Slashdot Mirror


IBM Responds To SCO: Business As Usual

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."

40 of 828 comments (clear)

  1. IBM Responds to SCO Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fuck off

  2. Sorry were those YOUR cornflakes I was pissing in? by coupland · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  3. Predicting the next Slashdot announcement by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 5, Funny

    SCO fires back at IBM, Swears to go to court to collect Damages.

    details at 11

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
  4. smack by SlamMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just got a mental picture of Big Blue with a big leapord-print hat laying down some pimp hand.

    --
    Mod point free since 2001
  5. SCO says IBM helping terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    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 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.

    1. Re:SCO says IBM helping terrorists by the_quark · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not only that - why does Boies have such a sterling rep, anyway? The three big cases I'm aware of he's been involved in are DOJ vs. Microsoft, his management of Gore's legal strategy in 2000, and his defense of Napster.

      Microsoft - nominally won, but the original terms of the settlement were pretty much a slap on the wrist, which Microsoft is now (allegedly) ignoring anyway.

      Gore - anyone who's noticed who our President is right now knows how this one went.

      Napster - Lost in convincing fashion, so badly the company cratered.

      Now maybe he has a knack for finding indefensible defendants (I don't think Perry Mason could've won Napster), but as far as I can tell, when you put Boies on the case, it's as good as lost!

    2. Re:SCO says IBM helping terrorists by baomike · · Score: 5, Funny

      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.

  6. SCO section? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  7. What's more, SCO's claims today are illegal by TekPolitik · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:What's more, SCO's claims today are illegal by Alien+Being · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But they have nothing to lose, so they're free to run a "scorched-earth" campaign.

  8. Holy crap.... by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

    1. Re:Holy crap.... by Alien+Being · · Score: 5, Funny

      "ascii middle finger"

      Should be EBCDIC middle finger.

  9. White collar WWE by Alcimedes · · Score: 5, Funny

    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. :)

  10. phone call by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    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*

  11. Hydrodemolition Robot Crushes With Water by SteveAstro · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...IBM pisses REALLY hard on SCOs shoes....

    Steve

  12. IBM or Tyler Durden? by macshune · · Score: 5, Funny

    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!


  13. International Law by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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:

    "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." "

  14. I'm not sure you are right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  15. Question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Question. by Voivod · · Score: 5, Informative

      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

    2. Re:Question. by Imperator · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, this would be prosecuted, thanks to the Bush administration's sincere stance against corporate crime.

      Oh, wait...

      --

      Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
    3. Re:Question. by mcgroarty · · Score: 5, Informative
      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.

      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. :-)

  16. Re:Sorry were those YOUR cornflakes I was pissing by coupland · · Score: 5, Informative

    Fascinating, I always assumed "FUD" was invented to describe Microsoft tactics but now that you mention it, FUD is a much more accurate description of IBM's tactics in the late-eighties, early-nineties. To coin an old phrase "no one ever got fired for buying IBM". Fortunately they have learned a lot from the early-90's crash and although I'm still sure their only motivation is still profit, you have to admit that when you think "FUD" in 2003 it doesn't bring IBM to mind anymore.

  17. See SCO run by BlackSabbath · · Score: 5, Funny

    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!

  18. Jury Duty by micaiah · · Score: 5, Funny

    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

  19. OSI paper explains a lot by CousinDave · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The OSI Position Paper on the SCO-vs.-IBM Complaint suggests why IBM seems so confident.

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

    CousinDave

    --
    It's too late to lose the weight you used to need to throw around.
  20. How time change by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  21. <whiiir>, <shoop> by Anonymous+Freak · · Score: 5, Funny
    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.
    --
    Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
    The purpose of that site was not known.
  22. AT&T Not SCO owns Termination rights by bwt · · Score: 5, Informative

    The licences between AT&T and IBM that are posted on SCO's site as Exhibit A and Exhibit B.

    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.

  23. That sounds familiar by Have+Blue · · Score: 5, Funny

    "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."

  24. Re:Sorry were those YOUR cornflakes I was pissing by coupland · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And not just that, Gerstner was a "traditional" CEO which is what they needed. Instead of responding to and engaging in the endless personality conflicts and insults that are constantly lobbed around Silicon Valley he basically just shrugged his shoulders and got down to the job of repairing the company and rescuing the stock price. His book is a good read, and the thing I find most interesting is that he didn't have some blinding insight into technology, he just shut his mouth, relied on common sense, and focused on what makes businesses work. It's amazing what a cool head can accomplish.

  25. Re:Sorry were those YOUR cornflakes I was pissing by jpetts · · Score: 5, Informative

    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

    --
    Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
  26. Re:way to go big blue!! by Ziest · · Score: 5, Interesting

    IBM is going crush SCO. It's gonna take a few years but they have been marked for death. No licensing, no merger, no buyout. Remember, IBM got into a pissing contest with the Justice Dept. in the 70's. In case you need to be reminded the Justice Dept. is part of the U. S. Government who prints the money. The Justice Dept. does not have to show a profit, IBM does. IBM fought the Justice Dept. to a standstill for over 12 years and still showed a profit every year.

    IBM most likely employs more people in their legal department than all of SCO. IBM is going to go into court with SCO and stall, bleeding them dry in the process. The legal fees will bankrupt SCO and IBM will not even break a sweat. Want proof? Go to your local University library and start reading the New York Times from the early 70's. 1971 or 1972. If I remember correctly IBM went into court to file a brief and the brief was 56 4-draw filling cabinets. It took the lawyers 2 years to read it. Ever seen mainframe documentation? Visualize that as legal paper work. SCO is dead they just don't know it yet.

    --
    Another day closer to redwood heaven
  27. From finance.yahoo.com by hamsterboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Interesting results from the Insider 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)

  28. Re:"No one ever got fired for buying IBM",I dare y by Jonathan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Imagine the fame for being the first person to be fired for buying IBM.

    Old news. fortune(1) has the following quote from the WSJ in 1989.

    Although it is still a truism in industry that "no one was ever fired for
    buying IBM," Bill O'Neil, the chief technology officer at Drexel Burnham
    Lambert, says he knows for a fact that someone has been fired for just that
    reason. He knows it because he fired the guy.
    "He made a bad decision, and what it came down to was, 'Well, I
    bought it because I figured it was safe to buy IBM,'" Mr. O'Neil says.
    "I said, 'No. Wrong. Game over. Next contestant, please.'"
    -- The Wall Street Journal, December 6, 1989

  29. The Power to Destroy by yintercept · · Score: 5, Insightful

    thus spoke the evil proctologist said: the enema of my enemy is my friend....

    The SCO Group of Lindon, Utah (not to be confused with the cutting edge SCO design firm of Santa Cruz that had made contributions to science) is simply trying to use the power of patents to destroy in its quest for riches.

    There are many who consider the power to destroy as a greater power than the power to create.

    Even though IBM may not have a perfect past, they do have a long history of creating things, and that history deserves a little bit of admiration. IBM has made a good steady stream of contributions to science along the path of it quest for world dominance. So, yeah, I will cheer big blue as I personally value those who create more than those that simply brandish threats and demand payments.

  30. This is *NOT* a good thing. by numbski · · Score: 5, Insightful

    IBM is going crush SCO. It's gonna take a few years but they have been marked for death. No licensing, no merger, no buyout. Remember, IBM got into a pissing contest with the Justice Dept. in the 70's. In case you need to be reminded the Justice Dept. is part of the U. S. Government who prints the money. The Justice Dept. does not have to show a profit, IBM does. IBM fought the Justice Dept. to a standstill for over 12 years and still showed a profit every year.

    IBM most likely employs more people in their legal department than all of SCO. IBM is going to go into court with SCO and stall, bleeding them dry in the process. The legal fees will bankrupt SCO and IBM will not even break a sweat.


    You do realize that this is precisely what is so wrong with our legal system and how corporations abuse it, right? It just happens to be working in our favor at the moment, but what happens why Goliath goes after the little guy and the little guy is right?

    --

    Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).

  31. Re:MOD PARENT UP. Re:This is *NOT* a good thing. by Ziest · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I agree. Wish I had mod points.

    I also agree. SCO is wrong and so is IBM but that does not change that the fact that IBM has been down this path before and will use what ever stick they can get their hands on. Right, wrong, or indifferent, today in America the guy who has the most money to spend on lawyers wins. You don't like this? Fine! What are YOU gonna do about it? Talk is cheap.

    SCO is wrong on 3 counts. 1) this bullshit that they own all the IP of Unix and all subsequent Unix like OS. 2) that suing people is a legitimate business model and 3) the thing that really pisses me off. That they can threaten IBM, Apple, the Linux, FreeBSD and Open Source community and get away with it with out retribution. In my view stupidity should be painful and stupidity on this scale should cause SCO and everyone associated with them should be extinct. All I have to do is wait a couple of years and they will be.

    This does not change the fact that the patent and legal system in this country is profoundly fucked. But one pile of shit at a time.

    --
    Another day closer to redwood heaven
  32. IBM-SCO dialogue... by tcak · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

  33. Indemnification and the worst job in the world... by dfung · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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