View Source: SCO - Waikato Linux Users Group

Edit PageHistory Diff Info LikePages
An [Acronym] for __S__anta __C__ruz __O__peration

Originally a company that distributed a version of [Unix] for the [Intel] [x86] architecture called [Xenix], bought from MicrosoftCorporation. Later they made another [Unix] version [SCO] [UNIX] System V/386. Their main market appears to have been relatively lightweight client PCs connecting to larger servers running a different flavour of [UNIX]. Their expensive software never became very popular, but their pricing structure fitted well with many consultants. In 1995 they bought ~UnixWare from [Novell], which [Novell] had bought directly from [AT&T], the original creators of [UNIX]. Their profits were being eaten alive by the growing popularity of [Linux] soon after however, and they made a few desperate moves to try this OpenSource thingamajic with little success.

In 2001, they were bought by [Caldera], a [Linux] distributor that had repeatedly made big plans to establish their LinuxDistribution as part of the business world and had repeatedly failed. [Caldera]'s hope was to benefit from the well established distribution channels [SCO] had built in over ten years of work. Well, chalk another one up for [Caldera]; the attempt failed. Desperate to make profits, they turned to the [SCO] products bought in with the acquisition, renaming themselves to __The SCO Group__. One more failure.

At this point, someone rememebered that they owned ~UnixWare, which meant ownership of the IntellectualProperty of the original [AT&T] [UNIX]. A plan was hatched to construe [Linux] as having been impossible to create without theft of IntellectualProperty from [UNIX]. The first one to get sued was [IBM], who had paid licenses to use that IntellectualProperty for their AIX clone of [UNIX], and later also invested (quite heavily) in [Linux]. The lawsuit is based on lateral interpretation of old legal documents. As if this wasn't ludicruous enough, they're also demanding money from ''users'' of [Linux], which is completely devoid of any legal basis. (If someone plagiarises your song, you don't sue the people who bought his CD, do you.)

Let's hope this lawsuit is their ultimate failure.

There are __heaps__ of resources on the web about this lawsuit. The one you don't want to miss is [IWeThey:PiratesOfPenguinance].

But see also:

* GrokLaw
* [IWeThey:SCOvsIBM]
* [Salt Lake City Weekly Editorial | http://www.slweekly.com/editorial/2004/feat_2004-01-22.cfm] (slightly long but very readable background to their dubious legal claims)
* [A company history of SCO | http://williambader.com/museum/dell/xenixhistory.html]
* [Cannot find Stolen SCO Code in Linux | http://www.linuxstolescocode.com/], a Page Not Found parody; also facts about the case and forums.

----

There's a [Google] bombing campaign to associate them with the search term [litigious bastards | http://www.sco.com/?sco=litigious+bastards]. At  the time of writing they're the number #1 hit for [that query | Google:litigious bastards]. The MyDoom [DDoS] attack prompted [DNS] changes which caused <tt>www.sco.com</tt> to not resolve, but it is now back.

----
CategoryCompany
10 pages link to SCO:
Last edited on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 11:48:51 pm by AristotlePagaltzis
Edit PageHistory Diff Info LikePages