Untitled
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| salparadise Jul 19, 2005 10:34 PM EDT |
Maybe they think if they leave it long enough everyone will forget they lied to the press, the courts and the IT community at the behest of M$ in order to scare people off Linux. A few prison sentences ought to be handed down for this. |
| PaulFerris Jul 20, 2005 6:52 AM EDT |
salparadise: Who's going to go to jail? SCO executives? Next question: Who gave them the loot to do all of this damage? The money was transmitted in the clear, right from Microsoft into their coffers. SCO, at the time, a company with a losing business proposition, gets a huge cash infusion from Microsoft under the guise that they're simply buying Unix licenses (nice). It just so happens that the cash infusion enables this dying company to do a whale of damage in the press as every pointy-haired boss scratches their heads and says "Gee, I wonder if there's copyrighted code in Linux?". No, if someone goes to jail it won't be the real culprits of this charade -- those people will be safely laughing in the Redmond Infirmary. --FeriCyde |
| alc Jul 20, 2005 9:00 AM EDT |
[No, if someone goes to jail it won't be the real culprits of this charade -- those people will be safely laughing in the Redmond Infirmary.] You hit that one right on the head. |
| dinotrac Jul 20, 2005 9:34 AM EDT |
Guys: What crime has been committed here? So far as I can tell, this is all civil stuff. |
| number6x Jul 20, 2005 9:56 AM EDT |
Lanham act violations are criminal. Also, SCOX is on record in filings with the SEC that they did not think about creating an IP licensing scheme for Linux until March 2003. This is because they gave big stock purchase options, pennies on the dollar, in February 2003 to all of the officers. If they knew they were going to start suing before the options, but kept the info secret, they are probably out of compliance with a few federal stock manipulation and insider trading laws as well. This e-mail pretty much proves they were planning this long before February 2003. I think telling lies to the SEC qualifies one for time in Club Fed. RICOH also has a nice ring to it as well. I hope Darl gets to spend his time in a Utah prison. It would be a shame to put him back East somewhere. In Utah his kids could visit him on the weekends and play a few rounds of golf with him or something. |
| PaulFerris Jul 20, 2005 11:29 AM EDT |
dino: crime? Who's talking crime. I'm talking justice. There's a difference. :P |
| dinotrac Jul 20, 2005 12:25 PM EDT |
number6x -- While it's possible that criminal acts could violate the Lanham act, Lanham act violations are otherwise civil affairs. |
| bstadil Jul 20, 2005 5:37 PM EDT |
Stock manipulation and insider trading are criminal acts. They have no case, told the world they had despite having knowledge to the contrary. Sold shares acquired for $2 , when they peaked at $20 based on their fallacious claims. Conclusion: Jail time |
| dinotrac Jul 20, 2005 6:06 PM EDT |
bstadil -- Jail time requires a crime. That means meeting ALL of the elements, including mental state, laid out in the appropriate statute. Insider trading is perfectly legal, BTW. Illegally profiting on inside information not generally available to the market is criminal. It ain't the same thing. As to stock manipulation...I sure don't remember seeing SCO stock rise to any great heights based and anybody losing money on its fraudulently inflated value. It's possible we've got some criminal acts in the mix, but I'm guessing not. |
| Fritz Jul 20, 2005 6:09 PM EDT |
I don't think they will get in trouble for stock manipulation. We all know that was the purpose of the suit, and like GI Joe says, "Knowing is half the battle." However the other half is having proof. What I think is possible, although still pretty unlikely, is a case of Malicious prosecution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malicious_prosecution). If it can be proven beyond a doubt that they knew all along that their case was without merit, than IBM might just go for it to make a point. -> Fritz |
| phsolide Jul 20, 2005 7:30 PM EDT |
You know what? The really interesting thing about this article is that the mainstream press seems to get it about SCO (finally). Instead of repeating the corporate spin, the mainstream press seems to finally have gotten around to reporting the facts. One wonders why this didn't happen in the DoJ vs MSFT anti-trust suit, Michael Jackson's last session in court, and the Rodney King beating trial. Clearly in all 3 of those high-profile cases, the mainstream press wasn't reporting what actually went on in the court battles. |
| dinotrac Jul 21, 2005 9:17 AM EDT |
Fritz -- I agree that malicious prosecution could be a winner for IBM. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!