Slashdot Mirror


SCO's Finances, Legal Case Take Hits

geomon writes "This afternoon, SCO will host a conference call where they will present '04 third quarter financial data. The news isn't expected to be comforting to SCO investors as they are coming up a bit short; earnings and dividends will take a substantial hit. The only bright spot for the company is the settlement with BayStar, a deal that will leave most of the cash they received from the investment house in the hands of SCO management, if only for a short time." Reader ak_hepcat writes "Groklaw has posted the text for the latest IBM memorandum in its case against SCO. In a nutshell, IBM accuses SCO of not only wrangling the legal process to keep delaying the eventual resolution of this case, but they go so far as to pull the curtain away and show that this table never had any legs to begin with. I'm no marksman, but I can tell when something is full of holes."

4 of 333 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Yet Again by R2.0 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Slashdot...objective viewpoint....

    Bwahahahahahahaha....

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  2. suprise suprise by KingPunk · · Score: 0, Redundant

    who would've thought that The SCO Group, were nothing but a bunch of profiteering lieing bastards driven by satan. ugh.
    well, we've know this for a long time,
    this isn't exactly what you call _FRESH_ news.

  3. Groklaw's IBM memorandum is /.ed; here is mirror by SlashdotTroll · · Score: 1, Redundant

    (First of all, proper to my observation; the verry instant SCO hinted even a shadow of lowering stock dividends is bad news. The stock will now tank, and whomever wants to buy SCO will do it quickly or if it was a facade by the SCO employees to buy back all their stock then there so.)

    (Also, Slashdot needs to mirror these articles. Groklaw can barely even respond on my traceroute. The text for IBM's memorandum follows; part 1 of 4;)

    IBM here explains all the reasons why its motion should succeed and why SCO should be sanctioned for failing to disclose information in discovery. "SCO has not only wasted IBM's time and resources over the past year of discovery, by requiring IBM to seek to compel SCO to provide necessary information that SCO apparently was only willing to come forward with in the face of a summary judgment motion, but SCO has also perpetuated fear, uncertainty and doubt about the lawfulness of IBM's activities."

    IBM mocks SCO's "surprise" that copyright infringement should be an issue, now claiming, for purposes of this motion anyway, it hasn't raised that issue and is relying instead on contract claims.

    IBM then lists numerous times SCO has mentioned copyright infringement. If I might add to their list the following additional instances:

    * "'What we found was that the infringements went way beyond just IBM's involvement and that other parties had contributed things improperly... in going through the process, we counted over a million lines of code that we allege are infringed in the Linux kernel today out of a total code base of five million,' added McBride.

    "Nevertheless, IBM was the source of most of that allegedly tainted code, said McBride: 'The vast majority of that did, in fact, come from IBM and when we say IBM, the majority of that actually came from IBM's acquisition of Sequent.'"-- Darl McBride, Infoconomy, 2003-09-11

    * "We are staring down the barrel of hundreds of thousands of lines of code that enabled Linux to go from a mom-and-pop operating system to a big-time, enterprise-class OS at Fortune 100 companies. It's really interesting to see what happens when people see the code, when they see how blatant the copying is."-- Darl McBride, Wired, 2003-09-11

    * "78. However, as is widely reported and as IBM executives knew, or should have known, a significant flaw of Linux is the inability and/or unwillingness of the Linux process manager, Linus Torvalds, to identify the intellectual property origins of contributed source code that comes in from those many different software developers. If source code is code copied from protected UNIX code, there is no way for Linus Torvalds to identify that fact.

    "79. As a result, a very significant amount of UNIX protected code and materials are currently found in Linux 2.4.x, Linux 2.5.x and Linux 2.6.x releases in violation of SCO’s contractual rights and copyrights." -- SCO's Second Amended Complaint

    * "But the unlicensed use of its Unix shared libraries was just the 'tip of the iceberg as there are so much IP we're dealing with here, ranging from copyright, trade secrets, patents, source code and licensing issues. Because this range of IP-related issues is so broad-based and there is such a wide-range of players involved, we're just making sure we move forward very sure-footedly. We don't want to start running before we can walk. We're trying to take things in the right order,' McBride said."-- Darl McBride, eWeek, 2003-02-26

    * "'Today is really the formalization of our going down the path of broadening our case to go beyond just contracts to include copyrights," McBride said. He added, 'Today's announcement really is a new front that we're opening up.'"-- Darl McBride, InternetNews, 2003-07-21

    * "'Today's announcement is really a new front that we're opening up' with existing enterprise Linux customers, McBride said. 'It gets you clean, it gets you square with Linux without having to go into the courtroom.'"-- Darl Mc

    --

    I am the nightmare of nightmares.

  4. Is this supposed to be news? by nwbvt · · Score: 0, Redundant
    I mean is there anyone reading slashdot who thinks SCO's case is going great?

    Oh well, if anyone here still needs a gmail account, I've got one here for a limited time only.

    --
    Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.