[Am-info] CNET: Microsoft to license SCO's Unix code

Roy Bixler rcb@bix.org
Mon, 19 May 2003 18:10:24 -0500


On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 02:51:08PM -0700, Mitch Stone wrote:
> I haven't been following this story closely, but there must be more 
> here then meets the eye.

Not necessarily, but of course there may easily be more to it than
meets my eye.

> Microsoft and SCO have had a long and not 
> always cordial business relationship.

That was long ago.  In recent history, Caldera, a once-promising Linux
distributor, bought out Unix-holder SCO with the idea of converging
Linux and Unix.  Apparently, Caldera was not doing very well and the
CEO who came up with the original idea, Ransom Love, left.  The
current CEO, Darl McBride, must have seen that most of Caldera's
revenues were coming from Unix with only some miniscule amount like 2%
coming from Linux.  That would appear to be enough reason for
Caldera/SCO to want to emphasise Unix and to downplay Linux.

> The wording of Microsoft's press 
> releases suggests an out-of-court settlement of some kind.

To me, it suggests yet another attempt by Microsoft to downplay Linux
and open source in general.  Buying the Unix license is a cheap way
for them to do that.  Since Linux is their number 1 threat, I'm sure
they could easily justify it (just as they could easily justify
offering Windows software for free to prospects showing a serious
inclination to an open source solution.)  Like Caldera's current
management, Microsoft has an interest in suggesting that proprietary
software has more of an aura of legitimacy (Microsoft would like to
conveniently bury Timeline's successful suit against it over
intellectual property rights violations in SQL Server.)  Caldera has
similarly been raising FUD over the legitimacy of open source
software.  They have even gone so far as to suggest that their action
in bringing suit over Linux is parallel to the music industry's
(RIAA's) legal actions against Internet file swapping.  Caldera's and
Microsoft's interests here coincide so I see no reason to believe
there is any coercion involved.

R.