SCO has valid case

[Keith Mastin]

> I did not get the impression SCO was trying to drag down the Linux name
> especially as a "past time" but rather they are moving to protect their
> IP (Intellectual Property) in the very same manner the music industry
> has been doing. (ie.Napster) They seem adamant about their current
> holdings (UNIX) and are trying to enforce their legal rights. SCO's
> assertion is that IBM (as a company, not rogue employees) did knowingly
> introduce AIX code to Linux licensed from the
> SCO/Novell/AT&T agreement. SCOX (Nasdaq $13.55) is a tiny company
> approx. 350 employees & current market cap 100M++ now that their stock
> price has increased from below one dollar a year ago. They were almost
> delisted. SCO has an impressive team of professionals working on all
> aspects of this case.

I'm amazed that you can hit the nail on the head and still miss it
entirely. The stocks are up, the main shareholders can cash out without
losing their shirts (provided they have the legalities in place first).
All the rest is snakeoil and red herrings. These are suits, not geeks,
making all the noise here. Their  priorities are all $$ related.

> SCO is not a group of "stupid idiots" as many seem to think they are.
> I'm amazed no one on the list server with advanced programming skills
> took the time to go to Vegas to try to get to the bottom of things or at
> the very least to hear SCO's side and grill them on the spot. They were
> all there answering any and all questions. At least no one else on the
> list server has spoken out yet about their trip to SCOForum yet. Hell
> I'm almost sorry I said anything now.

There was nothing going on in Vegas that was worth the trip. SCO wanted to
present their case in the court of public opinion to scare you even more.
Seems like they succeeded.

If you trust the SCO executive that much, put your $$ where your mouth
is... buy some non-voting shares of SCOX and hold them for say... a year
after this is all over? I believe in them so much that I sold all my
Caldera shares 3 hours after the IPO happened. 2 hours more and I would
have lost a good chunk of it.

> I UNDERSTAND substantial code exists above and beyond the powerpoint
> presentation however SCO is not prepared to release it publicly...yet.
> Don't dump on me. I support the Linux effort with great enthusiasm since
> it began but need to have options for different customers. I'm as
> adversely affected by all this the same as others in the industry. I
> don't need more FUD in my life. I was working with 3.5, 3.51, NT when it
> first arrived. I sure did'nt need that CRAP in my life
> especially when Novell had (what I considered) to be rock solid
> technology at the time. I welcome all comments. Nothing like a great
> brainstorming session to liven things up.

Your understanding seems to be informed by one side of the case. By this
point, everything SCO releases or says if controlled by shysters. Choose
to believe them if you want.

It's interesting to see the fallout of all this unravelling. Those who are
interested enough in SCO's side of the story seems to be wavering under
the onslaught of FUD. The question is will the numbers be sufficient to
keep SCO alive beyond the court case, or will they sell out to someone
else (in Redmond?) [insert suspicious movie music here] ?

BTW... and this is entirely speculation... what happens to software if the
copyright owner is defunct? It's not like SCO is going to leave a will or
an estate. Is it at this point that M$ buys the ...what? ...copyrights?
...SCO? outright for nothing in a short stock trade? Remember this?
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,110794,00.asp
Is any of this making any sense yet?



--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml