SCO news!
Posted on 02/14/2006 11:23:12 AM PST by ShadowAce
Some folks just dote on mystery. SCO must be one of them. It now turns out that, according to IBM's latest Motion to Limit SCO's Claims Relating to Allegedly Misused Material [PDF] and the Memorandum in Support [PDF], while SCO did list 294 items on its final list of allegedly misused material by the December 22, 2005 deadline, it failed to provide "basic specificity" on 201 of them. So IBM would like the court to limit SCO to the 93 items it actually provided particularized information for. Here's IBM's attached Exhibits [PDF].
Exhibit A is Todd Shaughnessy's Declaration from May of 2005. Exhibit B is a letter from IBM to SCO, pointing out what was missing on SCO's list on the interim disclosure that they'd need to cure by the 22nd. So, since December 5, SCO has known that IBM was going to file this motion, unless they finally coughed up with specificity how IBM has misused its materials. For example, it tells SCO that for most of the list, "SCO still fails to disclose (1) files and lines of code in Linux; (2) files and lines of code in AIX or Dynix; and (3) files and lines of code in UNIX System V." Worse, even when SCO does list a line of any of the three, it fails to adequately provide "any identification of the lines of Unix System V code from which the allegedly contributed material is alleged to derive or result."
After nearly three years of massive discovery. No wonder SCO filed under seal. They were afraid we'd die laughing.
IBM isn't laughing. They are as serious as a heart attack. This from the motion:
As this Court has recognized, SCO has made a plethora of public statements accusing IBM of misconduct, while offering no support for its allegations. The Court deferred IBM’s motions for summary judgment but ordered SCO to particularize its claims, once and for all, in the Final Disclosures. SCO has declined. For 201 of its 294 Items, SCO fails to identify the allegedly misused material with the most basic detail. SCO’s failure to provide even the most basic specificity for its claims is extraordinarily prejudicial to IBM and should not be allowed. Thus, IBM respectfully requests that the Court limit SCO’s claims to the 93 Items for which SCO provides detail sufficient to identify both the allegedly misused material and the allegedly improper source of that material.
This at the same time Intel has just told the court SCO wasn't truthful. Well, now, how's that for timing?
So, what is this about? SCO has tried for a long time to keep IBM in the dark, nearly three years now. IBM is telling the court that they shouldn't be allowed to game the system. And here's what is at stake, from the memorandum:
SCO contends generally that IBM misused the Unix System V code (which SCO purports to own) and the AIX and Dynix code (which IBM owns, but SCO purports to control). According to SCO, IBM improperly “dumped” Unix System V, AIX and Dynix into Linux. Given the scope of the code implicated by SCO’s claims, however, it is practically impossible to assess and defend against them without knowing exactly which versions, files and lines of code SCO contends are at issue. As the Court will recall, there are numerous versions of Unix System V, AIX, Dynix and Linux, and each version consists of thousands of files and millions of lines of code. For example, Unix System V R4.2 ES/MP consists of 22,222 files and 7,339,157 lines of code; AIX 4.3.3 for Power consists of 111,964 files and 138,420,329 lines of code; and Linux 2.6.15 consists of 18,811 files and 7,290,070 lines of code.SCO’s failure to specify its claims leaves IBM no way to defend itself except by undertaking a massive analysis, potentially of every single version, file and line of Unix System V code, every single version, file and line of code in AIX and Dynix, and every single version, file and line of code in Linux.5 As SCO well knows, there is no way IBM could conduct this analysis in several years, let alone in the several months afforded by the scheduling order. Unlike SCO, IBM does not know what SCO claims. If tolerated, SCO’s gamesmanship would give IBM and its experts no meaningful opportunity to evaluate in advance the claims SCO may choose to trot out in its expert reports, in opposition to IBM’s summary judgment motions and/or at trial.
IBM is asking the court for what IBM needs to defend itself and it is asking the court to force SCO to quit playing games. The court is certain to respond in some fashion. So either IBM will finally get the specifics from SCO, or SCO's list will be whittled down. IBM's memorandum ends like this:
As described above, in spite of the benefit of almost three years time and numerous requests from IBM and instructions from the Court, SCO has repeatedly refused to identify with specificity the basis of its claims. The resolution of this case should not be delayed further to provide SCO yet another opportunity. It has had more than enough opportunity to comply with the Court’s orders. As IBM has previously advised the Court, we believe it is in IBM’s interest and in the public interest to bring this case to a close as soon as possible.
In short: enough is enough.
SCO news!
I would not worry about IBM, they are no longer a manufacture of anything. They are trying to sell services and are being under cut. My bet is that 10 years from now they eitjer will not be or will be very small.
ping
This might be of interest to you.
Both SCO and the courts involved should be admonished for what I feel is a gross abuse of the court system. SCO should be shunned by all technology firms in the future.
Sweeeet.
Not a manufacturer? How do you figure?
They have outsourced most manufacturing, but they still make their own AS/400's and mainframes. Besides, they have shown that they can still sell hardware effectively even if they aren't building it themselves.
They buy stuff made in Asia and sell it under the IBM name.
The only thing IBM makes itself is "NO SENSE" at all!
I am an engineer and have been aware of this case for some time. SCO is indeed a slimy company that seeks to obtain through the courts what they cannot achieve competing in the marketplace. I wish IBM would crush SCO into nonexistence. In an ideal world, the company's executives would be sitting in prison for the rest of their lives. They are one more example of the RATS of the marketplace. SCO is full of thieves and charlatans. They lawyers are.... well lawyers.
And the CPUs used in the world's fastest supercomputers and all 3 next-generation consoles...
SCO has been grandstanding and mis-filing lawsuit after lawsuit... So far, they have not shown any misdeed from anyone but themselves. This is definitely a good case for tort reform.
40 million games systems will be sold this year with IBM microprocessers in them. It is estimated that everytime someone connects to the internet the packets go through 12 IBM chips.
IBM processors are the backbone of the internet.
< /IBMer rant>
"I would not worry about IBM, they are no longer a manufacture of anything. They are trying to sell services and are being under cut. My bet is that 10 years from now they eitjer will not be or will be very small."
You may be right. They used to have a great workforce of very loyal employees but not anymore. The management have been robbing the company and selling it off piece-meal for years. A lot of the services they provide are supported by offshore employees that don't have a culture of providing good service and it's beginning to show. They are cheap though.
Who is the OEM?
Oh really. All of our laptops are ThinkPADs, but we are switching. Support went to hell in a handbasket once it went to India. They wanted $700 to replace a nonfunctional USB port (with more than two years of the three year warranty still left). The time for fixes went from 48 hours to sometime next month. Not acceptable in our environment, so bye bye IBM.
Whoa there, you're falling into SCO's trap. The SCO Group started as Caldera, a Linux vendor, which bought the UNIX business from The Santa Cruz Operation in order to get its value-added reseller network to push Linux through. The Santa Cruz Operation then changed its name to Tarantella (the name of its other product besides UNIX) and Caldera changed its name to The SCO Group.
This purposeful confusion is meant to give SCO an air of respect and legitimacy it doesn't deserve.
The real SCO/Tarantella lives on as a subsidiary of Sun Microsystems, bought for a measly $25 million.
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.