IBM Subpoenas Intel Into SCO Fray 248
whovian writes "Since IBM was ordered by the courts to show more code, they are now reported by Groklaw to have subpoenaed Intel to show 'all communications between Intel and SCO or Canopy about IBM, Unix or Linux, all meetings with either concerning IBM, Unix or Linux, and all contracts or other business relations, past, present, or future, between Intel and SCO.' The text is available at the website."
linux on ppc (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:IBM running scared? (Score:5, Insightful)
On top of that, I'm sure their lawyers are very confident, they're just on a fishing expidition to see what else they can find that may be of use. Being meticulous never hurts.
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
But even then, the counter suits, and residual suits for damages, etc. This may be going on for a looooooooooooong time. When will it end is, indeed, a good question.
Food for thought (Score:2, Insightful)
No, you usually don't have to depose your best friends. Which is why this action may give some insight into the real state of relations between IBM and Intel.
Now that IBM has dumped their Intel PC business, they can afford to take off the gloves, and not have to worry about making nice in the morning.
Re:IBM running scared? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmm, interesting... (Score:3, Insightful)
Is it a purely defensive move? Or is the the "beginning of the end" of the PC industry as we knew it?
Linux + PPC (+ IBM) might beat BSD + PPC (+ Apple) -- espcially since IBM makes the PPC part! -- and definitely beats Windows + i86, but why the hell NOW??? What do they know that I do not?
Maybe I should actually go RTFA, but I doubt it will clear things for me.
Paul B.
Re:Food for thought (Score:3, Insightful)
Soap Opera Digest, eat your heart out. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:my professional, legal and technical opinion.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't even dare analyze this article (Score:5, Insightful)
So please, don't waste our time with useless conjecture, predictions, and "what-if" scenarios. Because really, what's going on here is just mental masturbation. Move along.
Its about intellectual property claims that... (Score:3, Insightful)
It like a bunch of people have pursued some man made rules or laws that rely on the earth being flat. But now that the earth really isn't flat, these rules, these laws are having a problem holding up. A lack of integrity of the rules/laws of which so many have beeing following.
So yeah, its really not supprising the exposure of the web of distortion that has spread thru out the industry.
Imagine what it would be like to see from the POV of one having clairity of the issue. Imagine how those following and supporting such distortion would be preceived by such a POV.
Perhaps this is such a view!? [ffii.org]
Power of IBM (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Food for thought (Score:5, Insightful)
Doesn't make sense (Score:3, Insightful)
I think there's a bit more to this than we've seen... but if anything when the dust is cleared it will be very interesting to look back and say "ahhhh, I understand now"
Re:*sigh* (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Soap Opera Digest, eat your heart out. (Score:1, Insightful)
Baystar later withdrew the majority of this.
It's completely pointless (Score:3, Insightful)
It's interesting for us to find out who's behind all of this, but not to the judge. These documents are only going to be needed because IBM thinks there's something there about licensing etc. deals. Not about helping out SCO or whatever.
A buyout would be a bad thing for IBM. (Score:5, Insightful)
In the long run, it's better for IBM to crush SCO, publicly, slowly and legally.
Not called "Wintel" for nothing ... (Score:5, Insightful)
would like to see SCO Group succeed in court.
Sun is pushing Sparc and AMD processors, IBM
is pushing (hard) with PPC processors, and even
HP is courting AMD processors -- all three
with their UNIX and GNU/linux.
Microsoft courted, and then dumped support
for microcomputers based upon the Alpha, MIPS,
and PPC processor. Intel's many mis-steps
with the Itanium (ia64) processor may well be
an issue that IBM would like to raise with
the court, especially as regards IBM's short
lived alliance with SCO.
IANAL, but no matter how much code IBM reveals
in court against SCO Group, SCO's main attacks
center on (1) ownership of derivative works,
and (2) legality of the GPL. Either could
seriously damage F/OSS if the case goes to SCO.
I do not have very much faith in the USA's
system of justice these days, particularly
since the DoJ let MSFT off the monopoly hook
so readily (after regime change).
Re:Hog wash! (Score:3, Insightful)
A court order to produce such information (probably under seal) would trump the confidentiality agreement.
Also, there may be business reasons why Company A doesn't want to appear too eager to acquiesce to the demands of Company B. A subpoena will preserve the fiction that 'they made us do it'.
Mar 99: Linux boots on Itanium process (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:A buyout would be a bad thing for IBM. (Score:4, Insightful)
however, that that is the case.
Another thing you might consider is that if MS gave more funds to SCO now,
even the mainstream media would make a big deal out of it. I don't think
MS wants that.
Re:IBM running scared? (Score:3, Insightful)
This theory would make more sense if it was IBM that has been dragging this whole thing out. It hasn't. IBM's been forthright with what the court has ordered. SCO's missed quite a lot of their deadlines for producing things and seems to be doing absolutely everything they can to delay as much as possible; they keep changing their focus in the courtroom, they keep insisting they know things and then suddenly announce they need an undetermined amount of time to pronounce the things they know, they respond to every complied-with set of evidence from IBM with suddenly different and far expanded demands for evidence. They spent most of their time in court over the last year continually objecting, no matter the nature of things, that they couldn't go on because IBM had not produced a specific set of evidence that the court had repeatedly ruled IBM didn't have to produce, until finally in the last court ruling the judge finally ordered IBM to produce this, with the reason given being "to appease the rote objection by SCO".
IBM is not the one who is making this take so long.
I don't think that IBM will stop by simply winning, they will continue this until SCO is dead and in this respect, this approach makes sense:
Thing is, IBM doesn't have to stop with simply winning... they've filed a countersuit. When SCO's case against IBM ends, IBM's case against SCO will go on.