Sounds like some kind of schoolyard challenge. Geez...
Posted on 03/03/2004 3:59:05 PM PST by rit
Client Server NEWS & LinuxGram 537.1 NewsFlash Competitive Intelligence about Servers, Storage & Related Phenomena
IBM CEO Ordered To Turn Over Linux Secrets to SCO By Maureen O'Gara
Wednesday, March 3, 2004 - The magistrate judge doing the legal housekeeping in the run-up to the $5 billion SCO v. IBM trial next year gave the SCO Group what it wanted today and ordered IBM to cough up the discovery that SCO claims is vital to its charge that IBM copied Unix code into Linux.
IBM has been told to turn over the releases of AIX and Dynix that SCO's lawyers say represent "about 232 products" in 45 days. SCO in turn has been told to provide the court with a memorandum saying whether the code is relevant or not to its case and identify additional files it may want.
IBM has also been ordered to give SCO "any and all non-public contributions it has made to Linux." SCO is on its own to identify IBM's public contributions.
SCO has also been given access to all reports and documents in the possession of IBMers involved in the Linux project including IBM CEO Sam Palmisano and IBM VP and top Linux evangelist Irving Wladawsky- Berger.
The paperwork is to supposed to include any materials relating to IBM's Linux strategy, Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells said.
Reports suggest that SCO is particular giddy over this stipulation, apparently having feared it wouldn't get access to IBM e-mail and filing cabinets.
IBM has also been told to response to SCO interrogatories and include "relevant information from all sources including top-level management.
IBM has identified 7,200 - yup, that's right, 7.200 - potential witnesses and the judge told IBM to give SCO the contact information of a representative sample of 1,000 of most important potential witnesses agreed on by both of them.
The court gave SCO 45 days to come up with the answers to IBM's interrogatories that it hasn't answered yet despite a previous court order and to identify all specific lines of code that IBM is alleged to have contributed to Linux from either AIX or Dynix or at least the ones SCO can identify at this time.
SCO is also supposed to identify all the Unix System V code that IBM allegedly contributed to Linux from AIX and Dynix and all the lines of code in Linux it claims to have rights to and identify the code SCO distributed to other people and explain who they were and when they got it and why.
Both companies have been ordered to produce source logs that identify how documents were kept and file memoranda with the court on the impact of SCO's second amended complaint that drops SCO's original trade secrets misappropriation charge and substitutes copyright infringement.
The switch means SCO has stopped saying IBM snitched code from either UnixWare or OpenServer and leaves the charge standing solely on derivative AIX and Dynix code.
Meanwhile, this Friday SCO is supposed to answer Novell's motion to throw out SCO's suit against it.
Client Server NEWS is published weekly by G2 Computer Intelligence Inc. http://www.g2news.com 323 Glen Cove Ave.; Sea Cliff, NY 11579, USA; Tel.:516 759-7025 Fax: 516 759-7028. Send press releases to news@g2news.com
Subscription price per year: $595/£395 individual reader. Corporate Subscription available at quantity discounts. paperboy@g2news.com
(c) Copyright 2004: While we are flattered that some of our readers may want to pass along copies of our stories to customers, clients, associates, friends, family and co-workers, please know that this practice is illegal, violates our intellectual property rights and undermines our efforts to bring you the kind of reporting you've come to expect.
And, so the legalese: It is illegal to reproduce, copy, photocopy, forward, e-mail, publish, broadcast, post on an Internet/Intranet site, rewrite, store in a retrieval system or otherwise distribute this publication or any portion of this publication or any article in whole or in part by any means, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of G2 Computer Intelligence.
Comments? Subscription? Permission to post to a web site? Reprint info?: e-mail: paperboy@g2news.com --------------------
Europe: Simon Thompson simon@g2news.com Tel: +44 (0)1280 820560; Fax: +44 (0)1280 820554
(c) Copyright 2004, G2 Computer Intelligence, Inc.
Comments? Subscription, permission to post to a web site or reprint info?: e-mail: paperboy@g2news.com
What it all means in practical terms is that the court didn't buy SCO's argument that it needed all of AIX and Dynix and it specifically rejected its request that IBM *first* provide AIX and Dynix, so that after that SCO could find what it needed. Since, obviously, IBM is unlikely to provide its side of the discovery order until the 45th day, SCO, under the identical 45-day requirement, will have to provide its answers to discovery before it gets to look at any more AIX or Dynix.
SCO is granted one request: that IBM turn over discovery regarding top management, including Sam Palmisano. Also Judge Wells asks that IBM turn over any nonpublic contributions to Linux that it may have made. She will learn more about Linux as the case goes along, and I believe she will find there aren't any such. SCO asked for source logs. Wells says fine, but SCO has to do the same for IBM. I don't remember IBM asking for source logs, but it is only fair.
They're coming after YOU!
And 27 percent didn't want to answer another *^#$%^$*& survey...
Looks like more one-sided bunk from Groklaw. If you read the actual order which I linked above, it says IBM is to:
1. To provide the releases of AIX and Dynix...within 45 days of this order. Following this production SCO is to provide additional memoranda to the court as to if and how these files support it's position..."
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but it looks pretty obviously like Groklaw is misleading people about this latest order.
I don't think your conclusion is supported. The judge has effectively ordered SCO to show "theirs" before IBM has to show IBM's. That forces SCO to disclose what they have been fighting tooth and nail against disclosing all along, because SCO has no such evidence. If SCO can't come up with any bona-fide support for their position before IBM produces source code for 232 different products, it will be pretty clear that any "additional memoranda" that SCO coughs up will also not be responsive as to "if and how these files support its position", rather it will be seen as the result of the fishing expedition ruse that SCO has always been after.
No they didn't. The judge said in regards to SCO's immediate requirements quote:
SCO is to provide all specific lines of code IBM is alleged to have contributed to Linux...that SCO can identify at this time.
Then as I posted above the judge later said:
"following this (IBM's) production (of code)"
SCO can then respond.
There's two quotes right out of the order that clearly seem to dispute what you and Groklaw are pushing.
I think you are reading it wrong. SCO does not get every iteration of AIX and Dynix known to man, rather the released versions that IBM was willing to provide anyway.
Sounds like some kind of schoolyard challenge. Geez...
Not yet, but the judge left that door wide open. From the order, again after IBM complies and SCO responds,
The court will then consider ordering IBM to produce more code from AIX and Dynix.
ROFL!!! It sure does!!! Here's to the long life of Unix if one has to lose.
I should have included a sarcasm tag. Outside of Bill Gates, there are probably very few people in CEO positions that could code their way out of a paper bag. Not to mention being aware of "secrets".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.