Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Predicting SCO's Actions Post Bankruptcy

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the litigious-doesn't-begin-to-cover-it dept.

Caldera 102

eldavojohn writes "SCO lost last year and began the bankruptcy filings a long time ago but PJ has some speculative bad news on what they retain through the bankruptcy proceedings. SCO proposes to sell a number of assets to an outfit called UnXis, which PJ characterizes this way: 'It starts to hint that this is more a renaming, taking in some new management who seem to have financial expertise, and SCO keeps skipping along as unXis, with the dangerous litigation spun off safely into a litigation troll.' In their filings SCO says they retain 'their litigation and related claims against International Business Machines Corporation, Novell, Inc., AutoZone Corporation, Red Hat and certain Linux users which are not material customers of UnXis (excluding certain large-scale users of Linux servers) that are claimed to have infringed against UNIX copyrights.' So that's still a possibility they could go after anyone who is a 'certain Linux user.' And what's even worse is that they'll retain a patent for running multiple Java applications on a single Java virtual machine. We may not be out of the SCO litigation woods yet."

cancel ×

102 comments

Simple prediction (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28446519)

They will hire an army of gay nigger soldiers (of butt fortune) to attack the GNU headquaters in Iowa.

Re:Simple prediction (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28446827)

But I thought that's who the GNU people were...

this fr1$t p0$t for GNAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28447003)

8==C=O=C=K=S=L=A=P==D~~ [www.gnaa.us] gay niggers attack gnu hq

Maybe... (0)

actionbastard (1206160) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446563)

A wild party. With hookers and fire trucks.

Re:Maybe... (1)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446973)

What, like this one [youtube.com] ?

Re:Maybe... (1)

nexxuz (895394) | more than 5 years ago | (#28454025)

Matter of fact ... FORGET the fire trucks!

Damn! (5, Funny)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446581)

We'll have to nuke them from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Won't work.. (3, Funny)

spiffmastercow (1001386) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446611)

We'll have to nuke them from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

They're like roaches.. They can withstand a nuclear apocalypse..

Re:Won't work.. (1)

PinkyGigglebrain (730753) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447079)

But they can't stand cold. Roaches are semi-tropical and will die in a frost.

We need to freeze them with truck full of liquid nitrogen, then nuke them from orbit.

Re:Won't work.. (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447747)

No. Don't nuke them! That will only heat them, so the pieces can flow together, create puddles, and before your know, it rises again.

(Try to keep up the metaphor here!)
Melt them in a liquid piece of something that is dead, but just like them.
Then send that compound straight into a black hole.

That's the only way to be sure.
Nukes. Bah. Noobs! ;)

Re:Won't work.. (1)

PinkyGigglebrain (730753) | more than 5 years ago | (#28448071)

Damn it!! You owe me a new keyboard!!

Re:Won't work.. (1)

BigGar' (411008) | more than 5 years ago | (#28452233)

To paraphrase Uncle Red: There are very few problems that can not be solved with a suitable use of high explosives.

Thus if the problem remains, you didn't use enough explosives.

Re:Won't work.. (1)

motherpusbucket (1487695) | more than 5 years ago | (#28453645)

...and Cher

Re:Damn! (1)

Icegryphon (715550) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446785)

So when can we get a dropship from the Sulaco? Oh wait, That crashed.

Re:Damn! (4, Funny)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446789)

Get Oracle to buy them. They are pretty thorough.

Re:Damn! (2, Funny)

mrsurb (1484303) | more than 5 years ago | (#28449891)

I guess Oracle could send them into the Sun.

Re:Damn! (0)

canuck57 (662392) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447925)

We'll have to nuke them from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Maybe not as bad as you think. Publish their IPs with a program to syn/ping flood them off the internet. Ya, I know, it isn't good netiquette.

Re:Damn! (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 5 years ago | (#28451553)

That's been done. All it did was hurt the other companies which were using the same host and create a lot of bad press for Linux users.

Re:Damn! (1)

Ultracrepidarian (576183) | more than 5 years ago | (#28449909)

Holly stake? Silver bullet?

Microsoft Corp. today announced.. (5, Funny)

NervousNerd (1190935) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446599)

Microsoft Corp. announced today that they were planning on acquiring SCO for $1985.67. "I believe this is a great opportunity for us to diversify our product portfolio", Steve Ballmer said in a press conference.

Re:Microsoft Corp. today announced.. (1)

Abreu (173023) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446793)

Microsoft Corp. announced today that they were planning on acquiring SCO for $1985.67. "I believe this is a great opportunity for us to diversify our product portfolio", Steve Ballmer said in a press conference.

Nah, they wouldn't be so obvious about it....

Re:Microsoft Corp. today announced.. (5, Informative)

jbrax (315669) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447219)

Exactly. In this video [youtube.com] Eben Moglen explains why for Microsoft threatening is better than suing. So Microsoft prefers denying [zdnet.com] that they have anything to do with SCO... although they may do some business with them [internetnews.com] .

Re:Microsoft Corp. today announced.. (1)

machine321 (458769) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447903)

Wow, they're paying 3x the share price?

Why worry? (4, Insightful)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446631)

SCO or whatever they become will keep losing cases. Those who are supporting them are treating it like a high risk investment and hoping it pays off.

They're a parasite with no turnover of any significant amount, you can't keep a business going if the sole source of income is from court cases.

Re:Why worry? (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446693)

I dunno, the RIAA seems to be doing lucratively that way...

Re:Why worry? (3, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446753)

However, the RIAA was filthy rich to begin with. On the other hand, SCO is about as broke as a college student, with no way to get revenue. Really, unless you have a really, really, really, really solid case, you can't gamble with stuff like that unless you have money to burn like the RIAA does.

Re:Why worry? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28446921)

My understanding was that there was proxy investment going on with SCO - ie: the money behind SCO will keep materializing from somewhere until the large company funneling the cash gets tired of this little game.

I don't know the specifics, but I heard this from a number of usually reliable sources.

Re:Why worry? (1)

WillRobinson (159226) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447777)

This is a bankruptcy proceeding, there are no investments, only purchase of assets that will go to the creditors. There is no plan that they currently have that will fly, as any purchase of any part of the company must be approved by the court, and the creditors. They are trying some shenanigans but in the end, it will be a few more delays so they can suck a bit more money out of the corps. They have not been providing the sec papers either. While they keep struggling, in the end they will just be a small crater in history.

Re:Why worry? (3, Funny)

Quantos (1327889) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447063)

If SCO need money badly enough I have a lawn that needs mowing, windows that need washing, and laundry that needs folding.

Re:Why worry? (3, Funny)

machine321 (458769) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447913)

You can probably use folding@home for the last one.

RIAA vs. SCO (4, Insightful)

qbzzt (11136) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446869)

RIAA attacks consumers, typically middle class or lower individuals who can't afford to fight back.

SCO attacks large corporations. IBM, for example, can't afford not to fight back. IBM has deep pockets, and a very diversified business. If it was known as an easy target, anybody and their cousin would sue it for the money.

Note: I am an IBM employee, but my job doesn't get me anywhere near legal strategy. This is purely my own opinion, and does not represent IBM in any way, shape or form.

Re:RIAA vs. SCO (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28450051)

Note: I am an IBM employee, but my job doesn't get me anywhere near legal strategy. This is purely my own opinion, and does not represent IBM in any way, shape or form.

What has the world become to be, when you have to write such a statement on your post.

Re:Why worry? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447779)

Not if you look at their business charts. By them, they will cease to exist in 5-7 years.

I'll just sit here, wait, meditate, and smile. :)

Re:Why worry? (4, Insightful)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447467)

you can't keep a business going if the sole source of income is from court cases

There is about a billion law firms out there that beg to differ

Re:Why worry? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28448371)

unless they are a law firm :)

Re:Why worry? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28450735)

'...you can't keep a business going if the sole source of income is from court cases.'

Unless you're a Law firm!

So... (3, Interesting)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446675)

So what does SCO have other than a few patents that may or may not be invalid, the name, and a whole lot of bad press?

Re:So... (1)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447181)

A few patents that (shiver) are probably valid until proved otherwise, and a whole lot of bad press? And don't forget the undying hatred of the whole industry.

Re:So... (5, Informative)

Col. Klink (retired) (11632) | more than 5 years ago | (#28448831)

Their latest filing claims they have a single java patent, but other than that, no, this was never about patents. SCO doesn't really have any and certainly didn't claim any when they sued IBM, Novell, Chrysler or anyone else.

They sued IBM over the copyrights to Linux, which they claim they own because they claimed they owned the Unix copyrights. Novell said that they never sold the copyrights to SCO, so SCO sued Novell for saying that.

Since SCO was suing IBM for copyright infringement, that whole thing was put on hold while SCO and Novell fought out who really owned the copyrights.

At trial, all of SCO's claims were tossed out in summary judgement and the like. The court agreed with Novell that SCO had no copyrights to Unix (it never even got to the question of whether or not Linux violates Unix copyrights and their mounds of secret evidence has never been presented anywhere). All that was left were the counterclaims that Novell had against SCO. Among those was the claim that all the money SCO had collected from Sun and Microsoft should rightfully belong to Novell. The judge agreed that SCO was guilty of conversion, which means that it was never SCO's money to begin with.

That part is important: it's not a debt owed to Novell, it was always Novell's money. SCO sold something to Microsoft and Sun that it didn't own. SCO had a right to collect royalties, but it was contractually obligated to give that money to Novell and be paid a percentage back. The court agreed and the only question was "Wow much of what SCO sold was Unix and how much was anything else?"

The only thing left for trial was to figure out just how much money SCO stole from Novell. On the eve of that trial, SCO filed for bankruptcy. Under the law, SCO has a certain period of time where they get to be the first to propose a way out of bankruptcy. They missed every deadline. When the courts had all agreed that their unique opportunity to file a plan had expired, other parties began filing motions.

Among those filing plans were the U.S. Trustee appointed to oversee the bankruptcy. He felt that SCO had no chance to move forward as an ongoing concern and moved to convert from Chapter 11 (reorganization) to Chapter 7 (liquidation). Novell and IBM agreed.

SCO's last move wasn't even the eve before this time. They were late to court, and appeared at the last minute (an hour beyond the last minute, actually) with a so-called "plan" to sell the company. The plan basically amounts to selling all the assets to another company and leaving a shell behind to fight Novell, IBM (and Chrylser and other former SCO-unix customers on the basis that Linux violates the copyrights of Unix). Selling the "business" means, essentially, moving all of "SCO's" money to another company and leaving nothing behind for Novell to collect from at final judgment.

SCO, as I said, showed up late and with only one copy of the agreement for the Trustee, Novell and IBM to see. They objected and asked the judge to move forward with the Chapter 7 conversion motions. They pointed out that SCO was past all legal deadlines. The judge said, and I'm not kidding or exaggerating, "What happens if I don't meet that deadline? Will they take me out back and shoot me?" Thus defying the statues, he gave SCO one more chance and agreed that they will meet in the required 15 days to hear about SCO's plans. The judge ruled that July 16th is 15 days from June 15th...

SCO is really holding out for an appeal. But they'll never turn everything back. And without the copyrights (and probably even with them), they don't have much of a case against IBM (and IBM, like Novell, has counterclaims against SCO). Red Hat is also suing SCO, also on hold for Novell/bankruptcy.

This is just a brief overview and I've skimmed over a lot. But no, patents aren't an issue here. If it were, they'd be in Texas, not Utah (or Delaware now for the bankruptcy).

Awesome synopsis!! (hint: ATTENTION MODERATORS!!!) (2, Interesting)

rts008 (812749) | more than 5 years ago | (#28450175)

Very well done, sir!
I would tip my hat to you but for two reasons:
1. I refuse to wear a hat unless it's a warm one during winter.(it was 100+ F[38+ C.] here in Oklahoma today, so no hat in sight)
2. Your User Name lists you as a Colonel, and I only ever made it to Corporal...**twice, and still came out as a Private, First Class[PFC]!

So, I hereby salute you, proper-like, Colonel, sir.

I am curious what comes about with their claimed Java patents, but I am personally getting tired of this circus.
Daryl and company reminds me more and more of a regional, severe cockroach infestation every day, just laughing at the exterminators since they have somewhere else to move to/change company names, etc.
This is a prime example of where corporations are not 'real' individuals/people, even though US law treats them as such at other times.

It seems like evidence that corporations have undue influence in politics here. (how much does a congressman or senator cost now days?)

I wonder how this will play out [slashdot.org] , and what effect it will have on cases like this whole SCO circus in the future.(I imagine it will not affect this specific case)

Sorry for the ranting, but an intelligent discussion seems to be a rare thing on /. anymore, so I had to try!

**US Army claimed I did/could not respect Authority; I claimed that respect is earned, and thus could not respect assholes and idiots...rank be-damned. They 'won' the argument, but I came out having learned a lot.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28451235)

Jurisprudence.
Making all that trouble and fuss, then planning to leave an empty worthless shell/vehicle to carry the can, has got to be plain wrong.
Besides that, the mooted 'Transfer' allows vast quantities of evidence to be legally or otherwise destroyed or somehow on purpose 'lost'. Bet the shredders have been busy.
Besides the money, it is a fair bet Lawyers are cooking up to have other Lawyers and executives prosecuted if smoking guns can be found.

Lastly, SCO has a record of 'last minite itis' and appeals on appeals and delays - that no Teacher would allow - what next - the dog ate the proposal?

Re:So... (1)

capnkr (1153623) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447253)

Well, over the years we have seen that they do have authoritative, quality tech spokesperson journalists like Rob Endarle, Mooreen O'gara, and Daniel Lyin's in their pocket.

Maybe they can get a thriving "Shill For Hire" business going. They obviously have the staff for it...

:/

Re:So... (3, Insightful)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 5 years ago | (#28448027)

The ability to provide Linux FUD. It's helped them stay funded so far, if you follow the "Microsoft Partnership" sponsorship that kept them alive, and their interference with IBM and Novell and RedHat have been significant.

They aren't producing new usable products, and their old market niche of rock-solid x86 server class UNIX systems has evaporated in the face of Linux and other, more technically progressive and less lawsuit driven companies.

Hasn't hindered adoption whatsoever... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28449499)

It hasn't interfered with Linux in the least actually. Since the lawsuits have started (2003) Linux's growth has been tremendous especially RedHat. Linux's growth is about the only thing that has kept Novell afloat and IBM is thriving under Linux.

I don't see the interference you are referring to.

Re:So... (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 5 years ago | (#28448797)

Computers, furniture, wall art, buildings and/or leases with time left on them, company vehicles, network gear, general office supplies, etc.

Liquidation means sell EVERYTHING!

Not even seeing the cost of the shroud lines! (2)

rts008 (812749) | more than 5 years ago | (#28450201)

Computers, furniture, wall art, buildings and/or leases with time left on them, company vehicles, network gear, general office supplies, etc.

Liquidation means sell EVERYTHING!

Yeah, but you're overlooking Daryl's 'golden parachute' in your 'EVERYTHING!'

Re:Not even seeing the cost of the shroud lines! (1)

dwiget001 (1073738) | more than 5 years ago | (#28452515)

The problem is, SCOXQ.PK is so broke, the Board of Directors is considering giving Darl a "Golden Shower" in lieu of a "Golden Parachute".

My conspiracy theory (1)

WebCowboy (196209) | more than 5 years ago | (#28463605)

So what does SCO have other than a few patents that may or may not be invalid, the name, and a whole lot of bad press?

Their thin and questionable patent portfolio is probably a diversion tactic. The takeover of its legitimate operations by the shell corporation unXis is, as PJ concludes, a crass attempt to shelter assets from losses related to litigation, the way a deadbeat tries to avoid child support by selling all his assets into a corporation in the Cayman Islands. It leaves SCO itself to be the little rubber room in which Darl can bounce around his delusional claims. Of course, the devil is in the details, and though they would be two corporate entities they'd be involved in each others affairs like dirty shirts...meaning that the smaller or weaker customers of unXis could be offered for sacrifice before the altar of Darl, in return for being isolated from IBM and Novel's countersuits.

One thing PJ doesn't highlight but sounds "interesting" to me is that significant investment through unXis will be directed toward the development of a "next generation UNIX platform". This bears some attention as far as interaction with SCO goes as well. In weird and wacky SCO-land they believe Linux is a derivative of their own "one true UNIX". Their wild Dr. Evil plan could involve the development of a Linux-based distribution. unXis would provide "enhancements" to their own distribution including DRM and activation, perhaps through technology licensed from Microsoft (who, based on their own filed patents, are at the forefront of crippleware technology). Needless to say, they'd provide no source code at all and would break Linux compatability or retain it where they feel it makes strategic sense in the marketing dept. This would be an unXis product, but the SCO litigation machine would continue to exist to continue the litigation circus claiming that since the "UNIX IP" belongs to unXis (because SCO sold it to them) and that Linux stole important parts of UNIX, that Linux is unXis' to steal back, so the GPL be damned. Though the courts have ruled that UNIX wasn't SCOs to sell, that is under appeal and being delusional, they are optimistic the decision will be reversed on appeal and some day decades from now they'll be awarded billions from IBM that they can invest in the legal destruction of Linux and perhaps the GPL itself.

Litigiousity (4, Interesting)

DynaSoar (714234) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446709)

"... with the dangerous litigation spun off safely into a litigation troll."

Don't count on it. The deal with their lawyers for the lawsuits was, a cut of the winnings if they won, a cut of the company if they lost. They lost. The landsharks inherited big chunks of the bloody corpse. Just imagine them trying to keep from turning the company into a perpetual replay of the last couple years. They'd bust a vein with the effort. I say the company will become the lawyers' hammer for every nail worth suing.

Re:Litigiousity (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446885)

But eventually they will lose enough cases and have no money to sue. If their organization wasn't half lawyers already, they wouldn't even be able to afford pursuing a decent case.

Re:Litigiousity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28447789)

But eventually they will lose enough cases and have no money to sue. If their organization wasn't half lawyers already, they wouldn't even be able to afford pursuing a decent case.

The only "decent case[s]" involving SCO have SCO as the target.

Bunch of fucking assclowns. They've reached the point of being a parody of Monty Python's Black Knight.

And can we lose the idea that David Boies is any good? Anyone who thinks Boies is worth 10 cents an hour needs to go back and watch Boies and his witnesses get absolutely eviscerated in Gore v. Bush. Boies' incompetence sunk any chance Al Gore had.

Re:Litigiousity (1)

DynaSoar (714234) | more than 5 years ago | (#28448031)

But eventually they will lose enough cases and have no money to sue.

Quite right. They'll run it into the ground by selling off assets and stock to fund their inevitable crash and burn. At which point the lawyers, having bled the coffers dry by their now self-determined fees will simply bail. They don't want to run a software company, they want to collect legal fees.

Sounds like tinfoil tiara time, I know. But why else would they have arranged to get a piece of the pie in the case that the legal tide turned against them, discrediting the company and ruining its value except for assets on hand? They wanted a disposable flag to defend.

Re:Litigiousity (1)

qbzzt (11136) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446887)

As long as they keep losing. Some law firms deserve to waste their efforts on non-renumerative issues.

Re:Litigiousity (2, Interesting)

Dare nMc (468959) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447585)

it would be a way too low risk method to move forward for the lawyers. The counter suit was the downside, so it would be a real disservice to allow SCO to drop their obligations/debits to Novell and the other legal agreements they signed, then broke (allegedly), to get these patents in the first place. Then allow some new company to just assume the patents. Not that all laws are fair, but it would be insane to assign any of the patent portfolio to anyone but IBM or Novell, without lugging all the obligations along with those patents. Seams Novell has already raised this point, I am guessing this whole speculation of the article, is not really a possibility.

Not allegedly (1)

schon (31600) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447613)

it would be a real disservice to allow SCO to drop their obligations/debits to Novell and the other legal agreements they signed, then broke (allegedly)

No. Not allegedly. A federal court judge has ruled that this actually happened. It is not merely an allegation, they really did break the agreements.

Hey, SCO! (3, Funny)

the_rajah (749499) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446743)

[French_accent] I fart in your general direction.[/French_accent]

Re:Hey, SCO! (1)

atomic-penguin (100835) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447195)

Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries!

Re:Hey, SCO! (1)

capnkr (1153623) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447299)

[outrageous_French_accent] I fart in your general direction.[/outrageous_French_accent]

Fixed that [uselessmoviequotes.com] for you. ;)

Re:Hey, SCO! (2, Funny)

Muad'Dave (255648) | more than 5 years ago | (#28451301)

[outrageous_French_accent] I fart in your general direction.[/outrageous_French_accent]

[frighteningly_accurate_French_accent ] I fart in your general direction.[/frighteningly_accurate_French_accent ]

There. Fixed _that_ for you.

Bet on it! (3, Insightful)

BCW2 (168187) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446769)

Whatever they do, it will be the most ridiculous, idiotic, and/or moronic and asinine thing possible!

Pretty much nobody here is warped enough to predict it right!

Re:Bet on it! (4, Funny)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447505)

I'll have a go. Darl McBride will come out of the woodwork and found to be an alien made robot. Now that his identity doesn't need to be hidden, he unleashes a genetically engineered plague that wipes out all of man kind... except for Hans Reiser. Together they forge an alliance and with the weapons taken from the RIAA, they wage a war against Heaven itself.

Re:Bet on it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28447809)

Hey, that's pretty good. What happens then?

Re:Bet on it! (1)

dwiget001 (1073738) | more than 5 years ago | (#28452617)

Hot, blue skinned and white haired alien chicks swarm the globe, locating and mating with geeks with the purpose of creating a new super race of beings. Eventually, this new super race overthrows Darl Vader and the Monopolist Senate.

Re:Bet on it! (1)

VoltageX (845249) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447933)

Did you just post the script for a new Uwe Boll movie?

Re:Bet on it! (4, Funny)

JohnBailey (1092697) | more than 5 years ago | (#28448069)

Did you just post the script for a new Uwe Boll movie?

Did you just imply Uwe Boll movies had scripts?

Re:Bet on it! (1)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 5 years ago | (#28451337)

Of course he does, if his actors were ad libbing the dialogue would be better.

Re:Bet on it! (1)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 5 years ago | (#28448079)

Now, how do we incorporate this into SubGenius mythos? Are you a preacher of "Bob"?

Re:Bet on it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28448311)

My sister calls me mushhead!

Re:Bet on it! (2, Funny)

ignavus (213578) | more than 5 years ago | (#28448973)

I'll have a go. Darl McBride will come out of the woodwork and found to be an alien made robot. Now that his identity doesn't need to be hidden, he unleashes a genetically engineered plague that wipes out all of man kind... except for Hans Reiser. Together they forge an alliance and with the weapons taken from the RIAA, they wage a war against Heaven itself.

Too obvious.

Re:Bet on it! (1)

lotho brandybuck (720697) | more than 5 years ago | (#28449579)

Hey, sounds great! Throw in a couple DC-8's and you'll have a religion there!

Bwahahahahah!!! (1)

rts008 (812749) | more than 5 years ago | (#28450227)

Pretty much nobody here is warped enough to predict it right!

Your UID precludes me from asking if you are new here, but seriously?

Mhuwahahahahahahahahhah!

I can ask this:
Have you visited here lately...actually reading the comments?

Funny, man....very funny!

BTW, I agree with you on the rest of your comment, but that one sentence just jumped out at me.

Whipping a dead horse (4, Interesting)

demachina (71715) | more than 5 years ago | (#28446893)

To be honest we've been worrying about SCO for years now, "the sky is falling" worrying, a couple front page /. articles a month kind of worrying, and to date SCO has won basically nothing, and have done very little actual harm excepting that caused by people worrying about and being scared by them enough to do stupid things they didn't need to do. They've run up some legal bills but they were mostly paid by companies that could afford them like IBM and Novell, and those big companies usually have lawyers sitting around spoiling for a fight anyway.

I'm making a resolution to absolutely stop caring about SCO until they actually win something in a courtroom or do ANYTHING which actually proves to be a real and substantive threat. Everyone constantly worrying about them has done more damage than if we had just yawned, and said "move along, nothing to see here".

Re:Whipping a dead horse (3, Funny)

oatworm (969674) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447601)

So, they're basically the North Korea of the tech world? Interesting... I wonder if Mr. McBride is "ronery"?

Cue 2-Live Crew's 'Me so Horny' (1)

rts008 (812749) | more than 5 years ago | (#28450303)

Kim Jong-il will 'love you long time, GI!'

Time to scrub my brain with bleach, now...

Karma be-damned, this could not be passed over!(good job)

SCO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28447043)

Ah, SCO the crap corporation that won't die.

I had a girlfriend who worked for them in the 80's, and she said they were a bigger clusterfuck than Borland was.

Re:SCO (2, Funny)

superdave80 (1226592) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447635)

That is such made-up garbage, there is no way that is true. You're making it up.

There is no way you have a girlfriend.

Re:SCO (4, Informative)

Draek (916851) | more than 5 years ago | (#28448575)

That'd be old SCO then, the infamous jerks are new SCO, formerly known as Caldera Linux before they bought old SCO's rights over UNIX and trademarks for their name, hired a complete idiot as CEO and changed their name to SCO while old SCO changed theirs to Tarantella, were later bought by Sun, who were later bought by Oracle.

So yeah, its messy.

UnXis (3, Funny)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447081)

I know nothing about the company, but I hate it passionately, if only because of its name.

UnXis. How the hell are you supposed to pronounce that? Unzis? Unks-is? Un-Eks-is? Damn them to hell.

Re:UnXis (4, Funny)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447413)

i think that is pronounced Unazis

pronouced "unctuous" (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28447509)

1. excessively ingratiating: attempting to charm or convince somebody in an unpleasantly suave, smug, or smooth way

2. oily, fatty, or greasy: resembling or containing oil, fat, or grease

Re:pronouced "unctuous" (0, Offtopic)

_ivy_ivy_ (1081273) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447711)

1. excessively ingratiating: attempting to charm or convince somebody in an unpleasantly suave, smug, or smooth way

2. oily, fatty, or greasy: resembling or containing oil, fat, or grease

Crap. Just when your out of mod points, you find this.

Re:pronouced "unctuous" (1)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 5 years ago | (#28449565)

Wow, I wasn't expecting any real insight to come from my tossed out, slightly bitchy post, but you pulled out some real gold. That HAS to be how that company is referred to from now on. Please, Slashdot, take note of this young man and his comment full of genius. This company must be called Unctuous from now on.

Re:UnXis (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28448519)

One uses the single letters to pronounce it.

S C O

Santa Cruz Operations

Yeah, I thought it was a weird way to name a company too.

But it's easy to pronounce.

And Santa Cruz used to be a Rockin' town, then the '89 earthquake changed it for the worse.

Perhaps the earthquake opened a fissure and Darl climbed out and assumed command?

Re:UnXis (1)

demachina (71715) | more than 5 years ago | (#28448773)

Needless to say its an anagram of Unix, presumably a play on Un-Unix. Whomever owns the Unix trademark should suit them!!! ... Can you sue for anagrams of trademarks? SCO doesn't own the Unix trademark do they, I lost track?

Re:UnXis (2, Funny)

bursch-X (458146) | more than 5 years ago | (#28449373)

If they state that they're not Unix (hence the spelling) maybe GNU and the FSF can sue them for not being Unix?

Re:UnXis (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28449975)

Un-tiss, Un-tiss, Un-tiss baby.

What's next? (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447333)

Orwell summed it up pretty well: "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

Predicting MY actions (1)

PingXao (153057) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447599)

Post-SCO fiasco trial that was a waste of the court system's time and money, I'll go out on a limb here and predict my own actions post-SCO-bankruptcy.

I predict my respect for the legal system will fall several notches on a permanent basis if Darl McBride doesn't do jail time.

Issue Preclusion / Claim Preclusion (2, Insightful)

MarkvW (1037596) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447639)

A lot of issues and claims have already been resolved in prior cases. A thorough analysis of the risk of future SCO-Spawn-Litigation depends upon the preclusive effect of those cases. In other words, SCO's children don't get to relitigate things that SCO has already litigated (and lost) once.

The instant discussion isn't very informative because it appears to omit a thorough discussion of the effect of SCO's previous defeats on SCO's children's future prospects.

After?!?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28447731)

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Well, depends... (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#28447735)

...on how long they still find some total retard, who is willing to throw money in a defunct company with a clear course towards making it even worse.

Wait for Cramer to advertise them on his show. :P

Lets quit screwing around (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28448301)

We need to catch them while they sleep, just after dawn, drive a stake through the heart, cut off it's head, surround the body with blessed hosts and sprinkle it with holy water.

Worse thing about Salt Lake City, could never get used to all the damn Mormons^H^H^H^H^H^H^HVampires.

Can't IBM just buy them and shut them down? (1)

lotho brandybuck (720697) | more than 5 years ago | (#28449595)

Can't IBM, or IBM+Novell+Redhat+maybe Oracle up the bid for the "assets" and then just shut it all down? Not that I'm sure I trust any of these companies with this sort of thing.

Re:Can't IBM just buy them and shut them down? (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | more than 5 years ago | (#28450977)

the problem is "Toxic Assets"
Unless somehow a Judge actually waves off on this "plan" if you buy the company

1 You get the lawsuits and liabilities (hint you would have to pay Novell their money)
2 the current assets are not worth all that much
3 you encourage some other company to try the same thing

Right now IBM does not care about the money they want TSCOG dead and dust Novell would like to see some money from this but they really don't care about the amount as such (they already have paper for pennies on the dollar).

the real trick is the Felony Charges that some folks are looking at maybe seeing

On the patent, (2, Informative)

julesh (229690) | more than 5 years ago | (#28449947)

JX, a java operating system that does what their patent covers, was in development long before [jxos.org] they filed that patent application.

Darl McBride = Genious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28451463)

I have to say even though I LOATH the man and SCO I have to be impressed with their legal jujitsu. If I ever want to stretch a case out SO long that rocks erode first I KNOW who I'll be contacting! The threat alone that they will pursue a water dripping torture like gorilla jungle warfare legal strategy should be enough to force whomever to settle (except IBM of course! The Nazgul are patient)

Is there anything left to salvage? (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 5 years ago | (#28451827)

Here's the part that surprised me in all this... "Most of the current SCO staff, including developers, support personnel, sales and marketing are expected to join unXis."

They still have developers?  And marketing staff? Beyond the guy writing the BS on their website?

SCO was a respectable Unix company once, "first UNIX company" according to Eric Raymond. They also were Caldera which may have never been the biggest player in Linux distros but was certainly an interesting one and not a bad Desktop environment for the time.  I can't find any evidence of this on Google today but I'm sure I remember that it was actually Caldera not RedHat that wrote the first version of RPM.  They did this not for themselves but under contract for RedHat thus RedHat owned it and RedHat got their name on it.

Is there actually something of this still alive?  With SCO containing the distilled evil could there actually be something good to come from unXis?  It's hard to believe but it's an interesting idea.  Kind of like a glimpse into an alternate reality where the combined Caldera/SCO remained a Unix/Linux company rather than become what it is.

On another note, aren't corporate executives legally bound to do what is in the interest of shareholders? Hasn't SCO pretty much been gutted for it's executives personal project of Linux FUD? Can the shareholders sue the executives? It does seem like a form of theft.  My mother has SCO stock.  She wanted stock in a Linux company back when the internet boom was tapering off and some people were looking to Linux companies for the next boom.  I told her to buy RedHat when they first come out.  She waited and it went up w/out her.  She asked if there was another, I told her to buy Mandrake but don't keep it long as it is over-hyped and would shoot up then down.  She passed on it and it did exactly that.  Then one day out of the blue she informed me she just bought Caldera stock. WTF!?!  She said she read it was really big in Asia or something like that.  Now she has a stock shaped piece of toilet paper.

Add this code to the Linux kernel... (0, Troll)

motherpusbucket (1487695) | more than 5 years ago | (#28453721)

/*stolen SCO code */
int Darl;
int douchebag;
Darl=douchebag;
/* end of stolen code */
Bury it in the kernel and expose it in court for a good laugh

unxis.com (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 5 years ago | (#28458147)

It looks like a unxis.com is currently one of those "this domain might be for sale" pages. Minimum bid is $60, don't know what it would take to get them to actually sell if someone wants to get it before SCO does!

SCO are not permitted to pursue action (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28463025)

One of the outcomes of the Novell Vs SCO case was that the SCO group were not permitted to pursue action against Redhat and the SCO Vs Redhat case was dropped.

The truth is and the outcome of the trial was : SCO leased UNIX from Novell under a license and SCO thought that they had bought it outright or thought that they could get away with stealing it by claiming that they owned it just by buying a license.

Even if SCO did own UNIX (Which they don't) There is no UNIX code in Linux and it's extremely likely that Linus has or can prove that without a shadow of a doubt. So spreading FUD like saying "SCO's filling for bankruptcy and then re branding, we may not be out of the SCO litigation woods yet." Makes absolutely no sense.
Linux has NOTHING to fear from SCO, their staff and lawyers are morons and sleeping dogs should be left to lie.

This story is obsurd.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...