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!

IBM Subpoenas Intel Into SCO Fray

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the subpoena-envy dept.

The Courts 248

whovian writes "Since IBM was ordered by the courts to show more code, they are now reported by Groklaw to have subpoenaed Intel to show 'all communications between Intel and SCO or Canopy about IBM, Unix or Linux, all meetings with either concerning IBM, Unix or Linux, and all contracts or other business relations, past, present, or future, between Intel and SCO.' The text is available at the website."

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

*sigh* (1)

mtrisk (770081) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537415)

What are they trying to pull here? That Intel was possibly behind SCO's litigation? I doubt it...

When will it end?

Re:*sigh* (1)

antiMStroll (664213) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537430)

When the truth's out?

Re:*sigh* (1)

suteri (637146) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537483)

When the truth's out?
It will be out there right after the next X-Files [ign.com] movie opens.

Re:*sigh* (1)

DietCoke (139072) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537587)

The truth? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

So, to answer your question: never.

Re:*sigh* (5, Insightful)

Dorothy 86 (677356) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537457)

It will end when any of several things happen.

  1. SCO doens't have/want to spend the money necessary for the proceedings to continue
  2. SCO actually shows the evidence they claim they have, and it is, indeed, damning
  3. SCO figures out a way to get out of this mess scott free...

But even then, the counter suits, and residual suits for damages, etc. This may be going on for a looooooooooooong time. When will it end is, indeed, a good question.

Re:*sigh* (2, Funny)

Chexum (1498) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537612)

When will it end is, indeed, a good question.

On the other hand, there's another viewpoint: maybe all this is just a conspiracy of a curious IT historian, wishing to document the birth of Linux, and the spread of it, day by day, hour by hour. :)

Re:*sigh* (1)

stupidfoo (836212) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537615)

SCO figures out a way to get out of this mess scott free...

Being bought out by IBM would be one possibility. Big Blue clearly has more money and lawyers to throw around, but even they don't want to put too much money into such a worthless enterprise.

Re:*sigh* (1)

Dorothy 86 (677356) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537659)

right. IBM wouldn't put those kinds of resources into SCO... it would be a money pit. which is why SCO has to find a way out of their own hole. I think (IANAL, et alii) that IBM is just throwing the court system around to prolong the thing until SCO can't do anything any more, but as has been covered in posts below, IBM may know something. I just don't see much ground breaking discovery coming from this.

Re:*sigh* (5, Informative)

can56 (698639) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537793)

The folks at Canopy are now suing each other (see the Register for details). That is justice.

Re:*sigh* (4, Interesting)

Technician (215283) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537515)

When will it end?

It will end when either the defense or the offense runs out of money. They will chase anybody and anything that had any contact with Linux in any way do drag out the proceedings until the money runs out.

From what I see, this was never intended to be a quick case. I just wonder who the heck is funding this new round of SCO legal action and how long can they keep it up.

Follow the money if you can.

Who should be following this is ... (4, Interesting)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537704)

the SEC. and yet, they are doing nothing.

I suspect that following the money is next to impossible.

Re:*sigh* (3, Interesting)

Gogo Dodo (129808) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537732)

It will end when either the defense or the offense runs out of money.

Well, IBM made $3.04 billion last quarter so I can't see the defense running out of money anytime soon. SCO loss $6.5 million last quarter and apparently has less than $30 million in cash left. Of course, if you believe the conspiracy theory, then Microsoft made $4.75 billion last quarter. We could be here for awhile...

Re:*sigh* (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537521)

When will it end?

I have a feeling this is going to go on a looooooong time. The more legal discoveries (request for files), the more stuff will come up that may trigger further diggings and requests in an ever-expanding tree of issues.

I think Linux vendors should get together to sue and demand SCO tells them which code is at issue so that replacment code can be written. It would likely be better for the Linux community to code around the suspect areas rather than have this cloud hanging over everybody. SCO is holding us hostage via lack of specifics, not so much software code itself.

Re:*sigh* (1)

einhverfr (238914) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537565)

I think Linux vendors should get together to sue and demand SCO tells them which code is at issue so that replacment code can be written. It would likely be better for the Linux community to code around the suspect areas rather than have this cloud hanging over everybody. SCO is holding us hostage via lack of specifics, not so much software code itself.

I think the community has been demanding this for so long we have just given up assuming that SCO will ever show/find any evidence.

Secondly, why do you think SCO would give up the game that keeps them in business?

Re:*sigh* (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537672)

It isn't about code. SCO is claiming a patright on Linux. A patright is like a patent in that it covers general ideas, but a copyright in that it exists from the moment of creation. Unfortunately for SCO, patrights are not recognized in any country I know of, only copyrights and patents are and neither of those do what SCO wants.

Re:*sigh* (1)

kaltekar (464545) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537689)

Redhat did, effectivly, do just that when it asked for a declaration of non-infringment but the case is stayed pending the IBM lawsuit

Re:*sigh* (-1, Flamebait)

Are you a NIGGER (850302) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537796)

It's all a conspiracy by the lawyers. The ultimate goal is to redirect 100% of the assets of both IBM and Microsoft into legal fees. At a measley $500 an hour we could be here awhile.

Re: Monterey (1)

cyber_rigger (527103) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537554)

IIRC the big squabble was about the failed Monterey project with SCO
where Unix was to be put on the Intel "Merced"

I'm sure that plenty of information passed through Intel at the time.

Oh Dear God... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537421)

When will it end?!

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537427)

fp!!!

IBM running scared? (3, Interesting)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537431)

If IBM really had this "in the bag", why would they need to do such a huge step as issuing a subpoena to Intel for all that information?

No company wants to give up that much information, especially when much of it is not useful for the case and possibly damaging to Intel's business.

So far, Intel has been a relative outsider in all of this, and it is hard to understand what IBM is trying to get by bringing in a hardware manufacturer into this software matter. This may be a motion to subpoena, but even IBM's army of lawyers seems to be grasping at any straw now.

I personally don't think SCO has a very strong case, but watching IBM's actions, it seems that IBM is the one with the lack of firm ground.

Re:IBM running scared? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537445)

Intel was the third partner in the Monterey project (UnixWare+AIX for Itanium). As to what their actual involvement was...

However, since then Intel has been a massive backer of Linux, including massive investment into RedHat and driver engineering for Linux.

Re:IBM running scared? (5, Insightful)

barc0001 (173002) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537449)

No. They're trying to alienate as many potential allies for SCO/Canopy by showing that they're now willing to clusterbomb subpoena just like SCO is.

On top of that, I'm sure their lawyers are very confident, they're just on a fishing expidition to see what else they can find that may be of use. Being meticulous never hurts.

Re:IBM running scared? (5, Insightful)

skraps (650379) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537463)

Have you considered the possibility that they know something you don't?

Re:IBM running scared? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537494)

There is so much that the typical slashbot "knows" about this case, and it basically boils down to SCO not having a leg to stand on. However, if that were really the case, IBM would not have need of (as someone above described this) a fishing expedition.

So what is IBM up to? And why are they taking such a drastic step?

Re:IBM running scared? (1, Interesting)

forkazoo (138186) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537472)

how is subpeonaing Intel a huge step for IBM. Rather than be bothered by the order to show more code, they basically said, "Oh, hey, we totally already showed you a bunch, but I think those guys over there may have some interesting stuff. I dunno check them out. Leave me alone."

IOW, it's a chewbacca defense. Flood the court with lots of information which may or may not be entirely relevant. IBM can afford to keep the dog and pony show going longer than SCO can, so they will keep looking for truckloads of information that doesn't specifically incriminate them. Eventually, the court stops caring, and SCO goes bankrupt, and everybody goes home.

(Somebody please post the text of the Chewbacca defense, in case some of the other readers aren't familiar with it. I don't have time to track it down at the moment.)

Re:IBM running scared? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537519)

IBM don't need to drag it out - the whole case has turned into a disaster for SCO anyway.

Re:IBM running scared? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537530)

how is subpeonaing Intel a huge step for IBM.

Intel isn't a sub-peon...

Re:IBM running scared? (1, Funny)

PedanticSpellingTrol (746300) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537582)

Ladies and gentlemen of the supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider: (pulling down a diagram of Chewie) this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk, but Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now, think about that. That does not make sense! (jury looks shocked)

Why would a Wookiee -- an eight foot tall Wookiee -- want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense!

But more importantly, you have to ask yourself: what does that have to do with this case? (calmly) Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense!

Look at me, I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca. Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense. None of this makes sense.

And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberating and conjugating the Emancipation Proclamation... does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense.

If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.

Hog wash! (5, Informative)

bstadil (7110) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537477)

It's just a protection effort by IBM.

What they most likely want to establish is that SCO new Itanium was delayed and Intel notified them about the changing strategy of the processor.

SCO is claiming that the Monteray project was cancelled by IBM "out of the blue (Pun somewhat intended)" and due to the advent of Linux. IBM canceled the Monteray project as they were allowed to do since the business reason for continuing was no longer there. They need to have Intel confirm this, information which Intel obviously is reluctant to provide

Re:Hog wash! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537608)

Thank you. If only there was a way to only get significant, intelligent post like yours on slashdot...

Re:IBM running scared? (2, Interesting)

Eric S Raymond (234230) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537485)

Duh. To get valuable information from Intel, their future competitor.

Re:IBM running scared? (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537510)

> Duh. To get valuable information from Intel,
> their future competitor.

Future?

Re:IBM running scared? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537502)

So far, Intel has been a relative outsider in all of this

Not really. You might want to Google for it, but basically, SCO is suing IBM for intellectual property infringement, wherein they alledge IBM to put SCO's intellectual property to the Linux kernel the intellectual property obtained when SCO, IBM, and Intel still part of Project Monterey, which is a port of UNIX for Itanium. That was before Linux gained popularity.

Re:IBM running scared? (2, Interesting)

den_erpel (140080) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537576)


I personally don't think SCO has a very strong case, but watching IBM's actions, it seems that IBM is the one with the lack of firm ground.

I just had a presentation on patent law and practices (not that I pretend to be an expert, I think I just got a bit less clue-less). There seem to be a number of striking similarities here.

It is surprising to see that a very little number of patent cases are won on the grounds of the cases, most of them on technical details.

It seemed to me that this started out as an extortion racket, hoping that IBM would just cough up and pay. They didn't, and now IBM is striking back by bleeding them: they have far more resources to continue this than SCO has. I don't think that IBM will stop by simply winning, they will continue this until SCO is dead and in this respect, this approach makes sense:

When going to the ground of the matter, they might have a remote chance (how minute ever) that they might loose. In that case, they have made their opponent stronger. By first bleeding them, and hopefully killing them, they are just playing out all their cards, without risking anything at the moment.

Go IBM!

Re:IBM running scared? (1)

den_erpel (140080) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537591)

shoot, forgot to quote the first line:

I personally don't think SCO has a very strong case, but watching IBM's actions, it seems that IBM is the one with the lack of firm ground.

Enough (4, Funny)

X43B (577258) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537432)

Wake me up when it is over.

Re:Enough (3, Funny)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537506)

Guess you'll be in a coma for the next 10 years.

my professional, legal and technical opinion.. (1, Interesting)

che.kai-jei (686930) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537433)

..is wow.

dont be so quick to dismiss it.
hwo is really intels competitor amd or ibm?
amd for now. but i bm may displace both once x86 completely dies.

Re:my professional, legal and technical opinion.. (4, Insightful)

cyberfunk2 (656339) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537493)

Spelling and grammer helps when attempting to disseminate a professional opinion.

Re:my professional, legal and technical opinion.. (2, Funny)

njcoder (657816) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537560)

" Spelling and grammer helps when attempting to disseminate a professional opinion."

Grmamar deos, but stuides have shwon taht if you at laset get the frist and last letetrs rihgt, poelpe can gerenaly raed it.

Re:my professional, legal and technical opinion.. (2, Informative)

DietCoke (139072) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537609)

"Grmamar deos, but stuides have shwon taht if you at laset get the frist and last letetrs rihgt, poelpe can gerenaly raed it."

You forgot to read the last paragraph of the study:

"Doing this on purpose in a setting out of context generally implies that the instigator needs to find a new hobby."

Battle of the Titans! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537436)

Hopefully all the big companys get drawn in then we can get some drama!

Re:Battle of the Titans! (1)

AwaxSlashdot (600672) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537620)

Let's bring in others : Boeing, Nortel, ... Enron

AWx

Down with SCO (1, Troll)

soda160289 (776461) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537442)

Everyone who belives SCO should die say Aye!

linux on ppc (3, Insightful)

datadriven (699893) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537443)

I'm sure IBM would be happy if linux on ppc hardware got REAL popular

Re:linux on ppc (1)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537464)

Linux on PPC, now that's something everyone can enjoy!

Except maybe the hardcore windows fanboys.

Re:linux on ppc (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537500)

Ooooh oooh! Or those hardcore VMS fanboys!!! Or those Plan9 wankers!! LOL!! Or the fans of any other real operating system!!! This is such a fun template! Thanks!!

Re:linux on ppc (1)

metlin (258108) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537524)


You mean like this [yellowdoglinux.com] ?

gentoo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537708)

gentoo can install on a ppc with the same cd that installs on x86. how k00lrad is th4t! coz it kompiles the kode. konsider the improvement of compiling something big and slow to use your athlon kan do that too.

FREE TEEKID! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537444)

free teekid! First Amendmendt!
1!

Re:FREE TEEKID! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537467)

Kid? You mean the Star Wars Kid? [jedimaster.net]

Wow,cool dude.

Re:FREE TEEKID! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537529)

I sense much gay in you. Dangerous and disturbing this puzzle is. Yes, the gay is strong with this one.

Chinese conspiracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537446)

It's actually the future Chinese owners of IBM PC devision who wanted this. It's the first step for taking over Intel. Next subpoena Microsoft.

How typical... (2, Funny)

Regnard (803869) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537459)

only goes to show that nobody goes down alone.

Food for thought (2, Insightful)

Amiga Trombone (592952) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537462)

Don't ask me what it means, because all it means to me so far is that IBM suspects or knows something we don't yet know but we will, I'm sure, eventually find out. You don't usually have to depose your best friends, though. They tell you whatever you need to know volitionally, because they want you to win, and they'll do a declaration for you. You subpoena folks who are not eager to tell you what you wish to learn, or who wish to appear so.

No, you usually don't have to depose your best friends. Which is why this action may give some insight into the real state of relations between IBM and Intel.

Now that IBM has dumped their Intel PC business, they can afford to take off the gloves, and not have to worry about making nice in the morning.

Re:Food for thought (2, Insightful)

HFShadow (530449) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537481)

Or, intel hinted to IBM that they had some juicy details, but couldn't reveal them for one legal reason or another unless IBM could get a subpoena.

Re:Food for thought (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537673)

WTF? Have you ever heard of "X Series"??
IBM and Intel have a very strong relationship.

Re:Food for thought (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537492)

So far, Intel has been a relative outsider in all of this, and it is hard to understand what IBM is trying to get by bringing in a hardware manufacturer into this software matter. This may be a motion to subpoena, but even IBM's army of lawyers seems to be grasping at any straw now, and (spoiler alert) Hilary Swank's character is rendered paraplegic in a fight, and Frankie hesitates before helping her commit suicide.

I personally don't think SCO has a very strong case, but watching IBM's actions, it seems that IBM is the one with the lack of firm ground.

You repeat yourself. (1)

Joseph_Daniel_Zukige (807773) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537595)

Like Microsoft does.

I think IBM ought to just take all the data that SCO wants, dump it on a big slag of a hard disk in tarred text form, and dump it in SCO's lap.

There's your data, now what are you going to do with it.

Kind of like when the dog chases you and you stop the car and get out and ask the dog what he wants with your car.

No, I'm sure it's got to do with the termination of Monterrey. Perhaps somebody at iNTEL has already told the lawyers at IBM what parts to extract. Then they give the whole boatload to SCO for double checking, so SCO know's they've gone over the line in their fishing expedition.

Re:You repeat yourself. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537611)

You ought to reply to the original post [slashdot.org] that this the parent was stolen from.

Re:Food for thought (1)

haggar (72771) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537614)

Now that IBM has dumped their Intel PC business, they can afford to take off the gloves, and not have to worry about making nice in the morning.

And the converse is true, as well. Intel can go full throttle against IBM without risking any business, except maybe those 4 Itanium servers a year that IBM moves for them.

Re:Food for thought (1)

strider44 (650833) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537794)

Have you ever thought that this might be done as a favour for intel as opposed to intel being on the other side? Intel might just be saying "I don't want to appear to get involved, so just depose the required evidence".

Re:Food for thought (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537813)

> No, you usually don't have to depose your best friends.

How did this get +4 Insightful? Obviously you've never dealt with a court case more complicated than a traffic ticket.

When two companies discuss business it is done under Non-disclosure Agreements. Now I'm sure SCO and Intel had meetings about ia64 (since SCO was working on an OS for it and all) If IBM just went to Intel and said "hey tell us what SCO said back then" and Intel complied then SCO could sue Intel for NDA breach. Unlike their current suits they'd actually win that one, too.

In a previous job we were in a similar position -- one of our customers was being (quite justifiably) sued and the other party needed information relevant to the case from us.

We compiled the information but we couldn't just give it directly to them because that would breach our agreements with our (now former) customer. Instead we made a list of everything we had and had OUR LAWYERS write up a subpoena based on that.
Then we handed it to them and said "please have this served on us". As soon as it had a judge's signature on it we faxed them the stuff they wanted within minutes.

Basically in civil litegation ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING that you find out from third-party corporations goes through the subpoena process whether they're friend or foe. Don't assume just because Intel got one from IBM that they must be on SCO's side or anything.

Hmm, interesting... (2, Insightful)

PaulBu (473180) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537466)

So far the consensus here was that it is Microsoft behind the whole SCO debacle -- but what if IBM knows better (and I guess I'd bet my $10 on THEM knowing better ;-) ).

Is it a purely defensive move? Or is the the "beginning of the end" of the PC industry as we knew it?

Linux + PPC (+ IBM) might beat BSD + PPC (+ Apple) -- espcially since IBM makes the PPC part! -- and definitely beats Windows + i86, but why the hell NOW??? What do they know that I do not?

Maybe I should actually go RTFA, but I doubt it will clear things for me.

Paul B.

Re:Hmm, interesting... (1)

Art Tatum (6890) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537503)

Is it a purely defensive move? Or is the the "beginning of the end" of the PC industry as we knew it?

I don't know. But the whole thing is starting to remind me of the end of a theatrical production when all the actors come out on stage. Who's next, Charles Babbage?

I just LOVE this part! (1)

PaulBu (473180) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537532)

The term "communication" shall mean any transmittal of information, whether oral or written, including correspondence, electronic mail and other internet transmissions, web pages, Internet Relay Chat logs, instant messages [...]

I can just imagine Intel's Craig Barrett and our beloved Darl frigging chatting on IRC (!) how to shut the whole Leenux thngy down... ;-)

Or is it IBM just playing cute for the Groklaw / /. crowd?

Paul B.

Re:Hmm, interesting... (1)

hdparm (575302) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537742)

It is still hard to believe that IBM would be able to make a big dent in Wintel market. At least not quickly. For some reason, I think IBM and Intel are on the same side here.

Re:Hmm, interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537752)

Your industry faultlines are drawn wrong. It's actually more like this:

IBM, Apple, Motorola, BSD, Linux

vs.

Microsoft, Intel, Dell, George W. Bush, ...

How much longer until... (3, Funny)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537475)

Bumblebee Man from the Simpsons gets involved?

Re:How much longer until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537639)

Or until El Barto defaces them all, and they all quit in shame.

Re:How much longer until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537645)



Oy mi estomigo


IBM (0, Troll)

cyberfunk2 (656339) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537478)

IBM isnt running scared.. they're just playing the same dirty subpeona game that SCO is playing.

This is just another tactic to hopefully run SCO out of funds so they cant continue. We all know how it's gonna end, IBM's just trying to waste as little of THEIR money as possible by wasting as much of SCO's time and money as they can. Intel's just an unfortunate bystander.

I sure hope not. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537598)

Your hypothesis sounds plausable however, I hope it's not accurate. That's the part that really sucks about our courts is that other entities can become innocent bystanders.

Re:I sure hope not. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537632)

It also means that the courts are less powerful than big corporations. If a company has enough money to hold out against a plaintiff and the judge doesn't have the power to force both sides to come to a conclusion in a quick manner, victory in the courts will belong to the rich only.

If I were the judge, I'd be holding both of these companies in contempt for unnecessary delays and engaging in pointless fishing expeditions that have no relevance to the case at hand.

That's the problem, the legal system is already (1)

Polarism (736984) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537733)

compromised by the rich.

If you have the money advantage, you have a very large advantage indeed in court, as you can hire more expensive lawyers, and more of them.

I no longer have any trust or faith whatsoever in our judicial system, it is horribly broken.

Re:That's the problem, the legal system is already (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537783)

The thing I think, though, is that if you are rich, you probably ought to be able to afford the best lawyers. However, what those lawyers should be good at is arguing their client's case. They should not be experts at stalling and holding up due process so that they can bleed the other side dry.

I don't like SCO bringing this kind of case, because I think the case doesn't have merit. However, they did bring it and if they have evidence, then they deserve their day in court, just like anyone else. What I really don't like is all the calls for IBM to "bleed SCO dry" by dragging this case out longer than SCO's finances allow.

Doesn't make sense (2, Insightful)

phorm (591458) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537745)

There are a lot of other ways to drag the case on and further drain SCO's finances. Involving an outside entity doesn't make sense, especially since doing so via supeona isn't exactly likely to promote good relations with Intel.

I think there's a bit more to this than we've seen... but if anything when the dust is cleared it will be very interesting to look back and say "ahhhh, I understand now"

tired (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537479)

I'm too tired to think, but i have some thing insightfull to say, so mod me up on credit.

Re:tired (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537585)

sounds like you work for SCO? Or perhaps for IBM?

Soap Opera Digest, eat your heart out. (2, Insightful)

RealisticCanadian (850967) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537487)

OK, So SCO starts a frivolous lawsuit to try and become a household name before it goes belly up. Now, in the crosshairs, and with far more power and finances at their disposal, IBM calls in some other top-dogs to drag this out into a dirty courtroom scrap that promises to last even longer. Stalling tactics hoping SCO runs out of money? Maybe, but more likely, like most of these software-based lawsuits, it's just to add enough confusion to the mediation to keep anyone who wasn't actually there from ever seeing the truth. And this drama all plays out for us on the daily news... lucky us. Your tax dollars hard at work. That's one expensive soap-opera.

Re:Soap Opera Digest, eat your heart out. (1)

freemacmini (852263) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537650)

SCO is not going to run out of money. MS has given them 12 million dollars and arrainged for another 50 or so from baystar. Sun chipped in 9.x million too.

So far both sun and MS have gotten their money's worth from the deal. Lots of FUD, doubts raised about linux adoption etc.

There is no reason to think MS will stop there. If SCO starts to run out MS will find a way to pour some more money in. They have already signed some contracts with other canopy companies and some of that money will end up in the SCO legal warchest sooner or later.

This has been a great negtive advertising campaign for MS and it only cost them 12 million dollars.

Intel UniX (5, Interesting)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537526)

In the before time, from the long long ago Intel ported and sold a Unix of its own.

Perhaps info regarding thost contracts is what IBM is after.

Don't even dare analyze this article (5, Insightful)

l33t-gu3lph1t3 (567059) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537552)

With very few exceptions, no one who will post in this thread has any authoritative knowledge of business analysis or high-level computing industry politics. I can also predict that not a single soul who posts in this thread will have a good understanding of the legal nuances of IBM's most recent actions in the SCO case.

So please, don't waste our time with useless conjecture, predictions, and "what-if" scenarios. Because really, what's going on here is just mental masturbation. Move along.

Re:Don't even dare analyze this article (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537736)

Was that mental masturbation good for you? :-)

Re:Don't even dare analyze this article (1)

Macadamizer (194404) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537737)

What!?! You mean having Linux on your desktop and hating M$ doesn't make you an expert at complex IP litigation? Say it isn't so!

Intel should subpoena AMD! (3, Funny)

Mustang Matt (133426) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537578)

You know if enough companies subpoena each other maybe we'll end up with "open source" hardware (not necessarily GPL) but force all the companies to give up their trade secrets and consumers reap all the benefits! MWUahahahaha!

Re:Intel should subpoena AMD! (1)

Macadamizer (194404) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537714)

Yeah, except everything that is remotely a "trade secret" will get subpoenaed and discovered under a protective order, which means only the judge and the lawyers will see the really interesting stuff...

when will MS be invited to the party? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537580)

would be cute to see that :)

Its about intellectual property claims that... (2, Insightful)

3seas (184403) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537600)

... well that aren't valid in the first placed.

It like a bunch of people have pursued some man made rules or laws that rely on the earth being flat. But now that the earth really isn't flat, these rules, these laws are having a problem holding up. A lack of integrity of the rules/laws of which so many have beeing following.

So yeah, its really not supprising the exposure of the web of distortion that has spread thru out the industry.

Imagine what it would be like to see from the POV of one having clairity of the issue. Imagine how those following and supporting such distortion would be preceived by such a POV.

Perhaps this is such a view!? [ffii.org]

Attrition (1)

WilyCoder (736280) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537622)

If this turns out to be a war of attrition, IBM will bleed em dry....

the only thing that scares me... (2, Interesting)

pavera (320634) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537654)

Is that SCO/Caldera is Canopy group, and Canopy group has made almost all of its money by suing huge and successful companies. I'm not sure on their exact record, but I know they've done this sort of thing at least 2 or 3 times already. They are pretty good at doing this, so I don't like to see anything "going their way" at all... hopefully IBM can keep it on course, and kill them dead soon.

THIS IS WHY YOU SHOULD JUST BUY A MAC! (1)

ABeowulfCluster (854634) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537667)

No lawsuits in Macland... :p

Re:THIS IS WHY YOU SHOULD JUST BUY A MAC! (1)

kaltekar (464545) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537771)

Thinksecret ring a bell?

Next: Microsoft (1, Funny)

Max Threshold (540114) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537670)

Ooh! Busted!

One word (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11537679)

Obfuscation.

By dragging Intel into the convoluted lawsuit, SCO has been deprecated.

Power of IBM (2, Insightful)

a3217055 (768293) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537700)

IBM is a very big big company, they have a lot of leverage power with lawyers and with other companies. I am not following this as much as I should but it looks like IBM is pushing SCO into a corner and will use every arsenal to make a win. If IBM was going not going to win this court case they will settle. IBM will win it and it will be the end of SCO, we will then see slashdot posts about people buying SCO office furniture for $50.00 at there parking lots. IBM is a east coast company and they can leverage all the big wig lawyers to fight for them there is no way SCO can win. take care -A End result lawyers go home rich, SCO sells furniture and IBM's laptops go in to suspend using ACPI under Linux.

Re:Power of IBM (1)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 9 years ago | (#11537797)

Synopsis: IBM is big. SCO isn't so big. IBM will therefore win.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?