Slashdot Mirror
IBM Tells SCO Court It Can't Find AIX-on-Power Code
Ghostx13 writes "A story over at Linuxworld states that IBM has been less than forthcoming with its bits and pieces of source code SCO is demanding. SCO is alleging in its 3rd Amended Complaint that 'IBM put SCO-owned SVR4 code in System 3-based AIX for its proprietary Power chip architecture.' The problem? IBM 'can't find' that source code. Does IBM have something to hide?"
IBM has nothing to hide, they just don't want to give up the code. Or maybe they can't find it because it doesn't exist and SCO is making a false claim.
First post?
...but that horrid layout makes it tough to tell where the ads end and the article starts.
I think you can safely laugh at this before RTFA.
This is one written by Maureen O'Gara, who has about as much credibility as Laura DiDio.
Straight to the FUD Shill round file.
Why should IBM be forthcoming ?
After all, it's SCO they are dealing with and to be honest, I don't know anyone who would want to deal with them, except maybe the guy with the horns and the tail.
I know who I'd rather back in a dispute of this nature, given the track records overall.
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !
Linuxworld should be named "LinuxSuxWorld." It is devoted entirely to advertisers, with occasional snarky anti-Linux "articles" thrown in for show. They shouldn't even bother with the articles, and just shill 100% for advertisers like CNet/ZDNet.
Well, maybe, and I hope you're right, but what if IBM actually did do what they've been accused of? Is it that long a bow to draw?
The other thing is, if it were MS, people would be running around in circles and burning effigies of Bill Gates (me too, probably
I've just been fearing that there is some merit to behind all the SCO bluster, and this makes me fear it just a little bit more...
Iran has endorsed
SCO working conditions? I'm sure their lawyers are quite comfy and well fed. Does SCO even PRODUCE anything nowadays, other than FUD and lawsuits?
Then again, it could just be another fluff piece to try and boost the stock price up from yet another 52-week low. On the subject of which, the price of SCOX is now at almost exactly the same level it was right before Linux got dragged kicking and screaming into the court case and things went crazy...
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(1) SCO has all the SV code.
(2) SCO has access to all the code in Linux.
If there is no overlap between these two, then there is no copyright infringement, despite the crack-addled theories proposed. They may have a case against IBM for contract breach from one of their previous dealings, but I really doubt it.
What I wonder about is do they do this stuff as pure internet trolling? In other words, putting something out there that they know will inflame people so that it gets posted to Slashdot et. al. and therefore gets lots of page views and thus advertising dollars for their web site?
Or have they been bought off by somebody else? I mean, how does SCO, a broke, shitty company if ever I've seen one, get this small but vocal cadre of middling tech journalists to push their agenda loudly? Even now, when the market, mainstream journalists and anybody else with half a brain have pretty much written SCO off. That's why I wonder if maybe this is just trolling for ad impressions.
Just a thought... not a particularly focuses one, but a thought.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
If IBM wants to align itself with linux, it can't afford to play dirty licensing games with UNIX code. It's that simple. Either the company embraces open-source or else it's just another FUD factory -- even though it's currently a pro-linux FUD factory, it's still unacceptable.
I'm not saying IBM is guilty or innocent, but I am hoping to God it really can't find the code, because they make some good fuckin hardware, and I'd hate to have to hate 'em.
REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.
So, open source is like some sort of backup system for IBM's source code, then?
:)
That IBM can lose source code to an entire operating system helps dispel any argument that, for posterity, source code is safer in companies.
Has been entirely and quickly forthcoming with millions and millions of lines of code that SCO has basically been demanding as part of a fishing expedition.
One single piece of code out of these mountains IBM claims has gone missing.
Possible explanations from this:
1. IBM is telling the truth.
2. This is the one single piece of infringing code in all of Dynix or whatever which is infringing, and so they are hiding it.
Reasons for believing number one to be true: Well, it's extremely plausible. Given how much that IBM has produced the idea one single document among all of this has been legitimately lost within IBM is fairly believable.
Reasons for believing number two to be true: Well, nothing. But it's possible.
We certainly
SCO's strategy, for lack of a case until this point, has been to demand increasingly larger mountains of discovery until they hit something that is unreasonable. Once something proves to be unreasonable, they go to the press yelling "What does IBM have to hide???". SCO's media shills, working in a vacuum as they do, have been able to do this as often as they like despite the fact that generally, the reason IBM has not provided these things is that the judge ruled they did not have to. Meanwhile, it is probably important to keep in mind SCO has consistently refused to comply with even the most basic of discovery demands, even sometimes when ordered by the judge.
Now they appear, within this strategy, to have struck gold. They have located something which IBM is not producing, but yet the judge actually agrees IBM should produce-- and which IBM claims it is unable to produce. However, still, they have produced no evidence that this indicates wrongdoing of, well, any sort. There's no way you could make this appear so much as suspicious except by pointing to, well, the fact IBM's been so entirely forthcoming up until now. Once you do that it is possible to make it appear suspicious, yet, but not possible to actually make anything of it in court; from a court's perspective this detail is quite small. So it appears this is no victory for anyone except SCO's disconnected-from-reality PR shills.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
> and any moronic idiot that is given mod points
> that mods an anonymous post should never again
> be given anything.
Surely that depends on whether you think mod points are allocated to assist overcompetitive nerds to rack up their Karma scores, or whether you think the point is to increase the visibility of interesting and insightful articles.
I note that *you* posted as an Anonymous Coward. Perhaps there's some significance in that, but I'm fucked if I can figure out what it might be. Fear of the mods yourself, perhaps?
I find this hard to believe. Even if they did misplace a couple of tape backups, I'm sure they have ESCROW disks running around.
Those who are oblivious to ESCROW distributions, they are copies of entire source trees given to third parties (usually, a law firm) as a guarantee exchange to a client to provide them to access to sources if the supplier goes under. It's a way to secure big contracts.
Oracle does such ESCROW releases, and other companies do so as well.
- They discovered that the code was missing
- They made up a story as to why it's crucial
- They ask for it, jumping up and down about how deceptive IBM is
Just a thought =)Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
... never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence.
It's quite likely they cannot really find the code. Anybody that has worked at a big corporation knows that (If you haven't, just read the complete Dilbert strips, and you'll have an idea).
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
I have two things to say.
1) Linuxworld (snicker)
2) Maureen O'Gara (guffaw)
The pinnacle of journalistic integrity. (cough)
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
At the hearing, one of SCO's lawyers, another young thing from Boies, Schiller & Flexner whose footwork was smooth enough to impress even Groklaw's IBM-dazzled observers,
Wow, wait, what? Is this meant to be taken as objective?
mentioned the little matter of SCO's days-old Third Amended Complaint, which, alas, is under seal reportedly because it's based on some e-mail that turned up during discovery that IBM now claims is privileged though there's supposedly no hint of attorney-client communication about it.
Notice that SCO's side in this case seems to have absolutely zero respect for the judge and his rulings? The judge rules that IBM doesn't have to produce something; this becomes "IBM won't produce this thing". The judge rules that something SCO did in the courtroom violates confidentiality and orders it sealed; this becomes some kind of who-me where-on-earth-did-this-come-from thing which is somehow implied to be IBM's fault. Don't you think, maybe, the judge so consistently failing to take SCO's side isn't just some kind of head-slapping, inexplicable coincidence, but perhaps indicates some sort of problem on the part of SCO's lawyers?
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Well, I concluded that some time ago, but I still keep hearing the "they must have *something* right?" comments every so often, usually in stories like this where SCO has managed to do something we don't have the information to research :]
:]
Just you watch--I see the "all our *good* evidence is sealed/secret/hidden by IBM" line of arguements get more play with that new pro SCO website coming out... Of course, we've always retorted to that with "it'd have to be secret because every scrap you've shown the public was debunked in hours" line
I also find myself at odds. On one hand, due to the nature of law, I would wish that all things were equal and the merits of the case were the sole consideration. But at the same time I am compelled to feel some admiration for one who excels at one's profession. Especially when that profession's mix of knowledge, presentation, and application of legal code present distinct similarities to hackers everywhere. I suppose the problem is when skill obscures merit.
Having said all that... don't cry for SCO. They're not the underfunded little guy. They have actually put considerable funds towards their legal team. And while IBM's legal team is held in high esteem, SCO has supposedly secured some considerable legal talent themselves.
Now if all that talent could produce an inkling of merit.
LinuxWorld is certainly not a pro-Linux site, nor is it ZDnet -- it's put out by SysCon media. Well, at least the "con" sounds right! Maureen O'Gara is simply a SCO mouthpiece. I'm perplexed that CowboyNeal ran with it here, giving it credibility that it doesn't deserve. Maybe he's trying to earn those Cowboy Neal jokes.
But what's the lead story on LinuxWorld today?
Fraud in Linuxland? VA Linux Class Action To Go Forward
Yep, it's an attack on Slashdot's owner! If you can't take the message, dig the dirt on the messenger!
I once got a hold of some diaries that were written by a schizophrenic. He too believed fervently in the bible. He belived that god was speaking to him and telling him to go to particular places in order to witness prophesies coming true.
It was facinating reading. I wonder if there is a corrolation between schizophrenia and being born again. I would think it would be only natural to think that the voices in your head were coming from god.
evil is as evil does
The accounts from Groklaw witnesses at the hearing are informative, especially since they were available long before O'Gara published this piece. Nothing was said remotely like what O'Gara claims. Her report isn't just vaguely confused; it appears to be an outright lie. It COULD be that someone "spun" it to her. However, as PJ notes, O'Gara's articles make it plain that she reads Groklaw. None of these people saw O'Gara there, so her source almost has to be secondary. Given the obvious bias in the story, she could be being lead around by the nose for PR purposes by TSG.
Unfortunately, since the TSG crew decided to read a confidential email outloud in court, the whole hearing transcript has been sealed by the judge. [This could even be why TSG made such a clossal "blunder" in court.] It prevents early and thorough critical review. So, O'Gara would have had no means of "independently" checking the "facts" - given she doesn't like Groklaw's unabashed partisanship, which is opposite hers and quite critical of her as well.
------ The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+1 politicians.
Some of that is new to me (I missed part of the Groklaw exchange, for one), but yeah, that helps me explain this a lot better.
My view? Well, the Native American religion bit is to use peyote legally (although I think it requires at least some tribal descent? I confess to being unclear about the law surrounding it). However, I do know that they are allowed to posess and use limited quantities of it legally.
Anyhow, I figure him for just a random nut, and I wouldn't take the things he says at face value. I tend to doubt that even SCO would deliberately set this guy up to do anything on their behalf. As for his claims, I would tend to ascribe them to a mixture of psychotic episodes & hallucinogen use (e.g. the peyote). I seem to recall that peyote is not good for schizophrenics (or for anyone who cannot tell reality from fantasy--think about it, it just can't be good for you to deliberately hallucinate when you already have problems with reality).
Now then, to be fair to him, in no way could even a trained doctor diagnose this guy over the internet. I would tend to defer to the judge PJ found as to him being delusional (the delusion of grandeur--"saving" Linux for $50,000--is what makes me think schizophrenic), and if he admits to peyote use (again, to be fair, I haven't seen him say this), I would tend to think that this is just some random person who has issues with reality.
In short, I don't think he's a SCO "agent" of any sort. There are ways to make even a nut useful, but employing one as a messenger or negotiator when they're so unpredictable would be rather stupid even for SCO. On the other hand, SCO has never held conventional wisdom in high esteem, and they've been anything but predictable. Birds of a feather?