Oh I understand the why MSFT wants SCO to win this and I have no doubt MSFT has been doing something. I am just curious why BayStar outed MSFT on this?
By the way there is a follow up post here about who at MSFT Goldfarb talked to. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061009152706664
I'm guessing sworn testimony under penalty of perjury.
I just read the whole thing -- WOW! He even talked to SCO's law firm, which stated that they believed IBM would settle quickly, giving a good return.
"We also discussed SCO's lawsuit with David Boies from SCO's outside law firm, Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP. Mr. Boies informed me that he believed that IBM would settle the case fairly quickly."This bolsters another thing the OSS folks have been saying, that SCO didn't really have anything to back up the scrutiny of full discovery and a trial, and was instead hoping for a quick settlement to get them off IBM's back at a time IBM was promoting Linux.