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.
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 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.
... 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
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 a legal formality to cover Novell's ass if need be (in case of a NDA).
Plus, it's to make it so they can't say no, legally. So even if the document fishing turns out to be unfruitful, no harm to those subpoenaed, at least not in the long-turn (like having a colonoscopy).
... 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.
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!
sPh
Here's my plan. Have IBM "indemnify their customers." Do so in the following manner:
1) Litigate SCO down to approximately $.07/share.
2) Buy them out in the most vicious, humiliating way possible. Condemn their corporate headquarters, and let the Salt Lake and Provo LUGs wield the sledgehammers and wrecking balls.
3) Play nice with Novell, offering them a reasonable amount to release the entire SysV codebase into the public domain.
That attack vector against Linux is now dead as a doornail. The Open Source steamroller can move forward, and IBMs customers can feel safer about adopting Linux. Everybody wins.
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.
Groklaw coverred the story.
With that said, though - there are some bright spots at this company. My personal story is that I recently got an IBM NetStation PC (one of the really old ones) from my work. No drivers, nothing - but I wanted to get it working. The problem is, all the info about getting it to work using a Linux server to boot was out of date - all the links in FAQs to IBM were broken, no longer supported. I searched and searched, found only a little information - so I decided to contact IBM directly.
I thought it was going to be a dead end - likely they would ask if I had a service agreement (or would I like to purchase one), so they could help me. But surprise, surprise!
Not only did they help me, and quickly, they pointed me to the source for all the PDF documentation and drivers, and old TurboLinux install software for the boot server and everything - all in the span of a week!
I have so rarely received service like that - I was (and still am) greatly impressed. Technically, they didn't have to help me - I wasn't another company (I explicitly told them I was a hobbiest), but they supported me anyway - on their own dime.
THANK YOU, IBM (though I still hold my reservations about corporations)...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
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.
IBM *has* really chaged for the better:
I guess that depends on what you mean by "better". IBM used to have loyalty to the employees that built the company into the success that it is. Now, they are offshoring jobs, and non-executive employees are just replaceable widgets. IBM really doesn't have any regard for its customers either.
I trust them. Now.
Okay, IBM is better than SCO, but I wouldn't go all warm and fuzzy. I wouldn't trust them any further than I could throw their headquarters building.
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.
KA-CHING!
That sound you just heard was hundreds of millions of dollars of Microsoft monopoly money headed for the campaign coffers of both Bush and Kerry. Bribery has found a permanent place alongside lying, cheating, and stealing on Microsoft's standard playbook.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
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+
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.
return to an IBM-dominated world is _not_ what you want.
Right now IBM is pushing Linux forward. Of course they do that because they want to make money on their hardware. But if they suceed (and I think they will, it can suddenly go very fast), how could they possibly dominate the world? If another company could make some good hardware, they could run Linux as well. And with open standards, and two hardware platforms running the same open source software, it will really be hard to monopolize the market.
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
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.
Microsoft would try everthing in his power not to give the documents. The court case would be stalled for years.
A small company like S2 will give in faster.
200GB/2TB $7.95 Coupon: SAVE90DOLLAR
Rules 1 and 2 yes. Rule 3, hmm, I work for the big I, (no I'm not garnering karma points :) , ibm may at times be as subtle as a shaolin elephant, a ninja water-buffalo, a cow wearing ballerina slippers, that said, most would not enjoy being stepped upon by any of those creatures.
/. whippersnappers", the microsoft anti-trust trials, a mere skirmish. AT&T's anti-trust trials?, and they were broken up by the government in the end, ha. IBM's anti-trust trial(s)? They wore out, 4, 4+, some presidential administrations. On and on and on. They didn't get broken up. Funny that IBM used to be dark lord sauron in the land of Armonk NY, in the lord of the token ring :), but there are ARMIES of lawyers behind the black gates of armonk still, and the great lidless all-seeing "I" that has been in existence for oh 60-70 years may be about to fall like a thunderbolt. Perhaps like the asterioid that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. I worked at intel before this and the half-life of employees there is about 2-3 years. ibm has many employees who have been there for decades, 40-50 years. I suppose I wouldn't be suprised if some, stung in the past, had been watching and waiting for something like this sco, microsoft, thing for many many many years. I can't say I am cheering on the home team, no company gets to be big by being "nice". Ironic for we small free linux users, but somtimes one needs big pockets and a handy, well thumbed, copy of of Sun Tzu's Art of War to vanquish a cunning foe. (And I don't mean SCO, I don't think much of their "cunning plan".) Cartoon elephants rear up and run away from little mice, but this elephant may have just spotted the 800 lb gorilla hiding in the bushes who shoved the mouse out into the open towards the elephant in the first place. I think the foliage in the area is about to get a bit squashed and disturbed.
:)
To paraphrase another poster in this thread, "...for those younger
- the opinions are my own and the computer I'm posting this from is a power-pc, not running windows
You know that old "you got the right to remain silent" bit that cops tell you as they cuff you and you fall down the stairs on the way to the cells?
It is good advice, the best advice and the one piece of advice you should always take.
The part I don't get is that, at least in the movies, when they ask at the end "Do you understand these rights as I have explained them?" or however it goes, why would someone answer "yes" to that? Isn't that kind of an unnecessary thing to agree to? Why not just say "No, I don't really understand that... the only part I caught was that I need a lawyer, so I'm sure my lawyer will be able to explain it to me."
In an age when corporations are considered as evil as terrorists, IBM is quickly positioning itself to be the caring father figure who will watch out for us, and that is a DAMN good position to be in.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!