Microsoft Buys SCO Group's Unix

Internet News ^ | 19 may 2003 | Thor Olavsrud

[Mr. K]

Is this "The Onion"???

[stainlessbanner]

bump

[stainlessbanner]

filing

[goldstategop]

Its satire. I don't think Microsoft will be putting out a Linux based version of Windows anytime soon.

[sd-joe]

I think the whole thrust of this article is not that MS wants to put out a Linux version, but that it wants to join forces with "true" Unix in a fight against Linux.

And this, I believe, from MS point of view makes perfect sense.

[isthisnickcool]

Over the years SCO has done so many stupid things it's almost impossible to count all of them. But this one takes the cake. They are so dumb the next thing you will hear is that hired David Boise to represent them. Oh, wait, they DID just hire David Boise. LOL!

[Petronski]

I smell a rat.

[Dan12180]

Microsoft is losing ground to Linux in a small but growing group of previous users. It is fighting aggressively any competition it sees. I hope they are grasping at straws wtih this lawsuit. We need competition in the software environment and Microsoft won't tolerate any competition.

[The Duke]

I guess if you can't beat 'em in the marketplace then try to beat 'em in the courtroom.

[Strider]

"ensure intellectual property compliance across all Microsoft solutions."

Resistance is futile.

[chance33_98]

Alas, tis true.

[Dominic Harr]

One possible reason for this -- MS has used Unix code in Windows that they didn't have a license to.

First SCO threatens everyone with lawsuits for using their code, then MS suddenly up and licenses it.

Coincidence?

[kezekiel]

Sun-Tzu never wrote about the concept of "Embrace, Extend, Destroy," because he never heard of Microsoft.

[PatrioticAmerican]

"MS has used Unix code in Windows that they didn't have a license to. "

And what code would that be? Have you seen it?

[Dominic Harr]

I repeat -- one possible reason for this is . . .

[ikka]

It's a kabuki dance - pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

MS already is the second largest shareholder of SCOX. But you don't see the press release mentioning THAT, do you?

[Pearls Before Swine]

And what code would that be? Have you seen it?

Its actually a reasonable conjecture. SCO is maintaining that a great deal of Linux code has been "polluted" by use of unlicensed Unix code contributions that originated with ATT Unix. That's the basis of their suit against IBM, and IBM's contributions to Linux.

Couple that with the fact that its been widely published that MS has incorporated some public domain Linux code, and the conclusion is that maybe some of it was, albeit unintentionally, linked to the ATT code. So, as a humongously deep pocket with a checkered courtroom history, it would be prudent for MS to pony up for a license, just in case.

[kevkrom]

MS has used Unix code in Windows that they didn't have a license to

Probably not -- however, Microsoft has certainly used BSD code, which may or may not also be covered by the patent claims that SCO is making about System V. So, part of this may very well be defensive. Of course, the fact that this sets precendent that this is SCO intellectual propery that must be licensed makes it a nice "bank-shot" for them in the SCO vs. Linux lawsuit.