Slashdot Mirror
SCO Spreads Rumors About IBM Lawsuit
yeremein writes "SCO says it has found a new smoking gun in its battle with IBM. This 'bombshell' was not found in a court document; instead it came from a reporter's interview at SCOforum. The scoop? 'SCO alleges that since 2001, AIX has contained code for which IBM does not have a license. Moreover SCO claims to have found internal IBM e-mails in which IBMers acknowledge this shortcoming.' With the announcement comes a hefty boost in SCO's stock price." SCO is also going to bundle its worthless linux licenses with its Unix operating systems.
Did you notice that all of the related articles about Linux have a negative slant? They also didn't link to IBM's reply to the charges. The article is surprisingly useless.
Maybe, just maybe, they're jerks. (girlish giggle)
The only reason for SCO to release this info to the public now is to help the battle for public opinion, and if you want to do that, you should start with a source a bit higher up the chain then SCOforum, such as, say, the New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, or some other well reputed paper.
One needs to know a lot about human psychology to do well in the market, just knowing a lot about business doesn't make one rich.
They are doing so well legally, that the Daimler-Chrysler case got tossed, except that they are allowed to try the claim the response took too long. The judge in the Novell case told them he saw no evidence the copyrights were transferred to SCO in accordance with federal law. The 'Millions of lines' of SCO code copied verbatum into Linux has deteriorated into some bizzare 'non-literal copying' legal theory which means IBM's motion to declare there is no SCO copyrighted code in Linux appears to have a very real chance of being granted. Just where is this heap of evidence Darl? The only heap produced by SCO seems to fall under the catagory of fertilizer.
Wake me up when SCO actually says it in court. What they say to the press is so disconnected from reality that I refuse to bother worrying about "what if" this one happens to actually be true.
However, lawyers work their asses off, have to deal with other lawyers, and typically only get big money for representing morally bankrupt assholes.
As opposed to computer people, who work their asses off, have to deal with end-users, and practically never get big money while working for morally bankrupt assholes.
He didn't reveal that they have such information, he claimed they have it--just like ownership of UNIX, BIGNUM lines of infringing code, etc. Certainly no one would ever accuse Darl of actually releasing information. ;)
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
This has nothing to do with Linux, or IBM's motion for a preliminary injunction. IBM has asked the court to find that SCO has found no UNIX in Linux. SCO's "smoking gun" says they found UNIX in AIX. Gee, big surprise. That's why IBM pays licensing fees for AIX. All SCO is claiming is that they should have paid more. Of course Forbe's -- impartial reporters that they are -- can't resist a gratuitous jab at "Linux zealots", but Linux just is not involved here.
Nothing to see here, just SCO blowing their usual smoke.
===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
At a glance, this seems like purely an AIX issue
Heck, this doesn't even seem to be an SCO issue....
Even if IBM acknolwedges the emails -- all they say is that IBM might not own the AIX code. They don't say that SCO does! If it turns out that, say, Novell owns the AIX code instead of IBM -- that isn't going to help SCO at all. Announcing this on the SCOForum or wherever, and not in a courtroom discovery session... the point is just to spread FUD. And raise their stock value....
This news isn't SCO's "smoking gun" -- it's their "steaming pile of crap".
Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'