UnXis Group To Acquire SCO 131
Evil-G writes "In an email on Friday, SCO informed its partners that UnXis Inc. was chosen as the successful bidder for SCO's Unix software business on 26 January. The slightly convoluted phrasing is probably due to SCO's current reorganization under Chapter 11. On 16 February, the transaction is to be submitted for approval to the bankruptcy court where SCO's case is pending."
So all SCO has left is lawsuits? (Score:5, Informative)
Wow looks like all that is left of SCO are lawsuits, debt and a pending appeal. You have to wonder why in the world anyone would want to buy the business division, considering the SCO name is poison to just about anyone who knows anything about Unix. My guess is they will do anything in their power to distance themselves from the SCO name.
Re:SCO has a software business? (Score:5, Informative)
They claimed that Linux has substantial amounts of Unix in it which gave them "control" of Linux in their fantasy world. The problems with this were threefold. 1/ that they never proved the presence of Unix code in Linux and 2/ They have repeatedly been ruled in court not to own the required copyrights to back up those claims 3/ The moment the claimed code was identified it would begin to be removed. The legal owner of those copyrights says Linux doesn't violate them.
So no ownership of Unix or of Linux. All they are really trying to sell is the Unixware and Openserver businesses right now. Last time UnXis tried to buy it the bankruptcy judge said no deal, they need to get his agreement. Also Novell claims the right to veto such a sale and last time said they would.
Re:What is UnXis? (Score:4, Informative)
That domain is just some guy in North York, ON that does consulting (do a whois and look yourself).
It's not related to this, so don't call the guy up and give him shit.
The real domain, unxis.co.uk, as stated above, belongs to SCO since it redirects to SCO.
The question is, does the guy in North York have a beef with SCO now?
--
BMO
Re:SCO has a software business? (Score:4, Informative)
Slight pedancy... they were copyright trolls. Nothing really to do with patents (if they were squabbling over patents, they might have had half a chance).
But yeah - they (as sibling pointed out) used to have some halfway decent products. I think it was around the time they sued a couple of their biggest customers (Chrysler and AutoZone) that their other customers began phasing out (with extreme prejudice) UnixWare, OpenLinux/OpenServer, and damned near everything else that SCO owned and/or sold.
By 2006 or so, about the only folks left giving any money to SCO was Microsoft (by proxy, and directly) and I think Sun Microsystems (licensing SysV bits for Solaris), though I think Sun did that last back in 2004 and pretty much stopped after that.
Sounds about right (Score:5, Informative)
Re:SCO has a software business? (Score:4, Informative)
"Notice anything...funny...about Android? Like the fact that there is not a spot of GPL V3 code to be found? Why do you think that is?"
Because it's not (any version of) GPL. Except the kernel it runs on (which is GPLv2), it is mostly Apache.:
"The preferred license for the Android Open Source Project is the Apache Software License, 2.0 ("Apache 2.0"), and the majority of the Android software is licensed with Apache 2.0. While the project will strive to adhere to the preferred license, there may be exceptions which will be handled on a case-by-case basis. For example, the Linux kernel patches are under the GPLv2 license with system exceptions, which can be found on kernel.org. "
source: http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html [android.com]
Re:SCO has a software business? (Score:4, Informative)
The rot set in long before then. IIRC this started to blow up circa 2002, and by mid-2003 I was meeting people who'd never even used Unix professionally and had independently reached the conclusion that SCO were doing some very odd things.
IMV suing your customers is generally considered to be a Very Bad Idea. Suing your customers and then announcing this fact proudly to the press is... well, it's mind-boggling. Seriously, I cannot for the life of me figure out why anyone running a business would authorise a press release which essentially said "We're suing our customers". The only rational explanation is that there was something else - unrelated to SCOs continued business as an OS vendor - that was pushing Darl to do this.
I generally shy away from conspiracy theories because they almost inevitably end up with some absurdly convoluted idea that includes Elvis still being alive and in cahoots with Dracula - but it's really hard to avoid here.
Re:Just who is "UnXis Inc."? (Score:4, Informative)
Back in 2009 Unxis and SCO seemed to be the same company.
http://techrights.org/2009/07/14/sco-and-unxis/ [techrights.org]
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090711015440158 [groklaw.net]
http://www.unxis.ca/ [unxis.ca]
http://www.unxis.co.uk/ [unxis.co.uk]
http://www.unxis.com/ [unxis.com]
So I would say it all seems like a scam to avoid having to do anything legal.