"Microsoft will license the rights to Unix technology from SCO Group, a move that could impact the battle between Windows and Linux in the market for computer operating systems." http://news.com.com/2100-1016-1007528.html?tag=nl -- Powered by SuSE Linux 8.2 Pro & KMail 1.5.1 Never forget: At Microsoft, the engineering department are the Ferengi... The marketing and legal departments are the Borg!
* Fred A. Miller (fmiller@lightlink.com) [030519 10:43]: ->"Microsoft will license the rights to Unix technology from SCO Group, a move ->that could impact the battle between Windows and Linux in the market for ->computer operating systems." -> ->http://news.com.com/2100-1016-1007528.html?tag=nl Yeah. I guess they want to interfere with this arguement. They also have taken enough BSD code that if SCO goes after the BSD's ..Microsoft could end up getting hammered by SCO yet again. Could get ugly. I'll bet it's 70% "we wanna screw with UNIX/LINUX" and 30% covering their ass. Man, this whole thing is getting really ugly. I wish IBM would open their mouths and start fighting this crap. Seems NO one but the talkingheads/pundits are saying anything. -- Ben Rosenberg ---===---===---===--- mailto:ben@whack.org The IQ and the life expectancy of the average American recently passed each other going in the opposite direction.
On Monday May 19 2003 1:47 pm, Ben Rosenberg wrote:
* Fred A. Miller (fmiller@lightlink.com) [030519 10:43]: ->"Microsoft will license the rights to Unix technology from SCO Group, a move ->that could impact the battle between Windows and Linux in the market for ->computer operating systems." -> ->http://news.com.com/2100-1016-1007528.html?tag=nl
Yeah. I guess they want to interfere with this arguement. They also have taken enough BSD code that if SCO goes after the BSD's ..Microsoft could end up getting hammered by SCO yet again. Could get ugly. I'll bet it's 70% "we wanna screw with UNIX/LINUX" and 30% covering their ass. Man, this whole thing is getting really ugly. I wish IBM would open their mouths and start fighting this crap. Seems NO one but the talkingheads/pundits are saying anything.
That's what bothers me the most at this point. IBM has remained mute about it, which does NOTHING to calm anyone's fears, imagined or real. Fred -- Powered by SuSE Linux 8.2 Pro & KMail 1.5.1 Never forget: At Microsoft, the engineering department are the Ferengi... The marketing and legal departments are the Borg!
On Mon, 19 May 2003 15:03:42 -0400
"Fred A. Miller"
That's what bothers me the most at this point. IBM has remained mute about it, which does NOTHING to calm anyone's fears, imagined or real.
Loose lips sink ships. :-) It's better to keep silent, and keep the opponent guessing on what your strategy will be. I'm ignoring all the "stories and rhetoric" until the cases are presented in court, if it even gets that far. "They will have to pry my linux box from my cold dead fingers" ;-) If need be, Linux will be provided from countries who don't give 2 sh*ts, about the Sco patents. -- use Perl; #powerful programmable prestidigitation
Loose lips sink ships. :-) It's better to keep silent, and keep the opponent guessing on what your strategy will be.
Change of strategy...is that like changing your story (SCO that is). When I asked Ben why he thought that BSD would come under fire, he wrote that they (SCO) has changed their story a few times. I wonder is this is because of IBM's silence. SCO reminds me of a wounded dog, It is injured and is lashing out. If SCO was SOOO worried about the code, then they should have said something when they bought UNIX. I'm still worried and confused. 8^S I guess that we will have to wait and see what happens. -- Marshall "Nothing is impossible, we just do not have all the anwsers to make the impossible, possible."
On Mon, 2003-05-19 at 20:33, Marshall Heartley wrote:
Loose lips sink ships. :-) It's better to keep silent, and keep the opponent guessing on what your strategy will be.
Change of strategy...is that like changing your story (SCO that is). When I asked Ben why he thought that BSD would come under fire, he wrote that they (SCO) has changed their story a few times. I wonder is this is because of IBM's silence. SCO reminds me of a wounded dog, It is injured and is lashing out. If SCO was SOOO worried about the code, then they should have said something when they bought UNIX. I'm still worried and confused. 8^S I guess that we will have to wait and see what happens.
Personally I would not be too worried about the situation. I have a good idea how anal IP lawyers are and I doubt very much that IBM would have let anything slip. SCO is playing a game with high stakes, and their bluff will be called. I would not lose any sleep over this. IBM can take care of themselves, and I do not think they will give in to what amounts to blackmail. They sit on more IP than most (any?) other company in the IT sector. /Anders
On Monday 19 May 2003 12:51, Anders Karlsson wrote:
On Mon, 2003-05-19 at 20:33, Marshall Heartley wrote:
Loose lips sink ships. :-) It's better to keep silent, and keep the opponent guessing on what your strategy will be.
Change of strategy...is that like changing your story (SCO that is). When I asked Ben why he thought that BSD would come under fire, he wrote that they (SCO) has changed their story a few times. I wonder is this is because of IBM's silence. SCO reminds me of a wounded dog, It is injured and is lashing out. If SCO was SOOO worried about the code, then they should have said something when they bought UNIX. I'm still worried and confused. 8^S I guess that we will have to wait and see what happens.
Personally I would not be too worried about the situation. I have a good idea how anal IP lawyers are and I doubt very much that IBM would have let anything slip. SCO is playing a game with high stakes, and their bluff will be called.
I would not lose any sleep over this. IBM can take care of themselves, and I do not think they will give in to what amounts to blackmail. They sit on more IP than most (any?) other company in the IT sector.
/Anders
In regards to Anders, Zentara's and other similar statements. I have reservations about this whole chirade. But moreover, I tend to think A) Zentara has a point - Like the old line from the Godfather. "NEVER LET 'UM KNOW WHAT YOUR THINKING!" Let um sweat. Let them thrash about. Which leads me to Anders statement. IBM is ech you gee eee - HUGE. They are the veterans of the veterans in the technology circles. Everyone talks about M$ using dirty tricks... Who do you think wrote the book on corporate power plays in the tech sector ------- IBM. Who was the one that had the big anti-trust suit via the feds, lost and still kept rolling ---- IBM! I am very happy that IBM is backing Linux. It has helped immensly in the efforts to belay fears in corporate America (and the world) and give some credibility to Linux in the business circuit. They appear to be playing it fairly straight and are using it as a marketable commodity. When I think about SCO I think small timers that had a chance to make a mark and blew it. When I think about M$ I think right place at the right time and made the best of it and put a strangle hold on the desktop and ran ran ran. When I think IBM it think BIG BLUE, the bad boys, the walk softly and carry a big mother f*&%ing stick. I wouldn't want to go against IBM in pretty much anything. Ya, it can be argued that OS/2 was a failure. But what company doesn't have them. So what! M$ may have a team of 300 lbs team of gorillas for a legal team, but IMHO IBM is the 1200 lbs elephant. I'm not bothered by IBMs silence. It will, in my mind, be telling come the day the gabel hits the bench and the 1st arguements are heard... Then we'll start to get a clue about IBMs position. And I'm betting that's just the way they want it. So, give SCO all the rope they need. They'll know what to do with it. And if they need a pointer or two... I'm sure IBM will be more than happy to help them tie the knot. Just MHO. Now I'm going to go play Tribes2 or Diablo II and let SCO stew in their own juices. Cheers, Curtis. :)
I was trying to run away from this thread but could not :-)
* Curtis Rey;
In regards to Anders, Zentara's and other similar statements. I have reservations about this whole chirade. But moreover, I tend to think A) Zentara has a point - Like the old line from the Godfather. "NEVER LET 'UM KNOW WHAT YOUR THINKING!" Let um sweat. Let them thrash about. Which leads
I would guess IBM is basing its strategy on the following 1) Separate the people from the problem ( read people also as companies ) 2) Focus on interests not on positions 3) Generate a variety of possibilities before deciding what to do 4) Insist that the result be based on some objective standard Such a strategy normally will take a huge amount of time especially item number (3) and taking into consideration that they will need to focus also on their BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement). Item (4) needs a search thru the legal system to seek out similar cases and find out the decisions that came thru to analyze the options of item (3) All this takes time and hence the silence, yet it does not mean they are sleeping
Ya, it can be argued that OS/2 was a failure. But what company doesn't have them. So what! M$ may have a team of 300 lbs team of gorillas for a legal team, but IMHO IBM is the 1200 lbs elephant. I'm not bothered by IBMs
There is a Turkish proverb (roughly translated) "Mosquito is small yet it makes you sick" SCO could be small compared to MS or IBM yet if you think, it has caused lots of things up to now. On the other hand when you have mosquitos then you need to have repellants :-) -- Togan Muftuoglu Unofficial SuSE FAQ Maintainer http://dinamizm.ath.cx
That's what bothers me the most at this point. IBM has remained mute
about it,
which does NOTHING to calm anyone's fears, imagined or real.
I believe that IBM might have very good reasons to be mute. 1. All SCO claims about infringed SCO IP in Linux (kernel?, utilities?) are just a plain bluff of cash strapped and sinking company. 2. IBM might thinking about switching completely to Linux platform. 3. IBM might wait until SCO becomes very money tight, then IBM just can buy SCO for pennies or easily kill them in court litigations. 4. Name your own version ... Alex
I believe that IBM might have very good reasons to be mute. 1. All SCO claims about infringed SCO IP in Linux (kernel?, utilities?) are just a plain bluff of cash strapped and sinking company. 2. IBM might thinking about switching completely to Linux platform. 3. IBM might wait until SCO becomes very money tight, then IBM just can buy SCO for pennies or easily kill them in court litigations. 4. Name your own version ... Most major companies do not publicise their law suits. IBM will respond
On Mon, 19 May 2003 13:48:54 -0700
Alex Daniloff
On Tue, 20 May 2003 03:47, Ben Rosenberg wrote:
Yeah. I guess they want to interfere with this arguement. They also have taken enough BSD code that if SCO goes after the BSD's ..Microsoft could end up getting hammered by SCO yet again. Could get ugly. I'll bet it's 70% "we wanna screw with UNIX/LINUX" and 30% covering their ass. Man, this whole thing is getting really ugly. I wish IBM would open their mouths and start fighting this crap. Seems NO one but the talkingheads/pundits are saying anything.
Hi Ben, The following is a very interesting article produced by Eric Raymond in response to SCO claims. OSI Position Paper on the SCO-vs.-IBM Complaint http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html -- Regards, Graham Smith ---------------------------------------------------------
Hi, Just a question running around me since this stuff began. How in the world SCO can prove that somebody has stolen its code?. SCO UNIX is a closed source. Linux is public and 100% available for all human beings. Then, assuming someone shows a coincidence in code, any of these scenarios are possible a) SCO copies part of LINUX code and then Claims it has been stolen. b) Both Linux and SCO/UNIX derived from same source/books/educational formation. c) Actually some SCO code has been intentionaly sliped to LINUX. I personally believe the chance off c) is rather small. I think the Open Source kind to do the things this time is an advantage. Everybody can follow the history of Linux' source. Can SCO to say the same?. They have to demonstrate Linux is culpable, otherwise is inocent. Guillermo
The following is a very interesting article produced by Eric Raymond in response to SCO claims.
---------------------------------------------------------
-- Guillermo Ballester Valor registered linux user #117181 gbv@oxixares.com Ogijares, Granada SPAIN
One of the articles/interviews talked about how to obfuscate the code and that there is obfuscated code in the kernel, and that this was (part of) the basis of the IP infringement ... Interesting question then becomes, how much obfuscation is permitted - SCO could turn around and say 'see - this code says "if ( a == b )" and that is an obfuscation of "if ( kerner_parm_x == right_hand_wingding )" therefore ....' I think someone should patent breathing and then sue these characters for infringement ...this whole thing is so sickening, it feels like a M$ trademarked tactic. The only good thing I see coming out of this - no one in their right mind is ever going to hire McBride. IMHO it's a foregone conclusion that SCO's corporate life is near the end regardless of the outcome so his pension plan better be up to snuff.
<snip>
The following is a very interesting article produced by Eric Raymond in response to SCO claims.
OSI Position Paper on the SCO-vs.-IBM Complaint http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html
Good article! Hope that some of the info inside comes out in the trial (if it gets that far). -- Marshall "Nothing is impossible, we just do not have all the anwsers to make the impossible, possible."
participants (12)
-
Alex Daniloff -
Anders Karlsson -
Ben Rosenberg -
Curtis Rey -
Fred A. Miller -
Graham Smith -
Guillermo Ballester Valor -
Hans Forbrich -
Jerry Feldman -
Marshall Heartley -
Togan Muftuoglu -
zentara