SCO files for bankruptcy - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on SCO files for bankruptcy - Ubuntu ; Haven't been able to confirm anywhere else yet, but... http://www.linux.com/feature/119211...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: SCO files for bankruptcy

  1. SCO files for bankruptcy


    Haven't been able to confirm anywhere else yet, but...

    http://www.linux.com/feature/119211

  2. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:35:34 +0100, Colin Wilson wrote:

    > Haven't been able to confirm anywhere else yet, but...
    >
    > http://www.linux.com/feature/119211



    Its on Slashdot.. they actually filed for chapter 11.. Good riddance.

    --
    MCR
    MAME - History In The Making
    Got Linux? Get SDLMAME

  3. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    Colin Wilson wrote:
    > Haven't been able to confirm anywhere else yet, but...
    >
    > http://www.linux.com/feature/119211



    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...70914152904577


    --
    John

    No Microsoft products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  4. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 23:14:14 +0000, John F. Morse wrote:

    > Colin Wilson wrote:
    >> Haven't been able to confirm anywhere else yet, but...
    >>
    >> http://www.linux.com/feature/119211

    >
    >
    > http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...70914152904577
    >
    >


    The sad thing is SCO really f*cked themselves. When I first hear of them
    (late '80s or early '90s) they had good products and were innovators.
    Too bad they decided it is better to litigate then to inovate.



    --
    Mike McGinn
    "more kidneys than eyes!"
    Registered Linux User 377849

  5. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 00:33:32 +0000:

    > On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 23:14:14 +0000, John F. Morse wrote:
    >
    >> Colin Wilson wrote:
    >>> Haven't been able to confirm anywhere else yet, but...
    >>>
    >>> http://www.linux.com/feature/119211

    >>
    >>
    >> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...70914152904577
    >>
    >>

    >
    > The sad thing is SCO really f*cked themselves. When I first hear of them
    > (late '80s or early '90s) they had good products and were innovators.
    > Too bad they decided it is better to litigate then to inovate.
    >
    >
    >



    "They" didn't screw themselves. One man with a monumental ego, a total
    lack of loyalty to his employees and stockholders, a slithering, lying,
    devious, scoundrel, whose actions would make a used car dealer pimping
    flood damaged cars blush with shame.

    That's who did it and everyone he touched suffered.

    **** him and piss on his grave. Matter of fact, I wouldn't even piss down
    his throat if his asshole was on fire and we were trapped inside a Chinese
    firecracker factory.

    There, I think I made myself fairly clear on that issue.

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  6. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    Mike McGInn wrote:
    > The sad thing is SCO really f*cked themselves. When I first hear of them
    > (late '80s or early '90s) they had good products and were innovators.
    > Too bad they decided it is better to litigate then to inovate.



    "it is better to litigate then to innovate"!

    Hmmm. Doesn't that logic fit a lot of companies?

    Think DRM and the entertainment industry.

    EULA, with Microsoft and Apple being the flagship.

    Heck, even many (most?) governments!

    What goes around, comes around. Do unto others.... Etc.

    I prefer the philosophy of:

    Canonical: http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/philosophy

    Ubuntu's "humanity towards others" http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct

    And the FSF: http://www.fsf.org


    --
    John

    No Microsoft products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  7. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 21:46:24 GMT, MCR wrote:

    > .......... they actually filed for chapter 11.. Good riddance.


    Non Sequitur, actually.

    But, their future is _grim_. And, that is A Good Thing.

  8. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    On 2007-09-15, John F. Morse wrote:
    > Mike McGInn wrote:
    >> The sad thing is SCO really f*cked themselves. When I first hear of them
    >> (late '80s or early '90s) they had good products and were innovators.
    >> Too bad they decided it is better to litigate then to inovate.

    >
    >
    > "it is better to litigate then to innovate"!
    >
    > Hmmm. Doesn't that logic fit a lot of companies?
    >
    > Think DRM and the entertainment industry.
    >
    > EULA, with Microsoft and Apple being the flagship.
    >
    > Heck, even many (most?) governments!
    >
    > What goes around, comes around. Do unto others.... Etc.
    >
    > I prefer the philosophy of:
    >
    > Canonical: http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/philosophy
    >
    > Ubuntu's "humanity towards others" http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct
    >
    > And the FSF: http://www.fsf.org
    >
    >


  9. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 16:06:05 +0000, Allodoxaphobia wrote:

    > On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 21:46:24 GMT, MCR wrote:
    >
    >> .......... they actually filed for chapter 11.. Good riddance.

    >
    > Non Sequitur, actually.
    >
    > But, their future is _grim_. And, that is A Good Thing.


    Agreed. Sorry for being a pedant :-)

    --
    MCR
    MAME - History In The Making
    Got Linux? Get SDLMAME

  10. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    MCR wrote:
    > On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:35:34 +0100, Colin Wilson wrote:
    >
    >> Haven't been able to confirm anywhere else yet, but...
    >>
    >> http://www.linux.com/feature/119211

    >
    >
    > Its on Slashdot.. they actually filed for chapter 11.. Good riddance.
    >

    But can they use Chapter 11 to get out of paying Novell the millions
    they owe them?

  11. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.os.linux.ubuntu, in article
    <5l5k6pF6ib63U1@mid.individual.net>, Don wrote:
    >MCR wrote:


    >> Its on Slashdot.. they actually filed for chapter 11.. Good riddance.

    >
    >But can they use Chapter 11 to get out of paying Novell the millions
    >they owe them?


    Only if the bankruptcy judge agrees - probably not very likely. Look
    at the recent Chapter 11 proceedings with airlines like American,
    Delta, United or US-Air - where the parties agreed to some shedding
    of debt because if the company really does go tits up, the employees
    get little to nothing in the end. You need only look at Eastern Air
    Lines or Pan American that went that way.

    Old guy

  12. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    > The sad thing is SCO really f*cked themselves. When I first hear of them
    > (late '80s or early '90s) they had good products and were innovators.
    > Too bad they decided it is better to litigate then to inovate.

    Back in the 80s and 90s Microsoft owned part of SCO (that is where they got
    XENIX the MS version of Unix). MS unloaded their share sometime in the late
    90s, if I recall correctly.

    Here is an evil thought: What if Microsoft bought them when they were
    liquidated???????

  13. Re: SCO files for bankruptcy

    Little Gorm wrote:
    >>The sad thing is SCO really f*cked themselves. When I first hear of them
    >>(late '80s or early '90s) they had good products and were innovators.
    >>Too bad they decided it is better to litigate then to inovate.

    >
    > Back in the 80s and 90s Microsoft owned part of SCO (that is where theygot
    > XENIX the MS version of Unix). MS unloaded their share sometime in the late
    > 90s, if I recall correctly.
    >
    > Here is an evil thought: What if Microsoft bought them when they were
    > liquidated???????


    ITYM What if MS buys them when they are liquidated?
    Well, what then? If SCO had any leg to stand on, they wouldn't have
    fallen over, would they? As it stands, SCO doesn't have any substantial
    evidence that some part or another of Linux was stolen from Unix or from
    any of their code. So, even if MS bought SCO, they'd still have nothing.

    --
    These are my personal views and not those of Fujitsu Siemens Computers!
    Josef Möllers (Pinguinpfleger bei FSC)
    If failure had no penalty success would not be a prize (T. Pratchett)
    Company Details: http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/imprint.html


+ Reply to Thread