Creditor Objects To SCO's Plans 108
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "It seems that SCO is never without a trick up its sleeve. In the new '$100 million' reorganization plan, $5 million of which is cash and $95 million credit, one of the creditors is protesting because SCO is hiding the Definitive Documents until there's no time to object. In their own words, 'The debtors are proposing to file the Disclosure Statement 33 days before the hearing, in compliance with the requirement that it be filed at least 25 days before the hearing (F. R. Bankr. P. 3017). However, it is clear that this Disclosure Statement will be inadequate for evaluating the Plan, because it will not include any of the Definitive Documents. The Debtors are proposing to file the Definitive Documents separately, and to do so a mere five business days before the hearing, which is zero days before objections are due.'"
When ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Surprise anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Get your money NOW! (Score:3, Insightful)
Hey, with these guys, get your money now. The lawyers fees will eat it otherwise.
Totally amazes me how this takes so long to say what everyone believes, SCO - go-away. You have no claim nor future.
It's a flaw in the American judicial system (Score:5, Insightful)
It is pathetic that SCO has been able to drag this farce out for so long.
Here is the real story (Score:5, Insightful)
Legitimate businesses are dying for venture capital. And here it is, being wasted.
Fraud (Score:5, Insightful)
Judge Kimball already found that there was never any transfer of copyright. SCO's copyright registration was fraudulent (well, I suppose you could make the argument that it isn't fraud if they really *believed* they owned the copyright, but nevertheless, it's still invalid). It's already been decided that SCO does not own Unix copyrights or trademarks (the trademark issue was not decided in court, I do not believe, but by the US Patent and Trademark Office, I believe, which said that Unix was already a trademark owned by the Open Group [which anyone could have told SCO, but they wouldn't listen, of course]).
Basically, SCO owns no part of Unix.
There's also the *small* problem that they've never actually demonstrated any infringement by Linux, even if they *did* own Unix. Which they don't.
This whole Bankruptcy charade, as far as I can tell, has mostly been about delaying the inevitable, so that SCO's execs and board of director could continue to get salaries and outrageous bonuses for as long as possible, bleeding the company dry and leaving a worthless, dessicated carcass for Novell, IBM, Red Hat, and Autozone to fight over.
Re:Yes, well... (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess "products and services" means troll patents and lawsuits.
I wonder what "new innovations" of these they are about to unleash?
Re:Fraud (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Fraud (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Surprise anyone? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:get two more creditors and press for chapter 7 (Score:5, Insightful)
If anything now would be the time to advocate the Linux idea / OS more than ever. Computer kids out there get called all the time to fix friends and families computers, you should offer a special $20 install that would involve you installing a distro on their computer. The price is variable of course but distro's could work with the installers to make the going rate tempting enough for anyone to attempt to offer it at the price. People would look at it as quick cash, distributions would see that the easier it is for someone to install and educate the end user the more people will install their distribution for a price. Eventually as people grow more aware of the OS they will search out to install it themselves, at this point the OS will be so easy to install and run it will catch like wild fire.
Now the ones who were installing the OS move up to support / customization. What ever the price charged to do an install will be used as a type of yard stick of value. Eventually with computer power increasing and OS developers cooperation the time to install a running OS will take less time but as long as the price remains set and the operation is exact and efficient you will be making that $20-$40 in under 10 minutes. From there you can use that as a reference to charge for time in support and customization. As long as the initial price does not waver much people will build trust in the concept and the best will be in demand. This is the most diverse and distributed industry that will ever be.
Re:Tagged: (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking of tags. . .
Holding knowledge of another's dark secrets is one of the foremost ways the game of politics is played.
I remember knowing the daughter of a political figure who had taught her well; he took her out drinking often when she was only a young teen so that she could build up a high tolerance to alcohol. He taught her how to dig up secrets in her opponents, and he taught her how to corrupt her fellows so that they would have secrets to fear losing control of. He was grooming he for political life; in short, he taught her the ways of Fear.
Early on when I met her, I told her that my way of living was to remain open about everything; there was no secret I would be too frightened to share, and in this way, there was no way I could be bound or controlled. I saw fear in her eyes when she looked at me then, and I didn't understand why until I got to know her better.
I have seen more harm arise from secrets kept than I ever would have imagined possible. And I have seen the most ludicrous acts which would normally be sorely condemned by society, not only easily forgiven but benefited from by entire communities simply because the participants were never afraid to share their thoughts and actions openly.
In this way, knowledge shared is power gained, and that is the only kind of power one really needs, because Good Guys don't play chess.
Just some thoughts.
-FL
Re:Tagged: (Score:3, Insightful)
Interesting thoughts. You touch on a theme that I have been thinking about lately: zero sum games versus more creative solutions.
So often we get stuck in zero sum games. You give up knowledge: I win; you lose. You get what you want: you win, I lose.
But it doesn't have to be that way. Shared knowledge can mean gains for both parties. Enabling your collaborators (competitors?) allows you to concentrate on your strengths.
Indeed, life does not have to be a chess match. But creativity and innovation are often required to avoid the trap of the zero sum game.
You're a liar (Score:0, Insightful)
with that and the "live my life" crap you just come off as sanctimonious
good effort though
Re:News? (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole thing is just a ploy to shield all those internal emails and documents that would reveal just who was really behind it all, we all know that M$ is in on it but who else could there be? What other companies or business interests have benefited from the FUD that SCO has generated?
By buying SCO and taking it back to a privatively held company it could be quietly dismantled and the evidence of collusion and conspiracy buried permanently.
Re:Tagged: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:They would have disappeared (Score:3, Insightful)
It was and continues to be a total SCO deal. The money they extorted from Sun and Microsoft is pretty much in line with other IPR ransom demands. IBM has so far spent at least $100 million litigating this one, Novell at least $10 million. IBM could have settled for less than they have spent, Novell had no reason to get involved at all.
I can promise you that when you get one of these demands, you don't think 'maybe I should pay so these people will go screw over someone else'. Instead its 'I really wish someone would stand up to this scum, pity its not going to happen'.
Anyone care to imagine what the Slashdot consensus would have been if Microsoft had chosen to stand and fight on this one and IBM had settled?
The mistake SCO made was to demand money from a company that simply could not settle the case at any price.