Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Nick Danger
So we are left with the conclusion that when it suits you to have the case tried by the public, you advocate in favor of that. But the moment it becomes inconvenient, you "hate to break it to us" that the case is being tried in court, not in public.

Nah. What suits you is taking my statements out of context.

Let us stipulate that your responses here are disingenuous; you are shifting positions in accordance with the instinctive bodily movements of a weasel.

Speaking of weasels, Nick, when are you going to provide me with proof that nobody from Santa Cruz Operation joined SCO after the purchase?

What kind of a weasel company has their CEO go out and make false statements in public that hype their chances at litigation (and hence their stock price), when he knows damn well that his lawyer is going to go in there the very next day and say the opposite?

McBride's statement about IBM's contributions was not false. As for whether that would be presented in court, any attorney will tell that a plaintiff should never act as his own spokesman. Darl McBride ain't an attorney. His attorney should tell him to STFU.

It gets better, though. SCO Attorney Heise has just stated in court that there is no System V code in linux. Now they want to base their whole thing on the "derivative works" nonsense. OK, that is their choice. But what does this say about the "enormous revenue stream" they are going to garner from selling licenses to linux users? If they admit there is no System V code in linux, they have no case against any linux user.

Actually, yes, they do. IBM contributed the code. If IBM won't indemnify them, SCO can sue them.
130 posted on 02/11/2004 8:19:48 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]


To: Bush2000
when are you going to provide me with proof that nobody from Santa Cruz Operation joined SCO after the purchase?

That's your formulation, not mine. I never said "no one" was transferred. The context was your claim that there was some significant quantity of ill will towards IBM over the fate of Project Monterey, and that this ill will entered Caldera in the form of institutional memory among the transferred employees. If you are now going to claim that it only took one employee of unspecified position to cause this effect, I think I'll ignore you.

Have you bothered to think through the implications of Doug Michels entering into talks with Caldera to sell them the crown jewels that he had been bragging about for years, just on the eve of the cancellation? Although the deal did not close for a year, SCO and Caldera publicly announced their intention to do this deal on August 2, 2000. The public announcement of the cancellation of Project Monterey was then three weeks away, although there were already rumors circulating for weeks before that.

Smarter people would have said, "Forget it, Doug. You tried to snooker us. You tried to sell us a 30-year-old bag of crap right before everyone found out the bad news."

Did Caldera do that? Nooooooo. They spent the next nine months futzing with lawyers and regulatory agencies to make the deal go through. I'm sure when they had the signing ceremony, the Caldera boys grabbed the champagne and jumped up and down, shouting "We bought it! We bought it!" And Doug Michels said, "Thank you P.T. Barnum! There really is one born every minute."

The year 2000 sucked for SCO. They were "restructuring" and laying people off months before any of this happened. IBM had nothing to do with that; Monterey wasn't even shipping. SCO's bread-and-butter business was tanking. In fact it's obvious now (because of the way Michels restructured SCO to position the "server software business" as a separate entity, all packaged up with a bow around it) that he decided to jettison the thing some time in the first quarter of 2000. So he can't be bitter; he was getting hammered on that side of the house, Monterey or no Monterey. He decided to bail before IBM did.

People aren't stupid. Whatever SCO employees might have been left after the various rounds of layoffs would see immediately, when the Caldera deal was announced, that they had been positioned for exit months before, when they were made a separate division. IBM didn't do that to them. Doug Michels did it. Had he not sold the division to somebody, he would have laid them all off. As a division they were losing money. A lot of money. They were lucky that anybody even wanted it.

136 posted on 02/11/2004 10:50:36 PM PST by Nick Danger (Give me immortality, or give me death)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson