On TechRepublic: 10 cool USB flash drive tricks
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 13 of 48:
Next »
« Previous
Amazing
After 4+ years, not a single positive ruling, zero evidence ever exposed, the case utterly and completely destroyed from day 1, some group takes a $5Million (yes, it is NOT $100M, it is up to $100 million over time) gamble to bail out SCO and all of a sudden you ask what happens to your business if IBM takes this opportunity to settle?

I have to ask why you would put your credibility on the line and actually report your opinion tied to this article you linked as opposed to just reporting the facts?
http://dotnet.sys-con.com/read/502009.htm

Why would IBM, which, I would suggest that IBM is also a group of people who can buy all the legal talent in the world who?ve looked at SCO?s evidence and one GLARING facts comes into view, why settle now?

SCO had a ton of momentum in the early going, presumably, at that time, if IBM had anything to be afraid of, they WOULD have settled. Why spend upwards of 10-20-30? million themselves defending what can only be described to this point as a SPAM campaign, now that SCO has some rich folks taking a flyer?

Finally, People who, if they do win, won?t just take IBM and Red Hat and Novell to the cleaners,, this is an example of absolute FUD at this point. The ENTIRE CASE, at this point, such as a miserable state it is in, DOES NOT EVEN INCLUDE LINUX. It is a simple contract dispute. Linux is no longer even a part of the proceedings, except as far as SCO got a summary judgement against them since they themselves are in breach of their contract.

I just don't understand your reasoning, and to be honest, the "Enderlyness" of this blog entry astounds me. Normally I read your blogs (while not always agreeing with them) as thought provoking, the above however, is...well, I hate to say it, will make you look like a Didiot.

TripleII
Posted by: TripleII   Posted on: 02/17/08 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Dear "Paul"  kozmcrae | 02/17/08
nice insults - but you're wrong on all matters of substance  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 02/17/08
SCO v. IBM was a contractual issue (at least according to Court documents)  B.O.F.H. | 02/17/08
nature of the dispute  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 02/17/08
The court documents are out there, read them!  B.O.F.H. | 02/17/08
Yeah, but what a source!  TtfnJohn | 02/18/08
Dear Rudy the Rabbit  junknstuff@... | 02/17/08
Paul is....  junknstuff@... | 02/17/08
translation?  tombalablomba | 02/17/08
Mmmm  junknstuff@... | 02/17/08
Sorry Murph, you are NOT in the same league. But nice try.  D. T. Schmitz | 02/17/08
I appreciate the sentiment  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 02/17/08
Amazing  TripleII | 02/17/08
I quote your talkback as direct support of my point.  TripleII | 02/17/08
Forgot, your source is Maureen O'Gara?  TripleII | 02/17/08
Why settle  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 02/17/08
The courts have already said Novell owns Unix.  B.O.F.H. | 02/17/08
Rewriting History  TripleII | 02/17/08
Bollocks  dave.leigh@... | 02/17/08
Re-instating History  TripleII | 02/17/08
There You Go Again  DannyO_0x98 | 02/17/08
Tally so far  Yagotta B. Kidding | 02/17/08
SCO COMING BAAAAACK!  steveballmar@... | 02/17/08
Low hits?  Erik Engbrecht | 02/17/08
If you had the slightest honest interest...  dave.leigh@... | 02/17/08
BTW...  dave.leigh@... | 02/17/08
By being consistent  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 02/18/08
By being bull-headed, you mean.  dave.leigh@... | 02/18/08
Just a contract dispute?  softdrat@... | 02/17/08
RE: Dear Pamela Jones:  none none | 02/17/08
How About Examples or Citations - Like Groklaw Always Does  smartguy2@... | 02/17/08
Dear Pamela Jones: You are right  deaf_e_kate | 02/18/08
Dear rtfa:  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 02/18/08
I did but everyone else has said what  deaf_e_kate | 02/18/08
If IBM settles...  John L. Ries | 02/18/08
that's what I think too -well, not about the day job  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 02/18/08
Are you assuming...  John L. Ries | 02/18/08
No, I'm not  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 02/18/08
RE: Dear Pamela Jones:  jurgen.manycolored@... | 02/18/08
Right, except, of course  murph_z ZDNet Moderator | 02/18/08
well, not of course..but  TtfnJohn | 02/18/08
Sure it's about Linux  JesperFrimann | 02/19/08
Nothing to do with Linux  softdrat@... | 02/18/08
Wrong: This is all about Linux  partner50153572@... | 02/18/08
Apparently the law is not your strong suit  partner50153572@... | 02/18/08
Ummmmm, ok!?  Sysadm1n | 02/18/08
RE: Dear Rudy:  shoktai@... | 02/19/08
Old post, but a comment anyway  Mitch 74 | 05/07/08

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here