Professional Web Applications Themes

SCO Down News (3 Stories) - SCO

A hacker brought SCO's webpages down, stories here: [url]http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11190[/url] [url]http://linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2003082501026NWCYLL[/url] [url]http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/24/sco_site_down_for_well_over_24_hours.html[/url] I do not think this reflects badly against the linux community. The linux community is very broad, and it was to be expected that someone somewhere would take this kind of action....

  1. #1

    Default SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    A hacker brought SCO's webpages down, stories here:

    [url]http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11190[/url]

    [url]http://linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2003082501026NWCYLL[/url]

    [url]http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/24/sco_site_down_for_well_over_24_hours.html[/url]

    I do not think this reflects badly against the linux community. The
    linux community is very broad, and it was to be expected that someone
    somewhere would take this kind of action.
    Shaun M. Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    Shaun M. <smacker404hotmail.com> wrote:
    >A hacker brought SCO's webpages down, stories here:
    >[url]http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11190[/url]
    >[url]http://linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2003082501026NWCYLL[/url]
    >[url]http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/24/sco_site_down_for_well_over_24_hours.html[/url]
    >I do not think this reflects badly against the linux community. The
    >linux community is very broad, and it was to be expected that someone
    >somewhere would take this kind of action.
    It does reflect badly. Let's just see how much crowing and
    self-congratulatory crap there is on Slashdot, shall we? I'd
    love to be wrong, bit I'm betting most of the anonymous
    morons will be all in favor of this.

    --
    [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: [url]http://aplawrence.com[/url]
    Get paid for writing about tech: [url]http://aplawrence.com/publish.html[/url]
    tony@aplawrence.com Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:37:08 +0000, ton wrote:
    > Shaun M. <smacker404hotmail.com> wrote:
    >>A hacker brought SCO's webpages down, stories here:
    >
    >>[url]http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11190[/url]
    >
    >>[url]http://linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2003082501026NWCYLL[/url]
    >
    >>[url]http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/24/sco_site_down_for_well_over_24_hours.html[/url]
    >
    >>I do not think this reflects badly against the linux community. The
    >>linux community is very broad, and it was to be expected that someone
    >>somewhere would take this kind of action.
    >
    > It does reflect badly. Let's just see how much crowing and
    > self-congratulatory crap there is on Slashdot, shall we? I'd
    > love to be wrong, bit I'm betting most of the anonymous
    > morons will be all in favor of this.
    You need to separate the actions of an individual from the actions of a
    group. How would you feel if a few people claiming to want the same
    things you do did something very bad, and people had less respect for you?

    I'm a "member" of the Linux community. I think SCO is wrong, and they
    should be and will be punished. Legally. In court. But I didn't attack
    them illegally, I was hopeful that nobody else would, and I'm mad that
    someone did. Now, because of someone else's actions that I didn't
    ask for, condone, or commit, you don't respect me and consider me
    immature. That's not fair.

    --
    Nucleon, <tcfelkermtco.com>
    <http://vlevel.sourceforge.net> - Stop fiddling with the volume knob.

    It might look like I'm standing motionless, but I'm actively waiting for my
    problems to go away.

    Nucleon Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] wrote:
    >
    > It does reflect badly. Let's just see how much crowing and
    > self-congratulatory crap there is on Slashdot, shall we? I'd
    > love to be wrong, bit I'm betting most of the anonymous
    > morons will be all in favor of this.
    Once again, you post a smear. What's more a smear that is simply not based
    on facts.

    Looking at Slashdot today, one can find a thread that occurred Sunday,
    discussing the purported (*) DDoS attack. Without reading every post,
    there is no clear congratulation towards whomever caused the DDoS, let
    alone an assumption that it was a Linux user/Slashdot reader. In fact,
    most postings seem to be of the opinion that any DDoS is not good.

    (*) Other postings suggest that there was no DDoS. Merely that SCO took
    their own website down. I take the view that either is possible and we
    will probably never know for sure what happened.

    I'm afrad that your own posting reflects badly on you, because, while you
    constantly complain about anonymous postings, you show a disregard for
    facts and truth that makes a mockery of non-anonymous postings.

    Whoever Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    Whoever <nobodydevnull.none> wrote:
    >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] wrote:
    >>
    >> It does reflect badly. Let's just see how much crowing and
    >> self-congratulatory crap there is on Slashdot, shall we? I'd
    >> love to be wrong, bit I'm betting most of the anonymous
    >> morons will be all in favor of this.
    >Once again, you post a smear. What's more a smear that is simply not based
    >on facts.
    Oh, you mean like you have been doing all along?

    Right.


    --
    [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: [url]http://aplawrence.com[/url]
    Get paid for writing about tech: [url]http://aplawrence.com/publish.html[/url]
    tony@aplawrence.com Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 at 20:20 GMT,
    [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] <tonyaplawrence.com> wrote:
    > The disregard for facts has, in fact, been the province of those
    > who, like you, condemned SCO before HAVING any facts. OK, it
    > does seem now that they are making claims about code that they
    > cannot claim ownership of. But until you had that fact, you
    > had no businessing condemning them.
    One thing. Why does SCO expect every Linux-using entity on earth to
    *not* wait until the facts are in before forking over license fees to be
    "allowed" by SCO to use Linux--in binary form only, please?

    --
    fD
    fLameDogg Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] wrote:
    > Whoever <nobodydevnull.none> wrote:
    > >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] wrote:
    >
    > The disregard for facts has, in fact, been the province of those
    > who, like you, condemned SCO before HAVING any facts.
    Show me where I posted a condemnation of SCO without facts. Can't? Then it
    is you who is posting derogatory comments that are not based on facts.
    What's that called again? Ah yes, libel.

    OK, so, since I post anonymously, it's not really libel. Perhaps
    "projection" would be a better term: the idea that people expect
    others to behave the same as themselves. In other words, since one makes
    non-fact based comments, one expects others to do the same.

    > OK, it
    > does seem now that they are making claims about code that they
    > cannot claim ownership of. But until you had that fact, you
    > had no businessing condemning them.
    Show me where I condemned them.

    Whoever Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    fLameDogg <flamedoggoperamail.com> wrote:
    >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 at 20:20 GMT,
    >tonyaplawrence.com <tonyaplawrence.com> wrote:
    >> The disregard for facts has, in fact, been the province of those
    >> who, like you, condemned SCO before HAVING any facts. OK, it
    >> does seem now that they are making claims about code that they
    >> cannot claim ownership of. But until you had that fact, you
    >> had no businessing condemning them.
    >One thing. Why does SCO expect every Linux-using entity on earth to
    >*not* wait until the facts are in before forking over license fees to be
    >"allowed" by SCO to use Linux--in binary form only, please?
    Good point, and I agree:
    [url]http://aplawrence.com/Blog/B377.html[/url]

    --
    [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: [url]http://aplawrence.com[/url]
    Get paid for writing about tech: [url]http://aplawrence.com/publish.html[/url]
    tony@aplawrence.com Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    Whoever <nobodydevnull.none> wrote:
    >On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] wrote:
    >> Whoever <nobodydevnull.none> wrote:
    >> >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] wrote:
    >>
    >> The disregard for facts has, in fact, been the province of those
    >> who, like you, condemned SCO before HAVING any facts.
    >Show me where I posted a condemnation of SCO without facts. Can't? Then it
    How do I show where an anonymous poster said anything?

    That's the problem: any old anonymous post might be you, but most
    of them aren't of course.

    It's what I said originally: whatever comes down, you can claim
    that you were in-line with it all along, never were wrong, never
    said anything contrary to the facts as they happened. Nobody
    can dispute you. We might come up with posts that SEEM like
    they could belong to you, but there's no proving it.

    When I'm wrong, it's on record. As it should be.

    OK, so here we are: the first code that SCO released seems to be
    stuff they can't claim ownership to. I only say "seems to" because
    I haven't seen anything myself, but I do trust the people who say
    that it's old BSD code etc. "Their word against ours" seems
    a pretty weak response to the rebuttals received.

    One would think that if they had anything better in their pocket
    now would be the time to pull it out. It wouldn't be a bad idea
    to find a sacrificial lamb one could pin the BSD code debacle
    on too.

    Just to try to forestall the inevitable: let's have no nonsense
    about "changing my tune". My "tune" has been the same all along:
    without evidence, I can't judge. Now that there IS evidence, I'm
    able to refine my opinions.

    And you, just because of anominity, are still not worth a thing
    in my book.

    --
    [email]tonyaplawrence.com[/email] Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: [url]http://aplawrence.com[/url]
    Get paid for writing about tech: [url]http://aplawrence.com/publish.html[/url]
    tony@aplawrence.com Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 01:08:11 +0000 (UTC), com wrote:

     

    Funny, but a lot of the people who were supporting SCO through open
    source development have lost a lot of respect for both SCO and their
    supporters. Guess it must be Darl's opinions. Let's face it, however
    this turns out, SCO is dead. Not that I believe they have any case
    whatsoever (if they did, why produce such ridiculous "evidence"?) but
    even if they managed any victory, they are bound to be crushed under
    the tank tracks of IBM fairly shortly. Remember, IBM have, in the past
    actually managed to beat the US Government into submission in court.
    You really think "Durl" and his band of (apparent) criminals have any
    chance? No, as soon as things look too grim, Durl and co will sell
    everything they can and move onto the next scam. Face it, SCO is not
    longer a tech company, it's a building full of lawyers and greedy
    execs who have no intention of developing any UNIX variant. They just
    want to wring the last drops of blood from the stone before casting it
    aside (egged on by BillG of course)...
    Scott Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    On Thu, Aug 28, 2003, com wrote: 
    >
    > [/ref]

    >
    >I doubt it. Longer term, yes, definitely. But not because of this,
    >though it could hasten the process.
    >
    >I need to dig through some web pages but it seems right now we
    >have the horse talking out of both sides of its mouth. I think
    >we can find recent quotes from McBride saying they want to be
    >open and show the code, and also quotes from Sontag saying
    >they never had any such intention. It all sounds pretty
    >ridiculous to me: http://aplawrence.com/Blog/B415.html[/ref]

    I don't think there's any ambiguity in Ransom Love's remarks when he was
    President of Caldera->SCO, nor is there any in Doug Michels' comments
    regarding the current SCO management's actions. Of course when Ransom and
    Doug were actively involved, Caldera/SCO was still trying to make money by
    selling something real, not by extorting money with land sharks.

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
    UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676
    URL: http://www.celestial.com/

    ``No matter how much I may exaggerate it, it must have a certain amount of
    truth...Now rumor travels fast but it don't stay put as long as truth''
    Will Rogers
    Bill Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    Bill Campbell <com> wrote:
     

    Got a pointer for these ?

    --
    com Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: http://aplawrence.com
    Get paid for writing about tech: http://aplawrence.com/publish.html
    tony@aplawrence.com Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    On Thu, Aug 28, 2003, com wrote: 
    >
    >Got a pointer for these ?[/ref]

    The reference below seems to be dead today (but then it's an ASP so that's
    no surprise). This is from an e-mail message I received on June 10th 2003
    so it's not exactly new in the timeframe of this action.

    TARANTELLA WON'T DANCE TO SCO TUNE (Linux News)
    Tarantella chief executive Doug Michaels has moved to distance his
    company from SCO following the Unix vendor's legal wrangling with IBM
    and Novell (CRN, 19 May, 27 May)....
    http://linux.ittoolbox.com/news/nr.asp?i=94705

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
    UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676
    URL: http://www.celestial.com/

    ``It is our duty still to endeavor to avoid war; but if it shall actually
    take place, no matter by whom brought on, we must defend ourselves. If our
    house be on fire, without inquiring whether it was fired from within or
    without, we must try to extinguish it.''
    -- Thomas Jefferson to James Lewis, Jr., 1798.
    Bill Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    In article <com>,
    Scott <demon.c.u.o.t.s.a> wrote: [/ref]
     

    The lawyer [one of them] who helped IBM beat the government is
    the lawyer that SCO has hired. It will be interesting - David
    Boies on SCO's side - while those he worked with are on IBM's
    side. This means that both sides know the tricks the other side
    just might bring into court. That may make it an evenly matched
    battle of wits. Of course IBM has a larger staff and more money.


    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv wjv . com
    Bill Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    comREMOVE (Bill Vermillion) wrote in message news:<com>... [/ref]

    >
    > The lawyer [one of them] who helped IBM beat the government is
    > the lawyer that SCO has hired. It will be interesting - David
    > Boies on SCO's side - while those he worked with are on IBM's
    > side. This means that both sides know the tricks the other side
    > just might bring into court. That may make it an evenly matched
    > battle of wits. Of course IBM has a larger staff and more money.[/ref]

    Keep in mind that the DOJ/IBM battle was 20 years ago, and Boies has
    aged a bit. I think senility is the only thing that can explain why
    he got involved with this fiasco.

    Take, for example, SCO's threat to audit AIX users? Not only did SCO
    not do this, they have no legal right to do this - yet they threatened
    all AIX users with this audit.

    Take, for example, SCO's new Linux license which isn't only illegal
    but entirely impossible to obtain.

    Take, for example, SCO's refusal to allow the Linux community to
    mitigate any damages much less even NAME them. Or their defeat in
    Germany at the hands of LinuxTag, or their libel of Perens and Eric
    Raymond, and their examples of code they showed pubicly that were
    debunked. I'm mystified as to why Boies thinks there is any
    possibility they can beat IBM over IP violations, and even if they
    could - how do they expect to collect damages when they've purposely
    prevented mitigation?

    Where has Boies been this entire time? Has he been advising his
    client at all? Worse - has he actually been advising his client
    to do all these things?

    Boies' name may have carried a bit of fear and respect before but
    after this, it will be synonymous with "idiot lawyer who got lucky
    a few times early in his career" or if he's lucky "over the hill
    sad old lawyer."
    fuzzywzhe Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    com wrote in message news:<bieckf$bgv$std.com>... 

    Wait a minute.

    I want to point out that there was justification for criticising
    SCO from the start of this. First of all, the development process
    for Linux is very well regulated. In order to get your code into
    Linux, you have to go through quite a few hoops, and often you
    have to get permission from your employer. Your name is attached
    to that code. So if you steal proprietary code, not only is your
    career over, but you'll be sued into oblivion. Who would do that
    for a volunteer project when they won't get any money out of it?
    Furthermore, the likelihood of being caught is VERY high since the
    code is published in source code form. You'd have to be crazy
    to steal code from Unix and put it into Linux intentionally. Keep
    in mind that SCO has been claiming nearly since day one that the
    theft was INTENTIONAL as well.

    Second of all, SCO has been making baseless accusations since day
    one. The Linux community offered to work with SCO, but it's been
    SCO that has refused to do this. The Linux community DOES respect
    IP and very much wanted to remove the code in question. At first,
    it seemed possible that some infringment may have happened, but
    without SCO specifying what it was, how could the Linux community
    fix this problem? When LinuxTag (back in, what was it, JUNE?) sued
    SCO in Germany over their claims and SCO settled it was widely
    and probably correct regarded they were lying. This is a reasonable
    conclusion given that SCO gets almost 1/2 of their revenue from
    Europe, and Germany is a critical place to have credibility if your
    doing business in tech in Europe.

    Third, SCO has changed their story multiple times. First they
    claimed it was just libraries that were stolen, then the Linux
    kernel was contaminated, then it was thousands of examples, then
    people were "obsfucating code" - etc. Let me tell you as a coder,
    that no coder likes to reuse code - they like to start from
    scratch. If I read code to understand it, I usually re-implement
    it from SCRATCH. Why do I do this? Because once you understand
    the entire problem, writing it only takes a few hours, and you
    are much less likely to produce bugs. "Obsfucating" the code to
    hide it's origins wouldn't be done by ANY programmer. When I
    heard that claim, it was obvious that SCO was lying, and they
    made that claim months ago. If you steal code, you don't steal
    parts of it, you steal a module, and at the smallest level, a
    function. Taking parts of a function would make no sense, since
    in order to do that, you need to undertand the function and all of
    it's side effects entirely. It's easier to re-write it from
    scratch, and that includes comments.

    So don't tell me that we were not justified in attacking SCO until
    just recently. I can list many more examples, but I think 3 is
    enough. It's been quite clear that SCO has been playing fast and
    loose with the truth for quite some time. I know that SCO was
    lying because I know how Linux is developed and how code is
    developed. What SCO was claiming is basically impossible. They
    are now claiming that fully one THIRD of Linux was taken from
    Unix. The very idea is ludicrous. If this was true, it would
    have been noticed years ago, and of course it wasn't.
    fuzzywzhe Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    In article <google.com>,
    fuzzywzhe <com> wrote: [/ref][/ref]
     [/ref][/ref]
     [/ref][/ref]
     [/ref]
     

    But he has not been standing still. The only significant case he
    lost was the Gore/Bush/Florida against the Supreme court but he
    won in the Florida courts. He also beat down Exxon when he
    was hired by Alaska. His record is impressive.
     
     

    Let's hope these get settled soon by the courts. I've been around
    law enough not to ever try to second guess the outcomes. I'm the
    black sheep of the family by not going into the law field. Though
    sometimes I think I'd get more respect if I said I was a lawyer
    than when I say I'm a network/computer/whatever consultant.
     

    We've yet to see anything in the legal system - and all good
    lawyeres tell their clients to 'keep your mouth shut' - though that
    doesn't seem to have worked well here.
     

    Since I'm not involved - and we've seen nothing on the legal side
    exepct the SCO complaints and the IBM counter complaints - it's all
    guess work. When/if it goes to trial it will be very interesting
    to watch.
     

    You probalby ought to check on what he has been doing. It's not
    just a few times early in his career.

    He's been involved in computer related legal issues. He was
    councel of Napster and Aimster. Gates comment about Boies
    was that Boies was "out to destroy Microsoft" when Boies was
    heading the DOJ's antitrust case against MS.

    Without seeing the evidence by either side I'll make no book
    on the outcome. But it is going to be interesting. Boies old
    firm has been hired by IBM. I'd like to see the other players
    involved. An as an 'over the hill sad old laywer' - if 1999
    is not that far in the past - that was the year he was voted
    as Lawyer of the Year by The National Law Journal.

    I guess you aren't very familiar with Boies.

    The trial will be like two championship sports teams facing off for the
    first time - you have no idea who will win or what the outcome will
    be - but it will be an exciting game to watch.

    In this modern era so many trials seem to get done to death in the
    press - and the surprises are the things that don't come out until
    the evidence is presented in court. But as the saying goes
    "It's not over until the fat lady sings".

    Myself - if I went to court - I'd rather have Boies on my side than
    for the opposition.

    Bill
    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv wjv . com
    Bill Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    In article <google.com>,
    fuzzywzhe <com> wrote:

    [Lucretia Deletia hacked away a lot of text here - wjv]

     

    While this does not refer to stealing code from SCO and putting
    in Linux many years ago there was source for a db utility put up
    in alt.sources. I remember getting that at that time. It's
    probably still on some old floppy somewhere. [actually at that time
    I had migrated from floppies to stiffies as they call the 3.5 disks
    in other parts of the world].

    A week or so later [after the horse left the barn] it turned out
    it was AT&T code that someone had stripped the comments from and
    put up as their own. So there is precedence. I suspect these
    things come from people who don't really know how to write good
    code so they take someone else code and stick their name on it.
    That's just a personal opinion.

    ......
     

    But then there are the wannabe coders - who don't have a clue. Not
    all people who call themselves programmers/coders really are.
     

    And some old Unix code was supposed to have comments along the
    lines of "You are not supposed to understand this" :-)

    Reading protected code and then re-implenting could cause legal
    problems. That's why when makers other than IBM started making
    boot proms for clone machines there would be a team that would
    fully descrtibe the funtionality of the code - and then these
    descriptions would be given to a team that had never seen the
    original source or dis-assemble source - and they worked in
    a 'clean room' type environment.

    Rewriting protected code after seeing the original can be
    problematic. If someone else described how the code worked
    and then you wrote it without seeing it - then you are probably in
    the clear.
     

    Since when? Has there been a new law passed or a new morality
    set implemented?

    Of course there were the obfuscation contests where you were given
    the code and tried to figure out what it did. Some of those things
    were truly amazing. That of course is a contest - but people have
    been known to do this.

    Claiming it is obfuscated would have to show how it was done.
    Unless it was clumsy it might not be easy.

    If you've not seen any of that type of code you might want to
    check out http://www.ioccc.org/

    The first pages show the mirros and all sites are listed
    by city and their location in degrees, minutes and seconds.
    You can see the humorous approach there as they say they were
    inspired by the Bulwer-Lytton Fiction contest - which also has
    truly bizarre entries.

    I wonder if there will be a lottery for seats at the trial ?

    Bill

    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv wjv . com
    Bill Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    comREMOVE (Bill Vermillion) wrote in message news:<com>... [/ref]
    > [/ref]
    > [/ref]
    > [/ref]

    >
    > But he has not been standing still. The only significant case he
    > lost was the Gore/Bush/Florida against the Supreme court but he
    > won in the Florida courts. He also beat down Exxon when he
    > was hired by Alaska. His record is impressive.[/ref]

    What do you mark as "significant"? He lost Napster. He lost before
    the Supreme Court.
     

    >
    > Let's hope these get settled soon by the courts. I've been around
    > law enough not to ever try to second guess the outcomes. I'm the
    > black sheep of the family by not going into the law field. Though
    > sometimes I think I'd get more respect if I said I was a lawyer
    > than when I say I'm a network/computer/whatever consultant.[/ref]

    Yes, I want this to be settled in the courts as well.

    You can BS your way through some cases, but trying to stick
    it to IBM over IP violations isn't one of the cases you can do
    it with.
     
    >
    > We've yet to see anything in the legal system - and all good
    > lawyeres tell their clients to 'keep your mouth shut' - though that
    > doesn't seem to have worked well here.[/ref]

    I think it's going beautifully for IBM.

    McBride, Sontag, and Stowell have been shooting their mouths off
    non stop. They've been caught in multiple lies as well. This is
    another reason that I think that SCO is very unlikely to have a
    case. One of the many reasons.
     
    >
    > Since I'm not involved - and we've seen nothing on the legal side
    > exepct the SCO complaints and the IBM counter complaints - it's all
    > guess work. When/if it goes to trial it will be very interesting
    > to watch.[/ref]

    SCO's filing was RIFE with errors, and some might say, outright
    lies. SCO a major Unix vendor? Linux a bicycle? Nasa was using
    Linux to make Beowulf systems in 1994. DejaNews was being run
    on a single Linux box in 1993. SCO Unix has NEVER had a major
    market share. Boies drew up that legal doent.

    SCO's major claim to fame is running McDonald's cash registers,
    and they are claiming that Linux developers had to code from
    them in order to become enterprise ready? Does that sound sane
    at all to you?
     
    >
    > You probalby ought to check on what he has been doing. It's not
    > just a few times early in his career.[/ref]

    Why don't you tell me about his other cases? The only significant
    one I know of is the IBM/DOJ case, where the DOJ basically gave up
    out of frustration. IBM WAS guilty of being a monopoly by the way,
    and they were punished for it in the same way MS is being punished
    for it - industry resentment. IBM had a rough time in the 1990's,
    but now, they are a truly competitive company again that competes
    on merrits. We'll see how MS does, and if they can make the
    conversion. IBM fought their way to the top, Microsoft rode IBM's
    coat-tails there.
     

    Boies hadn't ever sent an email before he took on the MS case,
    and you might be forgetting that he had a legal team underneath
    him to help. In *this* case, I doubt he has much of anybody
    under him now since the SCO case won't likely net him any money,
    and also will tarnish his reputation.

    Also, it's natural for Gates to say Boies as "out to destroy
    Microsoft" - it's PR propoganda from Microsoft. Gates would
    have said that regardless of who was representing the DOJ.
    What else would Gates say, "Boies is out to correct our illegal
    behavior for breaking our 1995 consent decree with the Justice
    Department?"
     

    With regard to evidence, people who are right don't continually
    change their story or get caught in lies.

    It's also real nice that Boies got a lump of metal from the
    National Law Journal, but it doesn't lend creedance to his
    rationale for taking on a client like SCO. Boies is strangely
    silent as well. Isn't that unusual considering how vocal he
    was during the DOJ/MS case, Napster case, and Gore case?
    Why has he suddently lost his voice?
     

    I know he's up for the equivalent of disbarment in Florida,
    currently:

    http://www.townhall.com/news/politics/200307/POL20030724b.shtml
     

    Read about his performance with Napster, one of his recent cases:

    http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,37857,00.html

    They weren't too impressed with his performance. I expect the
    same will happen with SCO. Actually, I'm quite certain of it.
     

    CANOPY, *not* SCO, had to answer a subpoena today with regard to
    this case. I'll bet this case doesn't make it to trial. Want to
    read what IBM requested?

    http://pel.cs.byu.edu/~sorenson/SCO/Docs/Subpoena.pdf

    Why do you suppose IBM is questioning Canopy? You do realize that
    IBM stated in their response to SCO's latest filing that SCO has
    "artificially inflated its stock price and been unjustly enriched?"

    Tell me, what would SCO, a Unix company, want with Vultus - a company
    whose products only work under Windows and only work with Internet
    Explorer? What motivation would SCO have to purchase Vultus, a
    company that is in the same building as they are?

    http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/linux/story/0,10801,83452,00.html

    Oh I know - it's a way to defraud their retail investors. Vultus
    is worthless, but by purchasing them, Canopy got to recoup at least
    some of their investment into Vultus - if not a profit.
     

    Considering he's let SCO basically hang themselves, I wouldn't want
    him representing me in a traffic court.
     
    fuzzywzhe Guest

  20. #20

    Default Re: SCO Down News (3 Stories)

    On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Bill Vermillion wrote:
     

    But only for those who saw the code under an NDA or knew that it was a
    protected trade secret. Once a trade secret is no longer secret, it's no
    longer protected.
     

    Yes, but ugly code is frequently rejected by Linus. Such obfuscation would
    likely make the code unacceptable to him.
     

    Whoever Guest

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. XML Flash News Stories
    By shawnryder in forum Macromedia Flash Data Integration
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 12th, 11:57 PM
  2. Flex Success Stories
    By Adam Cameron in forum Macromedia Flex General Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: September 29th, 05:28 PM
  3. Exporting all stories
    By CP1@adobeforums.com in forum Adobe Indesign Windows
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 18th, 12:54 PM
  4. IADs, adsObject and other stories
    By Martin c in forum ASP.NET Web Services
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 2nd, 02:29 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139