SCO Exec: Linux's Days as Free OS Numbered

[Gatekeeper]

Everyone:

I'm not too deep into the OS games nowadays, but this article was rather interesting, particularly for those who might suspect the motives of, say, SCO and Microsoft. Read the article and contribute to this thread as you see fit afterwards.

Gatekeeper

McBride: Don't blame us, blame IBM

Eric B. Parizo, SearchEnterpriseLinux.com News Editor

LAS VEGAS — During a keynote address Tuesday at the Enterprise IT Week conference, SCO Group Inc. CEO Darl McBride told attendees that the General Public License that governs Linux and open source software will not survive — and that the blame for that lies with IBM.

SCO filed suit against IBM in March, claiming that the computing giant had improperly donated Unix System V code to Linux. Unix System V code is owned by SCO and licensed by IBM. In a countersuit filed in August, IBM's primary defense, McBride said, was "putting the GPL between IBM and SCO."

"There is no doubt that the GPL is at risk right now, but we are not the ones that put it there. It was IBM. They put it in the line of fire," said McBride, adding that he was "thrilled" that IBM pulled the GPL into the legal discussion, because it's unlikely to survive his company's legal challenge.

McBride said that other flavors of Unix, like IBM's AIX, Hewlett-Packard Co.'s HP-UX and Sun Microsystems Inc.'s Solaris operating systems, are derivative code. "It's true that there are a whole bunch of Unix versions out there, but we own the trunk of the tree," McBride said.

McBride added that it is not SCO's intention to harm Linux or the open source community. Instead, he's defending SCO's most valuable asset — its Unix code — and the investments of SCO shareholders and customers.

"We think there's a lot of merit to the open source environment," he said. "For Linux to be able to move forward, there needs to be appropriate checks and balances in the open source process. We think there's a way for all of us to coexist peacefully." McBride predicted that Linux's days as a free operating system are numbered.

Microsoft connections?

In a press conference that followed, McBride rejected speculation that Microsoft was largely responsible for the sizable financial infusion SCO announced on Oct. 17 and is pulling the strings behind SCO's legal efforts in hopes of weakening the competitive threat Linux poses to the Windows operating system.

BayStar Capital, a venture capital firm, invested $50 million in SCO, and McBride at the time said he would devote a portion of the money to the company's legal war chest, to fight intellectual property infringements.

McBride confirmed that Microsoft has licensed SCO's intellectual property — meaning Redmond can legally use SCO's Unix code to create more back-end ties between Windows and Unix or Linux — but that's where the relationship ends, he said.

"The conspiracy theorists are out there but, with respect to what we're doing in the marketplace, we're not associated with Microsoft," McBride said.

[Lefty Scaevola]

I suspect it is more likely that SCOs days are numbered. They are getting the balme for the the attack on the GPL and they are quickly losing customers, I do not know how much of their customer base will care, but it is already seriously hurting then.

[uh Clem]

I suspect it is more likely that SCOs days are numbered. They are getting the balme for the the attack on the GPL and they are quickly losing customers, I do not know how much of their customer base will care, but it is already seriously hurting then.

Good.

[Provost Harrison]

I never wanted it when it was free, there is even less chance of me wanting it if they charge.

[The Templar]

A former collegue of mine who works at a firm (Proskauer) representing IBM in this suit and who is doing discovery says that SCO has jack and **** in the way of evidence (and Jack left town).

This whole suit is a nuisance suit.

[Q Classic]

www.groklaw.net

that's your one-stop shop for anything to do with this case.

i tend to agree that sco is screwed. they've made enormous allegations and have shown no substantial proof (the last one they did at scoforum was found to be legitimately released under the bsd license)... and if their allegations are proved to be false, well i can see hundreds of companies and people suing them for libel and slanderous remarks in order to kill their means of making money...

[DanS]

"We think there's a lot of merit to the open source environment," he said. "For Linux to be able to move forward, there needs to be appropriate checks and balances in the open source process. We think there's a way for all of us to coexist peacefully." McBride predicted that Linux's days as a free operating system are numbered.

There doesn't seem to be a coherent argument here. Only a couple of quotes strung together.

[Q Classic]

mcbride is also on record as saying that the only two industries that use the term users are drugs and software... not that he means to pass a judgement on that...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/34049.html
sco has admitted this is hurting their business.

and why do they keep having to push back their licensing program's date before it really becomes expensive? could it be that nobody's biting?

how about those sco motions to discovery, which boil down to "we need ibm to show us their source code so we can see where they're violating our ip rights"? and their waffling on ibm's discovery motions, going to the extend of printing out on paper a text copy of their source code? or using the symbol font during the sco forum to obfuscate the code?

[Urban Ranger]

From The Register article:

But in a filing yesterday the SCO Group gave a strong hint that while it anticipates riches from IP licenses, its current business is falling apart. Deeply embedded in the risks portion of the filing is this statement:

"We are informed that participants in the Linux industry have attempted to influence participants in the markets in which we sell our products to reduce or eliminate the amount of our products and services that they purchase. They have been somewhat successful in those efforts and similar efforts and success will likely continue. There is also a risk that the assertion of our intellectual property rights will be negatively viewed by participants in our marketplace and we may lose support from such participants. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our position in the marketplace and our results of operations. "

Which boils down to two admissions. SCO has already lost business from its loyal customer base. And it expects to lose more.

[mrmitchell]

BayStar Capital, a venture capital firm, invested $50 million in SCO, and McBride at the time said he would devote a portion of the money to the company's legal war chest, to fight intellectual property infringements.

Ah, yes, swell business management. SCO will certainly win its cases, develop better products, and become a champion of the industry to consumers.

I don't pay a lot of attention to this, but is it just me, or is SCO a black hole of stupidity? Everything they do seems to reek of idiocy.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by mrmitchell
but is it just me, or is SCO a black hole of stupidity?

That appears to be a fairly broad consensus.

[Promethus]

You'd think that with $50M they could hire a good MBA.

[Kirnwaffen]

You'd think that with $50M they could hire a good MBA.

Good MBAs know better.

[Ted Striker]

muhahahha

everybody is still missing the big picture

this is just a side excursion

SCO is being a good little soldier, watch out when Microsoft drops the REAL bomb on Linux

[Nubclear]

People are acting like SCO troops are invading America or something

[Ari Rahikkala]

Ted Striker: And you have insider knowledge on what this "REAL bomb" will be, right ?

(not to deny that you might be right in a way. Who knows what tricks MS has up its sleeve)

[Urban Ranger]

So, Ted, is this BayStar Capital just a front of MS? You should know, yes?

[Ted Striker]