[Leaplist] Misquoted again (but Damien listens) -- WAS: IBM plays their trump card

[Bryan J. Smith]

One of the reasons I don't hang around on this list is that some people "take a stance" and read what they want to read.
Damien McKenna might as well be my interpreter, because he seems to "just get it" when I speak.
I don't speak to "ally" myself with SCO, but to *inform* the rabid 97% of *rabid* Linux users of the *potential* issues they re ignoring.

I have *always* said SCO's lawsuit has been a bunch of BS *except* for Monterey.
And when it came to Monterey, of which the contract terms weren't  available until more recent, SCO had to give notice and IBM had to respond.
The mere fact that Caldera bought SCO didn't mean Monterey was "null'n void," which has been *wrongly* proliferated.

Well, well, well, now we *finally* have IBM's disclosure. 
Why did it take this long?
IBM *should* have been waving this thing *out* in-the-open!

SCO informed IBM on 6/9 -- of 2001!  Caldera bought SCO 10 months earlier!
It's clear that SCO did *not* follow the "notice" clause, so the contract was *void* 10 months earlier.
The fact that IBM still responded in its required 15 days
(IIRC, I have to check, it might have been 10 - although that could be 10 business days, which it might be within),
is just icing on the cake.
I mean, at that point, SCO had *already*broken* the contract!

Caldera bought SCO, SCO was basically *unethical* with a "don't ask, don't tell" which *voided* Monterey,
the #1 reason why Caldera bought SCO, and probably because IBM would have said no back then too.
IBM is utterly villified in my book now.

Although I would have like to seen Monterey GPL'd, like Caldera was going to do, IBM did *nothing*wrong* to Caldera.
IBM has a right to protect its IP as it see fits, even if another avenue would benefit the community more.
I.e., it still doesn't change the fact that the GPL'ing Monterey scared IBM to death
(which is why SCO's claims of IBM "GPL'ing" it's IP is non-sense and 180 degrees from reality)m
.
I'll now be the first, responsible Linux professional to say "IBM didn't break the contract or screw over Caldera, SCO broke it and screwed over Caldera."
SCO now officially and legally has *0* case, but *not* before this  disclosure by IBM.
Phil said it best, this is their "trump card" - although I'm still questioning, why didn't IBM make this public before?

Thank you Damien for continuing to _read_ what I actually say,
not what other people hear because they don't want to listen to logic.
I made *NO* assumptions other than to point out the *POTENTIAL* reason why the lawsuit came about,
and the *ONLY* place SCO has a case.

Right here on LEAPLIST, right after the lawsuit was filed, I *KNEW* - as did Linus and others "in the UNIX/Linux industry" - it wasn't about IP but Monterey.
I was probably one of the *EXTREME*FEW* here at LEAP who had even heard of Monterey
(much less was very excited when Caldera bought SCO in 2000
- let alone when Ray Noorda of Novell fame co-founded Caldera in the early '90s).

This is the difference from being an informed Linux professional and an ingorant Linux advocate.
I *know* and can now *proliferate* the *legal*fact* that SCO has no case.
Understand it's not SCO, but the 3.5+ years *screaming*, *ignorant* Linux advocates
who not only got one of my projects shut down at a Fortune 20 company in 2003,
but the people I have to fight and diffentiate myself when I talk to  others and say
"no, I'm not like them, I am only *now* saying I have a *real*, *legal*basis* for SCO's lawsuit -
even the original 2003 March filing - to be *utterly*baseless*.

As I said, I *tire* of what I'm clearly calling "Linux McCarthyism."
Applying guilt by association, demonizing people/entities for defending the legal *facts*
(especially "unknowns/non-disclosed" in filings) when they don't "policitally align" themselves
to already pre-conceived judgement based on *0* public fact and other things are what make 
97% of the Linux community *rabid* and *abhorred* by the professional, business and enterprise computing world.

Thank you Phil and Damien for continuing to be professional, often well in excess of myself -
because I shouldn't drop into the petty arguments with such ignoranr Linux McCarthies,
at least not in e-mail where my demeanor is questionable at times.

-- 
Sent from my Treo