Sun even more so. Unlike Msft, Sun insisted that their contributions remain confidenctial. Also, unlike msft, Sun got a buttload of option given to them by scox.
Sun is saying that they were just buying drivers from scox. Since when does a purchase like that come with a few hundred thousand options? The options are for $1.83, SCOX now selling for $13.
>>most of these guys got options when the stock was at $.66 just before all of this craziness started.
Actually, in January, when scox was still planning the lawsuit. SCOX insiders gave themselves a boatload of shares for - get this - $0.001 each. So insiders could sell shares for one cent each and still make 1000% profit. SCOX stock is now $13/share. Insiders are selling like mad.
>>As for the legal system, there is no wonder it breaks when you have no faith in it.>Faith is required to get something to work, so obviously something more than just the system is broken.>Blaiming the system is childish and naive.
Why is it so completely impossible that the system *is* responsible? The system in Germany worked, why not the USA? Maybe there are problems in the USA legal system that need to be repaired. Why is this point of view "childish and naive" ??
>>If someone knowingly gives you money just because you said they should and they were to stupid to tell you to f-off then that's their problem.
IANAL - but I'm not sure about that. Practically everyday I get these emails adressed from Dr Uhga-Buhga in the Congo or something. I'm supposed to deposit my money in some bank in Nigeria and make millions. Are you telling me this obvious fraud is legal? Are you saying that anybody who falls for fraud deserves what they get because it's their fault for being stupid?
Don't forget: when a PHB actually pays for scox extortion, it doesn't hurt the PHB, it hurts the company.
At what point can SCO finally be charged with fraud, extortion, and stock manipulation? When can SCO at least be sued in a civil court?
This is the most blantant racket I have ever witnessed. And the USA legal system seems to be completely incapible of doing anything about it. Frankly it is beginning to look like another huge failure of the USA legal system.
Germany shut down SCO a long time ago. Germany said put up or shut up - show us some evidence or stop making claims. Predictably, SCO ran away with it's tail between it's legs.
I have always been a bit patriotic. Honorably discharged from the US Air Force and all. It pains me to see how patheticly inept the US legal system really is.
SCOX finally registered some unix copyrights at the same time that SCOX announced new licensing plan.
Do you suppose that scox wants people to think that the two events are related? As if Scox registering unix copywrite, somehow gives scox some special rights regarding linux?
The real reason that scox is up 15% today, after being up 15% Friday is because SCO has announced their new licensing plan.
>>The company said it plans to offer UnixWare licenses tailored to support run-time, binary use of Linux for all commercial users of Linux based on the 2.4.x and later versions of the Linux kernel. SCO said any commercial Linux customers that purchase the license will be held harmless against past copyright violations and for any future use of Linux in a run-only, binary format
To me it seems that scox is putting the cart before the horse.
Shouldn't scox *first* prove that scox has some special rights to all versions of Linux with kernel 2.4 or above?
Then, *if* and only *if* scox does have some special rights, *then* scox can demand that linux users somehow pay scox for the privildge of using linux.
Right now scox is only *saying* they have special rights to linux. Talk is cheap. I could *say* I own the Brooklyn Bridge. Does that mean I can put up my own toll-booth on the bridge? Just because I say so?
By the way, if I had contributed to a voluntary effort like efforts, only to see my efforts stolen by McBride, I would be pissed.
Also, consider that scox insiders gave themselves a buttload of options for $0.001 each in January when scox was planning the lawsuit. Also scox set up an automatic options exercise plan in January.
Because it's all a racket to pump the stock price so canopy group, and scox execs, can back out. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if this lawsuit never goes to court.
Consider:
June 13th: scox share price goes through the roof on *huge* volume because scox swears it can, and will, cancle IBM's UNIX license.
June 16th: scox could have gone to court and filed for an immediate tempory injunction to stop ibm from selling aix. Scox did nothing of the sort. Instead scox announced that *they* consider ibm's license cancled, and that scox would be "seeking" a permenate injunction - which will take years. But that didn't stop the tech-pop-media from pumping out dozens of headlines about ibm's unix license being cancled.
Scox doesn't want to go court ever. Scox doesn't want to show "evidence" ever.
In Germany, scox was told to put up or shut up. Scox had to show *some* evidence or stop making their claims. Scox immidiately shut down their German web-sites, and signed a document stating they would make no further claims. Germany is scox's second largest market. And scox gave up the German market rather show any evidence.
The entire German incident was ignored by the USA tech-pop-media.
>>The program will be announced "within the next month or so,"
Last December, scox said they were "planing" a linux licensing programing. Then, about a month ago, scox said they would announce such a plan in July. July is more than half-way over, everybody is wondering what is going on. Now scox is saying they will have a plan "within a month or so." Or so?
Could it be that scox knows they can not legally implement such a plan? In two months will scox call another such teleconference to anounce their big plan, only to say once again: "we're working on some details to try and create some kind of a licensing program for Linux users to be able to run Linux legally."
Some details? Haven't they been working on "some details" since December? How complicated could it be.
Yet another SCOX bluff? Remember scox said they would stop ibm from selling AIX, they haven't. Scox said they would audit AIX users, they haven't. They said they were going sue Linus Torvald, they haven't.
But it did drive the stock price up another 15% in one day. And you better believe, insiders are selling like mad.
If you have been in IT long enough to remember the 1980's, then maybe you can see this as a continuation of the trend that started in the 80's and was interupted by the dot-com explosion.
Remember that episode of the Simpons, where bart goes to work for a dot-com? The dot-com pays bart, and everybody else with shares of stock they keep on toilet paper rolls?
It is just like that. Yahoo simply dilutes their stock another 5%. What the heck? Yahoo already way over 100 P/E.
Don't you get it? It's a matter of: you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. Sunw wants to maintain the goodwill of Linux users, while at the same time doing all they can harm linux - because linus isn't good for sunw's cash cow.
>>1) Sun hasn't purchased those shares, so SCO has not benefitted except by people making a big deal of it and giving them further press *hint*
Sun will purchase those share on the same day sunw sells them. It's a $2 million dollar gift from scox. The gift is in exchange for sunw shelling out a few million, which scox desperately needed.
>> 2) Even if Sun does purchase those shares, does ANYONE think that $384,000 is going to help SCO if they get into financial straights?
Not much. What really helps SCO is sunw giving scox millions for technology that sunw didn't really need. Just as msft gave scox millions for technology that msft didn't really need.
December: SCOX started claiming that their code was in Linux. Suggested they may start charging Linux unsers $99 per CPU.
January: SCOX insiders gave themselves a buttload of options for $0.001 each.
February: SUNW starts secretly supporting SCOX, and gets a buttload of warrents.
March: SCOX officially files a lawsuit against IBM.
May: MSFT starts supporting SCOX's efforts.
June: SCOX is now leagally able to make good on their threat to cancle IBM's UNIX license. SCO could go to court and ask for a temporty immediate injunction that would forbid IBM from selling AIX. SCOX does not do this. Instead SCOX claims that as far as they are concerned, all versions of AIX are illegal.
"Yeah because that much money (210,000 shares * $2 share = $384,300) is really going to make or break Sun. Uh-huh"
I think you have the math wrong, as previous poster pointed out:
---
SCO price as of this moment: $11.16.
Warrant price: $1.86.
Current profit: $9.3/share x 210,000 shares = $1,953,000
---
"Yes, I work for Sun. Yes, I think this stock deal is a tiny bit of a black mark in terms of supporting the Linux community"
Tiny? I think penguin-suit suit McNealy has just revealed whos side SUNW is on, after having lied about it all this time. SCO and MSFT are out to ruin Linux, and SUNW is bed with both of them. What a surprise, what three companies have the most to gain from ruining Linux?
Why do you suppose SUNW wanted to keep this quite?
>>Yeah because that much money (210,000 shares * $2 share = $384,300) is really going to make or break Sun. Uh-huh.>Yes, I work for Sun. Yes, I think this stock deal is a tiny bit of a black mark in terms of supporting the Linux community>But seriously, the math is simple and available to anyone looking at it
Not to simple for you. The warrents are not big deal. But it does show which side Sun is on.
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/m ai n/0,14179,2877578,00.html
We get several dozen requests a month just to come in and see AIX or HP-UX code base. And C++ programming languages, we own those, have licensed them out multiple times, obviously. We have a lot of royalties coming to us from C++. It was interesting to see the depth of Caldera's intellectual capital.
MozillaQuest Magazine: C++ appears to be one of the properties that SCO acquired through Novell's acquisition of AT&T's UNIX Systems Laboratories and subsequent purchase of Novell's UNIX interests by SCO. At this time most Linux and/or GNU/Linux distributions include C++ compilers and editors. Is this something for which SCO currently charges? If so, just what are the current arrangements? If not, will C++ licensing and enforcement be added to SCO's licensing and enforcement program?
Blake Stowell: C++ is one of the properties that SCO owns today and we frequently are approached by customers who wish to license C++ from us and we do charge for that. Those arrangements are done on a case-by-case basis with each customer and are not disclosed publicly. C++ licensing is currently part of SCO's SCOsource licensing program.
MozillaQuest Magazine: How about GNU C++? Does GNU C++ use SCO IP? If so, could SCO license and/or charge for use of its IP in GNU C++?
Blake Stowell: I honestly don't know.
MozillaQuest Magazine: Does the C++ that currently is included in most if not all Linux distributions contain SCO IP?
(a) If so, is that being done with or without SCO permissions/licensing?
(b) If so, what impact/affect does this have on the ability of people to freely distribute and use copies of those Linux distributions? (Under GNU licensing, anyone may make as many copies of a GNU/Linux distribution as they please, freely distribute them for no charge and/or for a charge, and use a GNU/Linux on as many computes as they please -- at no charge. Etc.)
Blake Stowell: Again, I don't know. That's something we would have to research.
``Be afraid. Be very afraid.''
regards, alexander.
P.S. Does anyone here know whether Microsoft was smart enough to include C++ (in addition to a rather mysterious "applications interface layer") in their recent license agreement with SCO ?
http://www.byte.com/documents/s=8276/byt10557846 22 054/0616_marshall.html (SCO Owns Your Computer: "All Your Base Are Belong To Us",...)
>>its pointless to embark on this stunt if they didn't feel they had a chance.. just beacuse we have not seen the evidence doesnt mean its real
Is that a joke? SCOX stock is up 600% since they started this lawsuit, and you better believe the insiders are selling like mad. SCOX said they noticed the offending shares last December. In January top execs gave themselve hundreds of thousands of options for $0.001 each.
SCOX was selling for $0.60 a share this year, which is more than scox is worth, considering that scox has never had a profitable year, and scox is losing marketshare fast. Now scox is selling for about $12 a share.
"obviously Linux owes its heritage to UNIX, but not its code. We would not, nor will not, make such a claim."
-- Darl McBride, CEO, The SCO Group. August 2002
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6293
Check out the 8th paragraph. ----
BTW: scox stock price has surged over the few sessions, and insiders are selling like mad. I think insiders just filed to sell 300K shares after the market closed.
I got this post from the yahoo message boards, the guy has a good point: ----- by: martin_lvnv (41/M/Las Vegas) 07/07/03 04:44 pm Msg: 18108 of 18112
Has anyone considered how strange it is that Darl is going to Japan to talk to the CE Linux Forum? CE stands for consumer electronics: i.e. very small embedded systems running out of ROM most of the time without a hard drive on a small cheap processor.
SCOs published claims both from press releases, news reports and their own complaint are about IBM putting "enterprise" technology into Linux: NUMA, JFS, RCU, SMP etc. None of these things apply in the least to embedded systems running out of ROM on a consumer electronic device. Whats up with that?
My only guess is that SCOs arrogance knows no bounds and they think anything using a computer chip, even a toaster, has to infringe on SCOs IP.
http://www.celinuxforum.org/PressRelease/pr02.ht m
Slashdot Mirror
Sun even more so. Unlike Msft, Sun insisted that their contributions remain confidenctial. Also, unlike msft, Sun got a buttload of option given to them by scox.
Sun is saying that they were just buying drivers from scox. Since when does a purchase like that come with a few hundred thousand options? The options are for $1.83, SCOX now selling for $13.
>>most of these guys got options when the stock was at $.66 just before all of this craziness started.
C OX &selected=SCOX
Actually, in January, when scox was still planning the lawsuit. SCOX insiders gave themselves a boatload of shares for - get this - $0.001 each. So insiders could sell shares for one cent each and still make 1000% profit. SCOX stock is now $13/share. Insiders are selling like mad.
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/Holdings.asp?symbol=S
>>As for the legal system, there is no wonder it breaks when you have no faith in it.>Faith is required to get something to work, so obviously something more than just the system is broken.>Blaiming the system is childish and naive.
Why is it so completely impossible that the system *is* responsible? The system in Germany worked, why not the USA? Maybe there are problems in the USA legal system that need to be repaired. Why is this point of view "childish and naive" ??
>>If someone knowingly gives you money just because you said they should and they were to stupid to tell you to f-off then that's their problem.
IANAL - but I'm not sure about that. Practically everyday I get these emails adressed from Dr Uhga-Buhga in the Congo or something. I'm supposed to deposit my money in some bank in Nigeria and make millions. Are you telling me this obvious fraud is legal? Are you saying that anybody who falls for fraud deserves what they get because it's their fault for being stupid?
Don't forget: when a PHB actually pays for scox extortion, it doesn't hurt the PHB, it hurts the company.
At what point can SCO finally be charged with fraud, extortion, and stock manipulation? When can SCO at least be sued in a civil court?
This is the most blantant racket I have ever witnessed. And the USA legal system seems to be completely incapible of doing anything about it. Frankly it is beginning to look like another huge failure of the USA legal system.
Germany shut down SCO a long time ago. Germany said put up or shut up - show us some evidence or stop making claims. Predictably, SCO ran away with it's tail between it's legs.
I have always been a bit patriotic. Honorably discharged from the US Air Force and all. It pains me to see how patheticly inept the US legal system really is.
SCOX finally registered some unix copyrights at the same time that SCOX announced new licensing plan.
Do you suppose that scox wants people to think that the two events are related? As if Scox registering unix copywrite, somehow gives scox some special rights regarding linux?
Some people would pay. If you rely on the tech-pop-media (zdnet etc) for your news, you would think that scox has a slam-dunk case.
Some people would rather pay than risk litigation.
The real reason that scox is up 15% today, after being up 15% Friday is because SCO has announced their new licensing plan.
7 77 1
>>The company said it plans to offer UnixWare licenses tailored to support run-time, binary use of Linux for all commercial users of Linux based on the 2.4.x and later versions of the Linux kernel. SCO said any commercial Linux customers that purchase the license will be held harmless against past copyright violations and for any future use of Linux in a run-only, binary format
http://boston.internet.com/news/article.php/223
To me it seems that scox is putting the cart before the horse.
Shouldn't scox *first* prove that scox has some special rights to all versions of Linux with kernel 2.4 or above?
Then, *if* and only *if* scox does have some special rights, *then* scox can demand that linux users somehow pay scox for the privildge of using linux.
Right now scox is only *saying* they have special rights to linux. Talk is cheap. I could *say* I own the Brooklyn Bridge. Does that mean I can put up my own toll-booth on the bridge? Just because I say so?
By the way, if I had contributed to a voluntary effort like efforts, only to see my efforts stolen by McBride, I would be pissed.
This should help it make more sense.
C OX &selected=SCOX
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/Holdings.asp?symbol=S
Also, consider that scox insiders gave themselves a buttload of options for $0.001 each in January when scox was planning the lawsuit. Also scox set up an automatic options exercise plan in January.
Not my first post on slashdot about this matter. Also posting on desktoplinux.com, osnews.com, lwn.net, and news groups.
Because it's all a racket to pump the stock price so canopy group, and scox execs, can back out. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if this lawsuit never goes to court.
Consider:
June 13th: scox share price goes through the roof on *huge* volume because scox swears it can, and will, cancle IBM's UNIX license.
June 16th: scox could have gone to court and filed for an immediate tempory injunction to stop ibm from selling aix. Scox did nothing of the sort. Instead scox announced that *they* consider ibm's license cancled, and that scox would be "seeking" a permenate injunction - which will take years. But that didn't stop the tech-pop-media from pumping out dozens of headlines about ibm's unix license being cancled.
Scox doesn't want to go court ever. Scox doesn't want to show "evidence" ever.
In Germany, scox was told to put up or shut up. Scox had to show *some* evidence or stop making their claims. Scox immidiately shut down their German web-sites, and signed a document stating they would make no further claims. Germany is scox's second largest market. And scox gave up the German market rather show any evidence.
The entire German incident was ignored by the USA tech-pop-media.
Scox
>>The program will be announced "within the next month or so,"
C OX &selected=SCOX
Last December, scox said they were "planing" a linux licensing programing. Then, about a month ago, scox said they would announce such a plan in July. July is more than half-way over, everybody is wondering what is going on. Now scox is saying they will have a plan "within a month or so." Or so?
Could it be that scox knows they can not legally implement such a plan? In two months will scox call another such teleconference to anounce their big plan, only to say once again: "we're working on some details to try and create some kind of a licensing program for Linux users to be able to run Linux legally."
Some details? Haven't they been working on "some details" since December? How complicated could it be.
Yet another SCOX bluff? Remember scox said they would stop ibm from selling AIX, they haven't. Scox said they would audit AIX users, they haven't. They said they were going sue Linus Torvald, they haven't.
But it did drive the stock price up another 15% in one day. And you better believe, insiders are selling like mad.
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/Holdings.asp?symbol=S
$5.95 a month. I've used them for years. Good service. No real problems. Have less trouble with them than I've had with the more expensive services.
One thing I would not do is pay for one of these services for a year in advance.
If you have been in IT long enough to remember the 1980's, then maybe you can see this as a continuation of the trend that started in the 80's and was interupted by the dot-com explosion.
I think the telcoms in other nations are usually less privatized than in the USA. That $21 a month is subsidized by the government.
Remember that episode of the Simpons, where bart goes to work for a dot-com? The dot-com pays bart, and everybody else with shares of stock they keep on toilet paper rolls?
It is just like that. Yahoo simply dilutes their stock another 5%. What the heck? Yahoo already way over 100 P/E.
Don't you get it? It's a matter of: you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. Sunw wants to maintain the goodwill of Linux users, while at the same time doing all they can harm linux - because linus isn't good for sunw's cash cow.
>>1) Sun hasn't purchased those shares, so SCO has not benefitted except by people making a big deal of it and giving them further press *hint*
Sun will purchase those share on the same day sunw sells them. It's a $2 million dollar gift from scox. The gift is in exchange for sunw shelling out a few million, which scox desperately needed.
>> 2) Even if Sun does purchase those shares, does ANYONE think that $384,000 is going to help SCO if they get into financial straights?
Not much. What really helps SCO is sunw giving scox millions for technology that sunw didn't really need. Just as msft gave scox millions for technology that msft didn't really need.
Linux is hurting Sun and Msft get it?
>>Sun made this deal before SCO whent nuts
Timeline:
December: SCOX started claiming that their code was in Linux. Suggested they may start charging Linux unsers $99 per CPU.
January: SCOX insiders gave themselves a buttload of options for $0.001 each.
February: SUNW starts secretly supporting SCOX, and gets a buttload of warrents.
March: SCOX officially files a lawsuit against IBM.
May: MSFT starts supporting SCOX's efforts.
June: SCOX is now leagally able to make good on their threat to cancle IBM's UNIX license. SCO could go to court and ask for a temporty immediate injunction that would forbid IBM from selling AIX. SCOX does not do this. Instead SCOX claims that as far as they are concerned, all versions of AIX are illegal.
>>Microsoft and Sun don't like each other, but they have a common enemy: Linux.
Msft and sco-caldera aren't exactly the best of buddies either. sco-caldera is the company that sued msft over the dr-dos thing.
sco-caldera had just bought dr-dos, after sco-caldera got a big fat msft settlement check, soc-calder threw dr-dos on the scrap head.
sc-caldera = rambus.
Not sure what happend to my post, I'll try again.
"Yeah because that much money (210,000 shares * $2 share = $384,300) is really going to make or break Sun. Uh-huh"
I think you have the math wrong, as previous poster pointed out:
---
SCO price as of this moment: $11.16.
Warrant price: $1.86.
Current profit: $9.3/share x 210,000 shares = $1,953,000
---
"Yes, I work for Sun. Yes, I think this stock deal is a tiny bit of a black mark in terms of supporting the Linux community"
Tiny? I think penguin-suit suit McNealy has just revealed whos side SUNW is on, after having lied about it all this time. SCO and MSFT are out to ruin Linux, and SUNW is bed with both of them. What a surprise, what three companies have the most to gain from ruining Linux?
Why do you suppose SUNW wanted to keep this quite?
>>Yeah because that much money (210,000 shares * $2 share = $384,300) is really going to make or break Sun. Uh-huh.>Yes, I work for Sun. Yes, I think this stock deal is a tiny bit of a black mark in terms of supporting the Linux community>But seriously, the math is simple and available to anyone looking at it
Not to simple for you. The warrents are not big deal. But it does show which side Sun is on.
Originally got this from yahoo message board:
m ai n/0,14179,2877578,00.html
2 _S tory03.html#C++_Issues
6 22 054/0616_marshall.html ...)
2 .swf
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/
We get several dozen requests a month just to come in and see AIX
or HP-UX code base. And C++ programming languages, we own those,
have licensed them out multiple times, obviously. We have a lot of
royalties coming to us from C++. It was interesting to see the
depth of Caldera's intellectual capital.
http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux03/ScoSource-0
C++ Issues
MozillaQuest Magazine: C++ appears to be one of the properties
that SCO acquired through Novell's acquisition of AT&T's UNIX
Systems Laboratories and subsequent purchase of Novell's UNIX
interests by SCO. At this time most Linux and/or GNU/Linux
distributions include C++ compilers and editors. Is this
something for which SCO currently charges? If so, just what
are the current arrangements? If not, will C++ licensing and
enforcement be added to SCO's licensing and enforcement program?
Blake Stowell: C++ is one of the properties that SCO owns today
and we frequently are approached by customers who wish to license
C++ from us and we do charge for that. Those arrangements are
done on a case-by-case basis with each customer and are not
disclosed publicly. C++ licensing is currently part of SCO's
SCOsource licensing program.
MozillaQuest Magazine: How about GNU C++? Does GNU C++ use
SCO IP? If so, could SCO license and/or charge for use of its
IP in GNU C++?
Blake Stowell: I honestly don't know.
MozillaQuest Magazine: Does the C++ that currently is included
in most if not all Linux distributions contain SCO IP?
(a) If so, is that being done with or without SCO
permissions/licensing?
(b) If so, what impact/affect does this have on the ability
of people to freely distribute and use copies of those
Linux distributions? (Under GNU licensing, anyone may
make as many copies of a GNU/Linux distribution as they
please, freely distribute them for no charge and/or for
a charge, and use a GNU/Linux on as many computes as they
please -- at no charge. Etc.)
Blake Stowell: Again, I don't know. That's something we would
have to research.
``Be afraid. Be very afraid.''
regards,
alexander.
P.S. Does anyone here know whether Microsoft was smart enough to include
C++ (in addition to a rather mysterious "applications interface layer")
in their recent license agreement with SCO ?
http://www.byte.com/documents/s=8276/byt1055784
(SCO Owns Your Computer: "All Your Base Are Belong To Us",
--
http://www.planettribes.com/allyourbase/AYB
>>its pointless to embark on this stunt if they didn't feel they had a chance.. just beacuse we have not seen the evidence doesnt mean its real
Is that a joke? SCOX stock is up 600% since they started this lawsuit, and you better believe the insiders are selling like mad. SCOX said they noticed the offending shares last December. In January top execs gave themselve hundreds of thousands of options for $0.001 each.
SCOX was selling for $0.60 a share this year, which is more than scox is worth, considering that scox has never had a profitable year, and scox is losing marketshare fast. Now scox is selling for about $12 a share.
Far from pointless.
"obviously Linux owes its heritage to UNIX, but not its code. We would not, nor will not, make such a claim."
3
-- Darl McBride, CEO, The SCO Group. August 2002
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=629
Check out the 8th paragraph.
----
BTW: scox stock price has surged over the few sessions, and insiders are selling like mad. I think insiders just filed to sell 300K shares after the market closed.
I got this post from the yahoo message boards, the guy has a good point:
t m
-----
by: martin_lvnv (41/M/Las Vegas) 07/07/03 04:44 pm
Msg: 18108 of 18112
Has anyone considered how strange it is that Darl is going to Japan to talk to the CE Linux Forum? CE stands for consumer electronics: i.e. very small embedded systems running out of ROM most of the time without a hard drive on a small cheap processor.
SCOs published claims both from press releases, news reports and their own complaint are about IBM putting "enterprise" technology into Linux: NUMA, JFS, RCU, SMP etc. None of these things apply in the least to embedded systems running out of ROM on a consumer electronic device. Whats up with that?
My only guess is that SCOs arrogance knows no bounds and they think anything using a computer chip, even a toaster, has to infringe on SCOs IP.
http://www.celinuxforum.org/PressRelease/pr02.h