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.

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.

Re:Almost 5 Years...

[MarkRose]

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

Nei-ei-ei-eigh!

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.

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*

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.

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. ???