Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Cornering SCO in Delaware
LordNite writes "There is a great article over at Groklaw on the latest motion in the RedHat's Delaware suit. RedHat has filed for the start of discovery. Looking at the list of documents RH is requesting it looks like SCO will finally have to come clean. Naturally SCO is trying to stall. It looks like the beginning of the end of this whole mess." The faster this can get into court and be over, the better.
The article mentions that SCO is trying to stall as much as possible. Probably the executives at Santa Clara have'nt sold off all their shares yet. Once that is done, you can be sure to see the cases flying off the shelves.
My mom never taught me to sign.
Sure, Red Hat has a vested interest in defending Linux, however, there are more companies like Suse, who could take up the fight, but aren't. Kudos to Red Hat. This is one reason why I still buy and support Red Hat.
Once they are discovered, they are no longer entitled to trade secret protection, meaning they cannot sue the releasing party if they were released illegally.
The thing is - anything that's in the Linux code base by definition is not a secret.
Nobody's telling SCO "show all of your code" - they're saying "which lines of the Linux source do you believe is infringing?"
The only reason not to answer that question is that there is no infringing code.
Note in the quote of the license by nice SCO people it says
If LICENSEE fails to fulfill one or more of its obligations under this Agreement, AT&T-IS (AT&T Information Systems) may, upon its election and in addition to any other rememdies that it may have, at any time terminate all the rights granted by it hereunder by not less than two(2) months' written notice to LICENSEE specifying any such breach, unless within the period of such notice all breaches specified therein shall have been remedied; upon such termination LICENSEE shall immediately discontinue use of and return or destroy all copies of SOFTWARE PRODUCTS subject to this Agreement.
I think there is an argument on the phrase in bold I added. SGI says they have remedied the breaches SCO says it is not enough.
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
The difference being that Ken Lay and his company are from Texas, where the current President is from and who was Governor. Lay and Enron were big contributers to the GOP and Bush for a long time, and likely circulated in the same social circle as the Bush family (oil/energy, Texas, wealthy, politics, the overlap is massive).
The Enron prosecution isn't done and Lay isn't out of the woods yet. There was just recently a news blurb about Lay refusing to hand over documents in his possession, citing the 5th Ammendment.
Darl is probably the only "name" exec at SCO and is a "name" only for creating this fiasco. While probably "connected" politically in the same way all wealthy CEO types are, I highly doubt he has or can even buy the juice that Lay had with the GOP pre-Enron. Not from the same state or industry as many Bush insiders, nor does he have the non-business political standing.
Furthermore, he's created enemies at bigger businesses like IBM that have heavier hitters than him, with longer, deeper political connections and from bigger states, mitigating any potential political advantage he *might* have had.
And remember, Sam Waksal from Imclone is *already* in the can, Martha Stewart faces a fraud trial that could land her in the can, too, and the guy from Tyco I believe will likely enjoy the a nice long membership at the Orange Jumpsuit Country Club.
Overall, I think McBride is *just* the kind of sacrificial lamb that the Justice department and SEC would like to see turning on a spit over an open fire. Not politically connected enough to be a threat to them and reaping major political benefits for the overly-pro-corporate Bush administration when he gets a public hanging.
> I predict that today the stock value will mirror yesterday, it may even end slightly up. This is because little or none of the news read here at /. and other such places is getting filtered through to wall street.
Actually, the reason is that you buy stock like SCOX as a speculation, not an investment. It's a simple theory that boils down to this: no matter how dumb it is for you to own the stock, someone dumberer will buy it off you for more.
So far, that seems to be a pretty accurate assessment.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.