Slashdot Mirror
SCO Says IBM Hurt Profits
AlanS2002 sends in a link from a local Utah newspaper covering the SCO-IBM trial. The Deseret News chose to emphasize SCO's claim that IBM hurt SCO's relationship with several high-tech powerhouses, causing SCO's market share and revenues to plummet. "[A]n attorney for Lindon-based SCO said IBM 'pressured' companies to cut off their relationships with SCO. And 'the effect on SCO was devastating and it was immediate'..." As usual Groklaw has chapter and verse on all the arguments in the motions for summary judgement.
... to pay your $699 license fee you cock-smoking tea-baggers.
Isn't that what competition is about? Taking business from competitors?
I fear the Y2038 bug
Probably SCO should have thought about this before suing IBM for billions of dollars (with fake claims.)
You can't handle the truth.
IBM 'pressured' companies to cut off their relationships with SCO
Has IBM finally learned from Microsoft?
Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
The theme "not our fault". When will these jokers die? Wasn't it SCO suing it's own customers that might have had something to do with their profit loss? Or their millions spent on flimsy legal activities? Might it have been... oh what's the point, it is all too ridiculous anymore. There's just about nothing that can be said that hasn't not been said ad infinitum already. This stuff almost doesn't rate as 'news' anymore, just another spewing forth from the absurd. The news will be when this is over and their corpse rotting.
Can we call this one a dead horse and move on?
They started it.
Research shows that 67% of those who use the term "research shows", are just making shit up.
SCO did plenty of hurt to their own selves when they fired letter-shots across the bow of companies using Linux.
After they're done with this suit, they will sue IBM for messing up their restrooms, for parking in the wrong spots, for eating greasy food while looking at their legal documents, for IBM laywers not wiping their feet before entering SCO on rainy days, for sneazing colds around, etc. etc. etc.
Table-ized A.I.
If it was any other company maybe I would care.
Ok, so I am reading this article "SCO Says IBM Hurt Profits",
and it gets only one tag: "IBM" ? WTF? Is this the day of the podpeople or what.
This is slashdot dammit. I need my yes/no/fud/SCO*!!!! fix.
IBM hurt the relationship between SCO and other people by fighting SCO's copyright suit. By fighting the copyright suit, it pissed off many people who decided to move away from SCO lest they may be sued in a few years.
Fight Spammers!
I'm sure the impact on their business had nothing to do with them frothing at the mouth and raving like a pack of lunatics since 2003 while threatening to sue their own customers over using Linux.
Nope, not a bit.
It, like Groklaw, must all be part of a Scientology-level conspiracy by IBM to discredit them and make them look bad.
*sigh*
Sanity is a sandbox. I prefer the swings.
Will this IBM/SCO deal every be completely over, with no more trials, hearings and news?
It just seems like this has been going on longer than other trial I can remember.
Gone!
I think common sense have more to do with companies to cutting off their relationships with SCO, than IBM pressure. Who would be stupid enough to do business with companies that are in the habit of suing their customers.
God is REAL! Unless explicitly declared INTEGER
There seems to be no limit. When you squeeze the bull's nutsack, he may ram a horn up your ass. Good for IBM.
Their claims are such an act of desperation, it has turned this entire incident into a comic farce.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
SCO is still being backed up MS and probably Sun. Until they quite backing them, it will not end.
Actually, they are looking for the Q-bomb. Darl needs to improve his reading list.
Despite the daily press conferences, SCO never came up with any evidence to support their claims. They did briefly claim copyright infringement on a specific piece of code only to have the claim shot down within hours when the original author was tracked down.
While all of that was going on, blogs all over the tech world spouted off about how lousy SCO's products were, how there are better alternatives, and how SCO appeared to be running a pump-and-dump scheme to swindle investors just before the company finally died.
Their quarter filings looked rather dim as well. They didn't even have enough funds to pay for their own lawsuit. That is until Microsoft came along and gave them a huge infusion of cash in return for something Microsoft had no use for. This reinforced the idea that the daily press conferences truly were nothing more than FUD.
SCO encountered even more troubles with an SEC investigation and the deaths of two key board members who both shot themselves in the head.
If you were a SCO customer watching all of this, would you stick with their product?
I was thinking about this last night. When will such litigation end? Even though the fashion industry has its share of IP warriors, nobody ever seems to be in court for years over the stitching on the seams of a bra or underwear. Why is that? Is it just because nobody cares enough to report that, or is it because the media likes the hi-tech IP wars better, or is it because other industries are not so hell bent on destroying each other?
I'd venture to say that people own roughly the same value or more worth of clothes compared to home computing equipment. Surely the value of sales is roughly similar?
Is it because hi-tech companies are more involved in the political arena? OR is it just because the patent system is woefully unable to deal with hi-tech IP issues?
I think its the latter, and the industry as a whole should begin to focus on that problem to avoid all these other litigation based problems.
Just a though
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
The Deseret News is nothing but a rag, I've lived in Utah for years and I don't think I've ever seen them report anything well and timely. The Deseret News will support anything Mormon or Utah over other religions and states, don't bother reading.
I will someday have children and their children's children will still be reading about what is going on with the SCO debacle. Good grief.
SCO helped to make Linux headline news...
And as they say, news, good bad or poor is better then none.
Since when was IBM responsible for SCO's profits?
SCO Xenix cough Openserver has the been the worst unix out on the market for almost 20 years and Caldera's Openlinux lite sucked goatballs. Old sco has the opportunity to make Openserver more like Solaris, AIX, and Linux for over 2 decades but decided to make it stagnant for decades.
Worse SCO intentionally crippled its product by not having standard components like a TCP/IP stack unless of course you pay $1200 or something outrageous. No gnu tools, no debuggers, no well just about anything to troubleshoot a dying sco.
But it seems IBM hurt SCO not by endoring Linux but SCO's crappy linux distro and lottery ticket. Darl McBride won over $26 million personally from the disk compression lawsuit from MS that was included with DOS 6. I think he wanted the same thing to happen with Linux and they were hoping old sco would provide. Bad move.
SCO has itself to blame and they could have been the next redhat or maybe sun if old sco actually improved their os 20 years ago. Its time it died like other companies who made poor business decisions.
http://saveie6.com/
First you fight them, then you laugh at them, then you ignore them, then you win.
(With apologies to Gandhi).
One of the absolute requirements for a lawsuit is that there be damages. No damages, no suit. SCO has to claim that IBM has damaged them in some way and the only way that counts (for companies at least) is monetary. There are really only a few ways one company can cause damages to another. Hurting the profits is one such.
... Launch the suit, make sure you haven't forgotten anything that will get it immediately tossed out of court. Make it obvious that the suit will grind on for years and cost a zillion in lawyer's fees. Hope the other side will pay you off just to get rid of you. Of course that's what SCO tried and it didn't quite work.
So, the next time you want to launch a bogus lawsuit to cause a nuisance or FUD or something, don't forget to claim damages. Of course, since you're a person not a company, you have a few other kinds of damage you could sue for; let's see; your car was bumped by a shopping cart; you can claim whiplash; your quality of life was irreperably damaged
SCO Says IBM Hurt Profits
Good.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Sour grapes. Unless they're alleging IBM did something illegal, why should anyone care? And even if they're alleging IBM did something illegal, why should anyone believe them?
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
...that tried to "persuade" companies like Daimler-Chrysler to not use Linux via potential law suits, thus trying to hurt Redhat's and Novell's profits? Granted, for a tort case to succeed there has to be damages, but still, it's like the pot calling the kettle black....
SCO has no right to whine. They digged their own grave.
Sorry, I tuned out everything after "SCO says..."
It, like Groklaw, must all be part of a Scientology-level conspiracy by IBM to discredit them and make them look bad.
Scientologists are harmless paragons of PR wisdom next to this clumsy attempt by M$ to "compete" with free software.
Microsoft paid these jokers to do as they did and probably directed their actions. SCO deserves contempt, M$ deserves your hatred and the same kind of treatment.
It was easy enough to hack off and replace SCO, eliminating Windoze is not much more difficult and brings much greater rewards. I've been M$ free for five years, you can do it too. The further you get away from it, the better off you are and the more you wonder how you ever got things done before.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I thought it was because theysued their own customers.
CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
How much longer until we get to watch Darl McBride's podcasts; live commentary about "intellectual property" from federal pound-Darl-in-the-ass prison? SCO remind me of the black knight except less funny. I'd still get a belly laugh out of Darl and friends being criminally convicted.
Lets' take up a collection for them while we're at it.
... and know intimately:
Would
You
Like
Fries
With
That?
Umm like i think i said the last time PC/Linux folks are busy making the world work while mac folks are busy worrying about what color the paint is
/other mac conferences
Does anybody know the numbers for Linux conferences verses mac world
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
Oh booo freakin' hoooo
This case reminds me of something from the plot of the early '90's movie From the Hip, starring Judd Nelson. In the early parts of the film Nelson's character is told by the client he is defending against an assault charge that the client knows its a losing case but he wants the trial to last at least 3 days just to hurt the plaintiff financially. Nelson's character manages to stretch the trial out for much longer than that by staging a hearing over the admissibility of the word "Asshole" in court.
Besides the presence of Assholes, this reminds me of this SCO case because it seems as though SCO's strategy for some time is no longer connected to winning a judgment in the case, but to making this case drag on.
- An OS that hasn't be updated in forever
- Absolutely no native software
- A decent chance of being sued by SCO for no real reason.
- A decent chance of being sued by IBM or someone in the Linux world for using software that SCO distributed in violation of the GPL
- An absolute lack of techies with experience in your platform
- The 50% "conscience" bonus you need to pay your admins to work with SCO
I'm moving my servers to SCO today!!Probably SCO should have thought about this before suing IBM for billions of dollars
When the whole thing started, I was wondering if anyone at SCO had any clue they lived in this big glass house. They must have been blinded by the bright shiny money MS offered. Were they thinking they were immune from returned stones?
The RIAA is running into the same problem with customer relations but the sales drop off isn't that great yet.
The truth shall set you free!
SCO is a bunch of whiny babies that can't get ahead on their own merit, so they want to take it from someone else.
We'd all be better off if we follow the advice given on this website.
A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
It, like Groklaw, must all be part of a Scientology-level conspiracy by IBM to discredit them and make them look bad.
Has anybody gotten any updates on Paula Jones? The conspiracy theory has not been laid to rest yet.
I have been listening for an update.
The truth shall set you free!
You forgot arrogant, difficult, expensive tech support!
[1]http://news.com.com/2100-1016-1010569.html
Evil IBM "pressured" companies to dump SCO by offering better, more reliable, standards compliant software for less money. Curse you IBM!!!
So, they started with:
1. License Linux for $699 a-piece
2. ???
3. Profit!!!
Then it turned into:
1. ???
2. ???
3. Profit!!!
And now, finally it's:
1. ???
2. ???
3. ???
What profits? Once tricking day traders into investing in their law suit factory, won't work. Because even they have figured out you have no real product to sell, what are the profits supposed to be based on?
Regrettably, /. dropped the sarcasm tags.
I hope IBM will be doing some more of that.
They miss the mark every single time. I mean it couldn't possibly be the fact that they chose to sue their own customers that alienated people from them.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Just as long as you remember that Microsoft is a fscking monopoly.
Microsoft is the biggest company that uses fsck? Does the Unix community know this? I think the Justice Dept. should check into this...
I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
Alas... my response was to that particular point in your post (and not the other ones) which isn't sarcastic at all when you know the facts. Just a reality.
you might remember more.
IBM was sued by the Gov for some 20+ years. And AT&T had a anti-trust lawsuit for years.
It, like Groklaw, must all be part of a Scientology-level conspiracy by IBM to discredit them and make them look bad.
Not scientology. Mormon, which, as someone who watched that cult destroy countless lives (including people with whom I share genetic material), is at least as toxic as cult, and certainly as dishonest.
To those who have escaped the clutches of these sorts of cults, or (as in my case, as an atheist since I was five or six) have had to live a life of rationality in a sea of religiously induced madness, I can only say that it is unsurprising that the SCO attack on Linux, and by extension free software in general, was fostered in Utah and led by a Mormon bishop.
...meet response from the past...f /Body_painting.JPG
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d
My sig can beat up your sig.
Can't you just see Darl McBride behind the wheel of a rusted-out Yugo, puttering along, belching blue smoke as the SCOmobile burns more oil than gasoline, continually backfiring, muffler dragging on the pavement, one wheel replaced with a half-sized spare covered in 3" of dust, heading for a railroad crossing where the gates are down, the lights a flashing, the train whistle sounding, and the ground is shaking from the approaching train thundering down the mountain at full speed?
Darl's cackling in a high-pitched voice, completely out of control, "Make your time! All your code are belong to us!" as he approaches the crossing...
Suing your own customers already has a working business model.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
IBM is not the only company to squeeze others for their profit. They killed Amdahl out of greed. They've done that in the software and hardware business many times over. It's not like IBM is an angel.
For those of you who remember, it was not too long ago when Microsoft was the champion of freedom and IBM was the tyrannical oppressor.
Microsoft is often bashed about this very same practice, squeezing PC makers to ship machines pre-installed with windows "otherwise....", however, don't forget the hundreds of other companies that resort to similar unethical behavior.
That said, SCO asked for it. They are getting shafted and they only have themselves to blame. This time, I am all for IBM. When it comes to fscking with open source and Linux, take no prisoners and spare no quarter.
What is the general state of business honesty and governance in Utah? I'm in Australia and a bunch of scammers from Utah called iMergent have turned up again this week - last time they had to pay out close to a million for scamming small investors with a fake ecommerce scam, but for now law enforcement can only warn people to be wary that they may reoffend. Is the place really a business wild west complete with snake oil salesman or am I getting a very distorted view?
thats what you call plummit. http://finance.google.com/finance?q=SCOX
Really? I though their primary source of revenue was to sue any tech company it possibly could to generate revenue streams, as opposed to actually marketing anything. It would be wonderful if someone could figure out a way to destroy SCO and put all of its officers and shareholders in a deep, dark, dank, rat and roach-infested dungeon somewhere for a very long time.
You can't hurt something which doesn't exist. That means SCO must actually have profits. That is the real news here.
Hopefully, that's next.
Tech Public Policy stuff
s/Paula/Pamela/ and she's back. You really should read Groklaw, you know.
From what I've heard, SCO has become pretty much a lawsuit machine, throwing it's resources into the suit to the detriment of it's software development.
Thus, SCO's products would be becoming outdated, supported by a company that doesn't appear to be in solid financial shape. The odds of me being able to maintain any SCO systems would look bleak.
Add in the anger at the company for it's frivolous and damaging lawsuit, I'd imagine that I'd be able to get rid of the systems.
I don't read AC A human right
These SCO bastards never cease to amaze me. IBM hurt SCO's profits, and scared away their customers? What about all this FUD (that was knowingly false) that has been streaming out of SCO since this case began.
Someone should really slug Mr. McBride in the nose.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Utah is run by Mormons. To give you some understanding of the Mormon mindset vis a vis business, consider the statue of Brigham Young in front of the Mormon temple in Salt Lake City. He has his back to the church and his arms outstretched towards the bank across the street.
You see, as long as we wear our magic sin-repelling underwear, we can sin all we want and it doesn't stick.
Now? About fifteen years out of date (funny, how SCO's ability to innovate stopped around the same time they started litigating).
It is funny how some people just do not get what is an acceptable, ethical way, of behaving in a capitlist environment.
The idea is that you compete based on your own merits, not that you set up protection rackets in order to force others to use your products or services.
IBM putting pressure on its clients would be an action of an unethical company, but given the other comments on this thread, and who is doing the complain (a legal representative of SCO) I think we can safely assume that IBM did not do what the poor sod is claiming they did.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
If (and this is a gigantic if of the size of SCO's lies) IBM were doing client intimidation, they should surely be denounced.
SCO has, how can I put it, a little credibility problem at this stage, so anything they said should be taken with a monumental grain of salt.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
You may not have been following this whole saga, so you're probably not aware you're talking about a different company.
The Santa Cruz Operation was located in Santa Cruz, California, and no longer really exists (what's left is called "Tarantella", and focuses on one product that SCO had before they sold off the UNIX business).
This UNIX business was purchased by a Linux company named Caldera, in Utah. When McBride came along and took control, they changed the name to "The SCO Group" (SCO doesn't stand for anything). So you're in fact talking about a different company, with a different (but similar) name, located in a different state, with totally different employees.
I guess I'm still saddened to hear how the Santa Cruz Operation has ended up; but at least they didn't come to this (even if their name did).