J
jack
I'm only posting this because there has been some discussion in this NG
as of late regarding SCO. I'm posting the entire article from the
NYTimes because I realize that many of you don't want to bother with the
registration crap before you can enter the site. Later on.
J.
-------
[Start Article]
March 12, 2004
Microsoft Said to Encourage Big Investment in SCO Group
By STEVE LOHR
ore evidence emerged yesterday about Microsoft's role in encouraging the
anti-Linux campaign being waged by the SCO Group, a small Utah company.
BayStar Capital, a private investment firm, said Microsoft suggested
that it invest in SCO, which is engaged in a legal campaign against
Linux, a rival to Microsoft's Windows.
BayStar took Microsoft's suggestion to heart and invested $50 million in
SCO last October. But a spokesman for BayStar, Robert McGrath, said,
"Microsoft didn't put money in the transaction and Microsoft is not an
investor in BayStar." He added that Microsoft executives were not
investors as individuals in the investment firm, which is based in San
Francisco.
Mr. McGrath said the suggestion came from unidentified "senior Microsoft
executives" but not Bill Gates, the Microsoft chairman, or Steven A.
Ballmer, the chief executive.
Microsoft, Mr. McGrath said, is not indemnifying the investment firm
against risk or otherwise indirectly supporting BayStar's move. "The
issue for BayStar," he said, "is whether there is a good return on its
investment in SCO."
Microsoft, Sun Microsystems and a few other companies have struck deals
with SCO to license its technology. SCO owns the rights to Unix, an
operating system initially developed at Bell Labs. SCO contends that
Linux, a variant of Unix, violates its contract rights.
SCO's legal campaign began last year when it sued I.B.M., a leading
corporate supporter of Linux, and recently stepped up its legal attack
by filing suit against two companies that use Linux, DaimlerChrysler and
AutoZone.
The defendants are fighting the lawsuits, saying they have done nothing
wrong and challenging SCO's claim that its rights are as broad as the
company contends.
Microsoft stands to gain most from any slowing of the advance of Linux,
which is maintained and debugged by a network of programmers who share
code freely. That model of building software is called open source
development.
It is not particularly surprising that Microsoft, given its interests,
played the go-between for an investment in SCO. "But this shows is that
there is a lot more than meets the eye in SCO's litigation strategy,"
said Jeffrey D. Neuburger, a technology and intellectual property expert
at the law firm of Brown Raysman Millstein Felder & Steiner. "SCO has an
agenda, and Microsoft clearly has an agenda, and it's doing whatever it
can to further its cause."
The extent of Microsoft's behind-the-scenes role in SCO's legal effort
has prompted questions and speculation for months. Last week, a leaked
e-mail message from an adviser to SCO to the company added to the
controversy in the industry. In the memorandum, sent to two SCO
executives, Mike Anderer of S2 Strategic Consulting discussed a role in
financing SCO, writing that "Microsoft will have brought in $86 million
for us including BayStar."
SCO acknowledged that the e-mail message, obtained by the Open Source
Initiative and posted on the open-source advocacy group's Web site, was
authentic.
But SCO added that it was a "misunderstanding of the facts by an outside
consultant" who was not working on the BayStar financing. SCO added that
Microsoft did "not orchestrate or participate in the BayStar
transaction."
A SCO spokesman, Blake Stowell, said yesterday, "We stand by that."
[End article]
---------------------
as of late regarding SCO. I'm posting the entire article from the
NYTimes because I realize that many of you don't want to bother with the
registration crap before you can enter the site. Later on.
J.
-------
[Start Article]
March 12, 2004
Microsoft Said to Encourage Big Investment in SCO Group
By STEVE LOHR
ore evidence emerged yesterday about Microsoft's role in encouraging the
anti-Linux campaign being waged by the SCO Group, a small Utah company.
BayStar Capital, a private investment firm, said Microsoft suggested
that it invest in SCO, which is engaged in a legal campaign against
Linux, a rival to Microsoft's Windows.
BayStar took Microsoft's suggestion to heart and invested $50 million in
SCO last October. But a spokesman for BayStar, Robert McGrath, said,
"Microsoft didn't put money in the transaction and Microsoft is not an
investor in BayStar." He added that Microsoft executives were not
investors as individuals in the investment firm, which is based in San
Francisco.
Mr. McGrath said the suggestion came from unidentified "senior Microsoft
executives" but not Bill Gates, the Microsoft chairman, or Steven A.
Ballmer, the chief executive.
Microsoft, Mr. McGrath said, is not indemnifying the investment firm
against risk or otherwise indirectly supporting BayStar's move. "The
issue for BayStar," he said, "is whether there is a good return on its
investment in SCO."
Microsoft, Sun Microsystems and a few other companies have struck deals
with SCO to license its technology. SCO owns the rights to Unix, an
operating system initially developed at Bell Labs. SCO contends that
Linux, a variant of Unix, violates its contract rights.
SCO's legal campaign began last year when it sued I.B.M., a leading
corporate supporter of Linux, and recently stepped up its legal attack
by filing suit against two companies that use Linux, DaimlerChrysler and
AutoZone.
The defendants are fighting the lawsuits, saying they have done nothing
wrong and challenging SCO's claim that its rights are as broad as the
company contends.
Microsoft stands to gain most from any slowing of the advance of Linux,
which is maintained and debugged by a network of programmers who share
code freely. That model of building software is called open source
development.
It is not particularly surprising that Microsoft, given its interests,
played the go-between for an investment in SCO. "But this shows is that
there is a lot more than meets the eye in SCO's litigation strategy,"
said Jeffrey D. Neuburger, a technology and intellectual property expert
at the law firm of Brown Raysman Millstein Felder & Steiner. "SCO has an
agenda, and Microsoft clearly has an agenda, and it's doing whatever it
can to further its cause."
The extent of Microsoft's behind-the-scenes role in SCO's legal effort
has prompted questions and speculation for months. Last week, a leaked
e-mail message from an adviser to SCO to the company added to the
controversy in the industry. In the memorandum, sent to two SCO
executives, Mike Anderer of S2 Strategic Consulting discussed a role in
financing SCO, writing that "Microsoft will have brought in $86 million
for us including BayStar."
SCO acknowledged that the e-mail message, obtained by the Open Source
Initiative and posted on the open-source advocacy group's Web site, was
authentic.
But SCO added that it was a "misunderstanding of the facts by an outside
consultant" who was not working on the BayStar financing. SCO added that
Microsoft did "not orchestrate or participate in the BayStar
transaction."
A SCO spokesman, Blake Stowell, said yesterday, "We stand by that."
[End article]
---------------------