Slashdot Mirror
IBM Subpoenas Several Companies in SCO Case
bl8n8r writes "IBM subpoenas are flying. Morgan Keegan, EV1, Oracle, Royce, CAI, Center7, Novell, Canopy, S2, are all asked to reveal details on all documents concerning any communications with or any meetings involving Microsoft regarding Unix, Linux, SCO and/or Canopy." Groklaw notes that even more subpoenas are likely on the way.
Great! It's fun seeing IBM in action, but, why are they doing this?
Hurricane Ivan: A 17th century prison collapsed. All of the inmates escaped.
S2 won't give out documentation regarding microsoft as it is covered under a confidentiality agreement
with SCO
S2 doesn't even have to say what it is for THAT to be very telling.
You're my boy Blue!!!
exactly what is IBM trying to accomplish by sending subpoenas to all these companies. How will this help their case against SCO?
With all these subpoenas, IBM may just be hunting for more than just evidence that SCO is completely wrong in their claims... Might even be that they're looking to get some dirt on Microsoft or bring down a few other companies with SCO.
One wonders when the high-tech companies will concentrate on the high-tech rather than the legal side.... mind you there was the whole Sun vs Microsoft case which Sun won over Java - perhaps IBM are hoping for similarly high damages...
Video Game cheats, hints a
All your documents are belong to us...
IBM are gods of being litigous bastards, legandary in fact. When SCO decided to fuck with IBM it was game over, and now their lawyers are digging up piles of documents to ram up their arse. WOO!!
Bethanie: Whore...
Fan Whore
One of the comments on Groklaw asks, "Why not Baystar, RBC and Microsoft?".
I think it's likely because these are corporations that would probably resist assisting IBM, and the IBM legal team could still be working out methods for compelling each of these corporations into full testimony. RBC would likely resist, and as a Canadian Bank they can tie up the whole process for as long as they want, unless compelled by a Canadian federal court. Plus, RBC is the most profitable bank in Canada, so they have billions in pocket change to throw at the fight, need be.
BayStar confirmed that Microsoft was connected to SCO, but maybe they have some kind of legal reason not to help? Or maybe the public facts are enough?
Trying to get documents from Microsoft in connection to SCO would likely be a huge legal undertaking, so that might be what's slowing things down. IANAL, but if Microsoft, BayStar and RBC joined the fray, wouldn't they have the power to somehow stop the whole process, or slow it dramatically as a joint force? You have to be extremely delicate when handling companies with track records like Microsoft. Maybe IBM's legal team is getting as much data as they can from corporations who won't put up much of a fight, before Microsoft comes in and shuts everything down.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/biztech/04/23/sco.inv estment.ap/index.html
How long has it been since we have seen any progress in this case? Finally IBM has stood up and started getting real evidence.
Normally I have no favoritisms towards corporations, but let's hope IBM crushes SCO once and for all with this move.
invented litigating you out of business. SCO kicked up enough dust to raise their stock price temporarily but several events have signalled that SCO is headed fast to their inevitable end.....
1. Plunging stock price
2. The Baystar admissions
If you are thinking of buying SCO stock, do it to short it. It only goes down from here. See ya in hell Darl.
SCO has had this coming for a long time, but its sad that the 2 thing I hate (Laywers and Patents) are going to bring them down.
This is kind of like seeing the school bully being hit by a bus - you are internally elated, but its not a pretty sight and you feel pretty sick afterwards.
Oh, well - as long SCO gets taken out, that's all that matters
You can't expect to wield supreme executive power, just because some watery tart threw a sword at you
Subpoena Novell ,why thats an interesting choice!
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
Remember, sometimes the crime is in the cover up.
CNN story
Jory
This is gonna get ugly! Ugly in a good way... :-)
... anyone else looking forward to the day when SCO's ''office'' is just a smoking field of rubble, their execs are all in jail, and anyone who had their fingers in this pie is up to their necks in subpoenas and/or SEC/FTC probes?
I can imagine IBM wanting to make that happen. Sorta the corporate equivalent of hanging corpses outside of a medieval town as a warning to others.
Go back, as they say. Remember how Microsoft, as a small startup no one had heard off, sold a third-hand operating system to IBM, profited enormously, and then went on to replace IBM as the world's #1 IT superpower?
Perhaps IBM simply think it's time for a payback. Ironic that if it were successful, this payback would also be 'aided' by a third company (SCO in this case), isn't it?
I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
Reading this, it sounds like a very nice turnaround from IBM. Now it looks to me (IANAL) that SCO & Co. have the potential to be exposed for the evil no-gooders that they are. I can imagine the piles upon piles of Microsoft anti-linux related communication (or should i say fud?) that has accumulated with these companies over time. This could be the real meat that is needed to really shake up this monopoly led industry.
...
In an ideal world anyway!
nick
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
The beating of war drums this morning.
Go get 'em, Big blue.
And for the record, I'm not holding that whole 'business tie standard' thing against you. I mean that!
My new top secret key -> C>N|KB
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) :
Subpoena \Sub*p[oe]"na\, n. [NL., fr. L. sub under + poena
punishment. See Pain.] (Law)
A writ commanding the attendance in court, as a witness, of
the person on whom it is served, under a penalty; the process
by which a defendant in equity is commanded to appear and
answer the plaintiff's bill. [Written also subpena.]
If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
After a rapid though the article and the comments, it looks like IBM is trying to invalidate totally SCO arguments that it own the copyright . It looks like they are also trying to find anti-concurrencial practices and track them down . They are collecting information for sure and get knowledge of who is the pupeteer . And if they include Novell in the lot it is to know what where the terms of the agreements between Novell and SCO in the selling of unix sources to the latter . I hope it help cut the Gordian Knot .
Pardon my Englsh , i am French
..they don't Subpoena Anonymous Cowards
Apologies if this is already been posted.
Got delayed - busy misplacing some documents
it's a good thing....I think it's to prove that there's something foul in the air (and no, CowboyNeal didn't have a burrito); aka Microsoft is using SCO to further it's anti-competitive practices, which can in turn be used against SCO.
I don't think companies that are being sued or threatened to be sued by SCO would say no to IBM's requests, as it is in their interests to help the one who has the bigger army of lawyers. Basically, the subpoenas are a legal formality; in case there's a non-disclosure agreement (a subpoena is a legal way of taking a peek without breaking that NDA), so the companies don't get sued by SCO/Microsoft for disclosing the agreement.
Fight fire with fire....this case, lawyers with lawyers. The only issue is that since SCO seem to have a secret ally/live-line (Micro$oft), hence IBM's move to possibly expose the foulplay by Microsoft, which will get M$ in hot water with the anti-trust settlements.
...I think IBM is looking to not only crush SCO (that they already know they'll do), but now they're trying to find leads suggesting this is a smear campaign.
While I doubt they're going to find condemning evidence, I don't think it'd take much to open another antitrust case against Microsoft. Along with the recent EU findings, I don't think they'd like that at all.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
IBM is asking for documents related to communications with SCO or with MS regarding Unix. Given that they're taking on Microsoft in some sense with their Linux strategy its in their interest to expose MS if they're bankrolling this. Or get a big settlement from them.
Why are they involving Microsoft and Novell in this?
The owls are not what they seem
If you read the others that focus mainly on communications with SCO, it looks like IBM is just being complete or simply curious; the case be dammed, who knows what this net will drag in?
That said, I am fully willing to consider that Microsoft is behind the SCO/Baystar/... mess strictly as an abuse of the market.
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
If you're wondering why companies like EV1 and Oracle are on there, here some food for thought: (IANAL)
Oracle is currently not paying SCO for a license along the same lines as EV1. IBM knows this and want to find out why companies like Oracle are bound to a different agreement on licensing than other companies like EV1.
Basically, IBM *knows* there is something fishy going on with SCO's licensing and plans on pointing it out in court. If any of you have any correspondence with SCO regarding their licensing, I would highly suggest contacting IBM and willingly giving it over, as it will only help their case.
There are two other reasons for the subpoenas that I can tell: 1) IBM wants to dispel the myth that you have to settle with SCO in order to avoid subpoenas. 2) IBM is most likely using this round to prepare for a second round of requests to appear in court. They are doing this to probably scare Microsoft out of ever trying to thwart Linux and Linux development again.
It's interesting to see all the different takes on this. Like one of the contributors, I can remember when you couldn't sell a PC if it wasn't described as IBM compatible.I suspect that when it's all over, say a couple of years down the line, MS will still be there and still fighting.
... If IBM win because SCO is exhausted, IBM has not won peace of mind about Linux. They don't have proven that Linux is safe, they just proved that fighting IBM is expensive.
It seems really clear that BayStar was encouraged, through S2, by MS, to invest in SCO.
But is it impossible for RBC to inject in SCO IBM's money, just to be sure they have the money to go all the way to the supreme court and to prove clearly and for all that Linux is OK. Without speaking of the boost in public image for IBM, as the good guy.
SCO is rapidly using up their nine lives; even if they have now ceased to be, their stock price is still subject to dead cat bounces.
This will probably continue to rebound until they get really on the nose, and finally end with a splat.
--been waiting for this. We all knew that SCO was most likley a stalking horse for microsoft. IBM now has enough they got on their own to go fishing in a pond they know is well stocked. this isn't blind fishing either, they KNOW there's tuff there. They waited until they developed enough intel to know they'll get more, the big fat juicey smoking gun stuff.
And YES, it just might turn out to be microsoft anti trust round two coming up out of this if it plays out like I think it will, and this time, they might get broken up and more real finage than they can painlessly handle. I HOPE the stockholders choke on it, too.
Too bad though,no marshalls and raids for the loot, the shredders are going to be burning up now. Maybe someone will crack and keep back some good stuff in hopes of getting a deal later on.
One can hope.
Who's on the "fishing expedition" now?
You are, Mr. Troll.
It's possible that IBM's legal team knew all along, but on the face of it those Baystar documents that Raymond posted seem to have provided a breech for IBM to charge into.
Kudos to him and his source.
Kill, Tux, kill!
...you dont piss off someone like Big Blue
A psychopath can't tell the difference between right and wrong. A sociopath knows the difference - he just doesn't care.
why would SCO go throught the trouble of litigating a case that they, could not solve?
It seems to me that, that is a question that I would ask if I were the judge in this case
I could easily believe at this point that IBM is simply trying to show why SCO hasn't been able to produce any viable evedence. It's a shot at thier legs, trying to take their case out from under them
once more into the breach
Of course, they can appeal the subpoena, and they may get out of it. It's unlikely, though.
It would be nice if IBM wasn't quite so quiet about all of this. I mean, I wouldn't mind seeing a little bluster from them, what they're thinking. On the other hand, it does give them this aura of a silent killer; you know speak softly and carry a big stick and all. And certainly enough people are complaining about SCO on their own.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
I am assuming you had to deal with IBM Global Services -- IBM's consulting division.
Have you ever worked or know someone who worked for a consulting company? Well, if so, then you would know that selling additional services, whatever the approach may be, is what counts most on the employee's yearly performance evaluation. You won't get fired if you don't sell, unless you're a sales person, but you do get rewards if you do. This means that when you deal with consulting companies, your mileage will vary.
i would not say the most popular but most used (not same to me)
i think it is hated by almost everyone for almost everything
but they still use it
some for the games, some for the applications, some for the ease of use, some because they know nothing else, some because they have to, some for hacking fun
hey and there are even people which like it
stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
Windows success hinged soley on Bill Gates deciding not to take orders from IBM. They were and will again be if allowed, twice the monopolist nazi that Microsoft is.
I'm not a lawyer, but with the exception of being a bad thing, what legal difference does it make if Microsoft did finance the whole SCO v Linux deal? Is that specifically covered in monopoly law? Otherwise, it seems to me like a perfectly good thing to do for your stockholders. People buy patents for IP protection (and settle exisiting suits) all the time. What would be different here? I can't see how this could be consider abusing your market position. Yes, I know everyone is against Microsoft - but what the legal behind this being wrong?
slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
I said judgement when I should have said ruling. A judgement would be something like damages.
Groklaw coverred the story.
IBM announced today that it will subpoena a Linux end-user by the end of the month. Ok maybe next month. Well, soon anyway...
Hold your breath until you get the letter, ok?
Study everything, you'll find something you can use - Jason Bourne
Wouldn't it be simplier to just subpoena Microsoft directly?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Since it's fashionable to quote Sun Tzu and because it's applicable here, I'll have a few shots at it:
"Let your plans be dark and as impenetratable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt."
"All warfare is based on deception. Therefore, when capable, feign incapacity; when active, inactivity."
"Subtle and insubstantial, the expert leaves no trace; divinely mysterious, he is inaudible. Thus he is a matter of his enemy's fate."
And of course, the greatest:
"What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease. Hence his victories bring him neither reputation for wisdom nor credit for courage. He wins his battles by making no mistakes. Making no mistakes is what establishes the certainty of victory, for it means conquering an enemy that is already defeated. Hence the skillful fighter puts himself into a position which makes defeat impossible, and does not miss the moment for defeating the enemy. Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory."
"So unmerciful is life, that everything afterwards is too late."
I would guess that a lot, if not most, of said correspondence is on one or more backup tapes somewhere. It takes a lot of tap dancing to explain away the disapearance of a backup tape.
In S2's reply to the subpeona, they indicated something interesting. They, 1) say they don't want to give info about communication with SCO, 2) say they don't have anything related to BayStar, and 3) say they don't want to give stuff related to Microsoft.
This can really only mean one thing: that they discussed with MS and SCO the subject matter of this suit. And they did not with BayStar (which was introduced to SCO admittedly by Microsoft).
IBM can only be getting ready to go after MS, though possibly indirectly via the anti-trust folks. They can make a great case, I would guess, for unfair and deceptive trade practices, and I doubt that they will roll over and die like W.'s administration.
Developing Retail Point-of-Sale Software
Here is what's happening. When SCO finally collapses, who do you go after for damanges? SCO's money will be insufficient to cover the damage to IBM's business and reputation, and most of that money would be eaten up by SCO's lawyers anyway. That is why IBM has been trying to make the case against the Canopy Group, SCO's parent company. Canopy has some money which IBM would be able to recover. But think of what happens if IBM proves, in the court of law, a direct link between SCO and Microsoft? Oh, Microsoft has money. Lots of it. That would be a VERY juicy target for IBM to go after. Microsoft knows this. That is the reason they've been trying to distance themselves from SCO ever since the Baystar connection became known. If Microsoft were found to be liable for the actions of its proxy, it would also open them up to a lawsuit by *any* Linux company. Hmmm, this is going to get interesting!
___
If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
It has to be said... I've been here on /. for a few years now and my karma's not bad. But when it comes to legal issues Groklaw has out-slashdotted /.
I simply don't read articles here anymore that are covered better on Groklaw, such as SCO legal wranglings. Mod me as you wish but it's just a fact --- I'm off to Groklaw now to read up on the IBM subpoenas.
Revolutionary technical change destabilises monopolies. It is, after all, what brought IBM down in the end. All monopolies seek to stifle and hold back technical development - IBM did so in the 1970's in just the same way Microsoft does now. They were not 'cool evil', they were just another greedy parasite, but, unlike Microsoft, a fearsomely efficient greedy parasite. IBM as a monopolist was far more damaging to our industry than Microsoft is now. You don't want them, or anyone else, back in that position. Seriously.
This is not an attack on IBM as presently constituted. Today they are pretty good citizens, as corporations go. But power corrupts, and monopoly power corrupts absolutely.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
For the past few years I've had this vision of a an IBM TV commercial I's like to see:
Scene: Godzilla rampages through town smashing buildings with MS, SCO and other rivals logos on them. People run screaming through the streets like so many cockroachs. Uses breath weapon to roast fleeing individuals who have a suprising resemeblence to Gates, Ballmer, McBride etc.
Voice Over:IBM, we're back and we're pissed...
fade out
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
The thing is when people are playing this kind of corporate mind games, what they say doesn't tell you what they're thinking. It tells you what they want the other party to think they're thinking, and that's not the same thing at all. Or else it's a diversionary move, or a double bluff, or a smoke screen, or...
White men may speak with forked tongues, but the tongues of corporate lawyers are n-ary for large values of N.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Scary future: (TINAT) this is not a troll
Microsoft (ala RIAA/MPAA, they buddies) starts to sue own "customers" who use unlicenced Windows and Ofiice the way MP3 copiers were sued. This in support of their (I presume) soon to fail subscruption policies. Who in their right mind would buy a subscription to an OS? I got a air and car subscription to sell them cheap ($1 a breath for air and $1 a mile for car use)
Why sue? Remember that other than Windows and Office, every other major M$ division (Xbox, MSN, etc.) has historically lost (lots of) money, yet investors keep investing in M$ because it has high ROI even in "slump" times. But OSS/Linux/Openoffice and friends are cutting into their 2 cash cows more each day!
Solution: M$ is pressuring their losing divisions to cut costs, warning the markets to expect lower earnings, etc. But their real solution is (IMO): Use the whole software/hardware DRM (remember they are buddies with Intel and the RIAA/MPAA) to lock in assure that every copy of windows/office phones home to say either "I'm registered" or "sue this guy!" and likewise with media files.
The Mac will be the only platform where the hardware is DRM free and the software is mostly DRM free (yes I know iTunes Music Store is DRM, but a mild and relatively harmless one).
Tie to Linux, because while the software is DRM free, the largest installed base is x86 Linux, which means same hardware DRM as Windows is likely, lest it falls into the less features/incompatible FUD M$ loves to push, along with Linux being branded a "pirate" OS by RIAA/MPAA.
And that is ignoring the worst case scenario, M$ using hardware DRM to lock Linux out of x86! Can't happen? yeah cause the US DOJ has been so vocally suing M$ lately for ever more blatant antitrust violations! The ground is littered with the corpses of companies who said M$ can't do that, we'll sue and either lost in court or won there but were still driven out of business!
Once upon a time, some ambulance-chasers shook down Apple. Rather than prove Apple keyboards did not hurt wrists, Apple settled and thereby minimized their expected expense of litigation. (An expected loss, as any MBA can tell you is the probability of an event, times the cost of that eventuality. If I sue you with a one-in-a-million chance of winning for a billion dollars, then your expected loss is one thousand dollars plus legal expenses.)
Thereafter some bright tort lawyers got the idea that if Apple provided a nice payday, then IBM would provide richer pickings. They sued IBM, but IBM did not settle. Instead, IBM fought and won in court.
But IBM did not stop there. Big Blue turned around and sued the law firms who had brought these nuisance law suits.
If, as us tin-hat wearers have suggested, Microsoft has financed barratry, maintenance and champerty against the Open Source community (of which IBM is a member) through SCO, Canopy and/or BayStar, then Microsoft should be held responsible. These subpoenas may indicate IBM's inclination to explore this kind of litigation.
sounds about right; just substitute 'gnu' for 'bull' and I think you'd be describing what MS is gonna do to Open Source.
It's GOOD to o3n the government!
I think I'm going into the paper shredder market. That and fire-proof bins. Come and get them while they're still hot. Um... obviously the bins are only to be used for "rubbish".
"These elements clearly point to a company in its death throes wanting desperately to get bought out."
Maybe just certain people at the top of that company are stashing away cash like crazy while they can and don't give one single, solitary flying fuck about anything or anybody else, including that company.
I work for a company of 87 employees as a desktop technician. For awhile we were solely an IBM shop until I showed management our failing hardware records with IBM (59 of our 62 workstations had hardware failures, and we would receive refurbed parts as replacements). A few months ago we started doing business with Dell. Since then we have replaced many of our IBM stations with DELL. To date we have 43 Dell workstations/laptops and our record for failing Dell hardware is: Workstaiton -- Failed right of the box Monitor -- suddenly went blurry. Hard Drive Failure - It was a Maxtor.... didn't see that happening! Over all I like IBM - our servers work great, and the support has been incredible -- on par with Sun support, but IBM desktops SUCK!
I think that you meant to put:
Tux, kill bill.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
It is good advice, the best advice and the one piece of advice you should always take. DON'T SAY A THING. Let the lawyers talk. They are trained for it and if they are any good they will say the absolute minimum as well.
We have two recent and excellent examples of people who didn't take this bit of advice. Martha Stewart. They didn't get her on her crimes but got her because she didn't keep her mouth shut and lied to cops. A big nono.
The other is of course Darl "Leghorn" McBride himself. Baystar is reclaiming their investment because Darl just can't keep his mouth shut. Baystar is not against the lawsuit, they love the lawsuit, they just want it to be fought out in the courts where there is a change of SCO winning (or at least they like the odds on it) rather then being fought out in the streets and press where SCO is only loosing.
So wishing for IBM to make public statements is like wishing for the CIA to have press annoucements about the deployments of secret agents. Ain't gonna happen.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
> I hope IBM kicks ass and takes names.
And they already got all the names.......
I wrote IBM back in 2000 for my high school senior project and asked them for a 10 port ethernet hub (unsolicited donations, yay!). Within a week I got a box in the mail and it was a 20 port 100/10 switch with a gigabit uplink. There was a brief note attached saying it was a used unit (used in their office) and that I could have it totally for free- no strings attached.
I used it for my project then later that year sold it to a production house (that I happened to be working for). Hooray for IBM.
You just figured out now that /. just
collects links to other peoples' original source material, adds commentary and then provides
an open bulletin board for debate?
I'm sure this is all standard boilerplate, but I'm also sure SCO's executives are _amazed_ IBM knew they'd try this:
Each paragraph should herein be construed independently and, unless otherwise directed, without reference to any other paragraph for the purpose of limitation.
The use of any definition for the purposes of this request shall not be deemed to constitute an agreement or acknowledgement on the part of IBM that such definition is accurate, meaningful, or appropriate for any other purpose in this action.
Each requested document shall be produced in its entirety. If a document responsive to any request cannot be produced in full, it shall be produced to the extent possible with an explanation stating why production of the remainder is not possible.
Each page or sheet produced is to be marked with a consecutive document control number.
All documents produced in response to this subpoena shall be produced in the same order as they are kept or maintained in the ordinary course of business and, where attached, shall not be separated or disassembled.
All documents produced in response to this subpoena shall be produced, where available, in electronic or machine-readable form.
No 2 million pages of shuffled dot-matrix printouts!
Because you're going to get beat to a pulp, and if the folks in Armonk have their way just plain dead.
My wife used to work at their law firm - rumor had it they once delivered 54 full four-drawer filing cabinets via 18-wheeler truck of legal documentation in a case - documentation that the receiving party had to shell out $400/hour to go through....
You have to love this, EV1 is continuing to be caught up in a fiasco they now wish they'd not gotten involved in, but more interesting that their pain is IBM's attempt to uncover Microsoft's hand of influence in the whole SCO debacle. This could really explode in Microsoft's face if it turns out that they have been orchestrating this as an anti-Linux campaign. It could be absolutely huge.
and you pretty much always expect the Republicans to come down on the business side of that argument.
That is just plain wrong and naive. Republican or Democratic ideology have nothing to do with this. I see you've been scripted by a certain IDEOLOGY yourself (and perhaps the moderator, too).
IBM is evil , SCO is evil , Microsoft is evil. GNU/Debian Linux is my friend. Know who your friends are !
All this SCO stuff is flying around so fast that I can't even keep the players straight anymore. is IBM a Good Guy(c) or a Bad Guy(c) in the whole affair?
Learn to fucking spell! Your post is painful to read!
lose/win
loose/tight
bonus not bonnus
their not theire
matter not mater
etc.
I get the feeling English isn't your native language, but please... at least double-check what you write. Read some more books to get a grasp on how words flow and should be spelled.
Explaination here
Obligatory LOTR Quote:
Mary: Are you mad? We are gonna get caught.
Pippen: Not this time!
I can see Darl right now...
"I believe we have only awakened a sleeping giant." - Adm. Yamamoto
IBM is fighting the good fight as we once did. Hopefully, Big Blue will make the enemy pay.
What if IBM did subpoena Morgan Freeman? I count six of the seven deadly sins:
Vanity - believing that SCO is without fault and will prevail
Envy - desiring all that Linux is and has
Gluttony - consuming resources of the legal system and the Linux community
Wrath - Darl's diatribes against Linux/OSS
Greed - the SCO 'pump and dump' scheme
Sloth - SCO does no work - they just sue, sue, sue!
Lust - hmm... anyone?
Until big dumb companies notice that free software does what M$ does. Then earnings and stock prices go into the toilet. It's already happening and M$'s power to coerce vendors and hardware makers alike is failing it. For Microsoft, this is a death spiral.
You might also consider public goodwill. IBM has plenty, Microsoft does not.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
A common truism back then was "nobody got fired for buying IBM", because you could get fired for buying non-IBM. Tactics like the following supposedly characteristic story were the cause of much anger against IBM in the 1970's. (Note that IBM never actually sold equipment until forced to as a result of the anti-trust case. IBM retained the equipment and leased it to the user):
Next week, a phalanx of IBM VPs shows up at the customer's corporate office, where they tell, not the IT guy's manager, or his manager, nor HIS manager, but the chairman of the company, "We see that Mr. Lowly Underling has installed non-IBM equipment on your system. We understand he has the right to do so, but we have to tell you that as long as that equipment is hooked up to our machine, we can't guarantee the operation of the machine. If you have a problem, it may take a day or two, or even longer, before your staff can demonstrate that it's not a problem with that Brand X equipment so we can come to your assistance. In the meantime, you'll be down, possibly for days. Are you sure you want to do that?" This is thinly-disguised extortion. Next day the IT guy is fired, IBM peripheral replaces Brand X peripheral.
Father, Son and Company is an illuminating and entertaining book by Tom Watson Jr., former head of IBM. His father Tom Watson Sr. made IBM a major player, starting in the 1920's IIRC. His stories about some of the tactics he used to compete with the then-leader in cash registers, NCR, are amusing and scary. Best example - building a bogus, fall apart NCR cash register, then impersonating an NCR sales guy and 'demonstrating' it to a business. The machine breaks, parts fall off, the prospect kicks the 'NCR guy' out, and an IBM guy comes in a little bit later to make the sale for IBM. Big Fun!!
When I started in the business the folks coming out of college were as much anti-IBM, anti-grey-tie, anti-cleanroom-computing as they often are against MS today.
*(PC success was also partly due to rebellion by the users against arrogant IT staffs - a lesson against any self-described 'ubergeeks' who think that knowing about computers gives them a right to condescend to the users.)
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/