about Royce Technology Value Fund.

Jonathan Cohen hasn't been afraid to invest the Royce Technology Value Fund in little-known stocks in distressed sectors of the industry.

As Homer Simpson might say: Ummmm, untapped Unix patents. Where can I get some of those? Doh! IBM!

SCO's case gets clearer (CNN)

Posted Oct 8, 2003 18:56 UTC (Wed) by patriot (guest, #14594) [Link]

Pump and Dump and who is Royce?

Royce is apparently a small cap fund manager that doesn't read much

http://www.roycefunds.com/about/inside_royce.html

And according to cmowire on /.

http://slashdot.org/articles/03/10/08/002215.shtml?tid=106&tid=130&tid=185&tid=187&tid=190&tid=88The

"short interest is *insane* on that stock -- as in maybe 15% of the shares out on the open market and not covered by the Canopy Group and such have been short-sold."

SCO's arithmetic

Posted Oct 8, 2003 22:40 UTC (Wed) by denials (subscriber, #3413) [Link]

If one multiplies 200 lines by the number of kernel releases that contained the allegedly infringing code, you still don't get into the 6 digit mark.

Perhaps SCO is multiplying 200 lines by the kernel releases, prereleases, and release candidates? There would only have to be 600 or so of those, which seems about right for 2.4 and 2.6 development cycle.

Or perhaps its a multiplication factor of the number of distributions that have shipped the code... 600 seems about right there, too, if you combine the number of distros, their individual releases, and/or reissued kernel packages, and platforms on which those distros run.

Legal math is fun.