Re: the source, so to speak, of the SCO lawsuit

"Federico Lucifredi" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.misc.free-software-business
Organization Endorfine.org
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Err,
    Sorry to poke at a sore spot, but after MS handsomely contributed to
both candidates' campaigns in the last presidentials, *amazingly* the DOJ
has decided to let Microsoft off the antitrust hook - I do not see the DOJ
going down that road again.

Besides they are all too busy tryng to figure out what carpet Saddam is
hiding under these days....

    -F

----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 15:00
Subject: Re: the source, so to speak, of the SCO lawsuit


> This cries out to be investigated by the FTC/DoJ and EC. They should open
> up shop inside Microsoft like they did with IBM and look over every
> transaction. The onus should be on Microsoft to show them that there is no
> ulterior motive behind any of their transactions. It is far too easy for
> them to use their money to do sham transactions with willing companies to
> do indirectly what they are prohibited from doing directly.
>
> The FTC/DoJ should immediately investigate the terms of the arrangement
> with SCO and see if the licensing fees bear any reasonable relationship to
> how much UNIX product Microsoft ships. If the fees are as significant as
> they would need to be for Microsoft to bankroll the fight against IBM, it
> is a prima facie case that the transaction is a sham and it should be
> treated as though Microsoft itself is conducting the case, with the
> antitrust implications that has.
>
> I would be surprised if the Microsoft lawyers would leave such an audit
> trail behind, since I have seen them be much more nuanced than that. It is
> more likely that they are giving SCO moral support for the case with a
> small fee reasonably tied to their UNIX products to show that intellectual
> property rights are important, so as to help establish their [false] claim
> that Open Source ignores IPRs. This will be the basis for a major FUD
> campaign to governments and big business. But I've seen Microsoft getting
> more and more desperate and that can cause dumb gambles.
>
> Nonetheless the transaction deserves scrutiny by the regulators to see on
> which side of the line this transaction falls.
>
> Tony Stanco
> Founding Director
> The Center of Open Source & Government
> http://www.eGovOS.org
> [email protected]
>
> Associate Director
> Open Source and eGovernment
> Cyber Security Policy and Research Institute
> George Washington University
> [NSA Center of Excellence in Information Assurance]
> 2033 K Street, NW, Suite 340
> Washington, DC 20006
> tel        202-994-5513
> fax       202-994-5505
> http://www.cpi.seas.gwu.edu
> [email protected]
>
>
> > Hm - Even with my own "issues" about MS, I find that a little excessive.
> >
> > After all, if you look at SCO's (minute) revenues, a very large chunk of
> > that is prurely licensing the original UNIX code (which speaks volumes
> > about their own producs).
> >
> > I will stick with the buyout strategy interpretation. Of course, once MS
> > sees that it can make a point out of licensing and GPL, tossing some
> > cash in the direction of the Linux problem is no big deal. But remember,
> > M$ used plenty of BSD code for its licensing stacks and builds a few
> > interoperability modules.
> >
> > They do not need a license, but they will gladly buy one if that makes
> > the point that all Linux distro assemblers should as well.
> >
> > -F
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Seth Gordon" <[email protected]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 13:07
> > Subject: the source, so to speak, of the SCO lawsuit
> >
> >
> >> Ah, I see it now.
> >>
> >> MS attorney: We'd like you to sue IBM on the grounds that Linux is
> >> violating your intellectual property in Unix.
> >>
> >> SCO attorney: What?  That's crazy!  We have no proof that they've
> >> violated anything, and we can't afford to drag them through the courts
> >> for a case we're certain to lose!
> >>
> >> MS attorney: We'd like you to sue IBM on the grounds that Linux is
> >> violating your intellectual property in Unix, make as much noise about
> >> this lawsuit as possible to the people who purchase Linux
> >> distributions, and drag out the case and the associated negative
> >> publicity about Linux for as long as possible.  We are prepared to buy
> >> a Unix license from you at a price which will more than adequately
> >> compensate your department for these efforts.
> >>
> >> SCO attorney: Let me talk to my CEO and get back to you on that....
> >>
> >> --
> >> "Ernie and Bert are not gay.  They're puppets.  They don't even have
> >> legs."
> >>   --The Children's Television Workshop
> >> // seth gordon // [email protected] // http://ropine.com/sethg/cv.html
> >> //
>
>
>
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.