Replies

Interesting article. It sounds plausible that IBM developers did something that they shouldn't have done. It also sounds plausible that, if those market capitalization figures are correct, that SCO will simply be bought out to solve the problem if IBM is guilty.

As the author implies, a lot of things could be done that aren't. I suspect that if firms like SCO and IBM "go nuclear", that they could expose the soft underbelly of software copyrights and patents that would result in changes to the laws. I still say that there is something fundamentally wrong with the law when you can't tell if you are breaking the law until you are in a courtroom and have a judgement.

Thanks for the respectful post. I hope we can continue to discuss this as the gentlemen we are.

SCO will simply be bought out to solve the problem if IBM is guilty.

SCO has claimed repeatedly they do not want to be bought out. Assuming this is true (which of course it may or may not be), could the SEC prevent hostile takeover if the two parties are embroiled in a legal contest? I am not sure but doubt they would allow it.

I still say that there is something fundamentally wrong with the law when you can't tell if you are breaking the law until you are in a courtroom and have a judgement.

Certain laws are unfortunately setup to "gotcha" such as DUI laws as it is NOT against the law to have a drink and drive, although it IS against the law to have over a certain amount you may not be able to easily measure yourself and then drive. However that being said, I don't really see where it applies to this case? If IBM took code they had promised via contract not to disclose to others, then did, it would seem pretty open and shut IMO.