On TechRepublic: 10 cool USB flash drive tricks
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 8 of 60:
Next »
« Previous
BULL.
...they are not "forcing expenses" on other companies - they are protecting their rights under the intellectual property...

NO, they are NOT protecting their intellectual property! If I was protecting MY intellectual property, I would have at the least showed SOME proof of ill-doing by now and DEMANDED the court stop further damage. I am not saying everyone should see it, but at least the parties involved are entitled to. No, I take that back... AT THE LEAST I would NOT spread so much FUD.

Its been over a YEAR, and IBM still has to hear exactly what they did wrong. Heck, its STILL in discovery, forget a trial... but that's ok, that's how the system works.

Protecting their intellectual property?... HA, how many times has Linux been copied, sold, and used since they started this mess. Protecting is the last word I would use when discribing this case.

Lets not forget their initial accusations were dropped!!! Some of this stuff they ask for is no longer relevant. Which begs to ask, did they actually think throught their accussations or just subpoena everyone that might have a link to Linux and GPL? Not only THAT, they called the FSF the "The Free Trade Software Foundation" and the OSDL "Open Software Development Labs"??? Yeah, very professional and serious in "protecting intellectual property".

But "forcing expenses" is completely valid for this situation. They didn't and still don't have a piece of proof and they dare to ask for other people's stuff? On what bases? Are they going to repay all the staff, time and work that was required for getting those materials or did they think its all free?

Sure at THAT time it might have looked like "protecting their intellectual property" but looking back from now, it was nothing but a way for them to help spread the FUD.

Not everything is about "for == good and against == bad".
Posted by: doe_z   Posted on: 05/20/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

(NT) Grasping at straws. How sad.  James T. Kirk | 05/20/04
ROTLMAO.. I picture Darl doing a Rodney Dangerfield skit...  Xunil_Sierutuf | 05/20/04
Of course they said no  jdunn_z | 05/20/04
"Forced expenses"?  psuedostratified | 05/20/04
Absolutely  James T. Kirk | 05/20/04
Yeah I would  voska | 05/20/04
Most excellent post!!!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/20/04
BULL.  doe_z | 05/20/04
They are protecting their rights???  IT_User | 05/20/04
Um they are the ones claiming to be "open"...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/20/04
you remember what they claim is open?  ryusen | 05/20/04
Oh, let's look shall we???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/20/04
what ethical questions are being questioned?  ryusen | 05/20/04
This is dealing with SCO, remember?  IT_User | 05/20/04
software vs correspondence  CobraA1 | 05/20/04
talk about misleading:  ryusen | 05/20/04
Re: talk  issthatso | 05/20/04
or  blahblahblah | 05/21/04
Yeah but this is ZDnet reporting  Albee_Freeoneday | 05/21/04
We have nothing to hide????  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/20/04
EVERYBODY has something to hide  Michael Kelly | 05/20/04
Makes no difference.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/20/04
For someone with 'No Axe to Grind' ...  George Mitchell | 05/20/04
the SCO "support group"  blahblahblah | 05/20/04
They're all just so fishy!  George Mitchell | 05/21/04
N A G  LongShipUser | 05/21/04
Way to go...  wploger | 05/20/04
No, I have a problem with...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/20/04
Oh good lord  wploger | 05/20/04
Pardon me???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/20/04
And if your knowledge is zero  Iain_Peters | 05/20/04
precisely  blahblahblah | 05/20/04
Hmm...  LongShipUser | 05/21/04
Of course  IT_User | 05/20/04
hmm  blahblahblah | 05/20/04
Excuse me!  George Mitchell | 05/20/04
They have nothing to look for  Robert Crocker | 05/20/04
buying time before the stock totally dies  blahblahblah | 05/21/04
here we go...  blahblahblah | 05/20/04
source open but not the secret dealings  dg mh | 05/20/04
From your lips...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/20/04
cleanliness  blahblahblah | 05/21/04
What is FSF hiding from???  BFD | 05/20/04
I agree, for all the claims of "openness"...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/20/04
FUD mode engaged...  Fred Fredrickson | 05/20/04
"for all the claims.... "  kd4yum@... | 05/20/04
Who doesn't have 'fish in the water'?  George Mitchell | 05/20/04
by that logic  blahblahblah | 05/21/04
or could it be....  ryusen | 05/20/04
So what?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 05/20/04
then let the court decide...  ryusen | 05/20/04
What are you?  jjon2121 | 05/20/04
Poor Bitty  Fred Fredrickson | 05/21/04
Re: So what? & "I see ZERO difference..."  jezter~ | 05/21/04
This isn't strange.  doe_z | 05/20/04
Oh, shades of Look and Feel!  kd4yum@... | 05/20/04
Looking at the subpoena  Robert Crocker | 05/20/04
Yes  IT_User | 05/20/04
Ping: No_Ax_to_Grind  boatelc | 05/20/04
wet seats at Redmond  jellyclock | 05/21/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement
Click Here

SmartPlanet

Click Here