Slashdot Mirror


BayStar Cashes Out of SCO Stock

Kurt Wall writes "According to Yahoo! Finance, BayStar, the company that funded SCO to the tune of $50,000,000, and then later changed the terms of the deal, has requested that SCO redeem the 20,000 shares of preferred stock issued in return for the funding. The reason? BayStar states that 'SCO has allegedly breached Sections 2(b)(v), 2(b)(viii) and 3(g) of the Exchange Agreement.' Naturally, SCO thinks it has done nothing of the sort."

524 comments

  1. Why they'd be doing this now? by Saven+Marek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Talk on the boards is that the breaches are due to SCO not revealing the entire story regarding their claimed 'ownership' of UNIX SysV. Notice SCO now states that UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group.

    In any case, looks like you live by the sword you die by the sword. It was after all Darl who stated "Contracts are what you use against parties you have relationships with". None of this using contracts to clarify just what each other's purposes are, and being a record of an agreement, they're to be used as weapons. SCO's breaches are what will come bite them on the ass, and nothing will save them with a contract that they can't hide way back in the muddying of time. $20million worth of redeemed stock is $20million SCO can't use against Linux, Customers, Ex Customers or whoever else has tried to be nice to them in the past.

    It's only a few hour's drive to Lindon from here. I wonder if I should go watch the fireworks.

    Shak's nude anime gallery

    1. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by peragrin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And SCO is going to die by the sword. What is SCO going to do next take baystar to court?? The judge will put that money in a lien, and lock it down until the suit is over. Take away 2/3rd's of SCO cash and keep boise paid they will burn out of cash in 6 months. If they get a break in the court with IBM. If not the next few months will be fun.

      It's been a Good Day.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    2. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Next? They'll Sue Baystar. Then they'll sue Boies.

      Then when their stock finally tanks, they'll sue their own shareholders!

    3. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by AviLazar · · Score: 0

      Don't you worry, SCO doesn't need the $20 million - they are estimating revenue growth due to law suits... -A :)

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    4. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      SCO announced that they are suing the Canopy Group for enticing them into destroying their UNIX and Linux businesses.

      Funny thing, is that it could happen.

    5. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Otter · · Score: 5, Informative
      A bit of clarification: these "breaches" sound like violations of a debt covenant. Typically, borrowers are required to maintain certain standards of total assets, current assets, debt coverage, things like that, and violating them voids the terms of the debt. Breaches aren't typically the sort of sleaziness, fraud or dishonesty most people here seem to be assuming took place.

      Disclaimers:

      1) I am not an investment banker.

      2) I have no idea what the precise lending terms were; on the other hand, I'm confident that the people behind "talk on the boards" also have no idea.

    6. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      It looks to me like Baystar is claiming

      1. SCO lied about their status
      2. SCO didn't disclose everything about their status
      3. There was disparity between press releases and the truth

      Sounds like what we knew all along...

      (The sections that baystar claim have been breached are:-

      2(b)(v)
      (v) Original Purchase Agreement. Excluding the representations and warranties set forth in Sections 3(a), (b), (d), (e), (i), (y) and (z) of the Original Purchase Agreement, the representations and warranties of the Company set forth in Section 3 of the Original Purchase Agreement (the "Original Representations and Warranties") are each true and correct as of the Closing Date, in each case as if made on the Closing Date.

      2(b)(viii)
      (viii) Disclosure. All information relating to or concerning the Company and/or any of its Subsidiaries set forth in this Agreement or provided to the Purchasers in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby is true and correct in all material respects, and the Company has not omitted to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statements made herein or therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. No event or circumstance has occurred or exists with respect to the Company or its Subsidiaries or their respective businesses, properties, prospects, operations and financial conditions, which has not been publicly disclosed but, under applicable law, rule or regulation, would now be required to be disclosed by the Company in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K.

      3(g)
      (g) Press Release; Publicity. The Company shall issue a press release (the "Press Release") describing in reasonable detail the transactions contemplated hereby as soon as practicable on or after the date hereof, but in no event later than the commencement of the first trading day following the date hereof. The Press Release shall be subject to prior review and comment from BayStar Capital II, LP ("BayStar"). Within two days after the Closing Date, the Company shall file a Form 8-K with the SEC concerning this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby, which Form 8-K shall attach this Agreement as an exhibit to such Form 8-K (the "8-K Filing"). From and after the Press Release, the Company hereby acknowledges that no Purchaser shall be in possession of any material nonpublic information received from the Company, any of its subsidiaries or any of its respective officers, directors, employees or agents, that is not disclosed in the Press Release. The Company shall not, and shall cause each of its subsidiaries and its and each of their respective officers, directors, employees and agents not to, provide any Purchaser with any material nonpublic information regarding the Company or any of its subsidiaries from and after the Press Release without the express written consent of such Purchaser; provided, however, that a Purchaser that exercises its rights under Section 4(n) of the Original Purchase Agreement shall be deemed to have given such express written consent. No Purchaser shall have any liability to the Company, its subsidiaries or any of its or their respective officers, directors, employees, shareholders or agents for any such disclosure. Subject to the foregoing, neither the Company nor any Purchaser shall issue any press releases or any other public statements with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby; provided, however, that the Company shall be entitled, without the prior approval of any Purchaser, to make any press

    7. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by caspper69 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry, IANAL, but I AM anal... The judge will put the money into escrow.

      A lien is an encumberance to some type of property (real or personal), preventing its sale or other disposition until the terms of the lien are satisfied. So, you'd escrow the funds with the court until they decide who gets what (which is atypical), or in the absence of funds, a judgment would be issued, which would then entitle the judgment holder to execute upon the real and personal property of the loser. Thus, depending upon your state of residence, may include the right to file a lien, execute (i.e. take) on personal property or cash, or even foreclose upon the real property of the loser.

      There's a whole host of caveats that I won't go into here, but no one's going to shell out any money for a while in this case simply because our courts move too slow, and SCO is going to counter-sue and also allege a breach of contract on Baystar's part. This is not going to slow down the SCO train in the interim by any means. But down the road it may be the final straw that puts SCO out of business, since most of their frivelous lawsuits should have been dismissed by then.

    8. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the correction in Liens.

      But it is going to slow SCO down, you forget Monday is the day SCO has to sho proof of their claims. If they don't show anything, how many people are going to help them. After Monday the whole thing is gonna blow up. IBM, Red Hat, Novell, Baystar and RBC will be fighting over the remains unless SCO pulls out an amazing show stopper.

      My bet is that by monday, Darl and Crew are out of the country, but then again they don't have any brains anyway.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    9. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by raga · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The subject tag deserves more attention than it is getting: why is Baystar doing it now?

      Given the connections that Baystar has with MS/Paul Alen et al, There has to be an angle that makes it worthwhile for them. Also remember that it was SCO that issued a press release with this bit of info. When was the last time they issued a pr with any info that showed them in a bad light?

      One possible scenario is that our friends at Canopy/MS have decided to pull the plug and bankrupt/kill SCO before IBM pierces the corporate veil and sends a bunch of execs to sing-sing (or at least gets a court to find them personally liable for SCO's misdeeds.)

      cheers- raga

    10. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by whoever57 · · Score: 4, Informative
      2) I have no idea what the precise lending terms were; on the other hand, I'm confident that the people behind "talk on the boards" also have no idea.
      No, none whatsoever, except being able to read the precise agreements:
      Original Agreement
      Modified Agreement
      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    11. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by rsmith · · Score: 2, Funny
      In any case, looks like you live by the sword you die by the sword.

      Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.

      --
      Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.
    12. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Otter · · Score: 1

      Yup, you're right. I'd blanked on the fact that there was stock involved, with resulting filings.

    13. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 1

      BayStar sounds more like an investor than a lender. Although Preferred Stock is often characterized as debt, BayStar would probably have loved to convert it to common stock because it would mean that SCO would be doing well in its business (shakedowns using the courts).

    14. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One possible scenario is that our friends at Canopy/MS have decided to pull the plug and bankrupt/kill SCO before IBM pierces the corporate veil and sends a bunch of execs to sing-sing (or at least gets a court to find them personally liable for SCO's misdeeds.)

      More likely they just figured this was the farthest that SCO is going and they might as well make a pretense to cash out and play it safe. As to the fallacy that anyone from Canopy, Baystar or Microsoft or any other investor in SCO would ever be held liable for any alleged misconduct, I have three words: not gonna happen. Investors are not responsible for the criminal conduct of the corporations they invest in.

    15. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by -Harlequin- · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe they think it's better to lose money now, and have the issue of who owns LINUX remain clouded in the public mind, than lose the money later when the courts publically declare LINUX to be the real deal and safe for everyone to use.

    16. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember way back when SCO was known as Caldera and tried sueing microsoft for someting like 11 billion? It had to do with caldera dos supposedly being muscled out unfairly.

      Perhaps microsoft has a far reaching memory and finds humor in the irony of funding, then killing their chances at another lawsuit.

      caldfyr

    17. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      It's likely that SCO was legally obligated to announce it. Or, possibly, they just wanted to announce that they would fight the redemption demand before the news became widespread.

      I fully expect their stock to tank on Monday. W00T!

    18. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by dipipanone · · Score: 1

      why is Baystar doing it now?

      My guess is that they've been reading the filings from IBM's lawyers, and they've just finished reading the latest one that asks for a summary judgement as soon as discovery is finished.

      I imagine that SCO has shared with Baystar information about the strength of their case, and Baystar now recognizes that this summary judgement is likely to be dismissal of all SCO's charges.

      I can't remember what Baystar paid for the stock -- wasn't it around $16 a share? It's been floating at around $10 for the last few weeks, and there are strong indications that someone (probably SCO via their buyback programme) has been buying to keep the stockprice artificially high.

      Anyway, they've finally figured out that there isn't going to be any billion-dollar payday and it's much more likely that SCO have simply pissed their investment up against the wall fighting an unwinnable lawsuit.

      It's the beginning of the end, I think...

    19. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
      It's only a few hour's drive to Lindon from here. I wonder if I should go watch the fireworks.


      Nah. I work just across the parking lot from them. I haven't seen anything cool yet. I mean, besides that red guy with horns and pitchfork walking in through the front door.

      Don't know what that means...
    20. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by dipipanone · · Score: 1
      Just to follow up to my own post:

      I can't remember what Baystar paid for the stock -- wasn't it around $16 a share? It's been floating at around $10 for the last few weeks, and there are strong indications that someone (probably SCO via their buyback programme) has been buying to keep the stockprice artificially high.

      Here's what OSDN's investment analyst Melanie Hollands has to say on this subject in an article on IT manager's journal:
      However, I do want to mention that it is possible (although I have no direct evidence at all) that this is a stock that may have been "ramped" from time to time. Stock ramping is a form of price manipulation, and occurs when some market participants act simultaneously to push up a stock price. This kind of action can be done at times when a stock price threatens to fall below, or stay below, important threshold levels such as a conversion ratio connected with a merger or convertible deal, or redemption level associated with, say, a PIPE deal.
    21. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      "My guess is that they've been reading the filings from IBM's lawyers..."

      Probably, but I'd bet the Novell filings have even more to do with it. After all, SCO told Baystar that they owned Unix (tm Open Group). Then the Novell filing comes along with the terms of what SCO actually bought. Bay Star is likely to be mighty ticked about that.

    22. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by fwr · · Score: 1

      How did this get a rating of 5, Informative? How can Otter be "confident" that people behind "talk on the boards" have no idea of the lending terms? The terms are right on the SEC's web site. How can you be an interested party and NOT be aware of the lending terms? Someone may rate this comment as -1 Flamebait, but Otter's post at best is Overrated.

    23. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Investors are not responsible for the criminal conduct of the corporations they invest in.
      I would think that they could be held responsible if they knew what was going and participated.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    24. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by 24-bit+Voxel · · Score: 1
      If baystar is really funded by MS (as many here claim) how could they possibly have an issue with No. 3? "There was a disparity between press releases and the truth." MS having a problem with misinformation? Well I'll be a monkey's uncle. I bet it plays out something like this...

      (phone rings)

      KETTLE: Uh, hello?

      POT: Hey Kettle, this is Pot. You're black!

      (fade to kettle)

      (applause)

    25. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by raga · · Score: 1
      Investors are not responsible for the criminal conduct of the corporations they invest in.

      If it is established that the investment was done as part of a criminal conspiracy, then yes, they would be responsible.

      BTW, Darl has a free "get-out-of-jail" card in the shape of an indemnification contract:
      ...indemnify the Indemnified Party against any liability incurred in any proceeding to which the Indemnified Party is made a party because he or she is or was a director or officer of the Company or is or was serving at the request of the Company as a director.

      AFAIK, none of the other guys do.

      cheers- raga
    26. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by raga · · Score: 1

      I can't remember what Baystar paid for the stock -- wasn't it around $16 a share? It's been floating at around $10 for the last few weeks, and there are strong indications that someone (probably SCO via their buyback programme) has been buying to keep the stockprice artificially high.

      Baystar has 20,000 Series A Convertible Preferred Stock which is worth $1,000 each. This is different from the common stock traded in the market.

      cheers- raga

    27. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be my guess given the microsoft connections are what they've been said, and that story ran all over the place including eweek. They're pulling the plug because its become dangerous.

      I scrolled down the messages to find the first message to post this obvious possible conclusion.

    28. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is not that the Novell filing came along after Baystar invested, it is that SCO knew about Novell's claims before Baystar invested, but kept acting like they had clear title to Unix.

    29. Re:Why they'd be doing this now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mean, besides that red guy with horns and pitchfork walking in through the front door.

      Don't know what that means...

      They're in bed with BSD?

  2. PREFERRED Stock by Serk · · Score: 5, Informative

    Before anyone gets the wrong idea, plase note, these are PREFERRED shares, not the normal one's you see quoted prices on...

    These shares value is set at $1000 each... so this is quite a big chunk out of SCO's warchest...

    Happy day!

    --
    Never ask a geek why, just nod your head and slowly back away. -Rob Malda
    1. Re:PREFERRED Stock by Hrrrg · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wonder if this means that SCO will now sue Baystar?

    2. Re:PREFERRED Stock by Blob+Pet · · Score: 1

      to be precise...20,000 x $1000 = $20,000,000. That's 40% of the original investment.

      --
      "...today consumers have been conditioned to think of beer when they see a bullfrog..."
    3. Re:PREFERRED Stock by SoSueMe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't see any reason they wouldn't, given their past behaviour.

  3. SCO ON SALE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny


    Woo, SCO's stock is down 10.56% already. What a great time for a shrewd investor to buy SCO stock at bargain prices!

    1. Re:SCO ON SALE! by BoomerSooner · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I shorted at 17.96 in January. I love these types of announcements. They make me more $$$ (negative publicity that is). I'm wondering if I should wait for bankruptcy to buy or just to take the money and run. There is a chance they may live (however small that is).

    2. Re:SCO ON SALE! by GFW · · Score: 5, Informative

      How much interest are you paying on the short position? SCOX is/was a "hard to borrow" stock. You should take the money and run at the point where diminishing further gains are outweighed by continuing interest.

    3. Re:SCO ON SALE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Better do it soon. Take a look at some of the new regulations that come into affect April 30th regarding shorting stocks

      Part I Section 1233.-- Gains and Losses from Short Sales
      PDF format

    4. Re:SCO ON SALE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Let's look at this number. 10.56% means squat. It's what the local news does.

      If something goes from 2 to 4, did it double, go up by 2, or grow exponentially?

      If you say it dropped 10.56% and it was at 100 before; or, if it was at 20 and dropped 10.56%, they tell a lot more.

      This is why you should say, "it dropped from x to y, or 10.56%." Figures can lie and liars can figure.

    5. Re:SCO ON SALE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ony to cover a short...

    6. Re:SCO ON SALE! by strictnein · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you say it dropped 10.56% and it was at 100 before; or, if it was at 20 and dropped 10.56%, they tell a lot more.

      Yeah, both stocks dropped 10.56%

      I don't think it really matters what the initial price was. A stock dropping that much is bad no matter what the initial price.

      You argument works a little bit better if the poster was saying how the stock dropped 5 points (not percent). If the stock was originally at 100 and it dropped 5 points that's not too big of deal. If a stock was at 10 and then dropped 5 points, it might very well be game over.

    7. Re:SCO ON SALE! by IANAAC · · Score: 0, Insightful
      God I hate the stock market mentality.

      Do you believe in SCO's business model? What they sell?

      Kind of a shame your attitude is what the stock market is all about these days.

    8. Re:SCO ON SALE! by ZeLonewolf · · Score: 1

      You only pay interest on a short position if it's underwater. If it's above water, your broker pays you interest.

      --
      "If at first you don't succeed, lower your standards."
    9. Re:SCO ON SALE! by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      They don't really have much of a product. Unless you mean all that hot air coming out of Darl's pie-hole. If they could somehow harnass that, they could power the entire west coast of the United States.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    10. Re:SCO ON SALE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, "shorting" a stock means you think it will go down. So the grandparent poster (presumably) does NOT believe in SCO's business model, etc.

    11. Re:SCO ON SALE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "These days"? Heh. Welcome to capitalism.

    12. Re:SCO ON SALE! by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 1

      I'm not a stock-market "player", but surely belief in the business model and/or the product are criteria for purchasing stock, not shorting stock? I'd have thought (usual, obligatory disclaimer...) that a complete lack of belief in SCO (and a complete lack of awareness of their product) is a totally logical reason to short SCO, and a reasonable, nay, ethical investment decision.

      I'd even go so far as to say it's a shame this attitude isn't what the stock market is all about these days.

      --
      This is where the serious fun begins.
    13. Re:SCO ON SALE! by GFW · · Score: 2, Informative

      Retail investors are usually not paid any interest in a situation like that. Check out this article. As the article points out, there are several issues to consider, including freeing up the funds for other investments.

    14. Re:SCO ON SALE! by bee-yotch · · Score: 1

      What I can't believe is that SCO's stock is still almost double sun's... wtf?

    15. Re:SCO ON SALE! by fdicostanzo · · Score: 1

      fyi, a short means he does not

      --
      Synergies are basically awesome, and they're even better when you leverage them. -PA
    16. Re:SCO ON SALE! by JesseL · · Score: 1

      Are you just comparing their stock prices? If so you should realize that that is an entirley useless way of comparing two companies. I'll bet you that Sun has a whole lot more stock out there than SCO, thus even though the price of a share of SCO is higher than a share of SUN, it also represents a much larger portion of the company.

      --
      "Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
    17. Re:SCO ON SALE! by cosmo7 · · Score: 1

      Let's look at this number. 10.56% means squat. It's what the local news does.

      You are almost, but not quite, entirely wrong. -10.56% is the most eloquent description of the events described.

    18. Re:SCO ON SALE! by cosmo7 · · Score: 1

      What I can't believe is that SCO's stock is still almost double sun's... wtf?

      Did IQ's just drop sharply while I was away?

    19. Re:SCO ON SALE! by Guido+von+Guido · · Score: 1

      Don't get greedy. Take the money and run

    20. Re:SCO ON SALE! by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      While they did get a peak of about $23 a share a couple times, their stock was hovering at $2 a share between Feb 2002 and Feb 2003, so it is still 4x what it was before they started this litigation crap.

      At least before Feb 2002, it slid from around $100 to $2 over the period of a year and a half.

    21. Re:SCO ON SALE! by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you can get the rest of Gates', Ballmers' and McNealy's holdings.

    22. Re:SCO ON SALE! by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 1

      No, you've only just noticed.

    23. Re:SCO ON SALE! by ZeLonewolf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have 1000 shares of SCOX short, and the amount that's above water is earning interest at 0.1%. I think last month it brought in $0.35 (which is, granted, practically nothing). If it goes so high that it cuts into my margin account, then I would pay. I use Scottrade. If your broker doesn't have dirt-cheap commissions and doesn't do basic things like paying interest on your cash balances, dear god get another broker.

      --
      "If at first you don't succeed, lower your standards."
    24. Re:SCO ON SALE! by whittrash · · Score: 1

      Shorting is the exact opposite of believing a stock will go up. Instead of buying a stock to own, you borrow a stock to sell. You then have cash on hand from your sale and an obligation to pay interest on your loan and to give that share back to the original owner. You already have the money, if the share price drops in the toilet, you still have the money, and since you have the money you pick that share up out of the toilet and buy it back and return it to the original owner. You keep the difference. You wonder what a hedge fund is? How they could keep going up while your stock went in the toilet, now you know.

    25. Re:SCO ON SALE! by Da_Weasel · · Score: 1

      No, i pronounce fsck the same way, I think it more fitting, seeing as how its more often seen in its pun format, than actual intended usage.

      And to everyone that pronounces it eff-sick, fuhsck you!!

      --
      If you must!
    26. Re:SCO ON SALE! by bee-yotch · · Score: 1

      Yup, looks like I'm a moron... whoops.

    27. Re:SCO ON SALE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The percentage is more important than the actually point drop because everyone owns a different amount. If a stock costs $1 but you own 10,000 shares and it drops 10% that is the same as if you have a 100 shares of a stock that costs $100 each dropping 10%.

      No matter how much you have the value of your SCO holding just dropped 10% you see? The actually number of points per share really doesn't matter...

      If I buy a stock for $70 and it goes up to $90 it seems like I made out decently...but what if I put that 70$ into a company that stock costs 55 cents a share and then the stock goes to $2? It's the percentages that matter not the points...

    28. Re:SCO ON SALE! by JesseL · · Score: 1

      It's a very common mistake. I freaked out several years ago when AMD did a 1->2 stock split and I hadn't been paying attention. At first I thought my $90/share investment had just dropped to $45 - scary (later of course it really did drop by nearly that much :-().

      --
      "Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
    29. Re:SCO ON SALE! by GFW · · Score: 1

      I'm impressed - Scottrade does have a good reputation for low commissions. If I was an active trader I'd definitely consider making them my broker. However, you still have to admit that 0.1% is a lower-than-market interest rate. What would the rate be if you were under water and paying?

    30. Re:SCO ON SALE! by ZeLonewolf · · Score: 1

      Depends on how big your account is, but between 5 and 6%. The number they quote on the main page is 5.45% on a $7500 balance. So roughly you pay $4 per thousand borrowed, per month. When you consider that commissions are in the $7-$15 range, it's not too bad unless you start to borrow large amounts.

      --
      "If at first you don't succeed, lower your standards."
  4. So Very Sad. by Volatile_Memory · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm weeping on the inside.

    --

    /**
    I have a "Zero Policy" tolerance.
    */

    1. Re:So Very Sad. by Vancouverite · · Score: 4, Funny

      So send in the clowns.... (Laghing on the outside, crying on the inside)
      There's got to be clowns....
      Oh Darl, you're here.

      --
      We are the Music Makers, and We are the Dreamers of Dreams...
  5. Rats by shamir_k · · Score: 5, Funny

    Always the first to leave a sinking ship

    1. Re:Rats by theM_xl · · Score: 1

      Of course I'm leaving! The *ship* is *SINKING*!

    2. Re:Rats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The lawyers have left already?

    3. Re:Rats by Adriax · · Score: 1

      And these rats are leaving by gnawing through the hull while wearing tiny orange lifepreservers and scubatanks.

      Atleast it means they're sinking faster now.

      --
      I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
  6. Watch it fall! by SeanTobin · · Score: 5, Informative

    Watch it fall in near-real time! Go go go! Ahhh... this makes my day :) At time of posting, last trade was 8.68. Also, check the trade volumes after the press release (at 1:45pm). People are paying attention.

    --
    Karma: SELECT `karma` FROM `users` WHERE `userid`=138474;
    1. Re:Watch it fall! by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Even better link.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    2. Re:Watch it fall! by rokzy · · Score: 1

      I don't know anything about stocks, but "down 11.28%" in a day sounds quite bad ?

    3. Re:Watch it fall! by kidgenius · · Score: 1

      It's amazing. It's falling really fast. It just keeps going down.

    4. Re:Watch it fall! by rokzy · · Score: 1

      actually I've been watching it go from "down 11.28%"
      to "down 13.56%" but then back up to "down 12.84%",

      and just now "down 12.53%"

      so not always going down ;-)

    5. Re:Watch it fall! by Algan · · Score: 1

      I don't know anything about stocks, but "down 11.28%" in a day sounds quite bad ?
      Yes, although it's not unheard of for a small company like SCO. Anyway, it's down 13.46 now... which fills my heart with song and laughter

      --
      If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?
    6. Re:Watch it fall! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know anything about stocks, but "down 11.28%" in a day sounds quite bad ?

      [voice style="Paul Teutul"]No, that means the stock is doing great. Turn around so I can smack you on the back of your head! [/]

    7. Re:Watch it fall! by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Using the link above, you can gain some additional insight.

      IF you look at the sell orders (ASK) vs the buy (BID) orders outstanding, it tells a horrible story for people who own SCO.

      Things to look for. What are people willing to pay for SCO, vs what people are asking to sell it. Compare both groups to the current asking price and you can see that most people who want to buy aren't the same as those who want to sell. People wanting to buy really know what the value is, while those people willing to sell are looking to squeeze a few extra $ out before cashing out.

      Expect the $ to drop substantially. Then perhaps you might find SCO does get its wish and get bought out by someone. Although it would be fun just watching the ship sink into the abyss.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:Watch it fall! by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Umm, yeah.

      That's why I posted the link.

      What it was doing half an hour ago is pretty useless info in the financial world.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    9. Re:Watch it fall! by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 2, Funny

      actually I've been watching it go from "down 11.28%" to "down 13.56%" but then back up to "down 12.84%"

      Yes, it's fun to watch the insiders furiously try to pump it back up and fail.

    10. Re:Watch it fall! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The volumes are small enough that those "insiders" could be "a daytrader in montana".

      It's not like this is the firsttime SCOX has dropped 15%. When the shit really hits the fan, it will be more like 90%.

    11. Re:Watch it fall! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These people have probably already jumped off the roof of their respective buildings.

    12. Re:Watch it fall! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
      The main reason it's not falling faster and harder is because 36% of the stock is shorted. Although this is an extraordinarily high number, representing extreme pessimism about the stocks future, it has the ironic effect of support on the stock.

      The reason is that short orders eventually have to be closed. To close a short order, you have to buy the stock. You can even put a stop order in so that when it hits below a certain price, your buy order is executed, locking in your profits. This causes automatic support, and probably accounts for most of the buying side of the stock today.

      Nevertheless, the value of the stock will prevail. Thus, no matter how many short positions there are to cover, the stock will continue to drop over time if its value is deemed to be lower. In this case, the short positions will simply slow down the inevitable.

    13. Re:Watch it fall! by MarkGriz · · Score: 4, Funny

      "I don't know anything about stocks, but "down 11.28%" in a day sounds quite bad ?"

      Depends on your perspective. SCO down 11.28% sounds quite good to me.

      --
      Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
    14. Re:Watch it fall! by cosmo7 · · Score: 1

      so not always going down ;-)

      When a stock sharply declines it is usually largely caused by traders shorting it. When the best part of the decline is over, the traders have to close their short - ie: buy the stock they sold when they did the short. This can boost the price of the stock and is sometimes called a short bounce (and not because it is not long in duration).

    15. Re:Watch it fall! by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 1
      This can boost the price of the stock and is sometimes called a short bounce (and not because it is not long in duration).

      Sometimes, it's called a dead cat bounce.

    16. Re:Watch it fall! by Voivod · · Score: 1

      This can boost the price of the stock and is sometimes called a short bounce.

      This effect is also known as a "dead cat bounce". This is my favorite phrase I've learned from The Economist. :-)

    17. Re:Watch it fall! by RdsArts · · Score: 1
      People wanting to buy really know what the value is

      Somehow, I doubt any of the people looking to buy know the real value of it.
    18. Re:Watch it fall! by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Interesting point about volumes. I wonder if there are any names we would recognize...

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    19. Re:Watch it fall! by sbaker · · Score: 1

      Then perhaps you might find SCO does get its wish and get bought out by someone.

      It's hard to imagine why anyone would want to buy them. Their IP appears to be essentially useless/non-existant (or they'd already have won some lawsuits). They have no products that potential new customers are likely to want. By the time they go down, they won't have any cash on hand. You *certainly* wouldn't be wanting to buy their name/reputation because that just stinks! Their userbase must be plummetting because no geek worthy of the name would want to work with them - so their support contract business is going to be in deep trouble pretty soon. Do they have any actual hard assets?

      --
      www.sjbaker.org
    20. Re:Watch it fall! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A sixteen bit D0h reads sooooo much better... where the hell did you EVER see a 12-bit processor?

    21. Re:Watch it fall! by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      The PDP-8 was a minicomputer with a 12 bit dataword. It was also implemented as an IC, the IM6100 manufactured by Intersil and second-sourced by Harris (circa 1977).

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  7. Who to believe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Well I've at least heard of SCO, so their statement carries more weight with me.

  8. The future for SCO by eddy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So what will happen? I say we're going to see a SCOX vs BayStar lawsuit. SCO likes lawsuits. They like to stall for time while talking shit to the press. It gives them time to dump stock gotten cheaply from options. We'll get more of that. Only this time, investor-types (people who matter as far as the stock is concerned) won't like it. Fucking around with your big investors? Now, that's something else compared to fucking around with a bunch of hippie nerds and IBM.

    I assume the "SCO must have permission from BayStar to start lawsuits"-clause in the contract won't be a hindrance, since probably BayStar will start it :-)

    If BayStar is able to get ~$20M back (20000 at $1000 plus interest and penalties), then maybe RBC want their part back... which would instantly kill SCOX dead, dead, dead.

    suggested mod-limit: 3

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:The future for SCO by FatRatBastard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      According to an article on The Street one analyst didn't think BayStar would have much of a chance of getting their money back but this would make it incredibly difficult for SCO to raise any more money (not that they had anyone beating down their door to loan them money lately). By publicly asking for redemption over a broken clause I see this as BayStar's big, giant "FUCK YOU" to SCO.

    2. Re:The future for SCO by jponster · · Score: 1

      seems something of an anticlimax really. I'd rather hoped that SCO would get raided by various SWAT teams, the whole board of directors would get put in the stocks and have people throw rotten vegetables at them, and Darl McBride would get fed to the lions. But hey, i'd settle for their bank balance falling through the floor.

    3. Re:The future for SCO by Locutus · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Wasn't publicly determined that Microsoft was the one who put BayStar and SCOG together? Well, another company loses millions by listening to Microsoft. Serves em right for not knowing what kind of deal they were going to get when a Microsoft exec opens his/her mouth.

      Maybe two birds get hit with this "stone". One, SCO gets no 2nd chance of added financing and two, businesses see who bad ANYTHING tied to Microsoft can be.

      Also, BayStar is probably getting wacked by it's investers no doubt. But since SCOG lied again and BayStar bought it is reason to blame BayStar for this. After all, it's been in the press about who owns the right to the UNIX name and that it was not SCOG.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    4. Re:The future for SCO by krynos · · Score: 2, Funny

      They could ask Bank of America for more money.
      After all BoA should be grateful that SCO didn't sue them.

    5. Re:The future for SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The assumption is that microsoft is giving them some other business to make up for this.

    6. Re:The future for SCO by Belegothmog · · Score: 1
      So what will happen?


      SCO will sue BayStar for tortious interference and SCO stock with surge to $15 per share. SCO executives will sell many more shares according to their "preplanned schedule," raking in a few million more bucks for themselves.

    7. Re:The future for SCO by drinkypoo · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      working with microsoft is like playing the lottery and any company whose CEO is desperate might choose to do so. yes it destroys the majority of companies that decide to shake the devil's hand but once in a great while it pays off well for someone, and when microsoft pays out, they pay out BIG.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:The future for SCO by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      There is no future for SCO.
      What of the people that still work for them. Will they ever get a job in IT again?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  9. The joy! by Ckwop · · Score: 4, Funny

    Phase 1. We know SCO's business plan is flawed.

    Phase 2. The Stockmarket knows that SCO's business plan is flawed. The share price is jumping about because people just like to speculate in the short term.

    Phase 3. And Now baystar knows SCO's business plan is flawed (and finds a technicality to get their shares back)

    Phase 4. ??? [The obligatory gnome-esc gap in the logic]

    Phase 5. Profit? haha.. not this time. Go Directly into Administration. Do not pass go. Do not collect 200. Darl can look forward to having tux inserted, lovingly, into his anus by his boyfriend in prison :D

    Simon.

    1. Re:The joy! by muppetsrule · · Score: 1

      1. Hire Lawyers 2. Sue 3. ??? 4. Make money

    2. Re:The joy! by 0x0d0a · · Score: 0

      I will be amazed if Darl goes to jail. He's a rich white CEO. Rich white CEOs generally don't go to jail in the US (not never -- when people get pissed a la Enron at being massively screwed over, things happen). Still, trying to prove personal criminal intent on Darl's part may be hard. I'd like to see it, but I doubt that it's feasible.

    3. Re:The joy! by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think the joke is on you man.

      Have you ever seen penguins jump in the water? Those little fuckers are so good at sliding in, they hardly displace any water at all.

      What Darl needs up his ass is an eServer.

      --
      If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    4. Re:The joy! by Algan · · Score: 2, Funny

      Have you ever seen penguins jump in the water? Those little fuckers are so good at sliding in, they hardly displace any water at all.
      Dude, sliders they might be, but have you seen the size of even the smallest penguins? I'd hate to have one of them residing in my lower intestine, however smooth their entrance might be.
      I do admit that the eServer idea has merit though :)

      --
      If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?
    5. Re:The joy! by nlindstrom · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yup, I'd say the rats are leaving the ship, or at least, selling off their stock in the ship: Insider & Rule 144 Transactions Reported.

    6. Re:The joy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget something simple like an eServer, nothing says loving like a PDP-10 with 50 gallons of PCB oil.

    7. Re:The joy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course white CEOs go to prison... I saw it just the other day on "Chappelle's Show". It MUST be true!!!

    8. Re:The joy! by goodster · · Score: 1

      "tux inserted, lovingly, into his anus"

      AIEEEE!!! Somebody help me poke out my mind's eye! :)

    9. Re:The joy! by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 1

      I, too, would be amazed if Darl went to jail because filing a lawsuit, no matter how frivolous, is NOT a crime.

    10. Re:The joy! by Kaboom13 · · Score: 1

      I'm being pedantic, but I challenge you to prove how it's possible to have a penguin enter water and not displace 1 penguin's volume worth of water whether he slides in or is dropped from a plane.

    11. Re:The joy! by stor · · Score: 1

      What Darl needs up his ass is an eServer.

      *Dr Evil Voice* A beowulf cluster of eServers?

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
    12. Re:The joy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about a PD-11 :)

  10. I am altering the deal. by sulli · · Score: 5, Funny

    Pray I don't alter it any further.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
    1. Re:I am altering the deal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't get it. Anyone care to explain?

    2. Re:I am altering the deal. by red+floyd · · Score: 1

      I can't decide if you're a troll or not, but what the hell...

      Lando turns Han Solo over to Vader in Bespin. Then complains that what Vader does wasn't part of their deal.

      Vader's reply: "I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    3. Re:I am altering the deal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And who are these people?

    4. Re:I am altering the deal. by red+floyd · · Score: 1

      OK. Now I know you're a troll...

      It's a line of dialog from the movie, "Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back".

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    5. Re:I am altering the deal. by stor · · Score: 1

      "I saw a shitty company in Utah... ...they were in PAIN!!!"

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
    6. Re:I am altering the deal. by JollyFinn · · Score: 1

      I was 16 when I first saw any starwars movie and that was mid 90's. And neither I knew who those people where. You can assume he's young computer freak or just troll. Either way there are plenty of situations where you most certainly don't know a Starwars, and still read slashdot sometimes....

      --
      Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
    7. Re:I am altering the deal. by FattMattP · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I'm the original AC but not the second one. I've never seen Star Wars so I didn't know the quote. Well, I saw the first star wars where the kid races the ship through the canyons, but that's it.

      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
  11. LOL - Prankd! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL - SCO gott Prank3d!

  12. SCO announced today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    That they would be suing BayStar for the sum of $50,000,000 for their decision to cease funding their lawsuits.

  13. Que by strike2867 · · Score: 0

    Que all SCO thinks jokes:

    --

    Vote for new mod!!! Score:-2,Imbecile
    1. Re:Que by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      wtf is Que ?

    2. Re:Que by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He means queue. I think he was trying to sound smart. Que is the Spanish word for "what."

    3. Re:Que by GTRacer · · Score: 1
      Why, Que is the bastard offspring of Cue and Queue.

      GTRacer
      - alphabetically sorted for your convenience

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
    4. Re:Que by Aardpig · · Score: 1

      Que all SCO thinks jokes

      I think you mean 'cue'.

      Vote for new mod!!! Score:-2,Imbecile

      Pardon my impertinence, but that's a dangerous sig to be putting on a post like yours.

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    5. Re:Que by value_added · · Score: 1

      No, he means (and you meant) "queue".

      Google is your friend.

    6. Re:Que by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm only telling you this so you won't look like an idiot in the future:

      The word is "queue".

      As in, please go stand in the queue for 9th grade spelling.

    7. Re:Que by Aardpig · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, he means (and you meant) "queue".

      From the American Heritage Dictionary:

      cue : 1. A signal, such as a word or action, used to prompt another event in a performance, such as an actor's speech or entrance, a change in lighting, or a sound effect.

      That's what I meant. What did you mean?

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    8. Re:Que by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I think he meant 'queue', as in line them up.

    9. Re:Que by justMichael · · Score: 1

      I think he meant:

      queue 3a : a sequence of messages or jobs held in auxiliary storage awaiting transmission or processing

      As in line up the jokes, because there will be a lot of them. ;)

  14. Not $50M, only $20M by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Baystar is only on the hook for $20 Million. Royal Bank of Canada holds the other $30 Million.

  15. Whoops! by Kurt+Wall · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, it was the Royal Bank of Canada that changed the terms of the deal back in December 2003. But, what's a detail like that among friends?

  16. SCO requests specifics by mflaster · · Score: 5, Funny
    In SCO's press release:
    BayStar's letter did not provide specific information regarding SCO's alleged breaches of the Exchange Agreement. SCO is attempting to obtain specific information from BayStar...

    Gosh, making accusations, and not providing any specifics! That's horrible!!!!! I'm sure SCO is outraged.

    Mike

    1. Re:SCO requests specifics by lofoforabr · · Score: 3, Funny

      Maybe SCO will sue them for using this technique?

    2. Re:SCO requests specifics by eddy · · Score: 5, Funny

      This just in:

      BayStar Capital II, L.P. today announced a program under which SCOX officers are allowed to learn about the BayStar charges. SCOX officers are only required to sign the dotted line in an NDA about an NDA to a letter about a contract, and they will learn everything they need to know[0].BayStar believes this is a very fair and balanced offer and that only TERRORISTS would decline such a fine offer.

      [0] In addition, they will not be allowed to say anything about anything and may be asked to give BayStar money which they will then be legally required to do.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
  17. Damage Control by mboos · · Score: 2, Interesting

    BayStar probably wants out because the incident with Microsoft "recommending" that they invest looks bad.

    --
    --Mike Boos
  18. karma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    From SCO's Press release
    "BayStar's letter did not provide specific information regarding SCO's alleged breaches of the Exchange Agreement. SCO is attempting to obtain specific information from BayStar"

    1. Re:karma by stevesliva · · Score: 5, Funny
      "BayStar's letter did not provide specific information regarding SCO's alleged breaches of the Exchange Agreement. SCO is attempting to obtain specific information from BayStar"
      I'm hoping Baystar provides hardcopy of all 20,000 shares and 20,000 copies of the Exchange Agreement and declares, "It's in there somewhere, we just don't know where yet!"
      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
    2. Re:karma by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 3, Funny

      If I merely quote another part of the press release, will I get modded up as well?

    3. Re:karma by cshark · · Score: 1

      So that begs the obvious question... Anybody have a copy of the agreement between baystar and SCO?

      --

      This signature has Super Cow Powers

    4. Re:karma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes. As long as you can find one sentence that demonstrates irony as well as the parent. And can then choose an apt title that has a resonance with /.

    5. Re:karma by MuParadigm · · Score: 2, Funny


      "SCO is attempting to obtain specific information from BayStar"

      Anyone wanna bet against the lawyers at IBM laughing their asses off at this?

      Didn't think so...

    6. Re:karma by darkonc · · Score: 4, Informative

      As usual, check the Groklaw story for the gritty details, including the contract (and commentary).

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    7. Re:karma by csguy314 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Even better...

      "It's in there, and we know where; but we'll only tell you if you sign this non-disclosure agreement."

      --
      This is left as an exercise for the reader.
    8. Re:karma by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      "SCO is attempting to obtain specific information from BayStar"

      BayStar says they have found at least 60,000 occurrences of supporting material but SCO will have to show the court where they are.

    9. Re:karma by Admiral+Llama · · Score: 1

      I'll take that bet. I'm sure their asses have already been laughed off.

  19. Ding Dong, the witch is dead! by Lobo_Louie · · Score: 0

    At long last!

  20. SCO now stands for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    SCO now stands for "Shit! Cash Out!!"

    1. Re:SCO now stands for by cmdr_beeftaco · · Score: 1, Funny

      Martha Stewart got out yesterday.

    2. Re:SCO now stands for by Frequanaut · · Score: 1

      Haha. How long have you been waiting to post that?

      funny tho

    3. Re:SCO now stands for by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

      THAT is funny!

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    4. Re:SCO now stands for by Alsee · · Score: 1

      YES I agree! A very funny joke indeed ! !! ! !!

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    5. Re:SCO now stands for by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1
      • Are
      you making fun of me?
      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  21. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  22. Conspiracy Theory Dead by Flave · · Score: 0

    Well, there goes another conspiracy theory. I guess Microsoft isn't behind Baystar after all.

    1. Re:Conspiracy Theory Dead by 0x0d0a · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even if they were, they've been exposed and SCO is burning up rapidly and isn't likely to be able to stick it to Linux. There's little reason for anyone, including Microsoft, to keep money in SCO at this point.

    2. Re:Conspiracy Theory Dead by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Well, there goes another conspiracy theory. I guess Microsoft isn't behind Baystar after all.

      Not necessarly true. Remember, Microsoft wants all Unix vendors dead. Order may not be important.

      --
      "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  23. HaHaHaHa.... by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 1

    Made my day. Have a good weekend, Darl and Chris.

    --
    "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
  24. A quote from my favorite movie: "Die Hard" by dcavanaugh · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Oh my God! The quarterback is toast!"

    1. Re:A quote from my favorite movie: "Die Hard" by LMCBoy · · Score: 1

      So I guess Darl won't be "sitting on a beach, earning 20 percent"? Aww yeah.

      Yippie kai-yea!

      --
      Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
  25. MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Do we want every post to have a advertisement in the .sig? I personally think that moderators should mod down any post with SPAM at the end.

    Visit my website!

    1. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do we want every post to have a advertisement in the .sig? I personally think that moderators should mod down any post with SPAM at the end.

      Yeah right as you go and post a link to yours on the end.

      Beware I'm about to DDoS your site for the next 24 hours. That'll learn ya!

    2. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by khallow · · Score: 5, Funny

      Watch out! He's got some sort of bot fighting back. Every time I flood the site, my link gets hammered.

    3. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Even freakier, this guy has EXACTLY the same pr0n collection as me. I mean what are the odds!

    4. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      If you're going to be picky then state your problem correctly. SPAM the food, is all uppercase, and owned by Hormel.

      There's nothing worse than a whiner who can't get their facts straight.

    5. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      you just HAD to go and ruin the fun, didnt you? DIDNT YOU?

    6. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by zulux · · Score: 5, Funny



      What a looser... He's running OpenBSD 3.2 - just like me. He diden't apply the OpenSSH patches and I got right in. I'll just rm -r / [NO CARRIER]

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    7. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by NanoGator · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      "Do we want every post to have a advertisement in the .sig? I personally think that moderators should mod down any post with SPAM at the end."

      Pardon me for sharing something with Slashdot I thought they'd enjoy.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    8. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 5, Funny
      When I visit his site, all I get is HTTP Error 403 You are not authorized to view this page

      He must really hate me since I appear to be blocked from viewing it -- but everyone else on this thread seem to be laughing till the spit milk out of their noses, based on all the funny moderation going on.

      I feel left out!

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    9. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He reads your mail, too.

    10. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hormel
      Hey! Don't call Mel names, you insensitive clod!

    11. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm flooding my pants.

    12. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by AtariDatacenter · · Score: 1

      Yeah. I heard that this guy doesn't even know how to spell loser!

    13. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Do we want every post to have a advertisement in the .sig?

      Oh, did his post have an advertisement in the .sig? I didn't see it - I turned off .sig display ages ago. If you don't like people's .sigs, I suggest you do the same.

    14. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Do we want every post to have a advertisement in the .sig? I personally think that moderators should mod down any post with SPAM at the end.

      Well judging by the fact that his link has been slashdotted, I think there must be at least a few people out there who would disagree with you ;)

    15. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Yeah, I DARE you to try to DDOS my webpage at 127.0.0.1.

    16. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by khallow · · Score: 1

      My, -1 informative. I didn't even think that was possible. FWIW, I knew I missing clue since I don't know if loopback and the other links had common resources, but I figured most other people wouldn't know/care. Frankly, if I could give you a couple of my undeserved mod points, I would.

    17. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by WindBourne · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Ah hell. You gripe about spam and yey, I just checked your link. It looks like you stole my site. I do not like the idea of rewarding theves either.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    18. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdotted himself, what a nub

    19. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the google cache.

    20. Re:MOD PARENT DOWN spam in .sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me too, can someone mirror it please

  26. titilating by bl8n8r · · Score: 1

    absolutely titilating.

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
    1. Re:titilating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'd be funy if u'd speld it wright.

  27. Does it get better than this by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    So now SCO is suing its VC partners. Does it get better than this?

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  28. SCO: "Everything's fine, la la la..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seriously, when the fuck did SCO hire the Iraqi Information Minister?

    1. Re:SCO: "Everything's fine, la la la..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Seriously, when the fuck did SCO hire the Iraqi Information Minister?"

      When he left the New York Times?

    2. Re:SCO: "Everything's fine, la la la..." by Kjella · · Score: 2, Funny

      They didn't. The Iraqi Information Minister served at SCO as an intern, they taught him everything he knows. Of course, they called it that. In modern language it'd be called a terrorist training camp.

      [Ok, too overboard? Or do anyone have any better ideas to get the SCO execs sent to Guantanamo Bay? I'm sure they deserve it more than some of the people there...]

      Kjella

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:SCO: "Everything's fine, la la la..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>> Seriously, when the fuck did SCO hire the Iraqi Information Minister?

      Ever since even Ari Fleischer turned them down...

    4. Re:SCO: "Everything's fine, la la la..." by neurojab · · Score: 1

      check this out...

      http://www.anerispress.com/wltsim/

    5. Re:SCO: "Everything's fine, la la la..." by Anonymous+Bullard · · Score: 1
      1. Seriously, when the fuck did SCO hire the Iraqi Information Minister?

      Ever since even Ari Fleischer turned them down...

      So who's running the Bush & Blair Show then? They're singing the same exact tune: "Everything's fine, la la la..."

      Well, at least they seem to stick to the same spin ABI(*) compatibility which guarantees that also their PR stooges are interchangable.

      *America, Britain, Iraq

      --

      Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?

  29. The timing is late by titaniam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Did anyone notice that the stock was tanking BEFORE the press release? I guess they put out a negative release to justify the insider-trading fall.

    1. Re:The timing is late by Locutus · · Score: 1

      Sure enough, it looks like the sell off started yesterday. Maybe the SEC will start looking at this. After all, they went after Martha for a $40K profit....

      Good eye.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    2. Re:The timing is late by Monkelectric · · Score: 3, Informative

      Haven't there been allegations of "painting the tape" in this case? (artifical insider trades to raise volume)

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    3. Re:The timing is late by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      That almost always happens. The SEC 'enforcement' of insider trading laws is a fucking joke.

  30. Sweet Irony by Corruptpacket · · Score: 1

    Isn't funny how what goes around comes around. Is it just me or is this the funniest news of he day? My conspiracy theorist mind just can't help but thinking that somehow M$ will find some way to get this lost cash back into the SCO warchest at some point in the future. I know that Linux may not be the biggest desktop threat, but I'm pretty sure that Bill Gates & Co. hate Linux like nothing else. How do you use monopolistic buyout power against a OSS? This must be the best business riddle posed to Bill yet.

    1. Re:Sweet Irony by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and hows that working out for you BillG? Hmmm??? I know more and more people who are deploying Linux, and one massive corporation looking at a company-wide rollout and could care less about your piddly SCO lawsuit...

      YAWN.

    2. Re:Sweet Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I had absolutely no luck following your post. 5 digit user ID so i know you aren't 13. Grandparent bashes MS and you call him BillG. System overload. Error. Error.

      Your company needs to let you out of the server closet so you can go get some air and sunshine man. There is nothing about your post that is coherent, rational, or anything. WTF was that bro?

    3. Re:Sweet Irony by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Sorry, not bashing the parent, just bashing the mentality of the thought that Microsoft thought they could get anything out of this maneuver (if indeed they staged it), especially without evidence to back it up. It's hilarious when you right down to it. And even if there *WAS* evidence, other than specific legal action against the code contributors themselves, coupled with the fact that copyrighted code would be extracted at first opportunity, it's senseless what they thought they could buy by settling themselves in with SCO.

      Unless of course, they want to set themselves up as one of SCO's biggest creditors, so in the final bankruptcy/dissolution proceedings, they get the sum of all Unix IP that SCO lays claim to, or it gets shared betwixt Microsoft and SUN.

      I can EASILY see this being the sole prime reason they've gotten the large $8m+ investments considering they came about after the evidence was shown to be not forthcoming (if I remember my timetables correctly).

      MMM.... not 13, but perhaps not as articulate as I could have been Friday. :-D

  31. 15h35 EST by CaptainPinko · · Score: 1

    $8.33

    --
    Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
  32. Shareholder lawsuits are coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    or I'm not Anonymous Coward!

    1. Re:Shareholder lawsuits are coming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You're not Anonymous Coward. I AM!

  33. "Owner of the UNIX Operating System" by Bilbo · · Score: 4, Informative
    > Notice SCO now states that UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group.

    They're still talking out of both sides of their mouth though. They still claim in their press release that they are, "the Owner of the UNIX Operating System."

    Funny that they are the ones announcing BayStar putting the pinch on them. Guess they want to put the "positive spin" on it, just like everything else...

    --
    Your Servant, B. Baggins
    1. Re:"Owner of the UNIX Operating System" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This probably has a lot more to do with Novell claiming copyright over the UNIX System V codebase than it does with the trademark.

      When this started, everyone knew who owned the UNIX trademark. Everyone also believed that SCO had clear rights to the System V codebase, including (apparently) both SCO and Novell.

    2. Re:"Owner of the UNIX Operating System" by FatRatBastard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Funny that they are the ones announcing BayStar putting the pinch on them. Guess they want to put the "positive spin" on it, just like everything else...

      That, and I suspect that if any insiders dumped a bunch of stock today without announcing it would be eligable for a perp walk.

    3. Re:"Owner of the UNIX Operating System" by Goo.cc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah, it really ought to be "the Owner of a UNIX Operating System." since anything the Open Groups deems to be Unix IS Unix.

    4. Re:"Owner of the UNIX Operating System" by DrXym · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In the last week there have been three Form 4's and two Form 144's. I'm sure the accused will offer a completely reasonable Martha Stewartesque explanation in their defence.

    5. Re:"Owner of the UNIX Operating System" by whittrash · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just so you all know, I get dibs on Darl's Mercedes when it goes on the RICO auction block.

    6. Re:"Owner of the UNIX Operating System" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should that be "Owner" or "Pwner"?

    7. Re:"Owner of the UNIX Operating System" by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 1

      Oh good. Maybe there will be a similar result.

    8. Re:"Owner of the UNIX Operating System" by cubic6 · · Score: 1

      You think the Open Group could say that SCO couldn't use the Unix name any more? Then they'd have to call it "The Operating System Formerly Known As Unix". They could figure out some funky symbol for a logo too!

      --
      Karma: Contrapositive
    9. Re:"Owner of the UNIX Operating System" by yourruinreverse · · Score: 1
      "Funny that they are the ones announcing BayStar putting the pinch on them. Guess they want to put the "positive spin" on it, just like everything else..."

      The SCO Group as a public company is obliged by law to disclose any information that may affect their business aversely. That's their problem as a public company, and it is also what's keeping Canopy Group's mingling in all this nicely private (nice for them, for now).

      --
      JeR
  34. Mwahaha!!! by Jonboy+X · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Teehee, shorted another 200 shares at $9.15 when I heard the news. To all my fellow cube-dwellers out there, remember that sometimes reading the message boards can be whole hell of a lot more profitable than whatever the fsk it is that your employer's paying you to do...

    I'm not trolling, I'm trying to be insightful, or at least funny. Honest!

    8D

    --

    "In a 32-bit world, you're a 2-bit user. You've got your own newsgroup, alt.total.loser." -Weird Al
    1. Re:Mwahaha!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mwahaha!!! (Score:3, Informative)

      I'm not trolling, I'm trying to be insightful, or at least funny. Honest!


      Too bad, you were just too Informative...

    2. Re:Mwahaha!!! by Knish · · Score: 1

      Oh my gosh!!!! You will be all of ~$1800 richer, if the stock goes to zero, which it won't anytime soon. And then pay your taxes on that as well. Why don't you take up a career as a Day Trader?

      Geesh. Grow up and write something intelligent. No wonder you have to day-trade probably because your employer (if you have one) doesn't pay you fsk.

      --
      A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part.
    3. Re:Mwahaha!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or do it properly. I have 4500 (and yes, they were hard to find) at about 17 ... just about time to cash out.

    4. Re:Mwahaha!!! by Jonboy+X · · Score: 1
      Oh my gosh!!!! You will be all of ~$1800 richer, if the stock goes to zero, which it won't anytime soon.

      Oh no? Wanna bet? My money's on the table.

      Why don't you take up a career as a Day Trader?

      Or, maybe I'll look at it (stock trading) as a profitable hobby, just like poker, or mugging people in the alley.

      Geesh. Grow up and write something intelligent. No wonder you have to day-trade probably because your employer (if you have one) doesn't pay you fsk.

      Meh, I make enough to keep me in bologna sandwiches and Beck's, which is my preferred form of existence anyway. When this shakes out, I'll be able to afford some of that sweet sweet Deutschmacher lunchmeat.

      Those Germans sure know how to make a tasty bologna...

      --

      "In a 32-bit world, you're a 2-bit user. You've got your own newsgroup, alt.total.loser." -Weird Al
    5. Re:Mwahaha!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Teehee, shorted another 200 shares

      Through which broker, may I ask? I'm wondering, because the word out there is and has been for a long time, that there simply aren't any shares out there to short.

      So where'd you get 'em? :-)

    6. Re:Mwahaha!!! by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      I think that making money by shorting SCO stock is hell of a lot more intelligent then "Dude I bought this phat gaming machine that'll be only worth half it's price next year, and I bought it on credit card" posts.

      "You will be all of ~$1800 richer, if the stock goes to zero, which it won't anytime soon. And then pay your taxes on that as well."

      Wow, I'd better ask by boss to not to give me raises in the future because I'd have to pay more taxes based on the raise.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    7. Re:Mwahaha!!! by Jonboy+X · · Score: 1

      I got my shares through Scottrade. A few buddies and I went in on some shares a few months ago, and a few more over the next coupla months, but there haven't been any available lately, until just the last few days. Somebody's dumping, the brokerages are buying 'em up and loaning 'em to us to short. It's all coming together...

      --

      "In a 32-bit world, you're a 2-bit user. You've got your own newsgroup, alt.total.loser." -Weird Al
  35. "Life after SCO" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The best-selling autobiography of Mr Darl McBride. With a preface by former laughing stock analyist Laura Dido. Edited by Rob Enderle and further censored for publication by Steve Ballmer former CEO and head monkeyboy at MSFT.

  36. Official loser by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Informative

    SCO once again makes the list of losers in trading today! At this rate, maybe it'll be number one at something by days' end.

    1. Re:Official loser by Holi · · Score: 1

      On a sadder note. Look who else is in that list
      NFLX -6.27 -%16.94 change.

      Starting renting more movies people.

      Off-Topic I know but I had to say it

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
  37. Screaming sound by nizo · · Score: 4, Funny

    That screaming sound you hear is SCOX stock breaking the sound barrier as it plunges into the abyss. Thank god, it is about time.

    1. Re:Screaming sound by 24-bit+Voxel · · Score: 1

      I live in Silicon Valley, and from here all we heard was a distinct "pffft" sound.

  38. Did you hear it? by IceAgeComing · · Score: 1, Funny


    The soundtrack for the SCO saga just cross-faded to a distant drumbeat, getting...slowly...louder.

    1. Re:Did you hear it? by Oriumpor · · Score: 3, Funny

      I thought that was the sound of the smallest violin in the universe playing to SCO's upcoming pity party in which Darl will try and run to the press after the FSF donation fund purchases all the open shares at a hefty $0.05 a piece.

    2. Re:Did you hear it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      was that before or after darl pushed the skeleton into the well?

    3. Re:Did you hear it? by Metasynaptic · · Score: 0, Redundant

      The place: an undisclosed boardroom. The participants: SCO and IBM IBM Executive: We have some startling news. SCO Executive: Haha, would you like to settle now or later? IBM Executive: Yeah, you wish. No, we just wanted to let you know that we've just fired all of our legal counsel. SCO Executive: Are you serious? Yes! We win! IBM Executive: Sort of. (an underling hurries in) IBM Executive: Is it complete? Underling: Fifty-one percent, sir. (SCO Executive looks puzzled) IBM Executive: Given that your stock costs six cents a share, we figured it would be a whole lot cheaper to just buy a controlling interest. SCO Executive: But.. but... IBM Executive: So, as your new majority shareholders, we think it's time for some changes in the board. In fact, you're all fired.

      --
      ---- Hardware: the portion of a computer system that can be kicked.
    4. Re:Did you hear it? by Metasynaptic · · Score: 1

      Okay, sorry guys, that sucked. Here's a version with crlfs:

      The place: an undisclosed boardroom.
      The participants: SCO and IBM

      IBM Executive: We have some startling news.
      SCO Executive: Haha, would you like to settle now or later?
      IBM Executive: Yeah, you wish. No, we just wanted to let you know that we've just fired all of our legal counsel.
      SCO Executive: Are you serious? Yes! We win!
      IBM Executive: Sort of.

      (an underling hurries in)

      IBM Executive: Is it complete?
      Underling: Fifty-one percent, sir.

      (SCO Executive looks puzzled)

      IBM Executive: Given that your stock costs six cents a share, we figured it would be a whole lot cheaper to just buy a controlling interest.
      SCO Executive: But.. but...
      IBM Executive: So, as your new majority shareholders, we think it's time for some changes in the board. In fact, you're all fired.

      --
      ---- Hardware: the portion of a computer system that can be kicked.
    5. Re:Did you hear it? by Knacklappen · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's the sound of enevibility...
      Only this time it's the evil agent himself who has his face pressed down to the rail. And there is no sudden backflip-like jump out of it.

      --


      Excellence: Moderate (mostly affected by comments on your karma)
  39. Oh noes! by DamienNightbane · · Score: 1, Funny

    If SCO flounders, what else are we going to bitch about and plot against? Also; SCOwned!

  40. A shame really. by Picass0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If we don't go to court to test the legality of the GPL in the SCO case, it means it will happen later... perhaps against someone who doesn't have their head up their ass.

    Going to trial against SCO is a sure thing for IBM, and therefore good for Linux. IBM and Redhat would tear SCO a new one, and the GPL would have it's day in court against the mental midgits from Provo.

    If SCO goes bankrupt, this (I assume) goes in a legal round file somewhere. Then we can just wait for Microsoft to come at us directly with an army of lawyers that dwarfs IBM.

    1. Re:A shame really. by back_pages · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I'm thinking the same way.

      If you're a prize fighter, you want your first professional fight to be against some out-of-shape opponent who stands a slim chance of winning but wouldn't mind the paycheck. In a lot of ways, SCO was the ideal opponent. They talked up the hype, they were bringing the payday to the ring, and they had a very slim chance of defeating Linux (and more notably, Linux's trainers in the forms of IBM, etc.)

      So if this "fight" doesn't actually occur, it scares away other potential easy wins for Linux's professional debut in the courtroom. A prizefighter whose opponents cancel the fights doesn't get a chance at the title - he's still an unproven amateur.

    2. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IF this doesn't go to court now I would expect IBM to fund an acquisition of SCO via a sock and bring it to court.

    3. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      perhaps against someone who doesn't have their head up their ass.

      Isn't this the prerequisite for challenging the GPL?

    4. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      IF this doesn't go to court now I would expect IBM to fund an acquisition of SCO via a sock and bring it to court.

      Then what many predicted would finally happen: SCO suing themselves (technically).

    5. Re:A shame really. by Paladin128 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      • If SCO goes bankrupt, this (I assume) goes in a legal round file somewhere. Then we can just wait for Microsoft to come at us directly with an army of lawyers that dwarfs IBM.
      Not bloody likely. IBM is a bigger company with a much bigger patent portfolio and many more lawyers than Microsoft.

      --
      Lex orandi, lex credendi.
    6. Re:A shame really. by koa · · Score: 1

      Well.. That begs the question then- when SCO dissovles into a smoldering pile of dookie. what will happen?
      And if they do in fact own the portions of UNIX that they say they do- who pretel will gain ownership of the UNIX copyrights?
      Methinks that there will be an interesting quick and dirty land-grab between Novell and IBM- but that won't have many GPL implications becuase both IBM and Novell are GPL Friendly.. for now..

      heh doom doom doom...

      --
      ....move along....nothing to see here....
    7. Re:A shame really. by LS · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Moderators, please mod the parent down. What does this have to do with testing the GPL? I thought SCO was suing for copyright infringment. Even if the GPL had been tested dozens of courts, if an open source project has privately copyrighted code, it is open to lawsuits. I'm not claiming that Linux has SCO code, only that this is not a test of the GPL.

      LS

      --
      There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
    8. Re:A shame really. by Locutus · · Score: 1

      This is only about 20 million and SCOG is most likely not going to be paying this back to BayStar( others have said ). So, the summary judgment could still occur before SCOG goes under. Unless the execs pilfer the coffers and hit the road but then they are far more likely to have the SEC and Johny Law after them.

      My guess is that it'll go to court and they'll ride SCOG out of business or until Microsoft buys them.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    9. Re:A shame really. by LMCBoy · · Score: 1

      Don't forget about IBM's counterclaims, which are the only part of the SCO-IBM case that actually have anything to do with the GPL. I don't think SCO going bankrupt shelters them from IBM's counterclaims, but IANAL.

      --
      Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
    10. Re:A shame really. by sphealey · · Score: 3, Informative
      What does this have to do with testing the GPL? I thought SCO was suing for copyright infringment.[...] this is not a test of the GPL.
      You need to go back and read IBM's counterclaims. So yes, the SCO vs. IBM case does include GPL claims, which will logically require a decision on the validity of the GPL before they can be resolved.

      sPh

    11. Re:A shame really. by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 1

      If someone is broke it doesn't mean you can't sue them. It only means there is no money to gain. So the question is if IBM is after money. I think the answer is NO.

    12. Re:A shame really. by MajorDick · · Score: 1

      Uhh, first of all there is pretty much not way MS could dwarf IBM when it comjes to their Army of lawyers, you forget IBM's roots IBM will litigate till you have nothing left nearly bringing themselves to a halt but theyll do it and theyll do it succesfully. IBM is no wimp and is quite a bit more experienced when it comes to litigation. How many times did IBM survive being chopped up , severaltimes I can think of with absolutley NO conscession.

    13. Re:A shame really. by LS · · Score: 1

      Am I hearing you correctly? Are you trying to analogize Mike Tyson to a couple million nerds sitting in front of computers late at night coding for fun?

      LS

      --
      There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
    14. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The issue is that SCO distributed Linux under the GPL. Trying to collect licence fees on Linux violates the terms of the GPL.

      Not even SCO is clamining that Linux contains SCO code.

    15. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isnt it happening somewhere else?

    16. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Not bloody likely. IBM is a bigger company

      You're wrong. What counts in a legal battle is how much cash you have. IBM (according to their latest financial statements) has about $45 billion in current assets (roughly speaking, that means cash or things that can quickly be converted into cash.) Microsoft has nearly twice as much ($80 billion). Microsoft can therefore hire more and better lawyers than IBM.

    17. Re:A shame really. by Christianfreak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wow, how many times has this been explained before? Its a good thing that the GPL hasn't been challenged. No one in their right mind is going to challenge the GPL. Why? you ask. Because any company who does is screwed wheither they win or lose. In fact they are more screwed if they win! Here's how it works:

      Say some company takes mplayer and makes a proprietary product out of it. The guys who make mplayer sue because the company has violated their license. Owner of the company is an idiot and the case actually goes to court.

      Scenario 1: The Company loses. Probably all they have to do is open source their product, possibly costing themselves some money if they have to recall software on a shelf somewhere, etc.

      Scenario 2: The GPL is declared invalid. The company wins .. but do they? Oops if the GPL is invalid then the code reverts back to the copyright owner (i.e. the mplayer guys) now the company has just admitted to blatent copyright infingement for which there are monetary damages + pulling their products, etc, etc. It gets better, if the GPL is invalid then its likely that all software licenses probably are by the same logic. In my opinion more so, as the GPL grants rights while most other licenses take them away! So now suddenly you have a situation where people can start challenging everyone's licenses. I can name a few large companies that probably would not be happy about that at all.

      Scenario 3: Some off his rocker judge says the GPL effectively puts software in the public domain. Well the same could then be true about all software licenses as in scenario 2. That's all that the Company can really hope for, even though its immediatly up for debate if that company's own licenses are valid.

      So as you can see it makes much more sense if a company simply complies. And as even reported by the FSF they do deal with GPL violations and so far they have 100% complience because its a no-win situation for a company that steals GPL code.

    18. Re:A shame really. by shotfeel · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually it has been tested. Eben Moglin would argue it simply hasn't made it to court because it clearly can't be beat. From one of his speech

      "For ten years, I did all of the GPL enforcement work around the world by myself, while teaching full time at a law school. It wasn't hard, really; the defendant in court would have had no license, or had to choose affirmatively to plead my license: they didn't choose that route. Indeed, they didn't choose to go to court; they cooperated, that was the better way. My client didn't want damages, my client wanted compliance. My client didn't want publicity, my client wanted compliance. We settled for compliance all the time. We got compliance all the time."

      Basically, when faced with actually going to court, people violating the license have always come to the conclusion that they couldn't win.

    19. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm... $120 billion.
      I bet the lawyers could buy a small country with that.

    20. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IBM has more lawyers than any other company on the planet, MS has a thing or two to fear from these folks.

    21. Re:A shame really. by __aadidx2690 · · Score: 1

      > mental midgits from Provo.

      Lindon. Just because Provo is nearby doesn't mean that we're ok if you get the two confused.
      I mean, c'mon... Lindon is like a 15 minute drive from Provo. ;)

    22. Re:A shame really. by nuonguy · · Score: 1

      Not bloody likely. IBM is a bigger company with a much bigger patent portfolio and many more lawyers than Microsoft.

      Sadly untrue. Microsoft boasts that they are the biggest law office in the world.

    23. Re:A shame really. by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      But IBM has Cravath, Swain, & Moore.

    24. Re:A shame really. by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Ah, grasshopper, but IBM was fighting bigger battles than this when Gates & Co were still struggling to buy themselves a startup.

      IBM knows how these battles are fought. Don't forget, they *won* against the DOJ; Microsoft lost, and got lucky that the new admin trumped the DOJ.

      IBM vs. Microsoft: I'd be buying IBM stock. It'd be a long battle, but IBM would crush Microsoft. Why do you think that Microsoft isn't attacking open source directly? Because they know that they'd end up fighting IBM; and they know goddamned well that they'd lose.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    25. Re:A shame really. by Picass0 · · Score: 1


      Yes, they are claiming Linux has "millions of lines of code" in the Las Vegas presentation.

      And that's all I have to say to an AC.

    26. Re:A shame really. by dacarr · · Score: 1
      If we don't go to court to test the legality of the GPL in the SCO case, it means it will happen later... perhaps against someone who doesn't have their head up their ass.

      Who needs SCO to do that? Seems the netfilter/iptables group has already done a nice job of it.

      --
      This sig no verb.
    27. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IBM is much bigger than Microsoft.

    28. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They admitted they lied about that in a legal brief.

    29. Re:A shame really. by Picass0 · · Score: 1

      Oh my heck! I'm sorry!

    30. Re:A shame really. by swillden · · Score: 1

      A slightly lengthier, but even better quote from Professor Moglen's talk at Harvard:

      "At the moment that I make [the call to request that a potential defant stop violating the GPL], the potential defendant's lawyer now has a choice. He can cooperate with us, or he can fight with us. And if he goes to court and fights with us, he will have a second choice before him. We will say to the judge, 'Judge, Mr. Defendant has used our copyrighted work, copied it, modified it and distributed it without permission. Please make him stop.'

      "One thing that the defendant can say is, 'You're right. I have no license.' Defendants do not want to say that, because if they say that they lose. So defendants, when they envision to themselves what they will say in court, realize that what they will say is, 'But Judge, I do have a license. It's this here document, the GNU GPL. General Public License,' at which point, because I know the license reasonably well, and I'm aware in what respect he is breaking it, I will say, 'Well, Judge, he had that license but he violated its terms and under Section 4 of it, when he violated its terms, it stopped working for him.'

      "But notice that in order to survive moment one in a lawsuit over free software, it is the defendant who must wave the GPL. It is his permission, his master key to a lawsuit that lasts longer than a nanosecond. This, quite simply, is the reason that lies behind the statement you have heard -- Mr. McBride made it here some weeks ago -- that there has never been a court test of the GPL.

      "To those who like to say there has never been a court test of the GPL, I have one simple thing to say: Don't blame me. I was perfectly happy to roll any time. It was the defendants who didn't want to do it. And when for ten solid years, people have turned down an opportunity to make a legal argument, guess what? It isn't any good."

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    31. Re:A shame really. by Tom · · Score: 1

      If SCO goes bankrupt, this (I assume) goes in a legal round file somewhere.

      Yes, but it also is a major opportunity for us go generate some FUD. Something like:

      Mess with Linux, go bancrupt.

      Would certainly make the next taker think twice.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    32. Re:A shame really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Microsoft [...] army of lawyers that dwarfs IBM"

      Erm, why do people keep talking like this? IBM is a BIGGER company than Microsoft. It has more employees, in more countries, and makes more money. Go check it out sometime.

      Microsoft vs IBM would be bloody and violent, but I'd still favour IBM to win.

  41. I can't help but remember... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and episode of The Beverly Hillbillies. There's some type of royalty coming from some country and as always, Mr. Drysdale is trying to figure out how much this guy is worth. Miss Jane says, "Chief, they're worth four to the dollar." (Drysdale doing mental math) Miss Jane: "Wait, that's four tons to the dollar and only in an extreme paper shortage."

    If that one isn't good enough for you, look at both sides of the toilet paper in your bathroom stalls. Someone might have made a killing on SCO stock and found it to be cheaper than a roll of sh%t paper.

  42. SHORT SCO!!! by jehreg · · Score: 0

    Time to short SCOX. We are pretty sure this is near the end, so let's drive the price of the stock to the bottom. Call your brokers :-)

    1. Re:SHORT SCO!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm, that has been done already. And they answered to this tactic already. Just sit there, relax and watch the spectacle.

    2. Re:SHORT SCO!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure being on the loss list for 3 days straight there may not be many shares left to short easily.

    3. Re:SHORT SCO!!! by grub · · Score: 3, Funny


      I would call my broker but my mom is upstairs on the phone right now.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    4. Re:SHORT SCO!!! by Stile+65 · · Score: 1

      I trade online, you insensitive clod!

      --
      I claim first use of "Error No. 0B" - or "No. 0B error." It'll be the new ID 10T!
    5. Re:SHORT SCO!!! by rewt66 · · Score: 1

      But watch out for the "dead cat bounce". If you short at the wrong time, even if you're right long-term, you can still lose your shirt...

    6. Re:SHORT SCO!!! by No.+24601 · · Score: 1
      I would call my broker but my mom is upstairs on the phone right now.

      I'm sure your walkie-talkie's free... go ahead make the call.

  43. Linux users must celebrate. by 0x0d0a · · Score: 4, Informative

    Linux users are required to celebrate with beer and an assortment of tasty food tonight. Now. Enjoy yourself tonight, and be happy. It's a good-looking new world for Tux and the rest of us out there -- things just got a lot sunnier. :-) Whee!

    1. Re:Linux users must celebrate. by DR+SoB · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey, an excuse to drink, is an excuse to drink! I'm with ya man!!!

      --
      Mod +5 Drunk
    2. Re:Linux users must celebrate. by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, this is the part where the guy we thought was the end boss crumples into a heap, and the victory music starts playing. But in fact, all it has done is force the real end boss to confront the player directly, which is when you really start wishing you'd saved all those powerups you used in the last fight.

      You obviously need to play more video games. Everything always goes back to video games.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    3. Re:Linux users must celebrate. by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      While I fully support your right to party, I will not sing the song until the witch is, fully and completely, dead.

      I'll have a beer and toast the "ha-ha" gods tonight, though.

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    4. Re:Linux users must celebrate. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      It's not if SCO will fail, it's when. As such, any setback is entirely expected.

      I don't mind eating tasty food, or drinking alcoholic beverages, and will make an effort to do both tonight because it's friday. But until the fat lady hits her high note, I'm not going to toast SCO's demise. They can do plenty more damage before their feet point skyward.

      One wonders just what SCO execs hope to accomplish besides making money. You'd think if money was all they wanted they could have found a way to make it without pissing everyone off so badly... But I suppose this was easier. Lying comes naturally to these people, so that part's no effort like it would be to me, or (hopefully) to most of you.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  44. Hmm - too much risk for someone behind the scenes? by sphealey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ok, a bit conspiracy-theoryish, but many including myself have speculated that there was someone behind the scenes of the entire SCO mess pulling the strings.

    Could it be that said string-puller has decided that there is too much risk that (a) SCO will not only lose its suits, but do so in a way that validates the GPL (b) IBM might break through the Canopy/Baystar corporate veil and find out who the string puller is? And therefore that person has taken some action to force SCO into bankruptcy and pull the plug on the lawsuits?

    sPh

  45. At SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    In SCO's headquarters...
    Darl McBride: 'Damn!... What can we do?'
    Employee: 'What if we sued them?'
    Darl McBride: 'Good! GREAT! Let's sue them. But, er... what for?'
    Employee: 'Hmmm...'
    Darl McBride: 'Let's say, that, erm... BayStar runs FreeBSD! Let's say FreeBSD contains our IP.'
    Employee: 'You have not lost your genius, Mister McBride! JOHN! Get a few lines from the BSD source code, will ya? Any lines will do.'

    1. Re:At SCO by (1)down · · Score: 1

      I think your getting close to it. If you have enough lawyers, everything starts looking like a lawsuit.

      --
      my other sig is a commando
  46. Sections 2(b)(v), 2(b)(viii) and 3(g) of the .... by Halo- · · Score: 5, Funny

    To help out, I've summarized sections 2(b)(v), 2(b)(viii) and 3(g) of the Exchange Agreement:

    2(b)(v) : Presumption of Correctness

    2(b)(viii) : Failure to Pass the "Laugh Test" Clause

    3(g) : General Asshattery Clause

  47. Pardon my language, but... by Slinky+Saves+the+Wor · · Score: 1

    ...this serves these SCO fucks right once and for all. Their stock price is slowly oozing through the floor.

    --
    I do not moderate.
  48. Was Baystar investment a trojan horse? by Optic7 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    That's an awfully quick turnaround time for this "investment" to come back around and knock a nice size hole on the side of SCO...

    Maybe it was IBM instead of Microsoft behind the Baystar investment? :)

    1. Re:Was Baystar investment a trojan horse? by uujjj · · Score: 1

      I doubt it.

      One possible reason Baystar pulled their investment is that Microsoft got cold feet. Recall that after the memos showing MS's involvement in the deal became public, a lot of people even outside slashdot were encouraging the government to investigate possible antitrust violations. Gates and Co. may well have decided that it wasn't worth the risk at this time.

    2. Re:Was Baystar investment a trojan horse? by Sri+Lumpa · · Score: 1


      Nah, it's obviously Microsoft that saw what an horrible thing SCO was doing and gave them a trojan horse to help Linux along.

      --
      "The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
  49. Don't do it! by djh101010 · · Score: 0, Funny

    It's a Joe Job - that's actually MY IP address.

  50. Re:hopefully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Yes, they can still litigate, but venue could change to a US District Bankruptcy Court. Things also become a bit more complicated when a company files Chapter 11 in that certain pending issues, litigation, etc, are subject to be "stayed" while the mess is ironed out.

    Chapter 11 might enable SCO to drag things out a bit longer in bankruptcy, but one fact would be hard to erase - the fact that the company is bankrupt. On the other hand, Boise, Microsoft, and others, might try to pick up the pieces and continue litigation.

    Whatever happens - SCO isn't going to go away as soon as some of us would like. And besides, they'll just be replaced by another Microsoft proxy or even (eventually) Microsoft itself.

  51. Putting the anal in ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    one analyst

    Yes, let's all stop and listen to the analysts. Analysts like the world renowned The Enderle Troll and Laura "Cheap Microsoft Whore" Didio. These guys (no offence, Didiot) know what they're talking about!

    1. Re:Putting the anal in ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also thestreet.com is a good contrarian indicator. When they say "buy", sell. When they say "sell", buy.

      This time though, sell regardless of what they say.

  52. Poetic justice by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 2, Funny

    BayStar's letter did not provide specific information regarding SCO's alleged breaches of the Exchange Agreement

    Talk about being hoist on your own petard! Hah! Show the infringing lines of the agreement, 'kay?

    1. Re:Poetic justice by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      You can only see the infringing lines if you pay Baystar $699 ;)

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
  53. Not how we want to see SCO die. by Jerk+City+Troll · · Score: 2

    This was an opportunity to test the GPL in court, but yet again, that will be delayed if SCO dies by other means. The court case must play out.

    1. Re:Not how we want to see SCO die. by kzinti · · Score: 1

      This is the way their case ends
      This is the way their case ends
      This is the way their case ends
      Not with a bang but a whimper

      (OK, so SCO's not finished yet, but things do appear to be unraveling, and I just couldn't hold back Mr. Eliot.)

  54. Re:The future for SCO: Street.com article by David+Hume · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the Street.com article "BayStar Says SCO Breached Note":

    "I look at this as bad news for SCO," said Dion Cornett, an analyst for Decatur Jones Equity Partners - Soleil. "I don't think BayStar is going to be very successful in getting their money back. It's very difficult for a private equity investor to force a redemption on a company that doesn't want to redeem. But it makes it very difficult for SCO to raise future financing ."

    SCO will certainly need lots of money if it wants to fight the likes of massive IBM, he noted. "I think they'll need all the $65 million they have in the bank to fund this fight. This is going to be a multi-year, very protracted lawsuit, if it's not dismissed."


    (emphasis added) Thus, even if SCO eventually prevails over Baystar this may still sink SCO. SCO won't be able to obtain enough funding to battle IBM, et al.

  55. Re:hopefully by arivanov · · Score: 1

    Chapter 11 means possible emerging out of bankrupcy as well as possibility for interested creditors to purchase liabilities (including rights to ongoing litigations). It is not the chapter used for winding down a business. The correct chapter should be 7. Liquidation. Game over.

    --
    Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
    http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  56. FUD U LIKE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    There's little reason for anyone, including Microsoft, to keep money in SCO at this point.

    really?

  57. There is a God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is but one God and Her name is Karma

  58. Tornado Effect by 4of12 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't know why, but for some reason I'm reminded of what I heard once about tornadoes.

    It's not the high winds that damage a house, it's that sudden change of pressure that causes the house to explode from the imbalance.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
    1. Re:Tornado Effect by pongo000 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Please don't waste time opening windows! The only way you'll see a radical pressure change is if you're in the vortex. By that time you should already be grabbing your ankles and making promises to your god.

      [This has been a public service message from the heart of Tornado Alley.]

    2. Re:Tornado Effect by dbfruth · · Score: 1

      No, It the crap that that just got blown off of your neighbors house that causes your house to explode. I don't know about your place but mine wouldn't stand up to well when faced with high velocity refrigerators and flying Toyotas. [Another Public Service Message from the heart of tornado Alley]

    3. Re:Tornado Effect by Christianfreak · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ummm ... wrong

      I know this is off-topic, but this particular myth bugs me because people have died doing stupid things like trying to open their windows when a tornado came instead of taking proper shelter. (The idea being that the pressure won't affect the house if the windows are open and the air can escape)

    4. Re:Tornado Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "people have died doing stupid things"

      You say that like it's a bad thing. Anytime someone dies doing something stupid, the human gene pool is enriched (slightly). Unless they've already procreated, of course, and then it's just funny. ;)

    5. Re:Tornado Effect by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      You make the assumption that someone who dies doing something stupid always does stupid things.

      That might have been the first (and last) stupid thing they ever did.
      The next thing they were going to do could have been a cure for cancer.

      Everyone does stupid things every now and then.

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
  59. Reminds me of that scene in star wars by voss · · Score: 5, Funny

    Lackey: Sir, there is potential flaw in our plan, shall I have the shuttle made ready?

    Darl: What in our moment of triumph?

    -----

    Ibm: Ok redhat, Youre all clear now blow this thing so we can all go home

    (Scene of SCO imploding)

    (Fat guys with beards in Star Wars t-shirts
    dancing in the streets)

    1. Re:Reminds me of that scene in star wars by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      You gnurf herder, LINUX shot FIRST!!!!

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    2. Re:Reminds me of that scene in star wars by mihalis · · Score: 2, Funny

      You don't need to see his headers

      These aren't the files you're looking for

      You can go about your coding

    3. Re:Reminds me of that scene in star wars by mihalis · · Score: 1

      Shutdown all the code stealers on the detention level. Shut down ALL THE CODE STEALERS ON THE DETENTION LEVEL

    4. Re:Reminds me of that scene in star wars by eddy · · Score: 1

      Fat guys with beards in Star Wars t-shirts dancing in the streets

      I recent that! Star Wars?!

      I'm wearing my "Don't ask me, it's a hardware problem"-t-shirt, thank you very much.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    5. Re:Reminds me of that scene in star wars by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      I recent that!

      Dude, I love that typo.

      --
      -- clvrmnky
    6. Re:Reminds me of that scene in star wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can always pull the "English isn't my first language"-defense, but in this case you're correct, that's a typo fair and square.

      resent. resent. resent. resent. resent. resent.
      resent. resent. resent. resent. resent. resent.
      resent. resent. resent. resent. resent. resent.
      resent. resent. resent. resent. resent. resent.
      resent. resent. resent. resent. resent. resent.

    7. Re:Reminds me of that scene in star wars by caluml · · Score: 1
      (Fat guys with beards in Star Wars t-shirts dancing in the streets)

      Would you be referring to the citizens of Slashdot land here?

  60. Going down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does this protend a soon to be expected sell-off of shares to the general public by SCO itself? Why not garner as much cash before it slides any furter. This would of course be the beginning of the death spiral for the company. It would be percieved that even their own execs don't believe in the viablility of SCO any more.

    Yea!!

    1. Re:Going down? by fishbowl · · Score: 1


      "Does this protend a soon to be expected sell-off of shares to the general public by SCO itself?"

      You're sure aiming high.

      I'm still waiting for the first negative assessment of SCO to appear in any mainstream press. At least anywhere that would be taken seriously by business folks. Except for Slashdot, Groklaw, and the occasional story here and there, you'd think everything was just fine.

      There's hardly ever so much as a passing mention of the litigation, much less anything that would resemble allegations that McBride et al are straight-up crooks who are lying, probably committing perjury, and making fools of investors and judges as they abuse the system and take assloads of cash in the process.

      It's never mentioned. Never a word about IBM, Redhad, Daryl's big mouth, the tenuous nature of their claims, etc. At least the Baystar story makes it onto the news sites. Some things can't just be airbrushed out, I suppose. Taking a hell of a long time for the tables to turn. I understand that things may be obvious to you and me (we're biased, after all), and not so obvious to others. But I don't see how you could side with SCO, given even the most perfunctory glance at the facts of the matter.

      Then again, there's tens of millions of voters who plan to cast ballots to re-elect Bush in November, and it escapes me how that's possible too.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    2. Re:Going down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm still waiting for the first negative assessment of SCO to appear in any mainstream press.

      Well, for the most part the mainstream press reports news. Novell claiming SysV copyrights was widely reported, for example.

      And "IBM submits XYZ motion - it's the beginning of the beginning of the beginning the end for SCO!" as seen on groklaw/slashdot isn't really news.

      Outside the IT world, this contract dispute is really not that big of a deal. Major companies fight these battles all the time.

    3. Re:Going down? by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      "Outside the IT world, this contract dispute is really not that big of a deal."

      I don't think the contract dispute is news either.

      It's the racketeering, stock manipulation, and perjury that alarm me.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  61. Bwaaahahahahahahahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *face turns blue*

    *heavy gasping breath*

    Bwahahahahahahahaha!

  62. WAG Contest... by Dave21212 · · Score: 1


    Don't miss out on the Wild Arse Guess contest each day on the SCOX stock price... It's a whole new ball game now ;)

    --
    "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
  63. It's the End of the SCO as we know it... by prgrmr · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...It's the End of the SCO as we know it,

    It's the End of the SCO as we know it,

    And I feel fine!

    I feel fine!

  64. Sigh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    If you're so hung-up on testing the legality of GPL, file your own damned lawsuit against IBM and make sure it goes to court. Otherwise, spare us the repetitive whining.

    1. Re:Sigh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm too busy fucking your mother in the face with my big black cock. She says, "Oh, I so glad to have a man! My son is such a fudgepacker"

  65. Wrong way round by Albanach · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think this is the first recorded instance of the ship leaving the sinking rats

    1. Re:Wrong way round by ccp · · Score: 1

      I think this is the first recorded instance of the ship leaving the sinking rats

      Sir, hats off to you!

      Cheers,

    2. Re:Wrong way round by LilMikey · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think this is the first recorded instance of the ship leaving the sinking rats

      It's been happening in Soviet Ru...

      why even bother.

      --
      LilMikey.com... I'll stop doing it when you sto
  66. Re:Hmm - too much risk for someone behind the scen by nizo · · Score: 1
    ...many including myself have speculated that there was someone behind the scenes of the entire SCO mess pulling the strings


    My money is on Count Dooku. If Microsith starts building a big round space station in orbit, we are all screwed!

  67. It would sure be interesting to know.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...who shorted SCOX up the kabongus this morning and then took the rest of the day off.

  68. The 45-day deadline is also coming up... by DanTheLewis · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... where SCO has been ordered to:

    1. To fully comply within 45 days of the entry of this order [NB: March 3 + 45 = April 17] with the court's previous order dated December 12, 2003. This is to include those items that SCO had difficulty in obtaining prior to the Court's previously ordered deadline of January 12, 2004.
    2. As previously ordered, SCO is to provide and identify all specific lines of code that IBM is alleged to have contributed to Linux from either AIX or Dynix. This is to include all lines of code that SCO can identify at this time.
    3. SCO is to provide and identify all specific lines of code from Unix System V from which IBM's contributions from AIX and Dynix are alleged to be derived.
    4. SCO is to provide and identify with specificity all lines of code in Linux that it claims rights to.
    5. SCO is to provide and identify with specificity the lines of code that SCO distributed to other parties. This is to include where applicable the conditions of release, to whom the code was released, the date and under what circumstances such code was released.
    6. It's a tall order. I foresee a lot of coffee drinking and nail-biting this weekend, whether or not the smoking suitcase is full of evidence.

    --

    Q: What did the comedian say to the crowd?
    A: If I knew, this joke would be funny.
    1. Re:The 45-day deadline is also coming up... by Pedrito · · Score: 1

      I read the German article referenced in the groklaw article and frankly, I found it quite enlightening. First of all, let me state, I don't actually speak, read, or write German, but I do a pretty funny imitation of each, and let me tell you, that's where the really juicy stuff is. It's a good read for anyone who doesn't know German.

    2. Re:The 45-day deadline is also coming up... by dbIII · · Score: 2, Funny
      whether or not the smoking suitcase is full of evidence.
      Going on past performanace I would say the smoking suitcase is full of crack.
    3. Re:The 45-day deadline is also coming up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You are hereby ordered to:
      • stop splitting infinitives!
  69. Darth BayStar to Lando SCOrissian: by adrianbaugh · · Score: 4, Funny

    We are altering the deal. Pray we do not alter it any further.

    --
    "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
    - JRR Tolkien.
  70. Re:Hmm - too much risk for someone behind the scen by sphealey · · Score: 1

    Well, Linus does look a little bit like Yoda, so all may not be lost....

  71. Dear SCO, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    somebody set up you the bomb!

    You are on the way to destruction. You have no chance to survive make your time.

    Ancient words of mistranslated wisdom :)

  72. Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    If i had mod points, i'd make this funny

  73. SCOX is down $1.22 by cdn-programmer · · Score: 1

    My - what a small drop. It just goes to show that many investors are what?

    1. Re:SCOX is down $1.22 by mkcmkc · · Score: 0

      I thought it you said "down *to* $1.22"
      Mike

      --
      "Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
    2. Re:SCOX is down $1.22 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when a 13% drop in price is a small one?

  74. SCO "IP repo", my paranoia by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    Assume that MSFT et al don't want SCO to suffer a clear string of court losses but would be interested in a 3rd party FUD asset that theoretically *might* rear its head again (eg. pot'l MS salesman, privately: "L is unsafe" or " I heard that more IP suits may be filed". A nice-for-MS-sales hard-to-trace fart in the open office) Inappropriate if MS owns SCO's "IP cremains", but an "independent" 3rd party might have fun while collecting payments originating from MS/Gates et al retreading Darl's persona. Sounds like time for MS' next front guys to repo SCO. Beware the borg.

  75. Re:Hmm - too much risk for someone behind the scen by arivanov · · Score: 1

    Well if it is so, it will go into Chapter 7 or 11. At that point if there is any interest to understand who this party is IBM can buy the relevant assets.

    --
    Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
    http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  76. mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mod parent up

    1. Re:mod parent up by Goobermunch · · Score: 2, Informative

      Here's the relevant language . . .

      Upon filing of bankruptcy petition, all legal actions being taken or to be taken against debtor are halted, no new lawsuits can be commenced and ongoing proceedings of judicial or quasi-judicial nature are halted. Bankr.Code, 11 U.S.C.A. 362(a).

      Hope that helps.

      --AC

    2. Re:mod parent up by Goobermunch · · Score: 1

      Forgot to include my citation:

      This is from In Re Joe DeLisi Fruit Co., 11 B.R. 694 (Bnkrtcy. Minn. 1981).

      --AC

  77. Re:Rats leaving the ship by yintercept · · Score: 4, Funny
    The lawyers have left already?
    Different schools of law have different mascots. While the rat is common, there are other law schools sporting the vulture and many more sporting the shark...There is nothing a shark loves more than the tasty bite sized meaty morsels that come with sinking ships.
  78. An optimistic spin by IceAgeComing · · Score: 1

    It's warm and sunny here, so I'm going to channel some good vibes and be optimistic for a rare and brief moment.

    Flash back to when the Penguin said to Darl: "If you attack me now, I will grow stronger than you could possibly imagine..."

    We've learned a lot from the tactics of SCO. Perhaps most importantly, Linux has had huge visibility as a result of the lawsuit. Plus there's time to tinker or shore up defenses. Plus laws in different countries are different.

    Yes. I think in movie scenes. So what if I do?

  79. Re:hopefully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could they still sue people when under chapter 11?

    Yes thay can. They can sue while in Chapter 7 too. The Trustee in Bankruptcy is paid based on how much the estate (the remains of the company) are worth. The estate consists of both tangibles (chairs, buildings, paper, etc...) adn intangeables (a cause of action ("right to sue someone" for lack of a better phrase)).

    Let me tell you from personal experience, (IAAL) trustees are greeedy, tenacious little fuckers. They will sure and litigate if there is even a chance of money. It's even worse because rather then front the costs and fees for the lawyers up front, they hire firms on contingency. (the whole "we don't get paid unless you win" agreement) Once those firms sink half a million in costs and fees, they will not give up. They'll go bust first.

    Lawyers suck.

  80. Three Words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suck it, Darl.

  81. SCO sues Baystar for breach of contract by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Come on we know it's coming so just have the newstory all ready to go.

    here a fill in the blank form for it to help you along

    _____ writes today SCO sued ____ for ____ and $____ in damages. SCO contends that ____ failed to _____ resulting in SCO ______. When reached for comment _________ declined to respond at this time due to pending _________ but released a press release stating "At this time _________ ."

    1. Re:SCO sues Baystar for breach of contract by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      • Phil Mycrackin
      writes today SCO sued
      • Your Mom
      for
      • Eating Boogers
      and $
      • 10,00,0000
      in damages. SCO contends that
      • Your Mom
      failed to
      • use a kleenex
      resulting in SCO
      • barfing
      . When reached for comment
      • Your Mom
      declined to respond at this time due to pending
      • Snot
      but released a press release stating "At this time
      • You SUCK
      ."
  82. Re:hopefully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, they can still litigate, but venue could change to a US District Bankruptcy Court.

    The bankruptcy would, yes. The resulting litigation from the trustee going after everyone for money would get kicked back to the District Court. Remember, you don't have juries in bankruptcy court.

  83. Royal Bank of Canada ($30 Million) to follow suit? by David+Hume · · Score: 3, Interesting

    According to the ZD Net article BayStar seeks to retrieve investment in SCO:

    The move means at a minimum that SCO has more legal wrangling in its future, but it also raises the possibility that the Royal Bank of Canada, which chipped in $30 million alongside BayStar's investment in October, could follow suit.

    RBC is keeping its options open. "We haven't requested a redemption. We're reviewing the situation and will arrive at a decision shortly," said spokesman Paul Wilson.


    (emphasis added) Makes one wonder who, if anyone, else owns preferred stock in SCO that is subject to the same or similar provisions.

  84. My prediction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Your honor, we were too busy with our taxes to provide the information. It's all IBM's fault.

  85. run on the bank/ by beforewisdom · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Isn't this how a run on a bank starts?

    Someone, not sure of the quality of the bank, asks to cash out in a high profile way.

    Soon, everyone else follows killing the bank.

    Maybe this will signal the begining of the end for SCO.

    I couldn't understand how their stock prices went up to start with all of the experts purporting that they never had a case.

    Steve

  86. IRONY: SCaldera cries "they aren't specific" by WCMI92 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "BayStar's letter did not provide specific information regarding SCO's alleged breaches of the Exchange Agreement. SCO is attempting to obtain specific information from BayStar and is evaluating its obligations and options with respect to the redemption notice. "

    ROFLMFAO!!! Anyone notice that little bit of irony?

    SCaldera's been running around saying that IBM, Novell, Redhat, Linus, your grandma, and everyone else has stolen their code and used it in Linux. MILLIONS of lines, they say.

    When asked for specifics (even by the court) they refuse to grant any...

    This is the first blow... Even if SCO holds off the redemtion request, they now must expend money in court to fight it. RBC might follow suit (and they should, or they are pissing away their $30 million).

    Either party has an excellent chance, if they are right on their claim to have the court FREEZE those assets pending hearing.

    This effectively kills SCaldera.

    BayStar has made the decision to do this because they have no chance of ever getting their money back otherwise. And they are doing this knowing it destroys SCO.

    This whole thing is over within 6 months now.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
    1. Re:IRONY: SCaldera cries "they aren't specific" by SlowGenius · · Score: 1

      Am I the only /. reader who thinks that the BayStar pigs deserve to get burned along with all the rest of SCO's stockholders as the company's stock slides into the septic tank? It's not like they didn't know what Darl's business plan was when they invested Microsoft's money...

      --
      Listen to what I say, not what I mean...
    2. Re:IRONY: SCaldera cries "they aren't specific" by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 1

      Free Market = your salary = Gross World Product / World Population or $10 a day.

  87. Get 'em while they're hot! by DickBreath · · Score: 3, Funny

    New SCO Preferred Series B stock certificates! Step right up! Get 'em while they're hot.

    New certificates being printed on convenient pre-perforated rolls of high quality two ply facial tissue.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    1. Re:Get 'em while they're hot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facial tissue comes in rolls?

  88. Re:Royal Bank of Canada ($30 Million) to follow su by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    <Makes one wonder who, if anyone, else owns preferred stock in SCO that is subject to the same or similar provisions.

    BayStar and RBC are the big two. I don't know if DB's got any, but if they do, they're a minor player.

  89. About SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is so hilarious I have to quote it here for those that didn't RTFA. This is a riot! Mod 5 Funny, Slashdot user: dmcbride.

    The SCO Group (Nasdaq: SCOX - News) helps millions of customers in more than 82 countries to grow their businesses everyday. Headquartered in Lindon, Utah, SCO has a worldwide network of more than 11,000 resellers and 4,000 developers. SCO Global Services provides reliable localized support and services to partners and customers. For more information on SCO products and services, visit http://www.sco.com.

  90. Re:The future for SCO: Street.com article by Marc+Desrochers · · Score: 1

    If you were IBM, what would you do: Motion for dissmissal (sp?) or Prolong the process until SCO is completely broke, and then buy them cheap?

  91. Probably not by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 3, Informative
    ...which is why he shorted the stock in the first place.

    NB: shorting a stock consists of "selling" shares you don't own. You can then "buy" them at a lower price. The poster sold at $17 and can buy back today at roughly $9, making $8 a share.

    Yes, this means that the poster effectively owns negative shares.

    It's the smart thing to do with SCO stock if you think they're full of shit. But it's risky: if the lawsuit has merit (yeah, I know, it's ridiculous, but bear with me) and the shares shoot up to $40 each, the poster is out just a ton of money.

    1. Re:Probably not by wayne606 · · Score: 1

      It's not whether the suit has merit, it's whether they can get something out of our messed up legal system. Those are not the same thing and I guess the price at any point is the potential value of the company if they did win big, multiplied by the chance that will happen. I figured a few months ago that the "market" believed the chance of that happening was about 10% ... It's just buying a lottery ticket for the investors.

    2. Re:Probably not by nacturation · · Score: 1

      It's the smart thing to do with SCO stock if you think they're full of shit. But it's risky: if the lawsuit has merit (yeah, I know, it's ridiculous, but bear with me) and the shares shoot up to $40 each, the poster is out just a ton of money.

      That's why stop loss orders are your friend. If share price goes about $12, buy back the shares. Effectively, unless the volume traded is so low that it's next to impossible to buy enough shares back to cover the initial short sell (at $17/share), you can lock in (for this example) a $5/share profit.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:Probably not by IANAAC · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know what shorting stock means. My point was it's a rather stupid way to hurt a business. Instead of hurting a business by withholding your own money (by bypassing their products/services altogether), you try to use someone elses. All that really does is turn to market into one big Casino. Call me naive, but I really think we'd have a better marketplace if investments were done on the basis of good business practices, not whether one can get rich quick or not.

    4. Re:Probably not by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      That only works if the business *has* costomers who could withhold their business.

      By not buying SCO OpenUnix, I'm doing exactly what I would have done anyway, so Darl isn't going to notice.

  92. IBM won't let it go that easily... by Kjella · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If SCO goes bankrupt, this (I assume) goes in a legal round file somewhere. Then we can just wait for Microsoft to come at us directly with an army of lawyers that dwarfs IBM.

    IBM was accused of not keeping their hands clean with contracts and licences. They will not rest until SCO's accusations have been completely and utterly discredited, even if it means flogging a dead horse. That they "ran SCO's war chest empty" simply won't do.

    It has very little to do with the SCO case at all. IBM is relying on major contractors like military, government, major businesses selecting IBM because they are rock solid and trustworthy. That the data they entrust to IBM systems will be handled exactly as specified in contracts.

    That, and I suppose some people in IBM would take a certain pleasure in doing it. But hey, if you can have both business and pleasure, why not?

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:IBM won't let it go that easily... by Vengie · · Score: 1

      Kjella! As on of your huge fans, I'm going to have to scold you here. You could have also added the fact that Microsoft's "army of lawyers" is NOTHING compared to IBM's Cravath. The original poster fails to note the disparate outcomes in US vs IBM and US vs Microsoft. CSM doesn't make mistakes. Period. -b

      --
      When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
  93. Man....I didn't do nothin.... by NIN1385 · · Score: 2, Funny
    Sco: "I didn't have no crack pipe sir!"


    Officer: "I saw you throw it!"


    Sco: "I didn't throw nothing!"

    :::The Officer Walks over to the crack pipe and sees a house key right next to the crack pipe:::


    Officer: "I suppose this key is yours though right..."


    Sco: "Yeah, the key is mine, but I didn't throw no damn crack pipe, do I look like a crack head to you?"


    Sco: "Don't answer that..."

    --

    If carrots got you drunk, rabbits would be fucked up. - Comedian Mitch Hedberg R.I.P. 03/30/68-2/24/05
    1. Re:Man....I didn't do nothin.... by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 1

      So, you were watching the "COPS" marathon on FX the other day, too? :)

      --
      "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
  94. Is this part of the "Master Plan"? by -tji · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This whole process has smelled of something not quite right.

    Through the whole process, SCO's claims were bordering on ridiculous. Their antics rarely ever resulted in a stronger chance of being able to win the case.. they merely generated more publicity.

    It looks to me like their only goal in the whole process was to create as much FUD about Linux and Free Software as they could. To get as much media coverage as possible, creating that seed of doubt in as many IT managers minds as possible.

    The grand finale is when they cannot fund the lawsuit anymore, and close up shop. With no conclusion to the case, that cloud of FUD still hangs over Linux.

    Yeah.. that's quite a conspiracy theory. It's probably more likely that the SCO people are merely morons. But, whether by design or by their ineptitude, I think that the death of SCO before resolving the case would be a bad thing.

    1. Re:Is this part of the "Master Plan"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      A couple points you might be overlooking:

      1) Rather than FUDding the market as a whole, SCO is trying to FUD their own customers. This may have bought them a couple more years of legacy SCO UNIX revenue. Or it might have backfired.

      2) Without the lawsuit, SCO had a 100% chance of going bankrupt. With the lawsuit, SCO has a 99% chance of going bankrupt.

    2. Re:Is this part of the "Master Plan"? by maxpublic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You ever work for government? Especially the agencies that tend to involve themselves in power politics and shady deals? Let's just say that they're definitely not the masterminds portrayed on the "X Files", despite their unwavering belief in their own intellectual superiority.

      Most conspiracies are one part cunning, one part accident, and eight parts a bunch of morons all acting at cross-purposes. But, like the monkeys and the typewriters, every once in awhile they produce something legible...or in this case - perhaps - something that actually works.

      SCO smells just like this. A dash of cunning, a pinch of good luck, and a huge dollop of stupidity contributed by a bunch of dumb-asses convinced they're the next Napoleons of the political/business world. By sheer happenstance things just might work out well for the puppet master...whoever that happens to be.

      But if it does it will have had nothing to do with masterful planning. The conspiracies put forward by shows like the X-Files and the loons just don't exist. Conspirators, by and large, are either too arrogant, too stupid, or both to actually pull off whatever it is they're aiming for...assuming you can keep them from fighting with each other over pecking order long enough to get anything done.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    3. Re:Is this part of the "Master Plan"? by swillden · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah.. that's quite a conspiracy theory. It's probably more likely that the SCO people are merely morons.

      I don't think it's either. Well, I do think they're not the brightest bulbs, but it appears more likely to me that they started with reasonably intelligent and only mildly underhanded plan ("Let's irritate IBM into buying us out") and then found that they had painted themselves into a very unpleasant corner when IBM called their bluff.

      I wrote a fairly detailed explanation of my view in a Groklaw post. I'd be interested in comments.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  95. Re: Sections 2(b)(v), 2(b)(viii) and 3(g) of the . by asr_man · · Score: 4, Informative

    A less flippant summary:

    2(b)(v) "You didn't outright lie to us about what you said about yourself in the original purchase agreement."

    2(b)(viii) "You didn't omit any material fact that would make what you say about yourself misleading. You also haven't withheld from the public information you are required to disclose by law."

    3(g) "You won't provide non-public information to us after the press release."

    Not that I don't find yours more entertaining.

  96. Watch out, Darl by LouCifer · · Score: 3, Funny

    ..you'll be joining me a lot sooner than later.

    --
    Religion is for people afraid of going to hell.
  97. Re:Tornado Effect (Offtopic, sorry!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    That was a popular theory 20 years ago; I remember during a tornado warning we'd open windows a crack before ducking into the basement.

    More recent studies show that the high winds are in fact the problem, not the pressure imbalance. So no need to get your carpet wet during the next blow...

  98. Re:Hmm - too much risk for someone behind the scen by mydn · · Score: 1

    Didn't Teledesic fail?

  99. Quiet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If EVERYBODY shorts SCOX, the price will go up again!

    1. Re:Quiet! by jehreg · · Score: 1
      Actually no, shorting means that you borrow someone's stock and you sell it right away with the promise that you will eventually buy some stock and give the stock back to whoever lent his to you. Of course, if the company goes bankrupt, you never have to purchase the stock back...

      So, if everyone shorts that means a huge amount of selling, bringing the price down. If enough shorting happens and the stock is low enough, it becomes a self-fufilling prophecy.

    2. Re:Quiet! by Aussie · · Score: 1

      shorting means that you borrow someone's stock

      I don't understand. Why would someone lend their stocks ? What benefit does the lender get ?

  100. Re:Rats leaving the ship by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 1

    To be fair, there is also the lion school of legal practice...fierce, brave, tenacious. Unfortunately the rats, vultures and sharks tend to dominate.

    Wow, for the first time ever in my /. posting history, it's actually relevant to add: IANAL.

    --
    This is where the serious fun begins.
  101. Snippets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I don't need the SCOX freakazoids coming after me, but I saw this on Yahoo's message boards and not here:

    2. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES.

    (b) Company Representations and Warranties . Except as set forth on a Disclosure Schedule delivered by the Company to each Purchaser (the " Disclosure Schedule "), the Company hereby makes the following representations and warranties to the Purchasers on the Closing Date:

    (v) Original Purchase Agreement . Excluding the representations and warranties set forth in Sections 3(a), (b), (d), (e), (i), (y) and (z) of the Original Purchase Agreement, the representations and warranties of the Company set forth in Section 3 of the Original Purchase Agreement (the " Original Representations and Warranties ") are each true and correct as of the Closing Date, in each case as if made on the Closing Date. For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms as used in Section 3 of the Original Representations and Warranties shall have the following meanings:

    i. the term "Agreement" shall have the meaning of the term "Agreement" as defined in this Agreement;

    ii. the term "Disclosure Schedule" shall have the meaning of the term "Disclosure Schedule" as defined in this Agreement;

    iii. the term "Securities" shall have the meaning of the term "Securities" as it is defined in this Agreement;

    iv. the term "Conversion Shares" shall have the meaning of the term "Conversion Shares" as it is defined in this Agreement;

    v. the term "Preferred Stock" shall have the meaning of the term "Exchange Preferred Stock" as it is defined in this Agreement;

    vi. the term "Certificate of Designation" shall have the meaning of the term "Exchange Certificate of Designation" as it is defined in this Agreement;

    vii. the term "Registration Rights Agreement" shall mean the Registration Rights Agreement as amended pursuant to Section 3(d) below;

    viii. the term "Select SEC Documents" means the Company's (A) Proxy Statement for its 2003 Annual Meeting, (B) Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2003 and (C) Current Reports on Form 8-K filed since October 31, 2003; and

    ix. The term "Transaction Documents" shall have the meaning of the term "Transaction Documents" as it is defined in this Agreement.

    Except as set forth in this Section 2(b)(v), all capitalized terms used in the Original Representations and Warrants shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Original Purchase Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, the term "2002 Annual Report" as used in the Original Representations and Warranties shall refer to the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2003.

    (vi) Brokers and Finders . The Company has no knowledge of any person who will be entitled to or make a claim for payment of any finder fee or other compensation as a result of the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

    (vii) Absence of Certain Changes . Except as set forth in the Select SEC Documents (as defined in Section 2(b)(v) of this Agreement), since October 31, 2003, there has been no material adverse change and no material adverse development in the business, properties, operations, prospects, financial condition or results of operations of the Company and its Subsidiaries, taken as a whole. The Company has not taken any steps, and does not currently expect to take any steps, to seek protection pursuant to any bankruptcy or receivership law, nor does the Company or any of its Subsidiaries have any knowledge or reason to believe that its creditors intend to initiate involuntary bankruptcy proceedings with respect to the Company or any of its Subsidiaries.

    (viii) Disclosure . All information relating to or concerning the Company and/or any of its Subsidiaries set forth in this Agreement or provided to the Purchasers in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby is true and correct in all material respects, and the Company has not omitted to state

  102. Here it comes, you won't BELIEVE this shit!!!! by Thud457 · · Score: 2, Funny
    If I had mod points, I'd mod that up as "funny" so it would then subsequently get modded down as "offtopic" three times!

    /snap!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:Here it comes, you won't BELIEVE this shit!!!! by SoSueMe · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Not to worry. It's toast now.

  103. Re: [CENSORED] by c13v3rm0nk3y · · Score: 1

    absolutely titilating.

    Now, now. Such language is frowned upon in Slashdot comments.

    --
    -- clvrmnky
  104. Re:(OT) Anime Gallery... by Oaffy · · Score: 1

    Just because I was interested I ran a tracert on that ip, and I looks like a computer running off of a Comcast line. Can you say TOS violation? Hehe, Comcast is probably, if they haven't already shut off his line. ;)

  105. Re:The future for SCO: Street.com article by tsotha · · Score: 1
    This is beautifull on two counts:

    SCO doesn't have enough money to stave off IBM's legal grinding wheel, since it can't raise more capital.

    Baystar loses its corporate ass, which will make it harder for any company to use lawsuits as a business plan.

  106. Yes, you are correct, but there is also interest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're absolutely right. The slashdot story has the wrong numbers. But 20 isn't quite right either because SCO has some dividend interest to pay as well. I believe it's about 4 million dollars worth. So the right number is about $24 million. There might be penalties to pay too but I'm not sure.

  107. Getting Jiggy With Darl by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

    The chances of BatStar seeing a dime are, well, slim as a thin dime. SCO lives in another reality, SCO will simply deny it's in violation, and stall any lawsuits until they fold. Darl and his buds will, by that time be on whatever planet their Mormon God has given them, or getting jiggy with Jeffrey Skilling in some resort jail.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:Getting Jiggy With Darl by HrothgarReborn · · Score: 1

      Yeah its the Mormons that are trying to kill Linux with all these darn Mormon controlled companies like Novell ... hey wait!

      Take the religous rhetoric elseware. The LDS church actively uses Linux in a variety of ways and the LDS owned university BYU actively contributes to a number of open source projects. Daryl is not viewed by the Utah community as a good Mormon and rumor has it there are even a few catholics that work at SCO as well.

    2. Re:Getting Jiggy With Darl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Jesus, dude, not getting your own planet?

    3. Re:Getting Jiggy With Darl by fishbowl · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "The chances of BatStar seeing a dime are, well, slim as a thin dime."

      I don't imagine it's about the money. This is an attack aimed at the investor mindset. Finally, FINALLY, someone who is in a leadership position has decided to call out SCO on their lies and crimes. Still a bit more subtle than I would like to see personally, but notice that this will be pretty much the first action that gets any hint of negativity into the mainstream news reports.

      Until now, pretty much every report on SCO is tempered with language that makes it sound as if there is some conceivable merit to the SCO allegations against IBM and RedHat, and like it's conscionable that Darl McBride is not in prison, etc. (Unless you read Slashdot or Groklaw, which, it may suprise you to note, people who make real business decisions haven't read or even HEARD OF!)

      The BayStar announcement HAS TO hit the press. It may seem less important than public statements from IBM or Novell, but those are just tech companies, meaningless in the financial world. This news item will get noticed. People who otherwise don't have a clue that there's anything amiss with SCO, hard as it is to imagine, will notice this.

      If only the press had any balls, to take off the gloves and tell it like it is, spelling the facts out with the biases where they ought to be, like PJ does. A hostile treatment of SCO would sell papers and so on wouldn't it? You'd think you'd hear about this stuff, but you don't, unless you look for it in fringe places like slashdot and groklaw.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    4. Re:Getting Jiggy With Darl by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

      Mod parent to 5000. This is the best thing that coulkd have happend. The money people may actually start looking at SCO / IBM / RedHat with a new idea.

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  108. SCOX trading graph by obsid1an · · Score: 2, Informative
    Here is a graph of their trading today. The news hit @ around 2pm.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SCOX&t=1d

  109. Re:The future for SCO: Street.com article by Marc+Desrochers · · Score: 3, Funny

    Don't law firms use lawsuits as a business plan?

    I might be wrong...

  110. Duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    you can see that most people who want to buy aren't the same as those who want to sell

    Wow, what a financial genius you are.


    And you got modded up to 4 at one point. This doesn't say much for the intelligence of /.'s moderators.

    1. Re:Duh! by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Yeah, saying what I meant.

      You can see that most people who want to buy aren't buying it because of its value, but because of its potential lack of value. While it seems most people wanting to sell are trying to get out with the least amount of loss.

      Yeah, that's what I meant.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  111. Re: Sections 2(b)(v), 2(b)(viii) and 3(g) of the . by Halo- · · Score: 1

    Thank you. The actual sections weren't readily apparent when I read the links, and I really did want to know what they were. I'm glad they are actually major issues, and not something SCO could easily get out of, like say... all press releases must be in 10 point Times Roman...

  112. Re:Rats leaving the ship by Bronster · · Score: 5, Funny

    To be fair, there is also the lion school of legal practice...fierce, brave, tenacious. Unfortunately the rats, vultures and sharks tend to dominate.

    Yeah, it's such a pity that the actions of 95% of lawyers make the other 5% look bad.

  113. Stock tumbling! by gnuman99 · · Score: 0, Redundant
    Yahoo finance

    Down about 10% today

  114. Down to $8.37 and still falling by jeepmeister · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And that's on high volume of trading. The slide has begun. I'm getting up a pool on when SCOX will be pulled from trading.

    --

    I don't need no estinkin' .sig
    Jeepmeister
  115. Could this conceivably be a bad thing? by Bootsy+Collins · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I worry that if the BOC joins in and asks for their $30M back, SCO goes bankrupt. If they go bankrupt, it's not like their lawsuits go away. Instead (IIRC, IANAL as usual) suits they filed are put on hold until after administration, while suits filed against them are voided with the option to re-file after administration. Stretching these out even more years wouldn't be a good result, I don't think. They need to be crushed in court.

    Anyone who is a lawyer, or knows about corporate bankruptcy procedures, and can comment on this?

    1. Re:Could this conceivably be a bad thing? by Moekandu · · Score: 1
      I worry that if the BOC joins in and asks for their $30M back

      Wait!?!?! Blue Oyster Cult invested in SCO?

      Don't fear the Reaper, Darl!

      --
      Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself; but talent instantly recognizes genius. -- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
    2. Re:Could this conceivably be a bad thing? by cwsulliv · · Score: 1

      If SCO does go bankrupt, wouldn't that give IBM or Novell the chance to buy up the whole operation for a pittance? Then the buyer could put an end to the whole sorry shenanigans by releasing under the GPL any portion of Unix IP claimed by SCO which might happen to be found in the Linux code.

  116. Slashdot editors screw up again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    As we've come to expect, /.'s editors got the story wrong. Baystar has not cashed out. It would like to. It's trying to. But it's not going to get its money out without going to court, which could take a couple of years.

    1. Re:Slashdot editors screw up again by crusher-1 · · Score: 1

      "But it's not going to get its money out without going to court, which could take a couple of years."

      Very true IMHO. The downside for SCOX is that litigating with a former investor will take away any shroud that SCOX has any claims of merit or fact. Also, I'm sure BayStar has been eyeballing SCO stock for just such a trend. The minute it hits 20 consecutive days under Ten point Five will be the hold that BayStar will have over SCOX.

      Consider. SCO rides under $10.50x20 days. BayStorm has at its perogative to yank its cash on demand. Now there's a nice hammer to hold over someones head! Cash out and consumer confidence goes to nil. Stock bottoms out, common share holder sell off... Done.

      Or, one could use it as leverage. Buyout of certain assest and some planned liquidation. Buy some unix patents - M$ seems to be very interested in patents. And BayStar is a nice little front of M$ gaining leverage? Perhaps in an off hand way.

      Monday will be telling. If SCOX's stock hits below $10.50 and if in deed BayStar has a solid 20 days and provable contract clauses then BayStar may be sitting in the drivers seats...

      Dear Darl! Big business in a modern Capitalist society is a dirty dog eat dog business. Kinda funny, SCO looked to highjack Linux on claims of ownership of code, and may find themselves owned by their investors, our just raped by them.

      Couldn't happen to a nicer group of suits. pfft!!

    2. Re:Slashdot editors screw up again by anno1602 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but somehow that's less of a point. Baystar may not be able to get their capital out, but such a well-publisized intention to move out of SCO will make it very hard for them to get more investors, and it's a massive PR/stock price problem for SCO.

    3. Re:Slashdot editors screw up again by pfdietz · · Score: 1

      You have that backwards -- if the stock stays that low for that long, SCO can force Baystar to take soon-to-be-worthless stock in place of the Prefered Stock. It was probably Baystar that recently pumped the stock above $10.50, just to prevent this scenario.

      By asking for the redemption, even if they don't get it, Baystar now becomes an unsecured creditor, ahead of other prefered stockholders and level with litigants like IBM in the upcoming bankruptcy.

  117. FIRST POST? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Beer and tasty food? Shit, I was going to waste the hours of my Friday evening reloading the front page of /. trying to get a big steaming tall FROSTY PISS on a just-posted article.

  118. I love the smell... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    of burning IT companies in the morning.

  119. Novell by bstadil · · Score: 1

    Corporate Headquarters and Principal Executive Offices 404 Wyman Street, Suite 500 Waltham, MA 02451 Main: 781-464-8000

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:Novell by HrothgarReborn · · Score: 1

      I forgot the rules were Mormons could not live outside of Utah.

      The company was founded by LDS bussiness people (all of them BYU grads). Most of its board are LDS. Most of its operations are out of the Provo, UT campus. A huge section of its employees are also LDS. I am not really saying it is Mormon controlled, I am just pointing out it could be said as easily as the Idea that SCO is Mormon controlled. Both of which are ridiculous statements.

    2. Re:Novell by bstadil · · Score: 1
      I know the history and agree with you that Novell has always be a tad sleazy from back to the Noorda days.

      I think Messman is actively trying to get rid of this factor as he is an outsider that arrived with the merger of Novell and Messman's consulting company (forget name).

      The move to MA is part of this effort I think.

      --
      Help fight continental drift.
  120. They pulled an SCO by The+Analog+Kid · · Score: 1

    BayStar's letter did not provide specific information regarding SCO's alleged breaches of the Exchange Agreement.

    They pulled an SCO on SCO. Bahahaha

  121. The SCO-BayStar Exchange Agreement by David+Hume · · Score: 1
  122. Re:The future for SCO: Street.com article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Thus, even if SCO eventually prevails over Baystar this may still sink SCO. SCO won't be able to obtain enough funding to battle IBM, et al.

    Microsoft will fund SCO indefinitely.

    Is this so hard to understand ?

  123. [OT] Re:Official loser by cgranade · · Score: 1

    Others losing in a big way today: Netflix and DoubleClick. Don't expect me to be shedding any tears today, nossir.

    --

    #define DRM chmod 000

    1. Re:[OT] Re:Official loser by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Trust me, Doubleclick stock price crashing can never be off topic here :-)

    2. Re:[OT] Re:Official loser by Spunk · · Score: 1

      Doubleclick, sure. I'll join you. But what do you have against Netflix?

  124. sucker list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Capital Guardian Trust Company, $22M* in SCOX stock
    Royce & Associates, Inc., $27M* in SCOX stock
    Krevlin Advisers, LLC, $5.1M* in SCOX stock
    Legg Mason Inc., $4.9M* in SCOX stock
    Oppenheimerfunds, Inc, $2.4M* in SCOX stock

    (* value subject to dramatic change, fund managers subject to losing all credibility)

    Meanwhile, the crooked fund managers manipulate the stock so that the Director and VP can exercise their options and unload before the stock hits rock bottom Insider Transactions.

    Check your mutual funds people. Don't do business with companies that are taking your money so some VP and SCO can throw a party with a peeing ice sculpture.

  125. Not only that..... by kajoob · · Score: 5, Funny

    but he has naked pictures of my wife too! He's a dead man!

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
    1. Re:Not only that..... by glitch! · · Score: 1

      [Not only that] but he has naked pictures of my wife too! He's a dead man!

      You provide pictures of your naked wife to dead people? Man, that's really twisted...

      --
      A dingo ate my sig...
    2. Re:Not only that..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      but he has naked pictures of my wife too!


      At least you get 'em for free. I had to buy them.
    3. Re:Not only that..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You provide pictures of your naked wife to dead people? Man, that's really twisted...

      hey, don't knock it till you've tried it ;)

  126. Re:SCO ON SALE! ( sig repliers anon) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yes, you're the only one who pronounces FSCK that way. The rest of us hominids pronounce it eff-sick

  127. Re:Rats leaving the ship by Goobermunch · · Score: 1

    Also, don't forget the Leeches. That said, everyone says they hate lawyers, but we're always the busiest at the cocktail parties. Everyone says they love teachers, but they tend to end up in the corners. IAAL. --AC

  128. Stock down by nightsweat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    SCOX down $1.29 to 8.37 (13.35%) today and already down more in after hours.

    Classic PR move - release bad news on a Friday when everyone has gone home and the markets have time to absorb and forget about it over the weekend.

    --

    the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
  129. mod parent up by RelliK · · Score: 1

    Can somebody please comment on what happens to the lawsuit if SCO runs out of cash and dies? Can IBM still get the declaratory judgement?

    --
    ___
    If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
  130. welovethescoinformationminister.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See welovethescoinformationminister.com it has been up for a LONG time now :)

  131. Brain in Neutral by bstadil · · Score: 1
    from The Street

    "I look at this as bad news for SCO," said Dion Cornett, an analyst for Decatur Jones Equity Partners -

    Please let me know how you get a job like this.

    Here I am posting to Slashdot risking Mod Point and all when I could put my brain in Neutral and make Money.

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
  132. Happy Birthday to me by Wehesheit · · Score: 0

    Today is my birthday, this is just another win in a good day for me.

    --
    This P.I.G. will walk on the water, This P.I.G. will walk on the sea, This P.I.G. will walk whereever he wants.
  133. Novell share of Microsoft and Sun license fees by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 2, Informative
    One thing I have not seen discussed yet acquires greater relevance than ever with the BayStar decision. The bulk of any Unix license fees that SCOG receives is supposed to be handed over to Novell.

    I wonder how long they can procrastinate on this before Novell asks for a court order to at least put this money in escrow? This, not the BayStar move, might be what finally makes it impossible for SCOG to maintain its litigation. Please Novell, do not take such action until SCOG's attack on the GPL has been well and truly demolished.

  134. Canadians: Vote With Your Feet by trance9 · · Score: 1

    I hadn't previously realized that one of Canada's major banks, Royal, was a SCO backer. I urge everyone in Canada who has business with Royal to cancel their cards, accounts, move their mortgages, etc., and when you do it, write a letter to RBC telling them why.

    It probably won't make a difference, but you don't have to have YOUR money in SCO, which is where it is if it's in a Royal Bank account.

    Re this: "The letter asserts that BayStar is entitled to the redemption of its shares under Article VII.A(vii) of the Certificate of Designation, Preferences and Rights of the Series A-1 Convertible Preferred Stock because SCO has allegedly breached Sections 2(b)(v), 2(b)(viii), 2(b)(viii) and 3(g) of the Exchange Agreement dated February 5 2004 among SCO, BayStar and Royal Bank of Canada, which also holds shares SCO's Series A-1 Convertible Preferred Stock."

  135. Re:Mirror that anime site please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We all need it!
    Mirrors? :>

  136. Re:The future for SCO: Street.com article by AhBeeDoi · · Score: 1

    IBM will seek a summary judgement, meaning they'll ask the judge to toss out the lawsuit for lack of merit. Actually, the suit may well be tossed out Monday if they can't produce any of the discovery material requested.

  137. Re:SCO ON SALE! how to magnify your gains. by whittrash · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you have had a consistent short position, you will have gained 50% or so on your money. If you feel confident in your position, buy to cover and take out a new short position at the current share price, if SCOX falls by 50% again you will make a 50% return on your new position, but if you leave it as is you will only see an additional 25% return above the 50% you have already made, the difference is a 125% return vs. a 75% return. Theoretically, if you you cash out and take a new short position every time SCOX drops 50%, you can earn vastly more money.

    Example: $1000(SCOX@$18) original short positon in SCOX. SCOX drops 50%, you make $500 and lock that in. You take a your gains and take a $1500(SCOX@$8) short position, that drops 50% and you make $750 and cash out again. You have now made $1250 more in gains, more than doubling your original position. By doing that every time SCOX drops in half, your position grows by half, $1500(SCOX@$8) turns into $2250(SCOX@$4) into $3375(SCOX@$2) into $5062.50(SCOX@$1)into $7593.75(SCOX@$.5) and then you let it ride to zero and victory where you collect! Under your plan the most you can make is $1000, my plan will make huge cash money but unfortunately I am too chicken to do this as I am nearly broke. A way to cut your risk is to sock away some of your gains in cash to protect against a margin call if SCOX momentarily fluxuates upward. A way to magnify your gains is to find an instrument that will go up in direct proportion as SCOX falls, but you will probably need cash on hand if your short position gets called in. A lot of people shorting SCOX can completely obliterate the share price in a matter of hours under the right circumstances. Enron and Worldcom went down that way, the short sellers took over and they went down in flames. You ever wonder why rich people like hedge funds? Now you know!

  138. You mean RBC *HELD* the other $30 million by StandardCell · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The chances of either Baystar or RBC getting their money back is slim to none.

  139. Written on SCO's Wall: Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsin by freakygirl · · Score: 1
    "And this is the writing that was inscribed: MENE, MENE, TEKEL, and PARSIN."

    "This is the interpretation of the matter: MENE, God has numbered the days of your kingdom and brought it to an end; TEKEL, you have been weighed in the balances and found wanting; PERES, your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians."

    "Then Belshazzar commanded, and Daniel was clothed with purple, a chain of gold was put about his neck, and proclamation was made concerning him, that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom."

    "That very night Belshazzar the Chaldean king was slain. And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old." (Daniel 5:1-31 RSV)

  140. It could probably be summed up in one line by dbIII · · Score: 3, Funny

    You idiots said you had a case - give me the money back!

    1. Re:It could probably be summed up in one line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You idiots said you had a database - give me the money back!

  141. more prose by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 1

    Three IPs for the Linux kings under the sky, Seven for IBM in their halls of stone, Nine for SGI doomed to die, One for the dark Darl on his dark throne In the land of Utah where the shadows lie. One IP to rule them all, one IP to find them, One IP to sue them all, and in the courtrooms bind them In the land of Utah where the shadows lie.

  142. Subtitled... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its needs a subtitle: "SCO takes a dose of their own medecine up their A**HOLE!"

  143. "Analysts" aren't -- Yankee liars. by eddy · · Score: 1

    Yes, "analysts". Jebus fucking crabs. Yankee Linux findings rigged too. I'm SHOCKED! shocked I tell you.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
  144. SCOX will be pulled from trading... by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


    Wish I had mod points for you. I expect it will be before mid-day on Monday.

    I suppose if enough sell orders come in over the weekend, it's possible that it will be pulled at opening on Monday. Should be interesting to see what happens.

    I can guarantee you, though, if you don't already have short position, it will be nearly impossible to get one any longer.

  145. Dibs on the RICO Auction Block. by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


    Fine. I'll take the two houses.

  146. Actually they CAN sue Boies for legal malpractice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Because Boies once worked for IBM, back when the US Govt sued IBM for antitrust. In the legal industry, the fact that Boies was once a "related party" to IBM and now he's an "adverse party" since he's working against IBM, that constitutes attorney "Conflict of Interest" (COI). If Boies botches, or even just loses the case for SCO, then SCO can solidly claim "legal malpractice" against Boies, take him to the cleaners and possibly ruin his ability to ever practice law again.

    Given the high profile of this case, I'm still stunned and amazed that noone has made a big deal of this yet. I used to work in the lawfirm computing biz, and was an expert in building COI databases and software search engines. Doing a COI search before taking on a new client was a fundamental requirement at all the lawfirms I worked for. No firm would dare even think of taking on a new client without a thorough COI search and even the slightest hint of a COI would be a disqualifier. Boies past employment by IBM isn't a vague COI, it's a hugely blatant COI. Something smells really, really fishy in the legal world about this whole SCO case.

  147. The Baystar deal has a stock price trigger by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative
    Here's the key clause, from SCO's SEC filing on the deal.
    • If the Closing Sales Price of the Common Stock is less than $10.50 (as adjusted to reflect any stock dividends, distributions, combinations, reclassifications and other similar transactions effected by the Corporation in respect to its Common Stock) for at least twenty (20) consecutive trading days, the Corporation shall have the right to redeem any shares of Series A-1 Preferred Stock then outstanding at price per share of Series A-1 Preferred Stock equal to the Face Amount plus all accrued and unpaid Dividends thereon through the closing date of such redemption.
    OK, has that happened? Almost, but not quite. Look at the closing price data. From 9 March 2004 to 2 April 2004, there's a string of 19 days with a closing price below $10.50. Now we see why SCO frantically tried a stock buyback program, which pushed the price above the threshold for a mere three days.

    But there's a clause in the Baystar agreeement that prohibits SCO from doing most share repurchases.

    This is going to get very ugly. Probably on Monday. When, remember, SCO finally has to disclose to IBM and the court what the claimed "infringing code" is. That deadline is tomorrow.

    1. Re:The Baystar deal has a stock price trigger by odin53 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what your point is. Why is that clause "key"? SCO has the right to redeem Baystar's stock when the trigger occurs. They don't have to exercise this right. Baystar's rights to redeem are elsewhere in the agreement, and none are keyed to SCO's closing price.

    2. Re:The Baystar deal has a stock price trigger by Animats · · Score: 1

      Wierd. You're right. "The Corporation" is SCO, not Baystar. And redemption of the preferred stock is at the "face amount" of $1000 per share. So this isn't really relevant right now.

    3. Re:The Baystar deal has a stock price trigger by Kalak · · Score: 1

      Can the editors mod his original comment down? He's admitted it's wrong, but it's still at "+5 Informative" even though it's been pointed out and agreed to that it is backwards of what he thought. *sigh* for some mod points right now (and it'd probably be meta-modded by some dolt as unfair if I did mod it down).

      --
      I am, and always will be, an idiot. Karma: Coma (mostly effected by .hack)
  148. Re:The 45-day deadline ... smoking suitcase by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    The only SCO suitcases I think anyone will see are the stinky ones full of crap and the bulging ones with the brochures for Brazil ;>

  149. Mod parent UP!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He IS right.

  150. The profit part by spiritraveller · · Score: 1
    Phase 4. ??? [The obligatory gnome-esc gap in the logic]

    If you want to profit, phase 4 should be "buy long term puts".

    Other potential strategies would be to sell non-covered calls or to short-sell the stock, but those are more risky. At least with the puts your loss is limited by the amount you paid for them.

  151. So... by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1
    How much dumber would he have to get in order to be completely wrong?

    I'm holding out hope he's a troll, otherwise our educational system is even more fucked than I thought.

  152. not just losing 20 mil by timmarhy · · Score: 1

    they are also going to loose massive amounts in stock value. a major backer pulling out of a venture always hurts stock prices.

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  153. April 15, 2004 by salvorHardin · · Score: 1

    From the SCO press release: "received a letter on April 15, 2004 from BayStar Capital II, L.P."
    I *knew* something good would have to happen on my birthday!

  154. For the thousandth time - no known Paul Allen link by Jayfar · · Score: 1

    "Given the connections that Baystar has with MS/Paul Alen et al" No, no, no. People keep reciting this same bit of misreading. The original Paul Allen assertion was based on folks not reading the large type header of a graph in a pdf white paper from Baystar - "Top Ten Investors All PIPES since 1995" - not Baystar PIPEs. This had also been reported incorrectly by wired online, has never been corrected by them, and has taken on a life of its own as an urban legend.

  155. Does SCO headquarters have an elevator? by dcavanaugh · · Score: 1

    I just had to ask.

    1. Re:Does SCO headquarters have an elevator? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think sco's building is only two floors so you'd blow yourself up along with your office chair/monitor/c4 contraption

    2. Re:Does SCO headquarters have an elevator? by dcavanaugh · · Score: 1

      "i think sco's building is only two floors so you'd blow yourself up along with your office chair/monitor/c4 contraption"

      And to think there are people who think there is no role for IT outsourcing!

      Happy trails, Darl

  156. Re:Hmm - too much risk for someone behind the scen by PhiloHmm · · Score: 1

    Do you think that there might be a connection between Sun and Microsoft on this one? Look who would have gained the most from SCO 'owning' Linux. Not Microsoft, but Sun, the most beleagured UNIX provider at present. I'm having trouble drawing the obvious connection - something more subtle going on here?

  157. Not prose by mabinogi · · Score: 1

    prose (P) Pronunciation Key (prz)
    n.
    1. Ordinary speech or writing, without metrical structure.
    2. Commonplace expression or quality.

    This sentence is prose, as it is an ordinary sentence.
    Lyrics from a song, and a poem from LotR are not prose, they are verse.

    --
    Advanced users are users too!
  158. uhhh hello by SQLz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are you guys all forgeting the MS + Baystar connection? The leaked memo? That shit totally fucked SCO over, MS wants out badly. There are serious legal implications for MS if a investigation shows they directly or even indirectly funded this. At least now, the company can claim plausable deniabilty.

    Next time they'll be smarter though. The plan now is for SCO to back out before the GPL is held up in US court and for someone else to come in and carry the FUD torch against Linux. Its probably going to suit patent related.

    1. Re:uhhh hello by Anonymous+Bullard · · Score: 1
      There are serious legal implications for MS if a investigation shows they directly or even indirectly funded this.

      Implications would imply at least a minimal level of enforcement. MS are totally immune under the Bush regime (... Look, a mother rabbit!!!). MS manipulated Corel's privatization both directly and indirectly and all the regulators did was a concerted yawn.

      --

      Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?

    2. Re:uhhh hello by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The plan now is for SCO to back out before the GPL is held up in US court and for someone else to come in and carry the FUD torch against Linux.
      Somehow, I guess "someone else" will be Sun...
    3. Re:uhhh hello by SQLz · · Score: 1

      If you have as much money as MS does, your pretty much untouchable under any regime, unless of course if Stallman was president. (now that would be +5 funny as hell)

      I would really like to see the FTC come down on MS with the full force of the law for this. Baystar admits MS execs called them to discuss a SCO investment. This was well into the FUD campaign and the leaked email suggests they were going to keep funding it. If a convicted monopoly secretely funding legal action against its only competitor is not illegal, I don't know what is. You can't smoke pot in this country, but this is ok?

      I think things are really going to get interesting now. When Sun becomes the new anti-linux golden boy for MS, SCO might get jealous and probably turn on MS. FUDMaster vs FUDMaster.

    4. Re:uhhh hello by cwsulliv · · Score: 1

      MS is probably smarter than to have been directly involved in any event. All it would have taken is a phone call from Bill G to one of his buddies from the old days who are no longer associated with MS and to whom 20 Million is just pocket change.

    5. Re:uhhh hello by SQLz · · Score: 1

      Baystar specifically said 'Microsoft executives' made the call.

    6. Re:uhhh hello by cwsulliv · · Score: 1

      The initial call yes, but not the investment.

  159. Abandon ship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AND iIIiiIII will AALLWAYS LooVE UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

  160. just to perplex you more. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am not voting for Nader anymore and will vote for Bush!

  161. SCO is a model by Numinous83 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    SCO is a model for everything that is wrong in the legal system of the US. It is fortunate that they are here, to point out problems, which may or may not need to be fixed. Where does freedom to take people to court end and where does throwing out stupid cases begin?

  162. It's a Server! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    > I think the joke is on you man.
    >
    >Have you ever seen penguins jump in the water? Those little fuckers are so good at sliding in, they hardly displace any water at all.
    >
    >What Darl needs up his ass is an eServer.

    Q: What is it?

    A: It's a server.

    Q: What can it do?

    A: Anything. It can monitor itself, back itself up, secure itself, patch itself, practically even heal itself.

    Q: Can it wipe its own ass?

    A: That's... still under development, there were some... issues... during alpha. After the delay caused by the untimely demise of the Goatse Guy, we at IBM believe we've finally found a solution to get things back on schedule...

  163. With Apologies To Don MacLean by red+floyd · · Score: 5, Funny

    A long long time ago
    Darl can still remember
    When Unix(tm) used to make him smile...
    And he knew that in a few weeks
    That he would sue those Linux(tm) geeks
    And maybe prop the stock up for a while...
    But IBM just wouldn't shiver
    The AIX code they wouldn't deliver
    Bad news on the newsrack
    BayStar wants their cash back
    I don't remember getting sad
    When I heard how their stock crashed so bad
    But I was laughing and oh so glad
    The Day The SCO Group Died...

    So we were singing
    Bye, bye, Mr. Darl McBride...

    --
    The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    1. Re:With Apologies To Don MacLean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Thats funny as hell, you should add that to music :P

    2. Re:With Apologies To Don MacLean by QuintLeo · · Score: 1

      One word. Neat! 8-)

    3. Re:With Apologies To Don MacLean by PingXao · · Score: 2, Funny

      (lol)
      ==========
      So we were singing
      Bye, bye, Mr. Darl McBride...
      You fooled Wall Street pundits
      But we know you lied
      Them BayStar boys gonna see you hang high
      Singin' this'll be the day that you fry...
      This'll be the day that you fry

    4. Re:With Apologies To Don MacLean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we were singing
      Bye, bye, Mr. Darl McBride...
      Turned our Linux into Unix now its time that you die.
      and Linus Torvaldes is drinkin whiskey and rye
      singin this will be the day that SCO dies

  164. Re:For the thousandth time - no known Paul Allen l by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  165. Gutless Barstards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For 13 long months SCOX have screamed FUD from the rooftops & been given favourable press all the way.

    SCOX have delayed showing a shred of credible evidence at every opprotunity.

    Now after all this excruciating wait, IBM have them in a position where SCOX _have_ to put up the evidence & _suddenly_ the money is all going away.

    The cowards are pulling the pin & fragging SCOX so no evidence will be shown, no decision is made by the court & a permanent cloud of FUD is left enveloping Linux.

    It will be a cold day in hell when I _ever_ knowingly spend another cent with Microsoft or anyone associated with them.

  166. did I say sixteen bit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too many heinekins...
    I meant Eight bit, which D0h obviously is; 00D0h sounds like homer puking or something....

  167. The 'DiDiot' a M$ whore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whoda thunkit?

  168. First rule for dealing with the Devil... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't!

    Hopefully, Darl and his cronies will have a long and painful experience being the 'Martha' of their cellblock!!

  169. Relative size: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As big an Asshole as Darl is, do you think a Penguin is going to fill him up?

    Hell, He's Microsoft$ bitch; It's got to be HUGE by now!!!

  170. You forgot: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A beowolf cluster of eServers, followed by several gallons of Hot Grits, administered by Natalie Portman herself!!! (or a Wookie, Chewbacca preferrably.)

  171. Testing the GPL by prat393 · · Score: 1

    Actually, it's in court right now - see the article from a couple days back. A judge issued an injunction based on a GPL violation.

  172. to quote william butler yeats.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from "The Second Coming", Yeats

    "Things fall apart, the center does not hold"

    "What rough beast, it's hour come round at last, Slouches it's way towards Bethlehem to be born?"

    a good day indeed.

  173. Song lyric: Who is that?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your sig is familiar, but I can't place it...

    1. Re:Song lyric: Who is that?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Motorhead's classic tune "Ace of Spades"
      Official Hompage

  174. So: if we set off the sprinklers at Microsoft HQ.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Will Bill G and his army of monkeys melt?

  175. If M$ was the reason, theyre fucked now, anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't undo what's been done; too many records on something like this....

  176. Shitload of trades just before, Eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any way to determine who sold off shares just before the shit hit the fan?

    Martha got it for 40k, these bastards deserve Bubba's tender ministrations, if anyone does!!!

  177. Re:Written on SCO's Wall: Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsi by Grog6 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I guess this is going biblical on their asses?

    Me, personally, I'd rather see someone show up with some pipe-hitting niggers to go medieval on their ass, but that's just me.

    (Not racial, props to Tarintino)

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
  178. We're not worthy..... by Grog6 · · Score: 1

    You rule!
    Seen your handle on GL;
    you should find someone with a voice to do a .mp3 and post it...

    Remember: Yankee doodle helped win the revolution.

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
    1. Re:We're not worthy..... by red+floyd · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I appreciate the props.

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
  179. What Beast indeed? by Grog6 · · Score: 1

    M$ isn't going away, after this.

    We lose the Twits who were so laughable in their folly that you knew they couldnt succeed, and what do we gain?

    A different attack, more reasoned, less easily brushed aside.

    And these fools have kept things uncertain for a year with totally unsubstantiated BS.

    The Next attack will be patant based, tieing things up even further.

    This doesnt help, unless we can reveal the M$ angle, and get sanctions.

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
  180. Baystar, SCO & Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That'll teach VCs to never trust Gates & Microsoft, especially when MS recommends a puppet company intended to undermine competitors like SCO. Some people have to learn the hard way.

  181. Is Darl a Scientologist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Because this while scheme REEKS of the kind of goofy crap that group pulls. I am sorry to have to put it in those terms, but the way this thing is going, it is almost cliche' Scientology legal bogosity.

  182. Title and leadin not quite right by QuintLeo · · Score: 1

    BayStar provided $20 million of the financing involved in the A series (later A-1 series) preferred stock deal, though the 20,000 shares figure is correct. Royal Bank of Canada provided the other $30 million, and apparently hasn't made a decicion on how to react yet. SCO, as usual, is trying to play the bad news down, claiming they didn't breach the agreement. In a truely odd twist of this mess, they're claiming Baystar didn't "specifically" identify the breach(es) involved. Sounds like a case of hoist on your own petard to me....

  183. Missing the Point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Sigh.... You guys are all missing the point. I will make some predictions. See if they don't come true.

    1) SCO Agrees to buy back Baystar's shares.
    2) SCO Investors launch class action lawsuite against SCO
    3) SCO declares bankrupcy
    4) Darl McBride nevers sells *any* stock options for SCO
    5) All lawsuits are dropped against the now non-entity previously know as SCO
    6) Microsoft uses the publicity to lobby the government to create laws restricting "unfair trade practices" of "free" software.
    7) Six months after the fall of SCO, Darl McBride is hired by some Microsoft/Paul Allen connected corporate entity and given a large signing bonus.

    Gee... Hardly even needed my tinfoil hat for that...

  184. No Begging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "begs the question" does not mean what you think it does.

  185. I wonder if Co$ ever did get the joke? by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

    Oh sure, you laugh that anyone could get fooled by a 127.0.0.1 address, but way-back-when, it really happened.

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  186. He meant splash..... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Man, get a life.

    Jeeeez.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  187. Re:Do It Legally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I have my end-user license

    That'd be the GPL, right? They haven't sold any other kinds of end-user license to my knowledge.

    As you say, if you want to use Linux do it legally. But you don't have to get your license from the SCO group. In fact, you can't; well, only part of it anyway. The GPL is granted to you by Torvalds and the other contributors, so the only bit of your license that you get from SCO is for the code that Caldera contributed.

  188. Baystar excuses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While it's great that Baystar sticks it to SCO, I hope people don't forget that they invested in SCO on Microsoft's recomendation. They should know what's going on. I can't believe one invested millions of dollars without having a tiniest bit of any idea what's going on. This recent episode maybe due to the backlash Baystar gets from the tech community.

    Destruction to both SCO and Baystar, I say, followed by Microsoft.

  189. come on people, finish it up! :) by pb · · Score: 1

    Did you write the dragon book,
    and do you think Darl is a crook?
    if Mr. Torvalds tells you so...

    and do you believe in text consoles,
    can coding save your mortal soul
    and can you teach me how to write a troll?

    Well I know that you're in leauge with him
    cuz I saw you writing notes in vim
    when I was reading the news
    about which people Darl sues,

    I was a lonely teenage larval hack
    with a pimply face and a server rack
    but proud of my DoS attack,
    the day, The SCO Group, died.
    I started singin...

    [CHORUS]

    --
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.