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.
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!!!
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.
Because they're being sued by SCO and they're gathering evidence against them?
All your documents are belong to us...
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.
How long were you in the hospital after the head wound?
True, but, they're asking several of the companies about communications with Microsoft about UNIX, Linux, and SCO. Now, that could be useful if the want to take on Microsoft. The other stuff makes sense though, except for Oracle, as said in the article.
Hurricane Ivan: A 17th century prison collapsed. All of the inmates escaped.
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.
IBM is the defendant, remember?
Once IBM demonstrates how you get screwed by suing them for crap, maybe some of this stuff will settle down.
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
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
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!
The thing is, last time I checked, IBM had never stopped development of new software and products. They have never stopped creating and selling innovative technology. A legal department is necessary for any large business. However, it only beceomes a problem when you are spending a disproportionate amount of employee time and revenue on legal proceedings. Anyone who has been following the SCO case knows that, based on the amount of information they've put out regarding their products vs. the amount they've put out regarding their legal case, they're clearly in the latter category. Same goes for their public financial filings. These elements clearly point to a company in its death throes wanting desperately to get bought out. Nothing about IBM's behavior indicates that they are in similar straits.
..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
SCO is basically a puppet for interests that can't be seen as directly attacking the Linux business. Smashing SCO would not be a significant discouragement to those interests. They'll just find another sock puppet. IBM is just following the money. Dumb bulls charge the cape (SCO). Smart bulls go immediately for the matador.
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.
I think they see SCO's case is about to dry up and blow away and they want to get as much out of this as they can before that happens (if they are unsuccessful at convincing the judge to not dismiss the case at SCO's request (which I believe is coming)). I believe IBM wants to keep this case going so they can get a judgement in their favor, not simply a dismissal but an actual judgement. I think they believe MS is involved and they're seeking evidence to support that belief. If they can prove that MS paid SCO to litigate Linux then IBM will have an extremely strong set of feet to stand on when they oppose dimissing the case. That's what I believe is happening.
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!
Microsoft because of a possible MS-SCO connection, and Novell because they're claiming that SCO only has a license to UNIX from Novell that can be yanked at any time, and Novell's yanking it, as they back Linux now (after all, what's SUSE now?)
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.
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.
Groklaw coverred the story.
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."
So not only can the elephant tap-dance, it can also play chess? ")
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.
Subpoena the "friendly" guys like Novel/Oracle etc to get a better idea of specifically what to subpoena from Microsoft in round 2...
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.
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.
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 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