Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

SCO Puts Unix Assets On the Block

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the neck-is-slender-executioner-very-skilled dept.

Unix 217

itwbennett writes "SCO Group announced Thursday that it plans to auction off most of its Unix assets, including 'certain UNIX system V software products and related services,' ITworld reports. 'This asset sale is an important step forward in ensuring business continuity for our customers around the world,' said Ken Nielsen, SCO chief financial officer, in a statement. 'Our goal is to ensure continued viability for SCO, its customers, employees and the Unix technology.' Interested parties must submit a bid for the assets by Oct. 5."

cancel ×

217 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Can they do that? (2, Insightful)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603496)

I thought Novel owned Unix and only licensed it to SCO, and that was already settled. How can they sell Unix if they don't own it?

Re:Can they do that? (5, Interesting)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603586)

They didn't say they own Unix, this time. They said they own Unix technologies and "certain UNIX system V software products and related services." Meaning, SCO Unix. Anyway, the news here is that they are officially not any sort of software or technology company anymore, they are now officially nothing more than a shambling, undead lawsuit factory. I suppose the one guy who still licenses anything SCO related will be happy they are selling his support contract to someone else.

Re:Can they do that? (5, Informative)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603918)

Spun wrote

They didn't say they own Unix, this time.

Press Release says

Even as it continues to battle for Unix ownership in court, the SCO Group plans to auction off most all of its Unix assets, including "certain UNIX system V software products and related services,"

Yes they are certainly still claiming ownership of Unix.

A Judge enjoin them from selling anything while the lawsuits against them are adjudicated.

Re:Can they do that? (3, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604002)

Gah! Really?!? You mean to tell me you actually read the article? My God, what has Slashdot come to? We do not read articles here. Here, we make uninformed and inflammatory comments about the poorly written and factually incorrect summary, mister.

Seriously though, thanks for pointing that out. Ownership of the generic trade name "Unix" and copyright is something different from ownership of SCO Unix. But still, if the judge enjoined them from selling anything, I don't see how they can legally do this.

Re:Can they do that? (2, Funny)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604036)

I know I know. My Bad.

I've been around almost as long as you, I should know better. Can I chalk it up to being a newbie??? ;)

Re:Can they do that? (3, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604214)

Sure thing, six digits. :)

Re:Can they do that? (1)

History's Coming To (1059484) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604398)

I've write "Linux system software products" for fun and provide "related services". Meaning I write little scripts and stuff and some of my friends try them out, and sometimes they ask me about them.

Doesn't mean I own linux.

Re:Can they do that? (4, Funny)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603606)

They're about to sue Linus Torvalds, after which they will own everything. (maniacal laughter)

Re:Can they do that? (2, Informative)

JDmetro (1745882) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603648)

Re:Can they do that? (5, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603806)


I think "it it plans to auction off most of its Unix assets" means they plan to sell off their O'Reilly books on eBay.

.

Buy it... (1)

mrops (927562) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604286)

May be I should get a bunch of investors to buy these assets and sue anyone using Linux.

Wonder if there is money to be made there.

don't forget to pay your $699 license fee (2, Funny)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603502)

you cocksmoking teabaggers!

Re:don't forget to pay your $699 license fee (2, Insightful)

grub (11606) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603584)

Sheesh, the mods have short memories and/or no sense of humour.

Re:don't forget to pay your $699 license fee (2, Insightful)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604060)

yeah, or maybe a post comprised entirely of "you cocksmoking teabaggers" is just sort of trollish?

Re:don't forget to pay your $699 license fee (2, Funny)

cmiller173 (641510) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604158)

The subject line "don't forget to pay your $699 license fee" is part of the post ... and the joke.

Could have been posted w/o the gratuitous insult (0, Offtopic)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604222)

you teasmoking bagcocker!

license fee? is that like a... TAX?!? (-1, Offtopic)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603642)

The Taxed Enough Already Party is vehemently against the paying of fees of any sort for services rendered, especially cocksmoking.

Illegal without a perscription. (0, Offtopic)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604070)

Cocksmoking is illegal in my state without a doctor's perscription.

Re:Illegal without a perscription. (0, Offtopic)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604186)

have you tried the new e-cock?, the starter kits are pretty cheap and come in several flavors.

$699 ! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603524)

Do unto others ...

Microsoft Should Buy Them (5, Insightful)

smartin (942) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603530)

They could use a decent operating system to sell

Re:Microsoft Should Buy Them (2, Funny)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603624)

Too bad Microsoft is infringing on no fewer than eleventy billion SCO patents too.

We're finding places where, line by line, they have stolen code that we stole from someone else!

Re:Microsoft Should Buy Them (3, Informative)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604114)

No, Microsoft was a concerned enough corporate citizen that they were the FIRST to pay big money to acquire a license to said technology. That was even before SCO found the money to start all the lawsuits, ironically.

Re:Microsoft Should Buy Them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33604352)

Probably even before SCO had the idea to sue anyone, actually.

They already did! (2, Informative)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603794)

Xenix anyone?

Re:They already did! (1, Redundant)

guruevi (827432) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604118)

Microsoft no longer owns Xenix, SCO does (no seriously). SCO Unix is Xenix. I guess they could buy it back but what good will that do them? They got rid of it for a reason.

Re:They already did! (1)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604368)

I never said they currently own it, I said they bought it.

Re:Microsoft Should Buy Them (5, Informative)

Enry (630) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603800)

I see you're not familiar with Xenix [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Microsoft Should Buy Them (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603954)

If you weren't aware, they're currently selling Windows 7, a decent operating system.

Re:Microsoft Should Buy Them (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604168)

SCO Unix used to be Microsoft Xenix.

Let's bid on it (5, Interesting)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603536)

Maybe we could all get together and chip in a buck or two to buy the assets, then open-source the whole thing.

How does that sound?

Re:Let's bid on it (1)

Anon-Admin (443764) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603830)

Im game, I would put a few bucks forward for it.

Re:Let's bid on it (5, Funny)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603956)

I'll put in twenty bucks, but only if the deal includes me giving Darl McBride a swift kick in the nuts.

Re:Let's bid on it (1)

JamesP (688957) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604014)

I would pay just to have the pleasure of firing McBride and the lawyers

Too bad they're gone

$100 (1)

TopSpin (753) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604260)

I'm up for this. More if necessary.

Some of this UNIX stuff has been ricocheting around the US legal system, such as it is, for decades now. SCO v Linux et al wasn't the first eruption of this nonsense. Time to retire it.

First Bid! (4, Interesting)

Skjellifetti (561341) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603546)

$0. SCO doesn't have any Unix assets.

Re:First Bid! (3, Funny)

ByteSlicer (735276) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603634)

Someone should buy it for $699.

Re:First Bid! (1)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603816)

It was $699 per processor, so... 0 processors!

Re:First Bid! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33604048)

Someone will, the cock smoking teabagger.

Re:First Bid! (1)

rdavidson3 (844790) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603666)

Or how about OSS community buying the IP assets they tried to claim that they owned through the trials, and once those assets are bought then give them freely to the community.

I realize that giving money to SCO leaves a bad taste in my mouth and the courts have ruled that there wasn't any infringement to begin with, but at least MS can't use that FUD to curtail companies from using Linux.

My $0.02.

Re:First Bid! (4, Insightful)

sconeu (64226) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603846)

SCOXQ already has a buyer in mind (probably Yarro), or they wouldn't do this auction.

Re:First Bid! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33604242)

Doesn't matter, after the suckers buy whatever they're selling. A few months or years later they'll get sued by SCO.

Re:First Bid! (1)

fishexe (168879) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604152)

My $0.02.

Going once, going twice...Sold!! to the man with the boring slashdot nick!
Congratulations, your two cents has just bought the right not to be sued by SCO!

Re:First Bid! (1)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604170)

"The OSS community" isn't a single entity, and whoever does buy it, they are going to want something in return. IBM or Novell could buy them then GPL them, but what would they get in return? They still have shareholders that deserve to know what the "investment" is going to return.

This isn't like both companies investing directly into Linux, which was already gaining steam and capturing marketshare. That can be explained as investing in the future. At best, buying the alleged "assets" would nothing more than a defensive move, OR an offensive move if someone wants to try yet again to bludgeon the big Linux players (not likely).

Re:First Bid! (1)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603714)

If someone doesn't mod you up in a timely fashion, SCO will sue them for violating their license agreement.

Re:First Bid! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603734)

Of course they do. All their tools and applications they've developed on UNIX platforms. What they don't have is ownership of the name.

Re:First Bid! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603792)

Too expensive. They should be paying you.

Re:First Bid! (2, Funny)

ChefInnocent (667809) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604146)

Maybe, but this isn't Soviet Russia. So instead we will have:

1. Buy SCO Unix assests.
2. ???
3. Profit!!!

Re:First Bid! (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604288)

Sadly, there are "Unix" assets. SCO Xenix 1 and 2 and /386 and some other stuff are licensed Unix ports. Not that they work very well. They don't own Unix (as seen in trial by jury, despite SCO's denial), but indeed, they have some licenses. Not that they're worth a plug nickel, but maybe someone might do something with them. Anyone but Larry Ellison.

As long as we're selling software we don't own (5, Insightful)

Zeek40 (1017978) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603604)

Would anyone like to buy the rights to OS/2 products systems and services from me?

Re:As long as we're selling software we don't own (4, Funny)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603756)

As your customer, will you ever-so-graciously promise not to sue me for using Linux?

Re:As long as we're selling software we don't own (2, Funny)

Zeek40 (1017978) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603824)

Sure, but I'm pretty sure there's some infringing code in some version of Windows somewhere. I'm definitely gonna sue you for that one. I mean both operating systems have GUI's, so they must have copied the code straight from my stuff, right?

Re:As long as we're selling software we don't own (1)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603858)

O noes! Probably!

May I pay you for protection against lawsuits that you may decide to file against me one day, regardless of their merit?

Re:As long as we're selling software we don't own (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604068)

Or you can buy VMS rights from me! All you Windows NT-derived OS users better get out your $699 per processor!

$1.73 million (5, Informative)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603640)

$1.73 million buys the whole company. http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SCOXQ.PK [yahoo.com]

Re:$1.73 million (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603718)

That seems a little high. I think it's worth about $1.73.

Re:$1.73 million (1)

haruchai (17472) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603776)

What a waste of $1.73 million that would be. It would be more productive to spend all that money and manure and dump it on the lawn of their HQ.
That's about the only way to get something to grow out of that patent shill mill.

Re:$1.73 million (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603784)

Considering it would take at least $10 million to cover outstanding claims, that puts the value of the Unix assets at $11.73 million.

Re:$1.73 million (1)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603972)

The company claims that the System V software on the block will be free of any bankruptcy-related liens or encumbrances.

Re:$1.73 million (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604106)

Yes, but the same company also claims that the Linux kernel contains source code ripped straight from Unix System V. I wouldn't be surprised if they also claimed ownership of the Brooklyn Bridge.

Re:$1.73 million (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604380)

Yes, but the same company also claims that the Linux kernel contains source code ripped straight from Unix System V. I wouldn't be surprised if they also claimed ownership of the Brooklyn Bridge.

And were planning a lawsuit against the City of New York for use of the bridge without paying appropriate licensing fees.

Re:$1.73 million (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603994)

There really isn't much left of that company. I'm not even sure it is worth that, part of their market cap might be speculative. After all they're much more likely to be worth less than 0 after all the lawsuits are settled.

They are trying to get bought (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603676)

This will make their debt the responsebillity of the buyer and not the management, which basically had extortion as a business model.

Here's for hoping nobody shows any interest whatsoever, so SCO must close its doors. It'll be even better if the SEC starts poking around, because then ties to Microsoft will be exposed and the fireworks can start.

Re:They are trying to get bought (3, Informative)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604178)

This will make their debt the responsebillity of the buyer and not the management

No it won't. They're only selling the assets and not the business entity. If they were selling the whole SCO enitiy - if someone bought all the outstanding common stock - then you would be correct, IIRC business law.

If you look at most business sales, the buyer only purchases the assets - includes any trademarks and other IP. Sometimes, as part of the deal, the buyer will take on some of the debt. SCO is in bankruptcy, this is strictly an asset sale and the proceeds will go to the creditors.

It goes for the liabilities too. By purchasing just the assets, the previous entity keeps the liabilities (lawsuits, judgments, and years ago, any environmental liabilities). That's the basics and there's a shit load of subtleties that the lawyers worry about - especially when it comes to environmental problems.

What assets? (3, Informative)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603682)

Unless by "assets" you mean "little asses", I don't think SCO has any. Besides which, can't Novell confiscate assets as part of the settlement of it's lawsuit? Seems to me there are a lot of interested parties that would request the judge freeze any sale of assets.

Re:What assets? (1)

sconeu (64226) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603876)

Because this is Bankruptcy Court, specifically Delaware BK court, and the BK judge in question has pretty much let SCOXQ do whatever the hell they want.

Re:What assets? (1)

adamstew (909658) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603944)

Novell could bid, and then since that money would be then sent (via the bankruptcy court) to SCO's creditors, they would just get some of it back.

regex (1)

suso (153703) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603696)

$title =~ s/[eintux]//g

Re:regex (3, Funny)

Zeek40 (1017978) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603772)

SCO Ps U Asss O h Block

Does that mean something in a foreign language or something?

Re:regex (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603998)

$title =~ s/Unix Assets/Sweaty Balls/;
$title =~ s/the Block/your Chin/;

business continuity? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603704)

Huh? WTF?

Auction? (4, Funny)

multipartmixed (163409) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603722)

I bid 50 quatloos on the newcomer!

time to call up the GNAA reserve! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33604196)

in honor of SCO, I demand 699 trolls, stat!

Caldera (caldera) - noun (5, Informative)

Picass0 (147474) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603732)

A smoldering hole in the ground, watched by many for signs of activity leading to great destruction. Usually produces little more than some noise and gas.

Careful... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603752)

... these assets are cursed.

Ahhh!!!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603766)

More Fresh Meat for Microsoft to devour.

Propagation (4, Insightful)

carrier lost (222597) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603804)

Maybe Paul Allen [techdirt.com] will buy them.

A pimple on the ass of capitalism (1)

Burz (138833) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603826)

What are the chances that more zits will appear as a result of this sale?

Re:A pimple on the ass of capitalism (1)

Bananatree3 (872975) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603988)

SCOX - A pimple on the ass of capitalism

that's gotta be in a dictionary somewheres. What a great phrase!

SCO's Auctions.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33603852)

    I'll give 'em $5 for that silly "Unix" name, and then offer free and perpetual licenses to every open source unix-like distribution. This has been silly. Give up the name, and we'll all be using Unix, rather than the pesky name wars.

    I'll give 'em another $5 for all that worthless IP, so I can grant free and perpetual licenses on that also.

Re:SCO's Auctions.... (2, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604010)

The Unix name is owned by the Open Group, which certifies a system (eg, AIX, OS X, Solaris) as being Unix.

So... (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603898)

...suing the pants off of anyone who mentioned the word "unix" didn't really work as a viable business model, did it? Ass clowns...

hey Darl (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603904)

ill trade you some Linux ISOs for those SCO assets, you'll have to download them yourself though.

Amazing (5, Funny)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#33603932)

Absolutely amazing. They haven't had a modern up-to-date system in ages, it turns out they didn't even own what they claimed to own. They got rid of the only people who had any hope of maintaining anything technically back in the '90s and they tried to defraud everyone in reach. And yet, all these years later the corpse is still twitching.

It's like the end of the horror movie when the monster shows some vague sign of life just as the credits roll.

Re:Amazing (1)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604058)

I was wondering:

What have they actually sold recently?

Who bought it?

What of their property is still in use anymore?

Re:Amazing (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604328)

As far as I can tell, nothing at all. They pretty much jettisoned everything and everyone that wasn't directly in support of their failed lawsuits years ago.

The last trace of development capability got spun off in 2001 as Tarantella [wikipedia.org] .

The last time I saw SCO Unix in the '90s it still looked, felt, and acted like it did in the mid '80s. Using it was like taking a trip back in time. If it is still in use at all, it is as a POS system in a company with it's head thoroughly buried in the sand. Most of them made the move to Linux years ago once it was clear there would be no meaningful updates to SCO ever again.

"Assets" (0, Redundant)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604004)

I wonder if their "Assets" are worth less now than the total they spent on loosing lawsuits?

They seem about as profitable as mining under my couch. Probably has about the same amount of dust bunnies.

Obilg Robocop (1)

seven of five (578993) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604038)

"I'll buy that for a dollar!"

Re:Obilg Robocop (1)

swordgeek (112599) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604116)

$1.02

SCO still exists? (0)

KingFrog (1888802) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604066)

What do they sell?

Re:SCO still exists? (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604302)

UnixWare and OpenServer, there are still places that run those for point-of-sales and financial systems. I know a couple towns (clients of my employer) that run it in their city halls for licenses, inspections, permits and fees. Can't talk them into changing it, either.

linuxville.com fails to sell for 100$ on ebay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33604072)

that's pretty fauxking funny/a clear statement on the state of the 'community'. 'can't GIVE it away on 2nd ave., it's in tatters', boop sha do be. ahhaha.

So... (1)

BigDaveyL (1548821) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604102)

Once SCO gets rid of this division, what will they sell, exactly?

The Real Story here (1)

fishexe (168879) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604124)

'This asset sale is an important step forward in ensuring business continuity for our customers around the world,' said Ken Nielsen, SCO chief financial officer, in a statement.

In other news, SCO still has customers. Not only that, customers around the world. I think that's the real story here.

Re:The Real Story here (1)

snspdaarf (1314399) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604382)

No, I am sure he was misquoted.

A hot opportunity (1)

whoop (194) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604132)

I'd imagine this will be a hot thing to buy. You could take it, and then sue all these big Linux companies. It's a win-win situation. What could go wrong?

Tree fiddy you say,,,? (0, Offtopic)

beef3k (551086) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604244)

And that's when I understood it was the Loch Ness monster! I ain't givin' no god damn Loch Ness monster tree fiddy!

My bid (0)

bobdehnhardt (18286) | more than 4 years ago | (#33604370)

Let's see, I've got $0.73 in my pocket. Think they can make change?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?