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.

Comments

Hurt Profits?

[Sillygates]

Isn't that what competition is about? Taking business from competitors?

Re:Hurt Profits?

[nmb3000]

Isn't that what competition is about? Taking business from competitors?

Remember that next time Microsoft is brought up.

There is more to a situation than just "that's what companies do". The reason Slashdotters get their panties in a twist when Microsoft is brought up is because their business practices are not always kosher.

Your +5 Insightful proves, it seems, that Slashdot likes to forget that this can apply to any large company, and that includes IBM and Google.

Re:Hurt Profits?

[Samari711]

The truth of this statement is, of course, an entirely separate discussion.

Actually, it IS the discussion at hand. In the hearing IBM stated that they have depositions from the heads of those companies saying that IBM did not in fact pressure them. This means that all of SCOx's evidence is hearsay. Additionally IBM goes on to say that even if what SCOx was right, what they claim IBM did is not illegal.

Re:Hurt Profits?

[GSloop]

IBM is NOT a convicted monopolist in any of the markets SCO is competing in. (If you can say SCO is competing in ANY market, other than frivolous litigation.)

Further, IBM has persuaded, at least allegedly, it's competitors (BayStar Capital Management, Intel, Oracle, Computer Associates, Hewlett Packard and Novell) to put the hit on SCO. Monopoly (of which IBM isn't by far) simply won't fly here.

SCO's claims are laughable.

Good

[roman_mir]

Probably SCO should have thought about this before suing IBM for billions of dollars (with fake claims.)

Re:Good

[schon]

It's not like it is going to go up in a puff of smoke once someone sees it. No, but (to paraphrase Douglas Adams) it might go up in a puff of logic.

actually, let me fix that: s/might/would/

Re:Good

[dbIII]

just really, really protective about showing the judge their evidence

In which case they should never be in court either and should be sulking in a corner if they have something they don't want to tell anyone. It is very late in the process - there is no evidence only expensive delaying tactics which would not be necessary if there was evidence in their favour.

The fake website DOS attack, the MIT experts on the payroll that didn't exist, the millions of lines of stolen code, the magic briefcase that could hold a couple of hundred kilograms of paper with the complete linux source code legibly printed on it and still be carried in one hand out of an aircraft in Germany - all these things point to a lack of integrity. It is most likely a smokescreen to conceal what is ultimately a con job - and linux is just the vehicle since it is complex enough to fool some credulous investors. I'd be curious to see how much of the SCO legal expenses go directly in the CEO's brothers pocket. It really does look like claim salting in the wild west to me.

Infinite variations on a theme?

[el cisne]

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.

Re:Infinite variations on a theme?

[kimvette]

It is like watching a train wreck, you cannot help but watch.

Except in the case of SCO, the train is heading for a compact car, and we're all rooting for the train.

Re:Infinite variations on a theme?

[Kjella]

Except in the case of SCO, the train is heading for a compact car, and we're all rooting for the train.

Nah, a car isn't unsympatethic enough. At this point it's like a skunk that ran past the train station spraying all the passengers, then set off down the tracks. Right now the train is still steaming up but everyone knows it'll just be a small bloody smear left when it's over.

Almost 5 Years...

[daigu]

Can we call this one a dead horse and move on?

Re:Almost 5 Years...

[MarkRose]

Can we call this one a dead horse and move on?

Nei-ei-ei-eigh!

Source of the Hurt

[pashdown]

SCO did plenty of hurt to their own selves when they fired letter-shots across the bow of companies using Linux.

This will never end

[Tablizer]

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.

IBM did hurt SCO's relationship.

[www.sorehands.com]

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.

Re:IBM did hurt SCO's relationship.

[rsmoody]

I have nothing to back this up, but I would put money on a large percentage of companies that were/are running SCO software were also running Linux somewhere. My bet is that when this started happening and the writing on the wall showed that SCO would be suing companies for running Linux if they could, they dumped any and all SCO software as fast as possible so that they would not pull some sort of "we are suing you for using Linux, and if you don't pay up instead of go to court, we are going to drop all support for any SCO software we are supporting." The smart thing in this case for any company using SCO software would be to run away from any SCO product and run FAST! When I worked at AutoZone's SSC, I remember seeing large numbers of Linux and Sun servers, but not a trace of SCO and if I remember correctly, in talking to some admins about the situation, they dumped any and all SCO products like a VERY hot potato not long after the suit started as their relationship with IBM seemed just rosy. flameaway

Not their fault

[Edward Kmett]

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*

And you take it seriously?

[Talgrath]

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.

Re:finally

[ScrewMaster]

Do a little research on "Amdahl". You'll learn very quickly how IBM used to treat competitors, back in the age of big iron, long before Microsoft was even a gleam in Bill Gates' eye. Sure, they've "re-invented" themselves in the past couple decades but we're still talking about Big Blue. SCO would have been better off tangling with the IRS.

Well

[Billly Gates]

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.

Re:Well

[Andy_R]

"Since when was IBM responsible for SCO's profits?"

Since the day SCO's business plan switched from 'sell stuff' to 'pretend we own patents on IBM's stuff'.

Re:Well

[Anna Merikin]

Caldera's Openlinux lite sucked goatballs.

Hey, you got too far when you trash-talk Caldera OpenLinux. Ver 1.3 was the first Linux I installed and then actually USED; I had installed an earlier SuSE, but could not grok how to use any of the programs it installed. COL-1.3 had KDE-1.0; WordPerfect's free Linux word processor was my main app. (I'm a writer.) I used it for several years until Netscape started requiring glibc6 and I had to change to another distro (RH)

OK, COL wouldn't compile even trivial programs out of the box, binary RPMs were nearly impossible to find as its directory structure was unique, and support was nonexistent, but it WASN'T WINDOWS, it didn't crash, and Lisa, its version of SuSE's YaST, was easy to use and worked well, making configuration easier.

We all have our first loves. Sometimes they had pimples and bad breath, but no one likes to hear our first Linux distro called bad names.

So what?

[ScrewMaster]

SCO Says IBM Hurt Profits

Good.

Re:An interesting question, indeed.

[phasm42]

Big businesses do not own massive climate controlled rooms filled with panties. We hope.

Re:Wait, what? SCO?! -- what year IS this, anyway?

[z3d4r]

Your posting to slashdot, and u have a 4 digit uid. You will never have children, as that requires interaction on an intimate level with a member of the opposite sex.

More likely your home made robotic shark with freakin lasers will read about the SCO debacle in soviet russia as they welcome their new beowulf cluster overlords running linux.

OMG! Sign me up for SCO!

[ZachPruckowski]

Think of all the benefits of going to SCO for your Unix needs:

• 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!!

Re:Wait, what? SCO?! -- what year IS this, anyway?

[Seumas]

Screw you, I have PLENTY of intimate interactions with members of the opposite sex! Sure, they usually aren't aware of it, but still . . . :P

The 3 Stages of SCO Business Plan...

[Anonymous Coward]

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. ???