[Am-info] SCO Agrees IBM Owns AIX, JFS, NUMA, RCU Copyrights!!

[Sujal Shah]

Microsoft most recently purchased a license from SCO for it's UNIX 
patents to shield them from any exposure internally.  While it may be 
exactly what it seems on face value, it sounds a little fishy.  From my 
reading of the news, there is a plan here with Microsoft, at least at 
two levels:  First, 10 million is nothing to microsoft, but a lot to 
SCO.  Microsoft purchasing the license adds legitimacy to SCO's claims 
by showing that a "major company" is taking SCO's claims seriously.  
Most people have seen through this part.  Second, SCO and Microsoft 
have established a relationship now that more cash can go to SCO.  They 
are burning cash at an enormous rate with now 3 separate legal actions 
going (a petition in germany, Red Hat, and the original 3 Billion suit 
against IBM).

All this publicity is great for Microsoft and Sun (look at the prices 
that SCO unveiled today).  The mere threat of high licensing costs will 
make people think twice about deploying with Linux.  They may still go 
with it in the end, but it is now a risk to be considered.

Also worth looking into, if you want to really catch some subtleties of 
the case, is the news from Germany.  There, a group took SCO to court 
for making unfounded claims in the press with the goal of harming 
Linux.  I haven't been following this, but comments I've been reading 
on slashdot (yeah, yeah, I know), indicate that the action was 
successful... SCO backed down rather than press their claims.  The 
RedHat action, in some ways, seems to be "inspired" from that example.

Finally, this all may just be a lot of saber rattling to get bought.  
Also interesting is that the Canopy group and McBride himself have a 
history of using litigation to make money: 
http://www.forbes.com/2003/06/18/cz_dl_0618linux.html .  This has also 
been hinted at in comments on slashdot.  My initial research shows that 
there is some truth to that.

Details:
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,58904,00.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1016-1007528.html
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,110868,00.asp - Users Voice 
Doubts about SCO-Microsoft Deal
http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/2208691 - this one has 
a price estimate at around 10 mil for both the new license and another 
SCOSource license.

This is ZDNet's summary page: 
http://zdnet.com.com/2251-1110-1001807.html
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5057840.html

The quickest course to resolution will be the RedHat suit, I think... 
it's essentially a put up or shut up action.  If the evidence is really 
as strong as SCO claims, it will be a long, drawn out battle.  If they 
shut up... well, that will be a bit telling in and of itself.

Sujal

On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 01:24 PM, Mitch Stone wrote:

> I was hoping for more in the way of specifics, frankly. I'm attempting 
> to write a column about this issue that make it comprehensible to 
> general readers. At this point, it's not even completely 
> comprehensible to me.
>
> On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 09:24 AM, Hans Reiser wrote:
>
>> I saw the connection..... we need to start collecting patents.....  
>> that is their nightmare, let them have it.
>>
>> Hans
>>
>> Mitch Stone wrote:
>>
>>> Speaking of which, didn't Microsoft recently invest in SCO? Any 
>>> connections being made here?
>>>
>>> On Monday, July 28, 2003, at 06:56 AM, John J. Urbaniak wrote:
>>>
>   -----------
>   Mitch Stone
>   mitch@accidentalexpert.com
>
>   You can fool too many of the people
>   too much of the time.
>   -- James Thurber
>
> _______________________________________________
> Am-info mailing list
> Am-info@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/am-info
>
------ sujal shah ------ sujal@sujal.net -----

                  http://www.sujal.net