"On the same day that CA blasted SCO, Open Source evangelist Eric Raymond revealed a leaked email from SCO's strategic consultant Mike Anderer to their management. The email details how, surprise surprise, Microsoft has arranged virtually all of SCO's financing, hiding behind intermediaries like Baystar Capital."

--Bruce Perens

Summary: The anti-Linux lawsuits that Microsoft funded just carry on -- for now

AS WE STATED the other day, despite the departure of Darl McBride [1, 2, 3] the SCO saga carries on and SJVN has the details.

According to a Salt Lake Tribune report, Cahn told U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Kevin Gross that "SCO's claims against IBM and Novell 'should be pursued aggressively.'"

You've got to be kidding me. I predicted that Cahn would want to continue the Novell lawsuit. After all, as it is, no one knows who really owns Unix's intellectual property. Unix's ownership is a big deal. If Novell owns it, then SCO has nothing left of any real value. But IBM? Come on!

We've known, not suspected, known for years that SCO's core copyright claims about IBM copying parts of Unix into Linux aren't true. No one who has read over any of the publicly available evidence thinks otherwise, except for SCO loyalists.

I can only presume that Cahn hasn't really looked at the case. He seems to believe that underneath all of SCO's copyright smoke there had to be some fire. Sorry, there's not even a spark.

At Groklaw, Pamela Jones insists that this is by no means news. From her notes on the bankruptcy hearing:

According to the Salt Lake Tribune's account, Cahn told the judge he'll pursue the Novell and IBM litigation, but that's not really news. He announced as much the other day, and again in the motion regarding the AutoZone proposed settlement, it was hinted at, and what choice does he have at this point? Boies Schiller are paid, and what basis would he have to say it isn't worth even trying, when copyrights are in the balance? The jury trial would naturally seem worthwhile to pursue, since what costs a lot in litigation is discovery, and that's over and done. If he didn't pursue that, he would surely open himself up to litigation by the shareholders McBride claims to be leading. And that costs money to pursue also, so all in all, it's the course of caution to pursue things at this point, or at least to talk like you plan to.

As SCO has neither a legal case nor a business case (it has virtually no business left), this is nothing to be worried about. But still, it's a pain in the butt. Is Microsoft still rewarding SCO? ⬆

"[Microsoft's] Mr. Emerson and I discussed a variety of investment structures wherein Microsoft would 'backstop,' or guarantee in some way, BayStar's investment.... Microsoft assured me that it would in some way guarantee BayStar's investment in SCO."

--Larry Goldfarb, Baystar, key investor in SCO