Slashdot Mirror
SCO Backing Off Linux Invoice Plan
rocketjam writes "CNet is reporting that the SCO Group is backing off plans to send invoices to corporate users in an effort to generate more takers of their Linux licensing plan. A spokesman said SCO executives were happy with current progress in the licensing program, and didn't feel they needed to send out invoices yet. SCO also extended the 'introductory' licensing price to the end of October, at which point the amount they are asking will double. Despite SCO's threats, 84 per cent of CIOs in a recent survey said it hasn't affected their plans to implement Linux."
I doubt this has anything to do with SCO's "satisfaction" with the level of response, but rather with the advice of their lawyers.
Generally, invoicing for other people's work is not held in high regard by the law.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
SCO doesn't like the fact that IBM and Red Hat are both fighting back. They decided it would be bad to have more companies filling suit at the same time.
"If, therefore, any be unhappy, let him remember that he is unhappy by reason of himself alone."
~Epictetus
So one CIO in 7 has changed his plans to switch to Linux.
That's not a paltry number, I'm sure.
A more interesting article regarding kids and games today is here.
They haven't sent out invoices because they're satisfied with the response on their Linux licensing program? Are you sure it isn't the fact that it would be illegal, and would get them into endless hot water? No, no, it's because they're getting loads and loads of money from 'concerned' companies.
There cannot be a company/organization stupid or spineless enough to actually buy a "sco binary" linux license . If so lets see the list... so we know where to place future shorts.
I'd be very interested to see how many people/companies have actually bought into the SCO FUD and bought a Linux license.
I was so freaked out when I missed the introductory licensing dead line. Got to go to the bank now.
What did they think, that if you sent an invoice to someone's accounting department that they wouldn't notice and just pay the bill?!
Hey... actually that idea isn't half bad.
Despite SCO's threats, 84 per cent of CIOs in a recent survey said it hasn't affected their plans to implement Linux."
This means that 16% of Linux implementations HAVE been affected by SCO's threats. I expect that this represents significant financial damage to Linux businesses as will be represented in the sure-to-ensue lawsuits that will follow SCO on its way down the toilet.
If I reduced SCO's "income" by 16% they'd probably put a contract out on me.
Apparently SCO's bluff is working about as well as the threats from Anonymous Cowards to beat people up over their internet connections.
"Just you wait! I'll extend the introductory price another month, and I'll get you then!"
Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
Does anyone else find it frightfully disturbing that 16% of CIO believed the SCO's claims to hold enough water that they've changed their implementation strategies? I understand why a company that wasn't already using Linux would see this as a reason not to swap. But to be using or implementing Linux and to change your mind against it because of this seems like a rather signifigant change in attitude.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
"In other news, SCO's stock surged $4.97, or 32 percent, to close at $20.50 Wednesday, after Deutsche Bank analysts Brian Skiba and Matthew Kelly initiated coverage of the company with a "buy" rating and a $45 price target for the stock"
does that mean 16 % has ?? that looks like a lot already ...
We all know SCO does not want to reveal they secrets they say is their property. It's already been revealed! If SCO wants to send a bill to people or artificial entities (corporations) to use their intelectual property, then they should've obyed the Patent Laws by registering the IP in question at the patent office as theirs. Then, after the conclusion of their monopoly to profit on their IP, the IP patent is dissolved and the knowledge becomes Public Domain. Yet, according to the Bible, if IP was a secret that was never published, then the following scripture would gracefully adapt to todays situation...
Deuteronomy 29:29;
The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.
This is agreeable, and so is Thomas Jefferson's intention of patents on IP. Anyone willing to second this motion for the Bible and Thomas Jefferson?
Yea, Amen!
Secured Party, Without Prejudice, UCC 1-207: Creditor
What I don't understand is that while most professionals are telling companies not to purchase the license, SCO is receiving a "buy" rating for its stocks, and has surged by 32%. Why would a company that is in the middle of multiple lawsuits valued at billions of dollars, struggling to get customers, and having professionals tell potential clients not to buy the product receiving a buy rating and having a surge in stock?
A little learning never hurt anyone.
So basically SCO has changed their position from:
to:
84 per cent of the topics that were associated with this artical were probably unnecessary. Or is it just me who thinks that having 7 icons running down the side of an artical is a tad too many?
---
Any man who can drive safely while kissing a pretty girl is simply not giving the kiss the attention it deserves. -- AE
I can't wait for this whole SCO thing to go away. Maybe it's a bit like that simpsons halloween episode where the billboard ads come to life. If you ignore them. They'll go away.
SCO died because of Linux. They thought they were the only intel based Unix OS out there. They didn't innovate & they died.
You tried your best, & you failed miserably,
The lesson is:
Never Try
No one even SCO, is retarded enough to send those invoices. The moment they send those invoices they step into federal law territory.
...
Mail Fraud
FTC
SEC
The list goes on and on
I find it damn hard to believe that anyone is buying licenses.
Got Code?
This whole SCO mess is probably wearing me out as much as anybody. Still I can't help feeling very sorry for the bulk of the people employed by SCO.
Think about it: Your firm is ridiculed by the entire industry, your management is insane, your future uncertain and your resume marked for life.
Ouch.
.: Max Romantschuk
As soon as they send out any invoices, companies that get them can choose not to pay.
An invoice is a demand for payment, but you're not required to pay if you can prove that you didn't receive goods or services from the company making the invoice.
So, the first time someone challenges it, SCO will lean on them and say "Don't make us MAKE you pay us", that company will say "Go on then." and SCO has a choice.
1) Go to court
2) Back off
If they choose 1, then the the court proceeding might look like this:
Defendent: We haven't received any goods or services from SCO, and are therefore not going to pay this invoice.
SCO: Yes you have! You're using Linux! It has our code in it! Pay up!
Defendent: Prove it.
SCO: No! We don't have to!
Judge: Case dismissed. Stop wasting the court's time, SCO
IANAL, as you can plainly see, hehe! But, I really fail to see how SCO would be able to enforce payment on any outstanding invoices even if they did send them.
No, the safest choice is by far to ignore this whole mess and keep doing what you were doing before SCO lost it's collective mind.
Deutsche Bank analysts Brian Skiba and Matthew Kelly today were arrested by officers from the SEC. They will be spending 8-10 year in a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison for market manipulation.
SCO Group Inc (The) SCOX 20.50 4.97 (32.00%)
Red Hat Inc RHAT 12.85 -0.15 (-1.15%)
International Business Machines Corporation IBM 92.74 0.02 (0.02%)
Pump and dump time!
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
In other news, SCO is reportedly "happy with negative press". Darl McBride was quoted "We're happy with the extent of negative press SCO has garnered so far, and don't intend to change our strategy soon." Analysts had previously speculated that the days of wild accusations against everybody and his pet gerbil were numbered, due to the increased risk of lawsuits against executives. "Negative press is always hard to get, but we do our best and are pretty successful" said McBride. "Watch out for our new projects: suing the Israeli government for using our Hebrew intellectual property, and getting the Chinese government to pay up for our rocket launching technology."
Not according to the article:
How is that insightful? The article clearly states that the 84% refers to those CIO's with linux installation plans.
At least for the ones' whose stock options have vested!
The enemies of Democracy are
boy, am i relieved! i was getting really worried there for a while.
no... no wait... no, actually, my policy is still that they can kiss my ass. yeah, that's it. sometimes i forget my policy on that.
Actually, I'd say that this is more reasonably taken from a pessimistic view. *16%* of all CIOs were negatively influenced (seems unlikely that it's a positive influence) toward Linux because of this one SCO money grab.
May we never see th
What I mean was they said they'd invoice users for the press they got out of it. They most likely saw it as a way to pump up their stock price and deflect negative publicity.
Point is, SCO is all bluff and no action. Does anyone really think they'd be stupid enough to really send those invoices and risk being bombarded with lawsuits? These guys want to be the ones filing the suits, not the ones being sued. They're trying as hard as they can to project the image that they're in control of the situation and confidently moving forward. At this point, bluster, hyperbole, and vague threats are all they have.
Someone may point out that they actually followed through with their threat to sue IBM. True, but they had to do something to initially give themselves some credibility, and they probably figured Big Blue would buy them out to make them go away. Now they're stuck in a situation they can't control, with IBM countersuing.
As for the decision to call off the invoices and extend the introductory prices for licenses, let's cut right through the bullshit and look at how businesses operate. If sales are going well, you don't back off of your strategy. If they feel that they're selling licenses to scared companies, they'd have no problem ratcheting up the pressure. They may have sold a few, and they may see sales trickle in, but they probably figure that raising the price will cause sales to decline by more than 50%, since they were going to double their prices for licenses. But my strongest suspicion is that they're stalling for time. They probably aren't selling a damn thing, and they've probably already decided that sending invoices won't help matters much.
I still firmly believe that the way to deal with these clowns is for anyone who's contributed to Linux development to sue them for slander. For an individual, filing a suit can be difficult and expensive, but perhaps those who are interested could join forces under the umbrella of an organization such as the FSF.
Look at it this way. SCO is like the cockroach in your kitchen that comes out at night to scavenge for food. Sure, it'll run and hide when the lights come on, but as soon as you leave and turn off the lights, it'll come back out. If it's one of the aggessive flying variety, it might even fly at you to frighten you, even though you're in no real danger. In any case, the only way to make the vermin go away for good is to kill it. SCO isn't going to go away until the Linux community picks up a shoe and splatters it all over the wall.
The article specifically says 84% of CIOs ignored SCO's licensing plans, not '16% of CIOs took the invoice threat seriously and had checks ready'. The reactions of the other 16% could include 'followed and got a good laugh', 'constantly bugged my IT staff and/or lawyers about what it means to us', or 'hedged our bets and put some projects on hold'.
In other words, saying '84% of Slashdot readers ignored the last Country Music Awards' does NOT mean the other 16% followed it on pins and needles.
R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
in an effort to generate more takers of their Linux licensing plan.
Basically they don't want to look too aggressive in order to have a chance. They have read all the reviewers remarks and realized that they are too pushy so they want to be the nice guys helping everyone else follow the law.
This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
...your face turns blue. You're gonna die because nobody cares.
84 percent?
Mod me down, I have too much karma.
Hammer of Truth
HA! Mod this up.
Hammer of Truth
So basically we can say 499 out of 500 Fortune 500 companies don't feel any need to pay SCO for the use of Linux after all of SCO's PR work.
People have guessed Microsoft as the Forture 500 company. There's an alternative option. SCO has a large customer that's no small fry.
Some know that McDonald's uses SCO at their cash registers for POS. Perhaps SCO managed to sell them Linux licenses in exchange for other favorable treatments.
"Pay up, we'll be sending out invoices"
Then a few months later:
"We won't be sending out invoices"
If they'd actually sent out any of the invoices, they could have been prosecuted for wire fraud. Which is, of course, why they didn't. The phantom "invoices" were just a trick to get people to think that there was something to this, and trick people into coming to SCO preemptively.
However, given that: Is SCO violating any kind of fraud/barratry laws by claiming they were going to send out these invoices, then not doing it? (At least given that the claim was clearly a way of tricking people into "voluntarily" giving up money?) Any at all? Just checking..
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Defendant: We haven't received any goods or services from SCO, and are therefore not going to pay this invoice.
SCO: Yes you have! You're using Linux! It has our code in it! Pay up!
Defendant: Prove it.
SCO: Okay, here. Will that be cash or check?
Defendant: nothing. We're taking this evidence and will deeply examine it (ie: we will Slashdot it). We will know in a few days weather your case is valid.
SCO: you cant do that!
Defendant: are you denying us the right to cross-check your evidence?
SCO: you have to sign a non-disclosure agreement! It's for our protection!
Defendant: but after signing that, we could only cross-check the information to a limited point. Once again, are you going to deny us our right to cross check the evidence?
one SCO executive whispers to another: do we have any valid evidence yet?
one SCO executive replies to another: depends if they're using kernel 2.6-something-er-ather. it doesn't have our old shitty code in it.
SCO: The prosecution would like to remove all charges your honor.
You are confusing me with someone who cares.
http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/tech/ronnaabramson /10119639.html
Deutsche Bank analyst Brian Skiba accompanied his buy rating with a $45 price target, but cautioned that investors should consider an investment in SCO "extremely high risk and volatile." Shares of SCO propelled $5.13, or 33%, to $20.66 in recent trading.
Buying SCO is akin to buying a call option on the company's controversial lawsuit against IBM (IBM:NYSE - commentary - research), Skiba wrote in his research note. In its suit filed in March, SCO charged IBM with misappropriating SCO's UNIX source code in its Linux business. But the case is complicated because of how SCO ended up with rights to Unix and the code's relationship to Linux.
The analyst doesn't try to hide the fact that this is an incredibly risky investment. You're basically betting that the lawsuit will be successful. Therefore, shorting this stock would seem like a way to get some easy money. Then again, I would have said the same thing about betting on the Cubs a few days ago.
Rank Presidents by th
Mod the parent down for not reading the article. Something 4:Insightful is just ridiculous for that.
"Of the respondents, 73 percent had Linux implementation plans, according to the survey."
the point of this lawsuit is not to make $ off the licenses, it's to pump SCO stock so the execs can bail richer than they were before. it's working.
"The executives have said we haven't had to do it yet," SCO spokesman Blake Stowell said of the invoice plan. They're happy with progress in the licensing program."
Translation:
Our stock is still soaring from our last round of FUD. The board is concerned we might have used too much of our FUD supply pumping our share price up and might not have enough left over to cover our asses when we start dumping our shares. Just good textbook FUD managment.
Yoohoo! Anybody there? You didn't think a guy as smart as McBride ever thought this would work, did you? He is stretching the game while his pump-and-dump operation is going fine. McBride still has a very large smile on his face, thank you.
10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then
Come on guys.. It works for the comments on slashdot articles. The only way to deal with trolls, like SCO, is to ignore them. If you keep reporting on, and getting excited about every ridiculous move they make, you're just doing them a favor.
Don't you love these banking boys, the people who said that all those
A wonder what Brian and Matt were predicting as "hot stocks" in 1999. As someone who worked in a company that IPO'ed in 1999 and had a target price of over $50 and was worth sub $2 in 12 months.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
I've heard a rumor that SCO has decided to target Hollywood's large Linux installations. The rumor has it that Sontag has decided that attacking Hollywood will generate a lot of press, more than attacking any other industry group. Apparently they're not interested in actually collecting money, but rather they are just interested in getting press coverage to get the stock price even higher.
DandyLion
Personally I reckon the analyst made a typo - look on the numeric keypad, 4 and 1 are adjacent. I reckon he meant $15. However the recommendation went out and they must stick by it.
See my journal, I write things there
This is right on the mark. The single most effective weapon in the opensource community's armor right now is silence. Every posting which fails to point out the real nature of this lawsuit - a stock scam - gives it credibility and feeds the scam. Seasoned operators in the financial services community understand this, which is why the stock will continue to be pumped as long as the opensource community fails to switch off the SCO loudspeaker. In effect, Slashdot and sites like it are functioning as amplifiers for the SCO case, and are simply pawns in a game they don't understand.
No...the law doesn't protect you from your own stupidity.
Wanna bet that this Fortune 500 company did not pay very much for it's "license".
SCO are desperate for some "customers" to make the look good.
I wouldn't be surprised if it whent something like this.
Darl: Hey, you're a big company.
We will license linux to your entire organisation for $1, deal?
Company: Yeah, sure, whatever, Darl. As long as you don't use our name and quit pestering us.
now if you excuse me, I have some business to do. You know, with actual customers, and actual products.
Or it was just Microsoft trying to give SCO some credibility and cash to keep them alive a little bit longer...
"First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
SCO Stock soars
Another one
Fastest Growing Company !!!
If this is the advice given to investors then it is no wonder that the markets are in such a mess. In fact these experts think that $45 dollars will be a fair target.
"Skiba calculated his $45 price target by forecasting earnings and revenue based on licensing agreements for Unix and other licensing opportunities."
Do we know whether or not the licenses granted to Microsoft etc were perpetual or annual, because otherwise I cant see where they think the additional funds will come from ?
From the article it also looks as though they are still angling for IBM to buy them for $1 BILLION. I think IBM will not buckle and will just crush them.
If a corporation issues an invoice to another business in the same country, then it is legally obliged to collect the sales tax (TVA, VAT, MWST)and pay it to the government. The tax has to be paid on a due date which may be before the invoice is paid. The other company pays the invoice including sales tax, then claims the sales tax back (yes, I agree, it's hard to think of a more stupid system but it is intended to combat fraud.)
If SCO tries the scam of sending out invoices, it will incur a huge liability for tax. The tax liability is a big inducement not to send out fraudulent invoices. Eventually the invoices will appear as bad debts, and that won't look good on the balance sheet either.
This leaves SCO with the option of sending out cross-border invoices. However, these are far less likely to be paid since even the most nervous accountant is unlikely to want to pay a US invoice for the claimed use of IP in a German product.
And my conclusion? Even more R&D and backoffice business goes to Europe, China and India. It's safer to do business there.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
Some know that McDonald's uses SCO at their cash registers for POS. Perhaps SCO managed to sell them Linux licenses in exchange for other favorable treatments.
Like a lifetime of Happy Meals for Daryl???
how long until
SCO are just trying to get their stock price high enough to buy a better company.
Of the 27% that didn't have plans, how many of them had cancelled their plans/piots (in part) because of the SCO thing?
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Once again, another bad piece of Journalism... I'm surprised they actually list an author on the headline. A machine could take a bunch of press statements and stick it together. This was an opportunity to ASK real questions regardinging the licensing issue and write about it. 'This is what sco says, but my investigation reveals...' would be a piece of actual journalism rather than this garbage. IT Press sucks again...
Well we know that some GPL'ed code is in OpenServer due to samba being in there; kinda makes you wonder what would be found if some neutral third party went through the code with the same microscope that they are using on Linux.
Might be interesting to go through OpenServer looking for copyright notices and find out how much is supposedly from SCO and how much is admited to be from third parties.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
This sums it all up for me: http://www.fucksco.com
Corrent, the POS OS comes from the vender. When I was at McDonalds (10 years ago) there was a buisness computer that talked to whichever POS was installed (PAR and Panasonic are the ones I worked with, but I presume there are others - each store is different, and they are not replaced often) in the back room, and that always ran SCO, with custom software. However as I left windows comptuers were starting to pop up here and there. I have no idea what the situation is now, and if I did I likely couldn't tell you.
IANAL but I think it depends on the terms/wording of the license. If the license is to use SCO Linux (which they own and can license however they want, although they could be held liable for violating the license on any GPL'd code it contains.) you can't sue because they provided what they sold you (a license to use their version of Linux). However, if you can prove that they either represented themselves as owning all linux distros and/or licensed you to use something they don't own you might have a case for fraud or false advertising.
"Skiba acknowledges that his call on SCO may be taken as heresy in the Linux community, but said it's important to separate the stock from the company. In addition, he argues that the idea of Linux being created by thousands of volunteer programmers is largely myth, given that companies like IBM, Hewlett-Packard (HPQ:NYSE - commentary - research) and others have paid thousands of employees to improve the operating system and build a business around it. "
Can this possibly be true?
TT
and what percent had linux plans (or even knew what it was) before this SCO business started making headlines in the trades?
Our CTO didn't until she read about this and asked for a position paper.
98% of CIO's can't find their own a-holes with both hands and a mirror.
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
At work one of the guys was showing around a copy of SCO/Caldera OpenLinux. I think it was version 3.2.
What caught my attention was a statement saying that support would be available online until January, 2004. IIRC this was silkscreened right on the install CD.
IANAL, but it seems to me that it will be at least January before the SCO ftp servers can take their Linux down without violating their own promises to buyers of OpenLinux. And possibly much later, depending on the drop dead date for the last version they shipped.
null sig
This is the code that Jack wrote.
This is the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
This the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
This is the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
This is SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
This is the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
This is the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
This is the website that mentioned the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
This is the customer who searched the website that mentioned the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
This is the confusion felt by the customer who searched the website that mentioned the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
This is the Red Hat lawsuit that discusses the confusion felt by the customer who searched the website that mentioned the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
Here is the SCO Press Release decrying the Red Hat lawsuit that discusses the confusion felt by the customer who searched the website that mentioned the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
Here is the SCOX stock propped up by the SCO Press Release decrying the Red Hat lawsuit that discusses the confusion felt by the customer who searched the website that mentioned the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
Here is the IBM countersuit that mentions the SCOX stock propped up by the SCO Press Release decrying the Red Hat lawsuit that discusses the confusion felt by the customer who searched the website that mentioned the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
Here are the SCOForum code samples referenced in the IBM countersuit that mentions the SCOX stock propped up by the SCO Press Release decrying the Red Hat lawsuit that discusses the confusion felt by the customer who searched the website that mentioned the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
Here is another NDA that once covered the SCOForum code samples referenced in the IBM countersuit that mentions the SCOX stock propped up by the SCO Press Release decrying the Red Hat lawsuit that discusses the confusion felt by the customer who searched the website that mentioned the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in the code that Jack wrote.
Here are the clueless analysts who signed the NDA that once covered the SCOForum code samples referenced in the IBM countersuit that mentions the SCOX stock propped up by the SCO Press Release decrying the Red Hat lawsuit that discusses the confusion felt by the customer who searched the website that mentioned the NDA that protected the license offered by SCO that claimed the AIX that shipped with the RCU that called the function that lay in th
Before you trash SCO and its cast of characters as totally worthless, Remember the value that they are adding daily to the technology community on a daily basis.
Go ahead, think about it for a minute or two.
Stumped? You cannot see a redeeming value it SCO continued existance?
This is the best tech soap opera/drama/comedy since Al Gore invented the internet. It has staying power, from a summer replacement series, now held over into the Fall line up. A great cast of characters. We could enjoy a full blow trial or two during next season. The third season could be taken up by SEC actions and a fourth season can have those pesty criminal trials.
I really think that Darl (Don't you love that stage name) should get some real recogition for his individual contribution. It must take special talent to play the serious straight man in this screw-ball comedy.
Mark Heise also deserves special notice for the inventative attack on GPL. Who would have thought an attorney would come up with the most comical moment in the entire season?
We should have several seasons of twists and turns if the producers of the SCO Comedy Group can avoid bankruptcy.
I personally hope it lasts until "Doctor Who" returns to PBS. Hey, Darl could play the new Doctor Who!
According to this report on the matter:
"Mr. Skiba doesn't own shares of SCO. Deutsche Bank may seek to provide investment banking services to the company."
Well, look at that.. Deutsche Bank wants them as an investment banking customer, all while their 'analyst' gives their stock a 'target price' 3000% higher than it was at the start of the year.
84 per cent of CIOs in a recent survey said it hasn't affected their plans to implement Linux.
I'm still concerned that 16% of cios were gullible enough to fall for this, or at least be worried about it. That's probably enough to warrant a class-action suit by companies like mine against SCO after they lose big to IBM and RH.
Do you have ESP?
Let me guess... SCO execs have another "pre-planned" round of stock sales coming up, don't they?
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
answered that "We were so scared of SCO and its claims, that we stopped doing our jobs, and were promptly fired. We are all filing a class action suit vs. SCO for mental anguish and punitive damages." ;-)
Regards,
Fredrick
Truth be told...
Some companies have lost some serious dough paying invoices even when they don't know where they came from or what they are for. It might be a viable business in and of itself... hmmm.
-KS
The guy mentions Morton directly so maybe it has some credibility.
Help fight continental drift.
I have to believe that when people start recieving these invoices someone will post one to the web. I am sure we will hear about it, or whatever. Furthermore, I think that we would probably hear about companies (or rumours about companies) that have signed up with the licensing plan.
I have a feeling that no one has signed up for the licensing plan yet. Some were suggesting that DB was the "undisclosed" company that had bought licenses from SCO Group. Who knows? It's not important who the company is, but I am curious if ANY company is actually purchasing licenses from SCO.
I would like to see evidence that proves:
1. Someone has actually purchased an IP (Linux) license from SCO Group. Anyone.
2. A picture of the invoice ( from someone who thinks it's a joke and won't pay it, etc... ) - if and when they claim they are sending out invoices.
I just don't believe that anyone is purchasing these licenses. Remember, the SCO Group has been quoted as saying that this fight for new IP laws and precedents is more important than the long-term stability of the SCO Group. The SCO Group will fight to the death concerning these IP rights, that's how committed and serious they are about it. It's an interesting concept, but death is imminent. This has also been said before, but it's basically true... there is no way they can survive an IBM appeal. And that's exactly what's going to happen if SCO, by some miraculous miscarriage of justice, win the IBM case.
Hey, there are lots of animals like that, too... willing to fight to the death. I bet my dog would be willing to fight to the death to protect my family, as well. It's not uncommon. But SCO may just be wrong about these IP concepts.
Imagine a company that makes caps for pickup trucks. They make caps for Fords, Chevys, and Dodges. That's OK! You can make aftermarket parts for multiple manufacturers. If Dodge comes out and says that any manufacturer that makes caps for their pickup trucks can't make them for any other brands of pickup trucks, such as Chevy, Ford, or Toyota, then Dodge will probably find themselves without any companies making aftermarket parts for them. That's all that's really going on here... SCO is saying that if you make aftermarket software for UNIX, that you can't make it for Linux, because then people won't buy UNIX. It's absolutely absurd, and unheard of in the business world. They may as well be suing Oracle for making a database that runs on Linux, if they are going to be taking that approach.
It means that we don't know what the other 16% answered. Without seeing the details of the survey, it's completely reasonable that 16% of CIO's either didn't respond to the survey or never had plans to implement Linux in the first place, which in my mind is much more likely.
I remember seeing numbers at the bottom of all of SCO's press releases circa June 2003, where they stated they had a worldwide network of more than 16,000 resellers and 6,000 developers. I know the first number (16,000) is correct, but the last one was either 6,000 or 8,000.
In the press release today regarding BayStar Capital's $50 M investment, the data on SCO states "...SCO has a worldwide network of more than 11,000 resellers and 4,000 developers".
So by my calculations, they have lost over 31 percent of their resellers and between 33 to 50 percent of their developers.
Either their figures on their press releases in June 2003 were very out-of-date (or grossly inflated) or they have, in actual fact, an extermely serious business situation that investors and others are not fully aware of.
And, for me, if it is a matter of the figures being out-of-date or grossly inflated, it would still make SCO one of the last companies I would ever do business with, as they seem to be slip-shod at best with their record keeping, easily proved false statements in their press releases, etc.
Regards,
Fredrick
I'd be interested to know what percent of people changed their plans to continue to use Microsoft software after the great worm breakouts.