Message ID: 10783
Posted By: walterbyrd
Posted On: 2003-06-04 10:05:00
Subject: Why SCOX lawsuit looks suspecious [sic]:

1) SCO refuses to openly disclose offending code. In spite of SCO claims that this code is already in Linux source – which is already open to everybody.

2) Why so much fanfare and hoopla over a contract dispute? Why mail 1500 threatening letters? Why sue Novell and Linus Trovald [sic]?

3) SCO was/is a failing company. This entire thing stinks of financial desperation.

4) Microsoft buying SCO linsence [sic]? Why? And especially, why now?

5) SCO shutting down web sites in Germany, rather than reveal any offending code.

6) SCO was distributing themselves, well after supposed discovery of “offending code.”

7) Boise has been the driving force behind this case since the begining, now he is quiting? Why?


Message ID: 10816
Posted By: walterbyrd
Posted On: 2003-06-04 10:58:00
Subject: Re: Why SCOX lawsuit looks suspecious:

>> SCO indeed refuses to openly disclose confidential code<<

Good lord, why, *why* is this so hard for sco pimps to understand: SCO doesn’t have to open up any “confidential code” The exact same code exists in Linux, remember? So all SCO has to do is say: “the offending code can be found in linux sorce [sic], lines. . ..”

Get it?


Message ID: 10978
Posted By: walterbyrd
Posted On: 2003-06-04 16:03:00
Subject: Top 10 reasons lawsuit looks suspecious [sic]

10) SCO refuses to openly disclose offending code. In spite of SCO claims that this code is already in Linux source – which is already open to everybody. Why not just give the specific line numbers from the specific linux kernel?

9) Why so much fanfare and hoopla over a contract dispute? Why mail 1500 threatening letters? Why sue Novell and Linus Travald?

8) If IBM knew they were in violation, wouldn’t IBM make an attempt to settle?

7) SCO was and is a failing company. This entire thing stinks of financial desperation.

6) Microsoft buying SCO linsence [sic]? Why? And especially, why now?

5) SCO shutting down web sites in Germany, rather than reveal any offending code. Why?

4) SCO was distributing Linux themselves, well after supposed discovery of “offending code.”

3) Boise has been the driving force behind this case since the begining, now he is quiting? Why?

2) Why did SCOX top officers give themselves so many options right before the lawsuit was issued?

1) Why is SCO so weaslish about the entire thing? For example, why the NDA? Why the threatening letters? Why the shifting position? Why does SCOX make up BS excuses for not revealing offending code?


Message ID: 10988
Posted By: walterbyrd
Posted On: 2003-06-04 16:17:00
Subject: Re: Top 10 reasons lawsuit looks suspeci [sic]

>> are you really that stupid, theyre going to court, the reason lawyers advise clients to say “no comment” is because they dont wanna disclose any information, dont wanna show their hand.<<

So why doesn’t SCOX shut up altogether? Instead of the threatning letters and press releases, and frivilous [sic] lawsuits againg [sic] Linux Trovald [sic], and so on?

No, SCOX is not being quite, not by a *long* shot.

What SCOX is doing is *selectively* shooting their months off. They scream accusations at the top of their lungs, then when asked for evidence they are suddenly quite.


Message ID: 12003
Posted By: walterbyrd
Posted On: 2003-06-09 16:40:00
Subject: Jail time for SCOX execs?

This is obviously as scam. Even the longs know it.

But if the scox execs can just walk away, then they have nothing to lose. scox is going to be out of business in two years anyway. some sco execs are already selling their shares. it really is a great scam.

scox execs have worded their statements fairly carefully. so they may walk away.


Message ID: 16689
Posted By: walterbyrd
Posted On: 2003-06-24 10:32:00
Subject: Arrogance of SCO is truly astounding

SCO received $8.5 million in FUD money. That brings their book value to about $10 million. SCO has never been profitable and has no competitive products. Yet, this recently formed, essentially worthless, company seems to consider their own power to almost limitless.

SCO apparently believes that they have absolute rights over all software technology developed in the last 30 years – if not more: SMP, NUMA, RCU, JFS, LVM, Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, maybe even MacOS and MS-Windows.

We poor pitiful peons can hope that the all-powerful Darl McBride will be kind enough to allow us to continue to use our present OS. We must recognize that is entirely up to him.

Resently the all-powerful lord and master Darl, has deemed that we may continue the Caldera Linux for which we have already paid.

I suppose we should all fall on knees, clasp our hands, bow our heads, and while sobbing uncontrollably, thank and praise our lord and god – the kind and powerful Darl. While trembling at his feet, we should bless the great and Darl for allowing us to use the Caldera Linux that we have paid for.


Message ID: 17106
Posted By: walterbyrd
Posted On: 2003-06-27 08:32:00
Subject: fud money: the bottom line

If scox gets more fud money, the scox may go up from here, and may be around for awhile longer. If scox doesn’t get fud money, then scox will be BR before the lawsuit starts.

scox has $10 million in assets and losses at least $25 million a year – sometimes over $100 million a year. Fair to say that from now on, scox will spend more, and earn less.

scox will earn less because: 1) scox has proven that they can’t be trusted. 2) Linux and msft are taking what little business scox had. 3) scox certainly can not afford r&d. 4) nobody can trust scox to even exist in two years – much less have competitive products.

scox will spend more because: 1) even though lawyers work on contingency, other court costs could be substantial. 2) scox is likely to be fighting several lawsuits filed against them.

So it all comes down to: will msft and sunw pony up enough money to cover scox’s substantial loses? I think there is a good chance msft and sunw will pony up.

Jonathan Cohen is a real analyst. He expects scox to earn $1.30 next year. He won’t say why. But he could have some inside information about upcoming fud donations.

msft only bough part of a unix license. msft could keep buying parts of unix licenses.

mcnealy may have worn a penguin suit as a publicity stunt. but image that you are mcnealy: one the one hand you have your cash cow; on the other hand you have your cash cow’s competition. if you have to go with one and kill the other – what do you do?


Copyright 2003 Yahoo SCOX. Messages are owned by the individual posters.