At first, I trashed SCO and thought they had _no_case_ based 100% of what I read in the IT media. But within 1 day, I realized what it might be about, since I had been anticipating Monterey for the past 4 years. That's when I actually _read_ the filing. And after reading items 1-49, I came to the "summary items" in 50-55. Then it was _completely_clear_. Which is when I posted this in 7 March 2003. Something that was not only confirmed by various posting by Cox, ESR and Linux _prior_ to May 2003, but _also_ Ransom Love (formerly of Caldera at that time) in his fall 2003 eWeek article. -------- Forwarded Message -------- From: Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith@ieee.org> Reply-To: leaplist@lists.leap-cf.org To: leaplist@lists.leap-cf.org Subject: [LeapList]Re: SCO v. IBM ... is this a joke? -- where SCO _may_ have IBM ... Date: 07 Mar 2003 22:31:30 -0500 On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 22:23, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
They aren't a "software" company, they are a "software IP" company.
The only place SCO _may_ have IBM is on Monterey. I'm sure many of you have never heard of it, but I very much followed it and the "fall out" of IBM a few years after it fizzled. Monterey was supposed to be an "unified" UNIX for 64-bit on a variety of platforms. Maybe this is where SCO has a licensing agreement with IBM, and that's why IBM isn't responding yet. IBM's big, they've got money, and SCO might actually have them, and be "in the right" on something there. Actually, Monterey would explain a _lot_ of things. E.g., I have regularly questioned why IBM ported JFS to Linux from OS/2 instead of AIX, as the former lacked a lot of UNIX interfaces that the latter did have. Monterey _might_ have been the reason. So settle in. Linux is fine, but IBM might lose some money to SCO, because SCO _may_ have a case in at least one area. But I don't think $0 of it is IP or technology-related, just business/partnership issues. Intel might be next ... stay tuned! [ From the SCO litigation text ... ] Project Monterey 50. As SCO was poised and ready to expand its market and market share for UnixWare targeted to high-performance enterprise customers, IBM approached SCO to jointly develop a new 64-bit UNIX-based operating system for Intel-based processing platforms. This joint development effort was widely known as Project Monterey. 51. Prior to this time, IBM had not developed any expertise to run UNIX on an Intel chip and instead was confined to its Power PC chip. 52. In furtherance of Project Monterey, SCO expended substantial amounts of money and dedicated a significant portion of SCO s development team to completion of the project. 53. Specifically, plaintiff and plaintiff s predecessor provided IBM engineers with valuable information and trade secrets with respect to architecture, schematics, and design of UnixWare and the UNIX Software Code for Intel-based processors. 54. By about May 2001, all technical aspects of Project Monterey had been substantially completed. The only remaining tasks of Project Monterey involved marketing and branding tasks to be performed substantially by IBM. 55. On or about May 2001, IBM notified plaintiff that it refused to proceed with Project Monterey, and that IBM considered Project Monterey to be dead. In fact, in violation of its obligations to SCO, IBM chose to use and appropriate for its own business the proprietary information obtained from SCO. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ----------------------------------------------------------- Americans don't get upset because citizens in some foreign nations can burn the American flag -- Americans get upset because citizens in those same nations can't burn their own