sco group - Ah HA!

[Charles Steinkuehler]

Zscoundrel wrote:
> OK, now it ALL becomes much clearer. . . . .
> 
> If you look a the clip below, it shows the ownership chain of Unix and 
> the original code, when you get to the bottom, just remember that 
> Microsoft made a large, and really weird investment in Caldera when they 
> were on the brink of bankruptcy.  I never understood why they would buy 
> a large stake in what was, at the time, a mid-sized Linux applications 
> provider.  Even when they dropped support for the Linux distributions, 
> it was a VERY cheap way to get what they believe is control over the 
> Unix code.  
> 
> It also explains all the media hype that pretty much mis-directs and 
> over-simplifies the actual facts of the filing.  
> 
> 
> *    *    *    * clip *    *    *    *   

The details in the OSI paper, along with the Microsoft investment in SCO 
scares me, and reminds me of a tactic successfully employed in the video 
industry (I design professional video equipment for a living).

A company was formed by the name of "Video Patents, Inc.", by a bunch of 
lawyers.  These guys basically go around and get companies to let them 
defend their patents (for a fee, of course), extracting license fees or 
damages from any infringers in the process (of course VPI gets to skip 
off the top of any damages, as well).

This doesn't sound so evil on the surface, just normal "outsourcing". 
But there are two key elemets that *MAKE* it evil:

1) Most of the patents being defended are pretty much completely bogus, 
with prior art going back decades.  Let's not get into all the problems 
with the patent system since the trial lawyers took over America, but 
suffice it to say the patent infringment claims are pretty much baseless.

2) Despite (1) above, big-name companies pay *BIG* licensing fees in 
order to "stay legal".

What is actually going on is the Sony's and Panasonic's of the world are 
funneling money to laywers so they can go after the small, inovative 
startups.  Both the money and the name recognition behind the licensees 
lend weight to the fact that the patents must be valid.

Now try and imagine how hard it will be to convice a layperson that 
SCO's claims are unfounded after Microsoft just gave them X [mb]illion 
dollers, and with SCO using that money to file suit against anyone and 
everyone they can.

-- 
Charles Steinkuehler
charles at steinkuehler.net