Today, Novell has come forward and asserted that it owns the SysV IP rights, and that SCO merely has a license to them. Furthermore, SCO has been begging Novell to sign over copyright to Unix. SCO's response? Groundless assertions that it has the right to pursue SysV IP infringers.
In other news, SCO announced profits for its 2nd quarter; the licensing program garnered $8.3 Million from licensing.
The pieces are finally coming together: SCO's lawsuit against IBM and its intimidation of 1500 companies are predicated on nothing more than hot air. Does this mean that many of those licensees can now sue SCO for fraud? Will the Germans prevail and force SCO to show its cards? Will IBM (and other Linux companies) countersue SCO for filing a frivolous, fradulent lawsuit?
Whatever happens, 'SCO' is poised to enter the business lexicon; I propose the following definition:
SCO (v): the act of engaging in a strategy to increase the value of a business by claiming IP infringement, filing vague yet high profile lawsuits and intimidating potential customers with possible future legal actions. May briefly increase revenue, but shortly causes the firm to implode and go out of business once the facts of the case are established, and it is determined that (1) no IP infringement took place because (2) the firm engaging in this legal chicanery never owned the IP in question.
