SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : SCO Group (SCOX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Dr. Voodoo who wrote (94)9/27/2003 8:56:48 AM
From: Glenn Petersen  Respond to of 239
 
IBM files counterclaims against SCO in Linux case

biz.yahoo.com

SEATTLE, Sept 26 (Reuters) - SCO Group Inc. <SCOX.O> damaged International Business Machines Corp.'s <IBM.N> business with its lawsuit over the rights to the Linux operating system, the world's largest computer company said in court documents obtained by Reuters on Friday.

IBM, which is being sued by Lindon, Utah-based SCO for embedding parts of SCO's Unix software code in versions of the free Linux operating system, filed counterclaims on Thursday that SCO has "misused and is misusing, its purported rights to the Unix operating system," a widely-used software platform for networked computers.

Linux, a variant of Unix which can be copied and modified freely, emerged a decade ago and is being used to run the Internet, handle financial transactions and even manage the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

SCO, which came to own the rights to Unix, sued IBM in March for billions of dollars and has threatened companies that they must pay to use Linux or face litigation.

"Since day one, the IBM strategy in the SCO lawsuit has been to defend against SCO's unfounded claims vigorously in court," IBM said in an internal memo to its sales force obtained by Reuters.

Armonk, New York-based IBM made several counterclaims, including an allegation that SCO itself contributed IBM's copyrighted software code into Linux.

"SCO has published false statements in a series of widely-distributed press releases, press interviews and other streams of commerce, as part of its bad faith campaign to discredit IBM's products and services in the marketplace," IBM said in its counterclaim, "As a direct result of SCO's false representations ... IBM has suffered damages in an amount to be determined at trial."

IBM also said in its counterclaim that SCO tried to devalue IBM's version of Unix called AIX, interfered with its customers, used "unfair deceptive trade practices" and breached a public license that allows Linux to be copied and modified freely.

Representatives from SCO did not immediately comment on IBM's counterclaims.

IBM also took issue with a recent move by Hewlett-Packard Co. <HPQ.N> to indemnify its customers who use the Linux operating system against potential legal troubles from the SCO-IBM spat.

"IBM and most other industry leaders do not indemnify for open source code," IBM managers wrote in an internal memo, "The typical approach to indemnity, and apparently HP's approach as outlined in the press, we believe runs fundamentally counter to the Linux value proposition."

IBM said in the memo that the Linux business is a bright spot "amid stagnant technology spending ... with sales of servers using the freely available software rising 63 percent to $2 billion in 2002 from 2001."

09/26/03 14:32 ET

Copyright 2003 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.



To: Dr. Voodoo who wrote (94)10/14/2003 9:34:47 PM
From: Glenn Petersen  Respond to of 239
 
Copyright Lawsuit Is Turnabout for SCO

nytimes.com

October 13, 2003

By JOHN MARKOFF

SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 12 - The SCO Group, the company that touched off a computer industry slugfest last spring by suing I.B.M. over its use of Unix software, may find itself embarrassed by a similar claim against a company once related to SCO.

Since filing a lawsuit claiming that I.B.M. added parts of the Unix operating system to the freely distributed Linux software, SCO has threatened other computer companies, the open source software movement and hundreds of corporations that rely on Linux, saying they are unfairly using Unix software that SCO owns.

But in an unpublicized case, one of SCO's former sister companies, Lineo, has agreed to quietly settle a third party's accusations that it engaged in the same kind of copyright infringement that is at the heart of SCO's claim against I.B.M., industry executives who have been briefed on the matter said.

The case spotlights the behind-the-scenes role of Canopy, an investment firm formed by Ray Noorda, the founder of Novell and a personal computer industry pioneer. Canopy is SCO's largest shareholder and formerly controlled Lineo.

Mr. Noorda, who has retired, acquired the rights to the Unix operating system from AT&T in 1992 while he was running Novell. He hoped to use Unix in his strategy to compete with Microsoft. Later that strategy shifted to backing the freely distributed Linux operating system, and Mr. Noorda helped finance a number of Linux software companies, including Caldera Systems, which last year changed its name to SCO Group. Lineo, was spun out of Caldera in 1999 and sold to Motorola last December.

Lineo was sued last year by MontaVista, a maker of software for specialized computers used in consumer and industrial applications that is based in Sunnyvale, Calif. The MontaVista executives said they had been notified that software their programmers had written and licensed under the GNU General Public License - the license that governs companies that distribute Linux software - had appeared, with copyrights removed, in Lineo's software. The license, which allows for the free distribution of software, still requires that the copyright notices be retained.

Neither side would comment on the settlement, which was put under a court seal last month.

SCO, based in Lindon, Utah, has been pursuing its litigation since shortly after Darl McBride took over as chief executive in June 2001 and decided that the company's commercial Linux strategy was failing. Under Mr. McBride, SCO has aggressively pursued what it contends are its intellectual property rights over the parts of the Unix operating system that it says I.B.M. transferred to Linux.

IBM and others in the open source movement note that SCO has provided little, if any, public evidence that its copyright has been violated.

Canopy is now SCO's largest shareholder, with two seats on the company's board, and has played an important role, analysts say, in shaping SCO's legal strategy.

"All roads lead to Canopy," said Laura Didio, a computer industry analyst at the Yankee Group. "They've been pretty clever in the way they've played this."

Although it styles itself as a low-profile early stage investment firm, Canopy has had other significant legal successes. In 2000 the firm won a $250 million antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft over its earlier DOS operating system. In August another Canopy-owned company, Center 7, won a $40 million ruling against Computer Associates.


Although neither party would comment on why the Lineo-MontaVista lawsuit had been sealed, legal experts said that it was probably because it might have a direct bearing on the dispute between SCO and I.B.M. One possibility involves a legal defense known as "innocent infringement" in which a copyright violator infringes unknowingly. If it became public knowledge that Lineo admitted guilt but settled for a relatively trivial sum by invoking that argument, it might come back to haunt SCO.

"If there are transcripts and pleadings that have been sealed in which Lineo makes the innocent infringement argument, that's a defense that I.B.M. and others could use in their lawsuits," said Jack Russo, an intellectual property lawyer at Russo and Hale in Palo Alto, Calif. "There is not a lot of law in this area and my sense is they are worried that this is something that I.B.M. could run with."

In a telephone interview, Canopy's chief executive acknowledged that Lineo had infringed on MontaVista's copyrights but blamed the transgression on the work of Hexamark Technologies, an Indian outsourcing company that worked for Lineo.

"This story may speak more to the dangers and cautions of working with these outsourced companies," said Ralph Yarro, chief executive of the Canopy Group. He added that when the incident took place Canopy was no longer the majority shareholder of Lineo.

Mr. Yarro, who is also chairman of SCO and led Canopy's lawsuit against Microsoft, argued that his company is not trying to destroy Linux but was simply asserting its intellectual property rights.

"The question is: 'How can we fix this issue and move forward?' " he said. "I'd like to see Linux survive."

He acknowledged that the Lineo suit did in certain ways parallel issues in the dispute between SCO and I.B.M.

"SCO picked a big fight and it flowed over to the Linux environment and we found ourselves in an awkward position," he said. "For better or for worse it's one of the cautions and dangers and flaws for the model. It happened to Lineo and has happened to several others."

Canopy's stance has angered people who develop open source software who have argued that the strategic intent is not so much to establish the truth of its claim but to drive up SCO's stock price. Since filing the lawsuit, SCO's stock has risen to $16.42 on Friday from $2.88 on March 31.

"These guys are making fraudulent accusations," said Bruce Perens, an open source software advocate. "They've had time to understand that they're wrong."

Mr. Yarro said: "I know I've been painted in a rough light. I hope that our companies are our legacy and not our lawsuits."