Slashdot Mirror
IBM Subpoenas Intel Into SCO Fray
whovian writes "Since IBM was ordered by the courts to show more code, they are now reported by Groklaw to have subpoenaed Intel to show 'all communications between Intel and SCO or Canopy about IBM, Unix or Linux, all meetings with either concerning IBM, Unix or Linux, and all contracts or other business relations, past, present, or future, between Intel and SCO.' The text is available at the website."
What are they trying to pull here? That Intel was possibly behind SCO's litigation? I doubt it...
When will it end?
Without a proper flamewar, Anonymous was undecided on what shell to run.
If IBM really had this "in the bag", why would they need to do such a huge step as issuing a subpoena to Intel for all that information?
No company wants to give up that much information, especially when much of it is not useful for the case and possibly damaging to Intel's business.
So far, Intel has been a relative outsider in all of this, and it is hard to understand what IBM is trying to get by bringing in a hardware manufacturer into this software matter. This may be a motion to subpoena, but even IBM's army of lawyers seems to be grasping at any straw now.
I personally don't think SCO has a very strong case, but watching IBM's actions, it seems that IBM is the one with the lack of firm ground.
Wake me up when it is over.
..is wow.
dont be so quick to dismiss it.
hwo is really intels competitor amd or ibm?
amd for now. but i bm may displace both once x86 completely dies.
Hopefully all the big companys get drawn in then we can get some drama!
Everyone who belives SCO should die say Aye!
I'm sure IBM would be happy if linux on ppc hardware got REAL popular
GETPKG - Package Management for Slackware
It's actually the future Chinese owners of IBM PC devision who wanted this. It's the first step for taking over Intel. Next subpoena Microsoft.
only goes to show that nobody goes down alone.
Need a color? Try 100 random colors
Don't ask me what it means, because all it means to me so far is that IBM suspects or knows something we don't yet know but we will, I'm sure, eventually find out. You don't usually have to depose your best friends, though. They tell you whatever you need to know volitionally, because they want you to win, and they'll do a declaration for you. You subpoena folks who are not eager to tell you what you wish to learn, or who wish to appear so.
No, you usually don't have to depose your best friends. Which is why this action may give some insight into the real state of relations between IBM and Intel.
Now that IBM has dumped their Intel PC business, they can afford to take off the gloves, and not have to worry about making nice in the morning.
So far the consensus here was that it is Microsoft behind the whole SCO debacle -- but what if IBM knows better (and I guess I'd bet my $10 on THEM knowing better ;-) ).
Is it a purely defensive move? Or is the the "beginning of the end" of the PC industry as we knew it?
Linux + PPC (+ IBM) might beat BSD + PPC (+ Apple) -- espcially since IBM makes the PPC part! -- and definitely beats Windows + i86, but why the hell NOW??? What do they know that I do not?
Maybe I should actually go RTFA, but I doubt it will clear things for me.
Paul B.
Bumblebee Man from the Simpsons gets involved?
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
What they most likely want to establish is that SCO new Itanium was delayed and Intel notified them about the changing strategy of the processor.
SCO is claiming that the Monteray project was cancelled by IBM "out of the blue (Pun somewhat intended)" and due to the advent of Linux. IBM canceled the Monteray project as they were allowed to do since the business reason for continuing was no longer there. They need to have Intel confirm this, information which Intel obviously is reluctant to provide
Help fight continental drift.
IBM isnt running scared.. they're just playing the same dirty subpeona game that SCO is playing.
This is just another tactic to hopefully run SCO out of funds so they cant continue. We all know how it's gonna end, IBM's just trying to waste as little of THEIR money as possible by wasting as much of SCO's time and money as they can. Intel's just an unfortunate bystander.
OK, So SCO starts a frivolous lawsuit to try and become a household name before it goes belly up. Now, in the crosshairs, and with far more power and finances at their disposal, IBM calls in some other top-dogs to drag this out into a dirty courtroom scrap that promises to last even longer. Stalling tactics hoping SCO runs out of money? Maybe, but more likely, like most of these software-based lawsuits, it's just to add enough confusion to the mediation to keep anyone who wasn't actually there from ever seeing the truth. And this drama all plays out for us on the daily news... lucky us. Your tax dollars hard at work. That's one expensive soap-opera.
A couple fans told me that my last journal entry was mint; give it a shot. Hope you like.
In the before time, from the long long ago Intel ported and sold a Unix of its own.
Perhaps info regarding thost contracts is what IBM is after.
The term "communication" shall mean any transmittal of information, whether oral or written, including correspondence, electronic mail and other internet transmissions, web pages, Internet Relay Chat logs, instant messages [...]
;-)
/. crowd?
I can just imagine Intel's Craig Barrett and our beloved Darl frigging chatting on IRC (!) how to shut the whole Leenux thngy down...
Or is it IBM just playing cute for the Groklaw /
Paul B.
With very few exceptions, no one who will post in this thread has any authoritative knowledge of business analysis or high-level computing industry politics. I can also predict that not a single soul who posts in this thread will have a good understanding of the legal nuances of IBM's most recent actions in the SCO case.
So please, don't waste our time with useless conjecture, predictions, and "what-if" scenarios. Because really, what's going on here is just mental masturbation. Move along.
------- "From bored to fanboy in 3.8 asian girls" ----------
IIRC the big squabble was about the failed Monterey project with SCO
where Unix was to be put on the Intel "Merced"
I'm sure that plenty of information passed through Intel at the time.
You know if enough companies subpoena each other maybe we'll end up with "open source" hardware (not necessarily GPL) but force all the companies to give up their trade secrets and consumers reap all the benefits! MWUahahahaha!
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
would be cute to see that :)
Like Microsoft does.
I think IBM ought to just take all the data that SCO wants, dump it on a big slag of a hard disk in tarred text form, and dump it in SCO's lap.
There's your data, now what are you going to do with it.
Kind of like when the dog chases you and you stop the car and get out and ask the dog what he wants with your car.
No, I'm sure it's got to do with the termination of Monterrey. Perhaps somebody at iNTEL has already told the lawyers at IBM what parts to extract. Then they give the whole boatload to SCO for double checking, so SCO know's they've gone over the line in their fishing expedition.
Your hypothesis sounds plausable however, I hope it's not accurate. That's the part that really sucks about our courts is that other entities can become innocent bystanders.
... well that aren't valid in the first placed.
It like a bunch of people have pursued some man made rules or laws that rely on the earth being flat. But now that the earth really isn't flat, these rules, these laws are having a problem holding up. A lack of integrity of the rules/laws of which so many have beeing following.
So yeah, its really not supprising the exposure of the web of distortion that has spread thru out the industry.
Imagine what it would be like to see from the POV of one having clairity of the issue. Imagine how those following and supporting such distortion would be preceived by such a POV.
Perhaps this is such a view!?
If this turns out to be a war of attrition, IBM will bleed em dry....
Is that SCO/Caldera is Canopy group, and Canopy group has made almost all of its money by suing huge and successful companies. I'm not sure on their exact record, but I know they've done this sort of thing at least 2 or 3 times already. They are pretty good at doing this, so I don't like to see anything "going their way" at all... hopefully IBM can keep it on course, and kill them dead soon.
No lawsuits in Macland... :p
Ooh! Busted!
Obfuscation.
By dragging Intel into the convoluted lawsuit, SCO has been deprecated.
question.
IBM is a very big big company, they have a lot of leverage power with lawyers and with other companies. I am not following this as much as I should but it looks like IBM is pushing SCO into a corner and will use every arsenal to make a win. If IBM was going not going to win this court case they will settle. IBM will win it and it will be the end of SCO, we will then see slashdot posts about people buying SCO office furniture for $50.00 at there parking lots. IBM is a east coast company and they can leverage all the big wig lawyers to fight for them there is no way SCO can win. take care -A End result lawyers go home rich, SCO sells furniture and IBM's laptops go in to suspend using ACPI under Linux.
the SEC. and yet, they are doing nothing.
I suspect that following the money is next to impossible.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
gentoo can install on a ppc with the same cd that installs on x86. how k00lrad is th4t! coz it kompiles the kode. konsider the improvement of compiling something big and slow to use your athlon kan do that too.
compromised by the rich.
If you have the money advantage, you have a very large advantage indeed in court, as you can hire more expensive lawyers, and more of them.
I no longer have any trust or faith whatsoever in our judicial system, it is horribly broken.
All your base are belong to Google.
There are a lot of other ways to drag the case on and further drain SCO's finances. Involving an outside entity doesn't make sense, especially since doing so via supeona isn't exactly likely to promote good relations with Intel.
I think there's a bit more to this than we've seen... but if anything when the dust is cleared it will be very interesting to look back and say "ahhhh, I understand now"
Building A UNIX Of The Future
SCO and IBM entered into a strategic business agreement in October of `98 to aggressively accelerate growth of UNIX enterprise servers. They are delivering a single UNIX product line for IA-32 systems and future IA-64 systems; the result, due in early Q2, 2000, is a single product line on IA-32, IA-64 and IBM PowerPC, ranging from entry-level servers to very large enterprise environments.
monterey cliff notes stuff basically
Isn't anybody here considering that this subpoena might just be a technicality?
Like Intel, having some proof which might help IBM, but is under NDA and can't release it without being in breach unless the court specificaly orders them to?...
.... and all contracts or other business relations, past, present, or future, between Intel and SCO....
.... does this include the document that they are going to send through Intel in June of 2005 that will admit that the purpose of this entire project was to pump up the stock price and that Intel doesn't have to worry.
Notice the "future"
Or perhaps is SCO going to claim that since their code ran on Intel chips that means that the chips are tainted and therefore all of Intels IP belongs to SCO.
I'm sorry, I'm to tired to be witty at the moment so this message will have to do.
Not that I like SCO of course, but instead this just displays how meaningless our judicial system has become.
Our laws are meaningless today, because we've been disenfranchised by corporations.
All your base are belong to Google.
Lots of posters here seem to think that once the judge finds out who's "behind" SCO that something will happen. But why would there? Suppose they find a document where an Intel executive advises SCO to sue IBM? That's not against the law at all.
It's interesting for us to find out who's behind all of this, but not to the judge. These documents are only going to be needed because IBM thinks there's something there about licensing etc. deals. Not about helping out SCO or whatever.
I used to work for a company that became IBM Global services (years ago), and also had a serious problem with a test version of the Linux 2.6 kernel (much more recently) and posted a message on LKML. An Intel engineer asked for a gob of information (which I provided), and the problem was solved (Linus found out 3 days later as others noted the problem, and the ready made solution). I'm sure my name (yeah, it really is Anonymous Coward), is on some of those documents. Dammit! Sukking SCO!
So, how did Linux become so capable of scaling beyond the heights of the old UNIXs. More importantly, who helped put what where?
As with the marketing of cars and TVs, it is the vendor's high end leading edge models which sells the standard models, from which most of the sales and profit is made. For the enterprise server market today, that high end is multi-headed 64-bit SMP systems, never mind the fact that single 32-bit processors provide more than enough power to do most jobs. For all intents and purposes, it is the ability of the core OS to scale on 64-bit SMP systems that defines "enterprise scalability". Other enterprise feature are effectively just add-ons, which in the case of Linux, have been freely contributed from many vendors and developers.
Since version 2.0, Linux was more than just a 32-bit x86 operating system. With the insistence and assistance of Jon "Maddog" Hall, Linux was already ported to the 64-bit Alpha processor, which delivered great performance and stability. Just like the traditional AT&T UNIX source base, the ownership of the Alpha chipset passed though many hands, suffering the same fate of a thousand cutbacks. Even Alpha's "native" OS, VMS, has been ported to Itanium by HP/Compaq.
Since 1997, Intel has been promoting the Itanium line as the inevitable successor for every other server processor on the market. Despite the early vaporware status, Intel has been very successful, at least in terms of marketing. With the exception of its mainframe systems, even IBM ships Itanium systems that directly compete with their own Power processors.
For what The SCO Group has to offer with SCO Unixware 7,the Itanium line is the only 64-bit option. The problem for The SCO Group is that modern Linux can compete so well in that same market that the value of Unixware is rapid deteriorating to a historical curiosity. I suspect that The SCO Group (at that time called Caldera) executives were well aware of this before they acquired the server part of Old SCO in August 2000, or they would have known, if they spoken to the right executives and technical staff.
So how did Linux get scale on Itanium? The SCO Group would have you believe it was all IBM's doing, which isn't as interesting as the real story. The web of history weaves to encircle and entangle a much more diverse group of conspirators, including many of The SCO Group, Caldera, and old SCO's own former executives and other employees.
In October 1998, IBM, Old SCO and Sequent teamed up to collectively develop parts of Unixware and AIX into scalable 64-bit-ready ports for IBM's Power processors and Intel's AI64, or Itanium, under the banner of Project Monterey. But by then, it was already too late.
In February 1998, well before even the first prototype IA-64 chips were available, a skunkworks team at HP, with some assistance from Intel, began the work toward porting Linux to IA-64. By October 1998, around the same time that IBM, Old SCO and Sequent had finished negotiations, HP had completed the build toolchain. By January 1999, the Linux kernel was booting on an IA-64 processor simulator, months before the actual Itanium processor was available. In March 1999, at Intel, Linux was booting on the actual Intel Itanium processor. In April 1999, CERN joined the project for the port of the GNU C library and VA Linux Systems joined the project and rapidly improved the stability and performance.
In May 1999, the Trillian Project was founded and HP, VA Linux and Intel collectively provided their source patches to the Linux kernel for the Itanium port under the GNU general public license.
A bootable kernel alone however does not make an OS make. HP supplied the patches for the toolchain (initial GCC C/C++ compiler, gas assembler, ld linker). Intel supplied the test platforms, apache, EFI, FPSWA, SCSI, SMP, libm (the old Linux C libraries). VA Linux ported E, E-Term, XFree86, utilities
But their CEO says... "SCO asserts that the GPL, under which Linux is distributed, violates the United States Constitution and the U.S. copyright and patent laws. . . ."
and
"We believe that responsible corporations throughout the IT industry have advocated use of the GPL without full analysis of its long-term detriment to our economy. We are confident that these corporations will ultimately reverse support for the GPL, and will pursue a more responsible direction."
I know it is sort of irrelevant to this particular article but it show the true motive behind their lawsuit(s) i.e. Money.
Then every failing company with a past contract with IBM would file a lawsuit and hope to be bought out.
In the long run, it's better for IBM to crush SCO, publicly, slowly and legally.
so you can bet that both Intel and Microsoft
would like to see SCO Group succeed in court.
Sun is pushing Sparc and AMD processors, IBM
is pushing (hard) with PPC processors, and even
HP is courting AMD processors -- all three
with their UNIX and GNU/linux.
Microsoft courted, and then dumped support
for microcomputers based upon the Alpha, MIPS,
and PPC processor. Intel's many mis-steps
with the Itanium (ia64) processor may well be
an issue that IBM would like to raise with
the court, especially as regards IBM's short
lived alliance with SCO.
IANAL, but no matter how much code IBM reveals
in court against SCO Group, SCO's main attacks
center on (1) ownership of derivative works,
and (2) legality of the GPL. Either could
seriously damage F/OSS if the case goes to SCO.
I do not have very much faith in the USA's
system of justice these days, particularly
since the DoJ let MSFT off the monopoly hook
so readily (after regime change).
mod parent up. Who ever modded this as flamebait is simply wrong. The opinion of the parent is essential right and is not mean to provoke.
Apple only seems to sue their biggest supporters.
If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
All that air pollution coming from Microsoft isn't a result of a manufacturing process.
Like old reports of the imminent extinction of mainframes, any report of a similar fate for Windows is a tad immature.
"windows fanboys" - Perhaps I am just adding fuel to the flame or maybe you are to young to shave and don't see the "fanboy" in the mirror every morning. Either way your post makes for an excellent example of projection (definition 6b).
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
One thing i'm sure of when it comes to this whole SCO circus is that all of a sudden i found myself thinking "oh, is this mess still alive? i thought it was gone and forgotten". And i bet a whole lot of people responsible for the IT-infastructure at companies thinks the same thing. "Hmm what was it about Linux and those court problems last year.. It was a rip-off or something.. I can't remember, it's free - now that's suspicious.. Can't remember what happened in court though, but i might be better off choosing this expensive piece of software instead. After all, it costs a lot of money - it must be good." If shitloads of people think like that now someone in Redmond can smirk a little. I'm basing this off the rumours that Microsoft funded the whole SCO-legal circus last year. I love conspiracies.
www.freshpilot.com
Intel had prototype Itanium chips by early April/March.
All communications, contracts or other business relations, past, present, or future, containing the letter "e".
Oops! That didn't catch Gadsby!
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
are people going to acknowledge that is hindering actual work being done. the progress this is hindering by wasting so much time and money on the legal process for proving what? proof of ownership? who cares at this point? does some one feel as though they missed out on a big piece of the cake? i think that some accord should be reached, get it over with already, and stop making such a big deal out of a pixel on the screen of what is.
I think its not long before SCO self implodes anyway if the latest news from the salt lake city tribune is to go by, Apparently noorda's daughter is being sued for a boardroom coup..
s ue d/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/31/canopy_
Unless off course there is someone on Slashdot who is not just killing time?
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Apple records that is...
Hope the iPod business doesn't go away, eh?
Funny thought... when ISSC was split from IBM, the IBM managers were glad for a place to dump their lousy workers (as reported by IBM's chief networking architect to me back in the 1993-ish time frame)
That place was ISSC.
ISSC sucked so hard though, they had to change their name to IGS to run away from that legacy.
Good luck you.
Many these discovery laws are powerful!
People can go to jail if they fail to disclose!
I work in litigation and subpoenaing someone with something as ridiculous as this is a great way to keep the other party busy and give yourself some extra time. In addition to that, it adds costs to the other party's litigation.
Sometimes, you can just keep subpoenaing and they won't be able to keep up. And generally when that happens, they will want to settle.
Wonder if Intel is going to have one of its attorneys claim legal professional privilege over the documents that they want to discover?
All fun and games I say!
It's in the lawyer genes.
If either client still has money, make more work for them to spend it on.
This is how SCO will lose. They just don't have enough $ to fight IBM. The side benefit to the lawyers is that they have work to the bitter end.
SCO was recently granted a look see at a huge load of IBM stuff and IBM told that failure to comply would result in SCO being given a look see at everything IBM has. This is designed to make IBM's lawyers read through tons of paperwork at IBM and then the same stuff gets read through by the SCO lawyers.
While IBM is reading through all this crap, they want SCO to be burning bux so they introduce yet another $hitload of paperwork into the mix.
If you've ever had dealings with a lawyer, you know what I'm talking about.
The lesson is similar to that one learns after dealing with a 'payday' or 'title' loan company.
When confronted by someone elses lawyer, before you hire your own, bury them in paperwork. The person who is after you may well run out of money/interest in spending money, long before you ever have to hire your own lawyer.
This has the makings of a good soap opera. All they need to do is sprinkle in a little sex and murder and we've got an award winning mini series on our hands. I think they should write this thing before it finishes though. It would be more interesting to see someone's interpretation of all this crap and how they think it will turn out rather than to watch a dramatic reenaction.
friends, though. They tell you whatever you need to know volitionally, because they want you to win, and they'll do a declaration for you. You subpoena folks who are not eager to tell you what you wish to learn, or who wish to appear so."
...
Huh? If one accepts that IBM and Intel have a 'nudge-wink' relationship going on then, this statement is pretty naieve on the part of the groklaw dude. You see, if you have a business selling to other business who are in competition with each other, the last thing you want to do is show any appearance of favoritism!
So, it's much more likely that you tell your best friend at a golf course, far from prying ears, that he might want to consider a subpoena for,
Now your best friend knows you have something, he can come get it, and you maintain the appearance of neutrality as far as your other customers and any 'fair trade' lawyers are concerned. As an aside, the LAW is directed somewhat at discouraging the concept of 'friendship' between businesses.
Jeez Mr. Groklaw dude. Where did you learn 'real life'???
Is this like truth or dare for grownups? "show us the code"
"no"
"then you have to tell so and so you like her"
Why I chose to not become a lawyer is beyond me.
As far as legal departments go, IBM has been pretty good at keeping their legal dealings watertight.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
IBM filed this motion on Jan 19. The actual subpoena was signed by IBM's attorney on Jan 13. SCO's motion for more discovery was granted Jan 18.
The blurb for this story is a little misleading. IBM planned to do this and may have even already had the subpoena executed by the time SCO's motion was granted. The timing was coincidental not causal.
...is, "Why did it start?"
For now, I'm rooting for IBM. And hell, maybe they're on to something. You never know. SCO has been making unreasonable demands for quite a while now. It's time the tables turned.
Please stop stalking me, bro.
There is no cloud hanging over everybody, unless we trust SCO when they tell us there is a cloud (while not letting us know exactly where it is). It's not our job to force them to finish their sentences; it's up to them to either speak or not speak. As long as they don't state their accusations in plain language, there is no accusation, and we can go about our business as usual.
If we were to "code around" anything on our mere suspicion that someone, somewhere may think it's not 100 percent legit, then we would be held hostage via lack of specifics, and it would only serve to encourage others acting just like SCO (merely hint at a problem, and everybody will bend over backwards to "solve" it for you). What if blackmailing were that easy? Put in a newspaper ad saying that "fires happen" and everybody starts offering you money?
Only when they drag me personally into court will I care to even answer their questions, and my answer will be no, my software does not infringe on the rights of anybody, and nobody has made that accusation before. Next question?
there's a big stinking mountain of shit underneath all this that could potentially cripple the whole industry?
Microsoft has been implicated via Baystar.
Intel is being implicated.
Novel has spoken about SCOs claims, but haven't taken any other definitive action.
Nobody holding copyright to code in use by SCO has revoked right for SCO to use any of that code.
SCOs use of the UNIX mark hasn't been revoked.
There's a lot of silence out there.
Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
Saadeeiiilnpqssum peenrsts mdiilnottuuus caeeelmnoprtuxs.
You are making my argument for me.
The "Itanium processor logic model" mentioned in the press release was a software simulation using the RTL description (written in ihdl) of the chip ("csim" to be exact). The simulator ran at an effective rate of about 1Hz from a netbatch queue amongst a huge farm of workstations in Santa Clara, and took weeks to complete (the simulation was not parallel).
The version of Linux that was booted (at 1Hz) was a highly stripped version of 2.2, ported by a team in Oregon independent from the Trillian efforts. The simulation took weeks to complete. Several months prior to that date, the same team booted Mach 3.0 in the same simulation environment.
Both of those kernels, as well as others configured for single & multi-processor with a few user-mode tests, were used during first silicon bring-up in late August of 1999.
The RTL source of the chip is used by additional tools to place and route signals and functional blocks (built from transistors and signal lines). That information is then used to produce masks, which are then used to produce wafers.
Trust me, as a guy that should know, there was no silicon until late August of 1999.
If I posted a photo of the wall-plaque that sits near my desk, it might convince you (tapeout July 4th 1999, samples August 30 1999), but I can't do that.
Well, listening to the suspected level of legal gymnastics in this, when its all said and done, do we get a movie out of this?
there sounds like waaay more backstabbing here than there was in 'Pirates of Silicon Valley'
can't wait. Hope there's lots of rockets and bombs and sex in it too.
1) No one was reporting the "imminent" death of anything, least of all me. You can feel secure that your precious windows will be around for many years to come and continue it's unprecedented success.
2) Other than a die-hard windows fanboy, who else would particularly care if PPC and Linux were the dominant combination for desktop computing?
As a Linux user I certainly don't care what hardware I'm running on as long as the few close-sourced apps I need are compiled natively. And the Mac kids wouldn't care, since there would be nothing keeping them from running OSX on the same PPC hardware.
3) See 1 and 2 and see how this is something that "everyone can enjoy" except "windows fanboys". A group you obviously take great pride in belonging to. Or perhaps you just aren't old enough to have developed much reading comprehension.
The Farewell Tour II
If it isn't GPL, it isn't good enough
which is kind of ironic considering that she uses Mac OS X and MS-Windows - and doesn't use Linux.
The GPL violates the U.S. Constitution?
Then SCO/Caldera/BS COMPANY doesn't know jack of the constitution. Did he take a civics class? Did he ever go to college?
Where do I have to go to slap this silly bitch because his claims are really starting to infuriate me!
The GPL is freedom!!
USA is freedom!!
WTF is he smoking?
You must of ducked while reading my post as the point went clear over the top of your head.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
hopefully sco will go bankrupt or reach its legal spending cap and just disappear like a "good" pos company
Get your torrents...
when a nurd vigilante steps up