Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Unix Operating Systems Software

IBM Responds To SCO: Business As Usual 828

Posted by timothy from the long-walk-short-plank dept.
Newsforge is running a statement from IBM on its decision not to bow to SCO's demand that they stop shipping AIX. In a statement this short, there's not much room for weaselly language, but the even-shorter version is this: "IBM's Unix license is irrevocable, perpetual and fully paid up. It cannot be terminated."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IBM Responds To SCO: Business As Usual More

IBM Responds To SCO: Business As Usual

Comments Filter:

  • IBM Responds to SCO Translation (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:11PM (#6218016)
    Fuck off

    • Sun sponsors SCO? Possible proof (Score:4, Interesting)

      by ultrabot ( 200914 ) on Tuesday June 17, 2003 @01:38AM (#6220206)
      Felt like saying this close to the top of the article... From here [com.com]:


      How did Microsoft's agreement to pay you for Unix rights happen?
      Darl: In the Microsoft case, they saw an opportunity. We originally approached them and said we're on a new licensing path; we have this intellectual property that we've started approaching vendors about. IBM is one we approached; Microsoft was another. We had about four big vendors in the last quarter that we talked with. With two of them, we signed deals. The other we're still talking with, and IBM we reached an impasse.

      To me it feels like they are still talking with HP, and Sun decided to pay up to take a stab at linux (in the back, I might as well say). Or is there any other interpretation? Was anyone surprised at how quick Sun was to advertise that they are in the clear?

      Boy, these Sun people don't seem like such friends of ours after all.

  • SCO has made public statements and accusations about IBM's Unix license and about Linux in an apparent attempt to create fear uncertainty and doubt

    I know it's silly but I always love when IBM uses the phrase "FUD" in corporate announcements since they know it means nothing to the mainstream press but it gets the Linux community all fired up. As petty and transparent as it is, IBM's press announcement can be roughly tranlated as "hey geeks, didja hear that? SCO called Captain Kirk a wimp, you feeling riled?" Well, riled we are...

    The second paragraph: "IBM's Unix license is irrevocable, perpetual and fully paid up. It cannot be terminated" is nothing but pissing on SCO's shoes. Beautiful, I can't suppress a beaming smile.

    • I'm not sure you are right (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:18PM (#6218110)
      I think your idealism has made you forget that IBM and SCO are COMPANIES. That means money is involved. That also means greed is involved. Any schoolyard-bully characterization you give them is naivety at the extreme. Yes, we'd all like IBM to kick their (SCO's) ass. But, they are doing it for different reasons than an armchair-quarterback like yourself would like to think.

      • Re:I'm not sure you are right (Score:5, Interesting)

        by coupland ( 160334 ) * <dchase@hotmailCHEETAH.com minus cat> on Monday June 16, 2003 @08:19PM (#6218620) Journal
        Despite the fact that you can't seem to differentiate between a friendly opinion on a web site and a personal attack on you, whoever you are, I will still take the high ground and agree that companies are still all about profit. However don't be so naive as to think that egos aren't a huge factor as companies pursue profit. I work for a Fortune-500 company and have seen multi-billion-dollar mergers scrapped because the respective CEOs wanted to come out the "winner". I've seen Silicon Valley companies ground into dust in a personal vendetta against a competitor. I've seen departments out to crush one another just to beat out an internal competitor. In this instance IBM seems to be taking it personally, and if you think IBM is above crushing a company just to hear the "squish" then not only do you know nothing about corporations, you also know nothing about people. IBM is holding a magnifying glass over SCO on a sunny day. And I sincerely suspect that rather than buy SCO and make them happy, they would rather see them fry in the sun no matter how much it hurts.
        • I'd imagine IBM don't particularly like companies trying to, when stripped of the legal niceties, basically extort money out of them. Crushing SCO sends a message to anyone else who might try it that IBM isn't going to roll over easy.

          • Re:It's also about sending a message... (Score:5, Interesting)

            by radon28 ( 593565 ) on Tuesday June 17, 2003 @12:15AM (#6219888)
            I remember a story about how some company tried to sue IBM over IP issues, and IBM would say "let's meet, we'll settle it out of court." So the company would show up for a meeting with IBM, with a list of their claims, and IBM would look at them, and then pull out binders of IP violations that that company had committed against IBM, which is nearly unavoidable for many companies because of the sheer amount of IP that IBM holds. The reps from that company would basically go "eep" and it would be over. Of course, I don't know if this story is true or not, but it would really say something about how IBM views IP-related lawsuits, and how they really aren't good for the industry as a whole, and they know better than to just go after companies without being provoked.

      • Re:I'm not sure you are right (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Guppy06 ( 410832 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @09:11PM (#6218990)
        "I think your idealism has made you forget that IBM and SCO are COMPANIES. That means money is involved."

        Money is nothing more than a tool. It's what you do with it that matters. IMO, IBM has been doing some rather nifty things with their money in the past decade or so. SCO is using theirs to litigate. I think it's safe to say that one is "better" than the other.

    • Re:Sorry were those YOUR cornflakes I was pissing (Score:5, Informative)

      by jpetts ( 208163 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:43PM (#6218367)
      I know it's silly but I always love when IBM uses the phrase "FUD" in corporate announcements

      The irony is delicious, especially when it was Gene Amdahl who coined the phrase "fear, uncertainty and doubt" to describe IBM's tactics towards his company after he quit IBM and founded Amdahl Computers (see one of the 1975 entries at http://www.academic.marist.edu/pennings/hyprhsty.h tm [marist.edu]

      • Amdahl UTS (Score:5, Interesting)

        by stanwirth ( 621074 ) on Tuesday June 17, 2003 @01:15AM (#6220129)

        Oh! How very delicious, indeed!

        When I was a newbie Unix Sysadmin in the mid-eighties, it was at a Very Large University that had been given an IBM 3090 "supercomputer" (while the administration, whose salaries were paid for by IBM Corp, purchased a second for full price , at a time when typical academic discounts from Sun and SGI were up around 50%). Well, there were a number of IBM employees "advising" University IT services full-time with offices on campus . They were there to squash any and all use of non-IBM gear, they were.

        IBM didn't really have a Unix offering at that time, and the faculty were just clamoring for Unix mini's -- Suns, SGIs, DEC VAXen running BSD 4.2/4.3, Apollos, HPs -- even PC's running XENIX. The faculty found it was more beneficial to their research projects to buy a smaller computer but have it dedicated to the project, than to have to buy time on the University supercomputer. For one thing, they'd have the hardware for as long as it lasted, and have, well, root access. And they could hire monkeys like me for peanuts to keep them running -- on the network!

        Well, my installing BSD on VAXen and keeping a network of Suns and SGIs running on the network made me none too popular with the Brainwashed-By-Big-Blue Brigade-- much as my putting cygwin on Windows boxes and occasionally whiping Windows altogether with a nice Linux install makes me none too popular with the MSCE's that infest corporate IT department these days.

        But in academics, as well as in business, it's the Golden Rule: the ones with the Gold make the Rules. By bringing in research grants, the faculty, who wanted unix boxes, were making the rules. Also, since much of the money was coming in from DARPA and Friends, who all championed BSD (having funded its development) we had the funding agencies to refer to as well. But the B-B-B-B Brigade would continually try to sell us time on the 3090 -- and we would be, like "get your eyeballs off of my stack, jack!"

        I recall numerous acrimonious meetings with the BBBBB where they would point to this wonderful "gift" of the 3090 as obligating us to use it -- at which point we would counter with "Well, if it was running UNIX, we'd consider it..." They'd come up with their FUD to the tune of "Well, IBM is working on Unix versions..." (referring to AIX which was vaporware at that stage, and a BSD RISC machine that unfortunately never got off the ground).

        But BOOM! We'd hit them with "Why not just install UTS on the 3090?"

        Oh! The dirty looks we'd get for that one! Talk about hitting a raw nerve!

        But now, IBM is our new best friend. The FUD Fighters and Champions of AIX and Linux.

        It is way beyond ironic. It is so deeply satisfying!

        Now IBM is famous for its interdepartmental rivalries. I do sometimes wonder if our little blows against the empire at that stage had anything to do with the ultimate rise of the groups, internal to IBM, that were behind the development of AIX.

        The truly ironic thing, though, is that the technical sophistication and security features of the PPC chipset and OS/400 systems architecture are really starting to impress me as being quite a bit better than what either linux or unix on any hardware platform ever had to offer. *nix is just starting to get serious database-tuned journaling file systems, stable security implemented, VM's (or LPARs) to your heart's content, and use of an instruction set that can directly manipulate tables of 64-bit hash keys (on the PPC anyway). The AS/400 has had these things for a looooong time. So...maybe we were wrong back in the 80's, and IBM had it right the first time.

        Truly ironic.

  • Predicting the next Slashdot announcement (Score:5, Funny)

    by the_Bionic_lemming ( 446569 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:12PM (#6218032)
    SCO fires back at IBM, Swears to go to court to collect Damages.

    details at 11

  • smack (Score:5, Funny)

    by SlamMan ( 221834 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:12PM (#6218037)
    Just got a mental picture of Big Blue with a big leapord-print hat laying down some pimp hand.

  • SCO says IBM helping terrorists (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:13PM (#6218045)
    It's even crazier than we think. SCO isn't claiming that it (or AT&T, Novell, etc.) necessarilly wrote the code that IBM allegedly put into Linux. Rather, SCO says that it has exclusive rights to any code that IBM distributed with AIX, even if the code is entirely IBM's own word! Essentially, all code in any form of Unix belongs to SCO.

    Accoding to an interview at Byte [byte.com] with Chris Sontag, SCO's VP, Linux is used by terrorists, and therefore IBM's Linux efforts are equivalent to selling arms to terrorists. Because of this, Sontag expects the US govt. to support his case against IBM and Linux as part of the war on terror. He also accuses Intel of using Linux as a way to flout US laws that ban weapons exports to North Korea.

    Unfortunately, this is not a troll or an attempt at humor.

    • Re:SCO says IBM helping terrorists (Score:5, Funny)

      by u19925 ( 613350 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:54PM (#6218436)
      Sontag is wrong if he thinks that US govt will help because Linux is used by terrorists, since Linux is also used by NASA, Pentagon etc. It would have been different matter if he had said that Linux is used by Al Gore....

    • Re:SCO says IBM helping terrorists (Score:5, Funny)

      by baomike ( 143457 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:58PM (#6218466)
      These guys are into some realy good weed. I wonder who their source is? Even a nickel box of this stuff
      would keep you going for a week.

    • Re:SCO says IBM helping terrorists (Score:4, Funny)

      by dhwang ( 93406 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @08:11PM (#6218566)
      Essentially, all code in any form of Unix belongs to SCO.

      SCO: All your [code] base are belong to us!

    • Docs on SCO's site dont support SCO's postion (Score:5, Interesting)

      by whoever57 ( 658626 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @08:23PM (#6218658) Journal
      If you look at page 2 of this document [sco.com] from SCO's site -- in a letter TO IBM, it quite clearly states:
      "We agree that modifications and derivative works ... are owned by you"

      The only qualification is that the actual lines of code from ATT's source code in the derivative works still belong to ATT.

      Elsewhere, in the documents, I found a paragraph that implies that if IBM has someone look at the original source code, write new code, the new code belongs to IBM. This seems to completely destroy any argument that the "methods, etc" belong to SCO.

  • SCO section? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:13PM (#6218050)
    Can we get a SCO section for all of this? I filtered Caldera so I don't have to see all of these stories and here's one slipping through.

  • What's more, SCO's claims today are illegal (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TekPolitik ( 147802 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:13PM (#6218052) Journal
    SCO's claims today that anybody running AIX is doing so without a license are themselves illegal - they constitute the tort of "injurious falsehood". Watch for IBM to make a counter-claim against SCO on this. Imagine how much IBM could claim to have lost if customers stop using and buying AIX because of this. That's the pecuniary damages. Then there's punitive damages. Idiots.

  • Holy crap.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Lord_Slepnir ( 585350 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:13PM (#6218054) Journal
    I was prepared for the harsh stance IBM was taking, but I wasn't prepared for the ascii middle finger and the "W3 0wnz0r j00 5c0 b10tch" on the bottom.

  • White collar WWE (Score:5, Funny)

    by Alcimedes ( 398213 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:14PM (#6218058)
    i'm picturing some kind of weekend, pay-per-view event, where IBM's lawyers square off against SCO's lawyers.

    the SCO lawyers will be puny, whiney, and the villians.

    the IBM lawyers would all be built like Goldberg and carry lead pipes in. it would be a bloodbath, over in a few minutes, and save us all the legal crap.

    let's face it, SCO is going to get bitch slapped hard by IBM at this point. they're trying to play hardball and up until now IBM has pretty much ignored them. however, like a fly that bites i have a feeling they're about to get swatted back into nothingness.

    i guess courtTV needs their drama too. :)

  • phone call (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:14PM (#6218059)
    The companies had engaged in brief but unfruitful discussions, SCO said last week.
    The call, intercepted by an unnamed source, went like this:
    Operator: Thank you for calling IBM. How may I direct your call?
    SCO: Mr. Palmisano, please.
    Operator: May I tell him who's calling?
    SCO: Darl McBride, CEO of SCO
    Operator: Oh, you again. *pause* He is still not taking your call. Would you like his voice mail?
    SCO: *sigh* Sure.
    [Flush][laughter]*click*

  • IBM's plan (Score:5, Insightful)

    by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:14PM (#6218065)
    Speak softly, and carry a big stick.

    Ever get hit by 50 gazillion patent infringment lawsuits and the one of the worlds biggest legal departments?

  • Hydrodemolition Robot Crushes With Water (Score:5, Funny)

    by SteveAstro ( 209000 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:15PM (#6218075)
    ...IBM pisses REALLY hard on SCOs shoes....

    Steve

  • IBM or Tyler Durden? (Score:5, Funny)

    by macshune ( 628296 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:16PM (#6218092) Journal
    Scene: SCO's balls are tightly wrapped in electrical tape and SCO is lying on the floor...


     SCO: Dddddon't hurt me!!

    IBM: We ship your clothes, complete your financial transactions, know your insurance info... WE GUARD YOUR DATA WHILE YOU SLEEP, DO NOT FUCK WITH US!


  • International Law (Score:5, Interesting)

    by G3ckoG33k ( 647276 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:17PM (#6218105)
    IBM is multinational by all means and any measure. International laws, i.e. laws in other countries than US may not be so overwhelmed by SCO's case inside the US as indicate in this Byte magazine article [byte.com]:

    "It is also undeniable that the business climate in the U.S. lets someone take a far more aggressive attitude towards a competitor's customers than does the climate in Europe. SCO should have anticipated this, but Sontag seemed to be quizzical about what these European lawsuits are demanding, and how SCO should react to them. I got the impression that SCO's management was thinking entirely in terms of U.S. law, and have not thought through the international implications of their actions.

    I find this amazing, especially considering that SCO's latest 10Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission reveals that "revenue from international customers accounted for 48 percent of operating system platform revenue." "

  • Question. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:20PM (#6218124)
    Let's say everything that the most cynical slashdotter suspects about this case is true. SCO has no case, this is an exit strategy, they're running around making a bunch of noise and making outrageous claims just to get attention and to try to scare IBM into doing what they say, and the instant that they are in the courtroom and their bluff is called, they are going to go down in countersuit flames in the most spectacular way possible.

    If that happens:

    What is stopping the people within SCO who started this case and subsequently destroyed SCO utterly from quietly selling all of their SCO stock sometime between now and the point SCO goes into court, thus making gobs of money in the span of time between SCO's stock price being temporarily knocked up by all the publicity around this case and SCO's stock price being knocked down once it becomes apparent SCO has nothing to back up their claims with?

    What is stopping the people within SCO who started this case and subsequently destroyed SCO from walking out of SCO with incredibly lucrative golden parachutes, and possibly simply being rehired at another company in incredibly high-ranking, lucrative positions just because from the ignorant perspective of another corporation's board, hey, they were the ones who got SCO all that attention and tried to capitalize on that IP, even though it didn't work out?

    I think specifically i'm thinking of Daryl McBride here. But I can't get rid of the sneaking suspicion that, by design this case is designed to cause SCO to go SPLAT like a little tiny bug on IBM's windshield, obliterating it and its stock value utterly, while somehow letting the board members who initiated this entire fucking mess somehow wrangle a huge amount of money for themselves out of it and walk away scot-free and with a big impressive "CFO, SCO CORP" bulletpoint on their resume. What is stopping them from doing this? Anything? Anything at all, either legal or in the way corporations hire? Will the people responsible for causing this mess have consequences, or will the only ones to face the backlash after SCO implodes be the stockholders and employees?

    Echo echo echo echo echo.

    • Re:Question. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Dachannien ( 617929 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:29PM (#6218218)
      Monday:
      IBM +1.75
      SCOX -0.28

    • Re:Question. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Voivod ( 27332 ) <cryptic.gmail@com> on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:43PM (#6218365)

      What is stopping the people within SCO who started this case and subsequently destroyed SCO utterly from quietly selling all of their SCO stock sometime between now and the point SCO goes into court

      You mean, like if their VP of Engineering sold every bit of stock he had? Ha ha, yeah... wouldn't that be.... hmmm...

      Newsforge: SCO VP Opinder Bawa cashes out [newsforge.com]

    • Re:Question. (Score:5, Funny)

      by Imperator ( 17614 ) <slashdot2 AT omershenker DOT net> on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:44PM (#6218368)
      Well, this would be prosecuted, thanks to the Bush administration's sincere stance against corporate crime.

      Oh, wait...

    • From finance.yahoo.com (Score:5, Insightful)

      by hamsterboy ( 218246 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:55PM (#6218440)
      Interesting results from the Insider [yahoo.com] page:

      2003-06-11
      OLSON, MICHAEL P
      Vice President
      6,000
      Automatic Sale at $8.59 - $8.66 per share.
      (Proceeds of about $52,000)

      2003-06-09
      BENCH, ROBERT K.
      Chief Financial Officer
      7,000
      Planned Sale
      (Estimated proceeds of $60,000)

      2003-06-09
      BENCH, ROBERT K.
      Chief Financial Officer
      7,000
      Automatic Sale at $9.16 - $9.3 per share.
      (Proceeds of about $65,000)

      2003-06-06
      HUNSAKER, JEFF F.
      Vice President
      5,000
      Automatic Sale at $8.90 per share.
      (Proceeds of $44,500)

    • Re:Question. (Score:5, Informative)

      by mcgroarty ( 633843 ) <brian@mcgroarty.gmail@com> on Monday June 16, 2003 @08:00PM (#6218484) Homepage
      What is stopping the people within SCO who started this case and subsequently destroyed SCO utterly from quietly selling all of their SCO stock sometime between now and the point SCO goes into court, thus making gobs of money in the span of time between SCO's stock price being temporarily knocked up by all the publicity around this case and SCO's stock price being knocked down once it becomes apparent SCO has nothing to back up their claims with?

      Well, apparently nothing [yahoo.com].

      Notice the huge block of 26-34k shares sold off-market at 1/10th penny apiece to all the executives just before the 100-day-warning IBM volley in March? Notice how this isn't an annual reward program -- didn't happen last year? Notice that there's not been any insider buying since that point, but plenty of selling once the stock swung upward?

      This sort of thing is not going to go unnoticed by the SEC. At this point, if I were playing devil's advocate and suggesting this were a glorious pump-and-dump scheme, I'd say that McBride and friends were merely playing for the cameras at this point, trying to look genuinely quixotic to the end while they take their turns selling off their chunks at one million percent profit.

      A lot of people are going to walk away from this with very fat wallets, no matter what happens. Some anticipated the market's buy-in and have already entered and exited. :-)

  • SCO is really small..... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by greymond ( 539980 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:21PM (#6218142) Homepage Journal
    It seems like SCO is like that little kid who just wants to be annoying so they will get attention (or in otherwords cause IBM enough of a headache that IBM will just buy them out to shut them up)

  • See SCO run (Score:5, Funny)

    by BlackSabbath ( 118110 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:25PM (#6218183)
    See SCO.
    See SCO lie.
    See stocks fly.
    Fly stocks, fly!
    See Gartner blow.
    SCO stocks grow!
    Grow stocks! Grow!
    See Novell.
    See Novell smack,
    Smack SCO! Smack!
    See IBM.
    See IBM laugh.
    SCO lawyers barf.
    SCO stocks cut in half.
    See SCO.
    See SCO whine.
    SCO says "It's mine!"
    See IBM.
    IBM puts foot down.
    SCO execs start to drown.
    Drown SCO, drown!

  • Jury Duty (Score:5, Funny)

    by micaiah ( 593598 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:26PM (#6218189)
    When this goes to trial I hope I get jury duty.

    "Do you know what Unix is?"
    No

    "Do you know what Linux is?"
    No

    "Do you know who SCO is?"
    No

    "Do you know what IBM does?"
    Ummmm they make typewriters?

    "Ok, you are on."

    Bwuahahahahah

  • Other players in the game (Score:3, Insightful)

    by arvindt ( 682037 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:30PM (#6218230)
    Well, if SCO hoped that IBM would settle or buy them out, they were clearly mistaken. Now that THAT plan has backfired, d u think they'll go after some one else next ? Maybe RedHat or SuSE ? It'll be interesting to see how they ( RedHat and others ) respond if that happens. After all, currently SCO is going after IBM only on the issue of trade secrets and their contract with IBM. Would they stoop to going after distributors of Linux if this doesn't work ?

  • OSI paper explains a lot (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CousinDave ( 527546 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:31PM (#6218231) Homepage
    The OSI Position Paper on the SCO-vs.-IBM Complaint [opensource.org] suggests why IBM seems so confident.

    (I'm sure it's been posted here before, but it's required reading)

    CousinDave

  • How time change (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:34PM (#6218267) Homepage Journal
    I can remember the day Big Blue was the enemy and everyone was rooting for this geek kid out of Redmond...

    My how things have changed since then.

    Even the big bad 'client/server' model is back..

  • <whiiir>, <shoop> (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Freak ( 16973 ) <anonymousfreak@nOspam.icloud.com> on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:34PM (#6218270) Journal
    That's the sound of Trink Guarino's butt being copied onto the copies of this release going to SCO's headquarters...

    Point by point translation:
    Since filing a lawsuit against IBM, SCO has made public statements and accusations about IBM's Unix license and about Linux in an apparent attempt to create fear uncertainty and doubt among IBM's customers and the open source community.

    SCO, shut up or put up.
    IBM's Unix license is irrevocable, perpetual and fully paid up. It cannot be terminated. This matter will eventually be resolved in the normal legal process.

    Just who do you think you are?
    IBM will continue to ship, support and develop AIX which represents years of IBM innovation, hundreds of millions of dollars of investment and many patents. As always, IBM will stand behind our products and our customers.

    Fuck off.

  • History of this court case (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MavEtJu ( 241979 ) <[gro.ujtevam] [ta] [todhsals]> on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:34PM (#6218276) Homepage
    In the past two months, I've been reading over and over and over and over and over about this court case, without there anything getting something done or new added.

    But in the same time, the crowd gets more enthousiastic, more violent in their responses and more sure of themselves.

    It feels like the time between october last year and somewhere april this year when the TV stations and pulp-newspapers around the world had specials every day about the upcoming war, with new(tm) and improved(tm) reports about how this was going to be finished and how everything would turn out right at the end.

    I'm going to ignore the SCO non-newsitems on slashdot until this case is over and read a proper review of it in one of the less sensational newsletters. Just my 2 cents.

  • The IBM droid says (Score:5, Funny)

    by geekoid ( 135745 ) <dadinportlandNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:35PM (#6218279) Homepage Journal
    "Bite my shiney blue ass, meatbags"

    Man, this is going to be fun.

  • Wait... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by The Bungi ( 221687 ) <thebungi@gmail.com> on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:35PM (#6218283) Homepage
    I find it slightly disturbing that in the entire Google news catalog, only Slashdot is carrying this 'story', and linked from NewsForge, no less.

    Who is this guy doing this "press release" anyway? Why isn't there an official statement from the company?

    And why did Timothy post this himself, linking to NewsForge (no less), instead of posting one of the hundreds of submissions he undoubtedly must've received, given the "hot topic"?

    Sometimes I just wonder...

  • AT&T Not SCO owns Termination rights (Score:5, Informative)

    by bwt ( 68845 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:36PM (#6218296)
    The licences between AT&T and IBM that are posted on SCO's site as Exhibit A [sco.com] and Exhibit B [sco.com].

    In section 3.03 of exhibit B it clearly states that "AT&T" may revoke the licence for non-compliance. Moreover paragraph 4 of the cover page contains a standard "no alterations unless signed in writing" clause. I see nothing that allows AT&T to sell this termination right without IBM's approval. There are similar sectoin in Exhibit A, section 6.03 and paragraph 4 of the cover page.

  • Big Blue (Score:5, Funny)

    by Kadagan AU ( 638260 ) <kadagan@ g m a i l . com> on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:37PM (#6218298) Journal
    Go for the eyes Blue! Go for the eyes!!!

  • That sounds familiar (Score:5, Funny)

    by Have Blue ( 616 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:40PM (#6218327) Homepage
    "IBM's Unix license is irrevocable, perpetual and fully paid up. It cannot be terminated. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It does not feel pity, remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead."

  • List of IBM's alleged violations (Score:5, Insightful)

    by soundsop ( 228890 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:41PM (#6218340) Homepage

    I haven't seen this posted before. In a news.com article [com.com], IBM's alleged violations are listed:

    Specifically, the transferred code includes the Journaled File System (JFS), extensions to make Linux work on a multiprocessor server employing the non-uniform memory access (NUMA) technique, Sontag said. In addition, he said read-copy update (RCU) for relieving some memory bottlenecks on multiprocessor servers, was transferred.

  • Dear SCO: (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geekoid ( 135745 ) <dadinportlandNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:47PM (#6218392) Homepage Journal
    a word of advice, you don't go after the company that practically has the patent on ones and zeros.

    sure, you might go after one division, and hope that just want to shut you up, but the core of the company? never.

  • IBM says (Score:5, Funny)

    by drsmithy ( 35869 ) <drsmithy&gmail,com> on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:49PM (#6218407)
    "How about I give you the finger, and you go the hell away."

  • SCO is running into a brick wall (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gotan ( 60103 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @07:57PM (#6218458) Homepage
    IBM simply put a brick wall into SCOs way. Considering that with all the ruckus they made SCO has burned all bridges behind them and will never be able to get this resolved on friendly terms there's no way SCO can go: if they stall the shareholders will finally loose confidence and SCO stock will drop through the floor to it's real value, and if they go to court IBM has them where it wants them and SCOs bubble will burst, maybe they can drag along the case a little longer by fighting in court, but then IBM might also countersue for damaged reputation, reduced sales because of FUD etc.

    IBM is calling on SCOs bluff, so SCO either has to fold or show their weak hand and lose.

  • What this means for Linux: win/win (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jlrader2 ( 682030 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @08:01PM (#6218494)
    The way I see this, this can only help Linux in the long run. If IBM wins, and it seems likely it will, we could start to see large chunks of AIX/UNIX code released under the GPL. If the UNIX code is declared generic, inhibitions to release unix-like code under the GPL will decrease substantially. On the other hand, if all hell breaks loose and IBM looses the rights to distribute AIX the results will be even more immediate. The "disputed" code will be replaced under the GPL by our programmers, and life will go on. *Most importantly* SCO cannot win this, because winning places a monsterous shadow of FUD over UNIX. Companies will think twice about investing in UNIX if they have to fear the fickle whims of SCO. This will be very interesting.

  • IBM and the strategy of Soviet Russia (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nice2Cats ( 557310 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @08:12PM (#6218570)
    IBM could of course just buy SCO and get rid of the problem quickly. However, in contrast to SCO, they are in this for the long run and probably take the long term view; they know that if they buy SCO, they are just taking care of the symptoms, not the cause. What they want to do is settle this Unix/Linux/AIX question once and for all. You want to make an example of SCO that every other company on the planet will learn from:

    Whatever you do /
    Don't fouque with Big Blue /
    Or Big Blue /
    Will annihilate you.

    This is like defending the Soviet Union against Nazi Germany: You just fall back a little, and fall back a little more, and let the opponent thrash around, kicking and screaming, burning energy and money, wasting men and machines, building up a supply line that he can't defend. SCO has to stay in the headlines, has to keep pushing deeper and deeper so the press stays interested, or else people will catch on to the fact that the don't have the resources to take Moscow, let alone Sibiria, before winter comes.

    And winter is on its way. Once the stock market realizes that this is going to be long, drawn out battle, they will lose interest in SCO, and the stock price will start to fall again -- we saw the first frost on Monday. Their stock price is like the temperature in Kelvin, likely to fall towards a very absolute zero if they don't keep moving. SCO is not equipped to fight unter six feet of financial snow, while IBM has resources to burn. This is where the comparison breaks down: IBM is not a starving Communist dictatorship, but rather has the industrial capacity of the U.S. to draw upon.

    So time is on IBM's side, while SCO is running out of ways to escalate this fight. And this is what is so beautiful about the press release: The way it makes clear that there will be no quick, furious battle, just a steady stream of legal artillery raining down on SCO while IBM slowly marches away, giving ground, gaining time. The actual court case will trap SCO like ice, and the the snow will start falling, and SCO will start starving.

    And all this time, safe behind the Urals, the penguins will be breeding...

  • It amuses me to no end that people consider buying SCO to be a valid option to be brought up again and again. There is no point. It would be of benefit to SCO shareholders, and to reward them for putting these idiots in place is not on IBM's agenda.

    If IBM were to buy anybody, they might buy Novell, since Novell owns the patent. Relatively speaking, that'd be an end run around SCO. In fact, if you really wanted to have fun as IBM, you'd buy the patent, and sell it to FSF for $1, and have the patented code GPL'ed.

  • Excerpt from next year's verdict (Score:4, Funny)

    by nightsweat ( 604367 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @08:28PM (#6218706)
    The court finds that SCO's allegations are groundless, baseless, and that IBM is entitled to damages in its counterclaim of one billion dollars.

    The court also finds that IBM is SCO's "daddy", and instructs SCO's legal counsel and executive management to "say it, biatch".

  • IBM announces Blue Thunder (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 16, 2003 @08:30PM (#6218717)
    IBM today announced the completion of the world's fastest legal team: Blue Thunder which was jointly developed by the U.S. Energy Department's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Harvard University and IBM. Blue Thunder can perform 3.9 trillion lawsuits per second (15,000 times faster than the average IP law firm) and has over 2.6 trillion bytes of high-tech patents to work with (80,000 times more than the average Wall Street tort artist). It would take a lawyer using a small office of secretaries 63,000 years to perform as many legal actions as this team can perform in a single second.

  • This is that funny feeling you get... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by EmagGeek ( 574360 ) on Monday June 16, 2003 @09:43PM (#6219206) Journal
    You know what I'm talking about...

    You know you do..

    You're getting out of your car with your briefcase and your bag of groceries and you have this eerie feeling you're forgetting something important. You stand up and reach for the door and give it a shove. As the door careens toward closure, that little switch in your brain flips and that little voice starts screaming "Take it back! Take it back! Your keys are in there!!!" In an instant, your body wretches trying to catch the car door closing but to no avail. That little voice in your head then says "Awww shit, you really fucked up now, and you're beyond the point of no return."

    This is what SCO has just done. They have started the final nail in their coffin in their juvenile, if not heroic, last stand. Their captain has just delivered the message to the crew that this cause is more important than their corporate lives, and they will fight to the death even though the odds are indeed impossible.

    In other news, monster.com stock is up 40% today on a wave of new resumes, mostly for UNIX developers.

    Now, if this turns out to be a "David and Goliath" situation and they get one of these "root for the underdog" bleeding heart liberal judges, we may have an interesting time yet. These do-gooders who think that parity is more important than justice and truth are easily conned by the "crying little guy" who is actually the devil incarnate.

  • IBM-SCO dialogue... (Score:5, Funny)

    by tcak ( 513301 ) on Tuesday June 17, 2003 @12:09AM (#6219865) Homepage Journal
    IBM: What does YOUR code looks like?
    SCO: What?
    IBM, pointing his gun: Say "what" again. SAY "WHAT" AGAIN! I dare you, I double dare you, motherf***er! Say "what" one more goddamn time!
    SCO: You s-s-stoleee my source code...
    IBM: Go on.
    SCO: I w-w-want YOUR m-m-money...
    IBM: Do I look like a bitch?
    SCO: What?
    [IBM shoots SCO in the shoulder]
    IBM: DO I LOOK LIKE A BItCH!?
    SCO: NO!
    IBM: Then why you trying to f*** ME like a bitch, SCO?
    SCO: I didn't!
    IBM: Yes you did. Yes you did, SCO. You tried to f*** ME. And I don't like to be f***ed by anybody, except by Micro$oft.

  • SCO now wants $3,000,000,000 (Score:4, Informative)

    by hobsonchoice ( 680456 ) on Tuesday June 17, 2003 @01:11AM (#6220110)
    SCO have amended their complaint against IBM: - They now want $3bn
    - Blames Linus for letting proprietary stuff into Linux
    - Complains Open Source "can be used for encryption, scientific research and weapons research" in Cuba, Iran, Syria, North Korea and Libya
    - Says IBM copied RCU
    - Sequent added to the complaint

    http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-1017965.html [com.com]

  • Hard Statistics on IBM vs. SCO (Score:4, Informative)

    by Tangfan ( 254054 ) on Tuesday June 17, 2003 @01:45AM (#6220239) Homepage
    Ok, I did a little digging, since everyone has been proclaiming how huge IBM was and how puny SCO was. My conclusion is that they are right. Here is what I found:

    SCO
    Net Assets: $37.4m (Source: Multex)
    Total Employees: 340 (Source: Multex & Yahoo! Finance)
    Legal Department Employees: Unknown (See below*)

    IBM
    Net Assets: $96,484m (Source: Multex)
    Total Employees:
    315,889 (Source: Multex)
    Legal Department Employees: 308 (Source: Law.com)

    Sources:
    IBM Balance Sheet - http://yahoo.multexinvestor.com/IS.aspx?ticker=IBM &target=%2fstocks%2ffinancialinfo%2fstatements%2fb alancesheet%2fannual
    SCO Balance Sheet - http://yahoo.multexinvestor.com/IS.aspx?ticker=SCO X&target=%2fstocks%2ffinancialinfo%2fstatements%2f balancesheet%2fannual
    IBM Legal Department as of 2002 - http://www.law.com/special/professionals/nlj/2002/ nlj_client_list_who_defends_corporate_america.shtm l
    IBM Legal Department in 2000 and 1999 - http://www.corporatelegaltimes.com/editorial/surve ys/aug01.cfm

    *SCO's legal department is not anywhere in the top 200, naturally, and no mention of size or otherwise is made in any SEC filings, etc. However, unlike IBM, SCO has no "Head Counsel," nor is any real mention made of an in-house legal department. From this, I construe that SCO either outsources its legal needs to a third-party firm, or does not employ enough lawyers to require a full "department." The acquisition of David Boies perhaps corroborates the first. Any additional information that anyone has would be helpful.

  • Indemnification and the worst job in the world... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dfung ( 68701 ) on Tuesday June 17, 2003 @03:14AM (#6220544)
    More than 600 postings on this thread, and (at the top level at least) nobody's mentioned indemnification yet...

    SCO thought they'd be smart today, pull the plug on IBM and the AIX installed base and let all those multi-billions of dollars of customers force IBM to it's knees. Oh please... A standard part of the (megabuck) license agreement that the AIX licensees sign is that IBM will indemnify them against patent and copyright infringement committed by IBM in constructing the product. IP infringements do happen, intentional or not, and it's only reasonable for a licensee to expect the licensor to stand behind their product. That's indemnification - it frees the person who's purchased the license from having to defend against an embedded IP infraction. In addition to IBM indemnifying their own code, they would normally ask indemnification against infringements by the licensee if they make mods.

    Now, if you're buying software from me, I can promise indemnification and buy and insurance policy. But you won't buy from me, because the IBM salesman also paid you a call, and explained that his ability to stand behind his product legally is unmatched by anyone else, probably in the world. More lawyers, more patents, more money and more lethal force than anybody else is packing.

    I've mentioned it in earlier postings, and it's popped up in this thread too. Little gnats often pop up and try to suck some blood from IBM. They are crushed quietly and behind the curtain by IBM's IP portfolio and legal muscle. Usually the customers don't even hear about the problem, which is the way they like it. Nothing probably makes the IBM contract management group more angry than having a SCO make a ruckus in public and cause them to have to call their gazillion licensee to tell them that there's no problem.

    The only question on how this will turn out is whether IBM will take SCO out for a ride in their limo before fitting them with concrete boots or whether they get it in broad daylight at the toll booth.

    Which leads to the worst job in the world (yes, even worse than yours). I remember reading an article that mentioned that only 3 SCO employees are focused on the lawsuit (yes, many many more non-employees), while the other couple of hundred continue on their path of innovation, the Caldera way.

    I think everybody realizes that this is going to take a while. The guy you *don't* want to be is the VP of Sales as SCO. Now, you might have been jazzed that your company was going to squeak, IBM would buy it to make the problem go away, and you'd go home with your $20 million bucks. Only it didn't work that way. Not only is IBM not going to buy you a mansion, they're not going to even acknowledge your squeaking. You might have felt a buzz of pride thinking that IBM would have to rename AIX to "SCO AIX". Now, IBM has about 3000 people talking to every client in the world telling them how their enormous company is going to crush your clueless company.

    Then the SCO CEO comes into your office, says "This isn't as easy as I thought it was going to be" and tell you that it will be really important that you maintain SCO's revenue stream since it will be too damn obvious if Microsoft gives SCO anymore money.

    When SCO makes a sales call today, do you think anybody *doesn't* laugh at them? That's a job that sucks.

    Oh well, I guess you can hope that Microsoft buys you before the end of the quarter. In two weeks...

    David Fung

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close