Slashdot Mirror


Forbes Examines SCO Subpoenas

z4ce writes "It seems that Daniel Lyons of Forbes just wrote yet another article on the IBM vs. SCO law suit. Now, Daniel seems to seeing SCO for the liars they are. One of the choice quotes include, "What's the point of hassling people who make chips and set-top boxes? Don't ask SCO's top execs. They don't know anything about this stuff, remember?""

11 of 416 comments (clear)

  1. Because... by eurleif · · Score: 4, Funny

    They clearly stole the idea of chips from SCO! Unix ran on chips before Linux!

  2. blah by Leroy_Brown242 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Jeese I'm tired of hearing about SCO.

    I wish Moore's law applied to the speed of lawsuits as well.

    1. Re:blah by mopslik · · Score: 5, Funny

      I wish Moore's law applied to the speed of lawsuits as well.

      Actually, Moore's Law applies to the number of lawsuits today.

  3. Holy shit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Stallman says the Boston-based Free Software Foundation, which he founded in 1985, has nothing to do with SCO's lawsuit. "SCO is suing IBM for violating a contract. We don't even know what the contract said. In terms of the resolution of that lawsuit, the Free Software Foundation is entirely uninvolved," he says.

    Holy shit! RMS talked to a member of the press and DIDN'T come off looking like a smug, reality-disconnected jackass!

    Truly amazing.

  4. Marketing via backlash by Preach+the+Good+Word · · Score: 4, Funny

    This thought occurred to me:

    SCO goes after Linux as a marketing/gain money tool.

    They get hated.

    Opposing SCO becomes popular.

    SCO has just handed people a new marketing tool - oppose/stand up to SCO, get attention, customers, etc.

    Though in reflection, their egregeous approach to an unsubstantiated claim was bound to provoke a backlash. And it was bound to be something that people would take advantage of.

    Did SCO even see this? My guess, no. They're up their in their own little world.

  5. Re:Confusion ... by AuraSeer · · Score: 4, Funny

    Even that Forbes reporter could (kind of) tell the difference between GNU/Linux the OS and Linux the kernel ...

    Of course the reporter could tell the difference, he had just gotten done interviewing RMS. He probably heard "GNU/Linux" a hundred times in ten minutes.

  6. Re:Daniel Lyons ? by schon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Quite a change in tone !

    Maybe his last cheque from Darl & co. bounced..

  7. Re:This isnt a desperation move, not to SCOs think by schon · · Score: 5, Funny

    we need to bring in as many people as possible to show how fragmented and uncontrolled Linux Development is .. and to that end, we are going to subpoena people who have nothing to do with Linux kernel development.

    Of course, if you look at it crosseyed enough, it starts to make a little sense.. by bringing to the stand people who have nothing to do with it, you make them seem even more fragmented and uncontrolled...

    "Mr Stallman, let's talk about the Linux kernel code you contributed.."

    "I've never made any contributions to the Linux kernel."

    "Ahh - so then let's talk about the code that you didn't contribute, then."

    "What?!?!"

    "Your Honor, see how fragmented and uncontrolled they are!"

  8. Finally Truthfull Headline from SCO by bstadil · · Score: 5, Funny
    The headline from SCO may be a Freudian slip of sorts.

    Press Relaese

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  9. Re:Confusion ... by SmackCrackandPot · · Score: 4, Funny

    This sums it up. SCO is suing IBM for breach of contract, nothing more, nothing less. What dows Linus Torvalds, Richard Stallman et al have to do with this contract? did they sign it?

    Reminds me of a car bumper sticker I once saw:

    "Protected by Mafia Insurance - You hit us, we hit you."

  10. Open Letter to SCO, their lawyers, etc. by superdan2k · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dear SCO & Friends,

    I understand what you're going through. As an individual, I went through this back in 2001, when the market tanked and I lost my cushy dot-com gig. A lot of companies went through what you're going through, but most of them had the common decency to go quietly and with dignity, rather than hiring lawyers and trying to take a Scorched Earth approach in a last valiant effort to save themselves. Here's a hint: you're not the Soviet Army and Utah isn't Stalingrad.

    Let's face it -- your goose is cooked. In an attempt to fill your coffers, you have succeeded in the most perfect execution of Operation: Footbullet since the dying gasps of the dot-coms in 2000-2001. Even if you win, you lose -- you have alienated the one group that you needed to hold on to any sort of market share: the geeks. If, by some stroke of magical luck, bought judge, planetary alignment, or guiding hand of Microsoft, you manage to actually pull this off and have the GPL declared null-and-void and you and your puppeteer, Bill Gates (no doubt, elbow deep in your asses, playing ventriloquist), manage to clean house registering patents and copyrights on works you didn't create, you will have only succeeded in enraging those who are responsible for creating those works. Those creators are people who have a say in what gets purchased at their offices, and I'd be willing to bet that it wouldn't be SCO or M$ (should their complicity in this fiasco be shown to be true and not just educated guesswork).

    That said, I'd encourage you to call off the attack dogs. We'll all have a good laugh at your "clever ruse" and share a beer together. Twenty years from now, SCO will be long-gone and irrelevant. God willing, M$ will be gone then, too. And you'll wonder to yourself: what the fuck was I thinking back then?

    Think it over. There's more of us than there are of you, ultimately, we, the consumers, control the future of your business. Do you really want to taunt that 800-lb. gorilla? Do you?

    --
    blog |