walter fry wrote:

> >I never thought I'd be cheering on the Nazgul of Armonk as they laid
> >waste to Caldera's and the Santa Cruz Operation's successors.
> 
> Having gone to high school in Santa Cruz county I am naturally interested 
> in hearing the background of SCO. I am very naive about that, would you be 
> so kind as to go into some detail, if you don't want to burden this wire 
> about that then I would like to invite you to wire me directly, particulaly 
> because I have heard Eugene affectionatly reffered to as Santa Cruz North ( 
> among other things such as Berzerkly North )

Short answer: The SCO Group is a different company than The Santa Cruz
Operation.

Less short answer: It's a long, complicated story.  The whole thing
has been chronicled in great detail at http://www.groklaw.net/ .
Here's a quick summary.

The company currently known as The SCO Group has only a passing
resemblence to the Santa Cruz Operation -- they're sometime referred
to as newSCO and oldSCO.

The Santa Cruz Operation was founded around 20 years ago, was
headquartered in Santa Cruz (obviously) and sold Unix (not Linux) for
PCs.  Somewhere along the line, they bought Novell's Unix business.
Novell had previously bought it from AT&T.

Caldera Linux Systems was an unrelated company, headquartered in
Lindon, Utah, founded in the late 1990s.  Its business was to sell its
own Linux distribution.  Similar to SuSE or Redhat, but Caldera was
not successful.

The Canopy Group is an investment company that became the majority
owner of both oldSCO and Caldera.  (I think they'd always owned
Caldera, but I'm not sure.)  They decided to restructure their
companies, and they transferred oldSCO's Unix business to Caldera.
This was sometime in 2000-2002, I think.

In March, 2003, Caldera sued IBM.  They made various claims, among
them that IBM has infringed Caldera's copyrights by putting Unix code
into Linux, that IBM has violated its Unix license with AT&T --er,
Novell --er, oldSCO --er, Caldera.  One of the people who launched the
lawsuit has practically admitted in a magazine interview that it was
intended as a nuisance suit.  But IBM didn't pay Caldera off, it chose
to fight the suit.  They countersued Caldera for GPL violations and
for infringing IBM's patents.

In the summer of 2003, Caldera changed its name to The SCO Group.
(Meanwhile, oldSCO had changed its name to Tarantella.)  It did that
for the purpose of blurring the distinction between newSCO and oldSCO.
It worked, some of the judge's early rulings have indicated confusion
on which company is which.

Meanwhile, IBM invested more than $200 million in Novell.  Novell, it
turns out, is (99% probability -- that's in court too) the actual
owner of the Unix copyrights.  NewSCO's current management apparently
didn't understand that oldSCO hadn't bought the copyrights from Novell.

Novell also exercised a clause in their contract with oldSCO that
excused IBM from any contract violations.  So now newSCO has no suit,
and they are still facing IBM's countersuit, which seems to be much
more solid than newSCO's suit.

NewSCO's strategy, since they found that IBM wasn't going to roll
over, has been to delay the suite as much as possible.  It now
appears that they will run out of money before the suit is resolved.
Their stock was delisted from the NASDAQ last month.

That saddens me.  It would be wonderful if this suit had resulted in
IBM using its formidable legal resources to prove the GPL valid.  But
that probably won't happen now.

This is the extremely short form of an astoundingly byzantine,
convoluted story.  I haven't mentioned newSCO's accounting problems,
the BayStar/RBC stock ripoff, Microsoft's investment in SCO, Canopy's
corporate shell games, the Yarro lawsuit, SCO vs. Novell, newSCO's
flurry of frivolous suits against its end user customers, oldSCO's
public domain release of "ancient Unix", or how the USL vs. California
Regents (aka the BSD trial) affects these suits.

-- 
Bob Miller                              K<bob>
kbobsoft software consulting
http://kbobsoft.com                     [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
EUGLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug

Reply via email to