Slashdot Mirror
IBM Denies Destroying Evidence in SCO Case
Rob writes "IBM Corp has denied claims made by SCO Group that it destroyed evidence relevant to
their ongoing breach-of-contract and copyright case, maintaining that SCO has had the
evidence in question in its possession since March 2005. SCO, which believes IBM breached
a contract by contributing Unix code to the Linux operating system, accused IBM of
destroying evidence in a July 2006 court filing, claiming that "IBM directed 'dozens'
of its Linux developers within its LTC [Linux Technology Center] and at least 10 of its
Linux developers outside... to
delete the AIX and/or Dynix source code from their computers.""
What's really funny about this particular SCO accusation is that they're basically accusing IBM of being careful not to accidentally put SCO's (alleged) IP in Linux, and trying to spin it as a bad thing. IBM didn't want its developers to inadvertently use AIX or Dynix code in their Linux development work, because IBM didn't want to risk revealing AT&T's trade secrets and violating their contract. So, IBM prudently directed developers who were going to work on Linux to get rid of the AIX and Dynix source on their machines prior to beginning Linux development work. Now SCO wants the court to interpret this attitude of respect for AT&T/Novell/SCO/TSG IP as bad-faith destruction of evidence.
I guess I have to admire their chutzpah.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Companies have their employees delete copies of source code all the time, particularly when they change projects or switch departments. It isn't in a company's best interest to have proprietary software in too many places at once, which was probably why IBM instructed these employees to delete it. This isn't destruction of evidence at all, since IBM almost certainly did not delete EVERY copy of AIX.
... who would ever delete source code for products clients are still using? I'm sure even Microsoft would never delete all source copies of Windows 3.1 ...
Now if these were the last copies of AIX source, then IBM is by far the dumbest company in existence
Huh? Don't mind me, I'm just the new guy.
I simply cannot believe how long this has gone on. What a staggering waste of time and resources. This is probably as good an example as any of why the West is probably going to fall. While China is ramping up production and making huge economic strides, we here in the US are arguing over lines of code as our manufacturing base continues to crumble. Changing over to a "service economy?" Please.
How many hours have been wasted on this type of crap? What useful item has been produced out of this or any of the other spurious "copyright" or "intellectual property" cases?
Trial lawyers giving money to politician lawyers, who make laws so trial lawyers can argue cases against rival trial lawyers in front of judge lawyers. So, what's the common denominator and who benefits? Follow the money.
This was reported a week ago on Groklaw (in much greater detail).
This is old news.
IBM instructed developers to purge their sandboxes. This, of course, has nothing to do with the source code in IBM's source control systems. It's just working copies on developers' machines.
Garry Williams
It's funny, there used to be a fair amount of posts in SCO Threads from people ( usually using words likes Slashbots, Groupthink, Worship OSS etc ) who believed that IBM might certainly be in the wrong and SCO could well have a case.
It's funny they don't seem to crop up anymore, just like all those people telling us our governments could never be so wrong about WMD and how they'd certainly find loads of evidence once the invasion was completed.
I really hate the use of "deny" in headlines as it seems to imply that something is true and it is being denied for some nefarious reason.
If something is simply not true, guess what? I'm going to deny it.
The headline should be "SCO accuses IBM of destroying evidence"
(eg: the party making the accusation should be the subject of the sentence)
TDz.
This is the suit that never ends, Yes, it goes on and on, my friend Some people started it not knowing what it was, And they'll continue litigating forever just because--
SCO's claims here a bit funny, why complain when IBM does the thing you most desperately want them to? Or perhaps the problem here is that SCO wants the Linux source pollution, then they might have an actual case...
Anyway, I'm thoroughly bored with this story now. I can't spare any more time griping about those bad people at SCO. They have become irrelevant.
www.jmagar.com
-
SCO's response: "Of course they're denying it! Denying it means they have something to hide!"
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
All of those things would infringe on SCO's intelectual property.
SCO: there is line by line copying of SCO code in Linux.
IBM: what source code.
SCO: we aren't saying and besides which you deleted the evidence.
davecb5620@gmail.com
SCO is making claims that cannot be proven either way. If there had been such file deletion, the files are gone so there is no proof they were ever there. If there had never been such files, the drives are in the same state as if they had existed and been deleted.
Time to stop playing word games.
Hang the SCO team or line them up in front of a firing squad. This witchhunt has gone on too long. They've used the courts to try to extort customer license fees, they've used the courts to impose heavy expenses on their targets, and they've used the courts to dig for evidence of vague claims without performing the due diligence of searching the public OSS archives first.
Fraud at the least, but I expect SCO is guilty of much worse. Stock manipulation. Extortion. Anything else?
Scrap the firing squad. Hang them and let the bodies rot in public so every other IP leech out there knows what their fate will be.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
I thought so as well so I looked it up: "In answering, the defendant is limited to admitting, denying or denying on the basis he/she/it has no information to affirm or deny"
e cted=488&bold=%7C%7C%7C%7C
Source:http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?sel
No no no, the real fun will begin when they are investigated for what looks like an elusive pump'n'dump scheme.
Doubtful. They'd have to be guilty of criminal misconduct. The only thing that comes to mind that'll do that is if the SEC goes after them on suspicion of running a pump-and-dump scheme.
SCO's toast no matter what, but SCO execs are probably safe. It takes a lot to "pierce the corporate veil" and go after execs directly.
SCO: there is line by line copying of SCO code in Linux.
IBM: what source code.
SCO: we aren't saying and besides which you deleted the evidence.
You forgot one step:
Dear Mr. "Bates":
Please send next payment.
Regards,
SCO
That's not technically true. While I agree with your general sentiment (this trial really needs to end), and while SCO's spin on this makes me dizzy, there are still ways to find evidence that has been deleted off a hard drive. (As long as the drive still exists, you can pull things off of it. The earlier after a deletion, the better chance you have to find things, but unless the developers were used to writing over the entire drive -- and had done so after the deletion of code -- there is most likely some of it left on the drive.)
Just so you know.
I [may] disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
SCO are not irrelevant, not yet. They need to be stamped into the ground with a boot heel, every ounce of life ground out of them, every molecule disassociated. Next, their principals need to be sued into oblivion, and their demonic attorneys censured for their unbelievably atrocious behavior. A message needs to be sent to IP trolls and their minions everywhere.
Even though we've centered the SCO trolls in the gun sights, there's still plenty of time to enjoy watching them try to slither away before their component atoms are blasted back to the alternate universe they came from. The longer and more painful this process is for them, the better. Where's the popcorn? Bring on the show.
As long as we're talking about IBM denies destroying evidence, we're talking about a question like "when you stopped beating your wife." Even if it has nothing to do with reality, it instills into the subconscious "knowledge" that will be hard to ignore.
Well OK, so maybe only a retarded person would try to make (or buy) that argument. We already know that the SCO legal team isn't retarded -- they're getting paid buckets of cash to drag their feet. The SCO upper mangement isn't retarded -- I'm sure they made a killing on options in the few days when SCO was trading at $20 a share after the lawsuit was announced. Then I guess the retarded people would be... the other people who invested in SCO expecting this lawsuit to go anywhere. Poor retarded people, always being taken advantage of by SCO...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
SCO can't find any infringing code in teh "OPEN SOURCE" of GNU/Linux.
So there is nothing for GNU/Linux to have to remove and work around.
Or was this already obvious?
It appears to me that this SCO v's IBM is a type of "Concorde Effect" (aka sunk-cost)
SCO have NO other business plan, and will (more likely than not) be destroyed if they pull out. They have NO other choice but to carry on this fight to the very end. There is, basically, nowhere to retreat to.
My guess is that, in 5 years time, there will be an economic thery known as "The SCO Effect" which will basically be summerised as:
There comes a point when a company has invested so much money in one course of action, which is now apparent to all parties (inside and external to the company) to be futile; however they have no other choice but to carry on, with a full knowledge, and with clarity of thought (albeit fatally flawed) that this is the ONLY course of action left to them.
The company have to have faith in the outcome as failure will lead to the total destruction of the firm.
The company has no choice BUT to drive on - no matter how ludicous their actions. This is, in summary, The SCO Effect. These are the slow, painful death-throws of a weaken and fatally wounded company trying to do anything to survive.
Lets face it - it happens frequently in the software industry.
Jaj