As I speculated they would in last weeks news of the shock SCO memo - stating that there was no evidence of UNIX code in Linux - the SpinDroids at 'The Operation' revved up and left no email, in-tray, filing cabinet and stone (I wonder Darl blinked in the sunlight, when they lifted his..) unturned for evidence countering the released memo. It seems their search has been successful - or has it?
SCO has moved to limit the fall-out from a recently unsealed memo, in which incoming Caldera boss Darl McBride was told that the company had no copyright claims on the Linux kernel. The memo said an audit had looked for, but failed to find a "smoking gun". A week later Caldera renamed itself The SCO Group, and three months later hired lawyer David Boies to lead a legal campaign based on its IP claims.
In effect, today's turn of events - in which SCO countered a pro-IBM memo with a pro-SCO memo - reprises an exchange between IBM and SCO lawyers played out last September when the sealed documents were referred to in court. This time we are able to see what they're talking about.
More at the Register here.
So the rebuttal is the prior study that was summarised and essentially came to the "no evidence" conclusion for the original (later) memo? And they're coming to a different conclusion now, on second thoughts? Hmmm. I love the smell of desperation in the morning... Smells like SCO getting it's ass kicked.
Discuss SCO inevitable fate in the news forum here.
SCO has moved to limit the fall-out from a recently unsealed memo, in which incoming Caldera boss Darl McBride was told that the company had no copyright claims on the Linux kernel. The memo said an audit had looked for, but failed to find a "smoking gun". A week later Caldera renamed itself The SCO Group, and three months later hired lawyer David Boies to lead a legal campaign based on its IP claims.
In effect, today's turn of events - in which SCO countered a pro-IBM memo with a pro-SCO memo - reprises an exchange between IBM and SCO lawyers played out last September when the sealed documents were referred to in court. This time we are able to see what they're talking about.
More at the Register here.
So the rebuttal is the prior study that was summarised and essentially came to the "no evidence" conclusion for the original (later) memo? And they're coming to a different conclusion now, on second thoughts? Hmmm. I love the smell of desperation in the morning... Smells like SCO getting it's ass kicked.
Discuss SCO inevitable fate in the news forum here.
RELATED ARTICLES
MSI MPG Velox 100R Chassis Review
October 14 2021 | 15:04
Want to comment? Please log in.