Analysis of SCO vs. IBM

icantblvitsnotbutter writes "An excellent -- and clear! -- article over at LinuxWorld.com has a multipoint analysis of SCO's 40-page complaint (this is a brief?!). For all those IANAL's out there, here's something to sink your teeth into. On the balance, the outlook seems positive for IBM. Still, the parallel invocation of a contractural clause potentially nixing AIX lends some credence to claims that this is a just way for SCO to coerce IBM into buying them out..." Some old documents from a similar lawsuit have surfaced, and naturally ESR has his own take on the case.

Comments

my take on ESR

[Anonymous Coward]

ESR is pompous, loud-mouthed, unproductive, and tried to get very rich from the hard work of OSS contributors, taking out proportionately far more than he put in.

There's nothing worse than having someone on your side who makes you look so bad they might as well be playing for the other team.

The kernel is written in C

[chiasmus1]

Your function looks a little bit like c++. This could not be the kernel because the kernel is written in c.

Re:SCO/IBM....what's this all about?

[greenalbatros]

Can someone explain to me what this is all about please, preferably in a paragraph and in plain english

no

OT: (Re:This is all about PROJECT MONTEREY!!!)

[mandolin]

Monterey was a real, live, flesh and blood endeavor in which SCO and IBM partnered to write a new, 64-bit, proprietary Über-Unix on Intel hardware

And honestly, WTF was SCO smoking when they decided to do that. When two or more companies collaborate (as opposed to having a customer/provider relationship) somebody *always* gets screwed.

Didn't they learn anything from OSF/1? What about OS/2? What about Itanium?