Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Subpoenas HP, Baystar, Sun & Microsoft

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the send-us-your-dirty-laudry dept.

nicolaiplum writes "CNet is reporting that IBM is sending subpoenas to HP, Baystar, Sun and Microsoft requiring them to disclose most of their dealings with SCO over UNIX licensing and litigation." From the article: "The subpoenas demand that Microsoft, HP, Sun and BayStar hand over a range of information, including details of their dealings with SCO, by March 7. They will also have to appear in court later in March to give depositions." Groklaw also has links to each of the subpoenas.

7 of 196 comments (clear)

  1. a well-known fact. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Microsoft bought thousands of SCO licenses in an effort to undermine Linux -- not as a way of giving credibility to any of SCO's claims, but rather as a way to fund SCO's FUD campaign, in what amounts to a cash donation!

    If anything should be subpoena'd its Microsoft's internal documents giving a risk/benefit analysis of making a cash donation to SCO in the form of to-Microsoft useless Linux licenses.

    1. Re:a well-known fact. by Aim+Here · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well that's not the only reason IBM is calling Microsoft to the stand.

      IBM wants everything Microsoft has on the SCO/Linux battle partly because SCO CEO Darl Mcbride was emailing Microsoft regularly over something that's not quite public yet, immediately prior to the lawsuit, and also IBM needs everything Microsoft has relating to Unix because SCO gave M$ and Sun a clean bill of health as regards Unix. IBM might be trying to compare it's practices relating to the Unix code base against those of Microsoft and Sun in order to show that it was at least as compliant as those two.

    2. Re:a well-known fact. by Aim+Here · · Score: 3, Interesting

      IBM found out about the emails in discovery for SCO vs IBM.

      As for what's in the emails, well that's subject of speculation. It might be about the $10 million worth of Unix licenses that Microsoft 'bought' and SCO lied about in their court or SEC filings. It might be about the $50-70 million worth of funding from Baystar that Microsoft helped put SCO's way (that's documented in the Halloween documents somewhere on catb.org) for no apparent reason. Or it might be that Bill Gates was doing some babysitting for Darl or something. You'll just have to watch the court filings for clues.

  2. Turn about is fair play by HangingChad · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If you buy in to the theory that MSFT funded the SCO follies in part because they wanted to slow the adoption of Linux in light of the delay in fielding Vista, then it's only sweet that IBM would be dropping on Redmond in time for MSFT's dirty laundry to get a good airing in court before the big roll out this fall.

    Talk about a turd in the punch bowl. Hehe.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  3. I forgot about this! by erroneus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Damn! It has been so long since any new developments or any old discussion has been brought up about it, finally there is some interesting activity in the SCO v. IBM case. Still, I have to wonder why IBM is willing to spend the money for the additional activity? Is "fighting back" worth it? What do they expect to gain on this?

    Personally, I can identify with wanting to fight back by exposing the sources of all the scuffle. But if I didn't have money to throw away and no easily identifiable profit motive, I just can't imagine myself doing it. Since corporations generally lack human emotional response, I can only assume there is good strategety and/or profit motivation. Anyone care to speculate?

  4. Re:Don't have to appear in court by Phantom100 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's not the only thing they got wrong. The subheading in the article refers to "IBM's version of Linux". Unless, IBM has done something new, there isn't any such thing.

  5. Re:This is very big by ZachPruckowski · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They may not need to win. MS certainly doesn't want to get DoJ investigations restarted again, and using SCO as a sock puppet to beat down on a potential rival sure is risky in terms of monopolistic practices. MS wants to avoid possible DoJ issues and get this whole thing buried? Well, write IBM a fat check, and consider them satisfied.