"Microsoft hardly needs an SCO source license. Its license payment to SCO is simply a good-looking way to pass along a bribe..."

--Bruce Perens

Summary: Another (public) take on the latest from SCO

SEVERAL DAYS ago we showed some mind-blowing developments in the SCO case. Groklaw chose to keep them private (for subscribers only), but the word starts percolating through subscription walls and into some other Web sites.

Slated writes: "This story demands greater exposure, € since it reveals the full extent of € SCO's (and their € partners') depraved € and thuggish € mentality, so please quote the full Groklaw article, for the benefit of non-members."

Here is another new analysis which sadly enough comes from a Web site that is currently down (and has been down for a while, so Sam Johnston hopefully works on it). Here is the text from Google cache for the benefit of those who can't access the site:

Dodgy dealings happen € all the time but it's not often € you get to see it boiling over € into the public arena € as we have today. I € saw in my newsfeed this € morning that € GrokLaw had picked € up on € (Darl, Norris, Bryan Cave Named as Defendants in IP Litigation - The Pelican Brief) a Courthouse News article (Ex-Partner Accused of AIP Trade Secret Theft) about a recently filed complaint € by Pelican Equity, LLC against Talos Partners, € Darl McBride € (of SCO € Group fame), € Robert V. € Brazell (of Overstock.com fame), Stephen L. € Norris, Rama Ramachandran and lawfirm Bryan Cave LLP.

It claims a conspiracy to "steal AIP's proprietary stock loan product" (EQUITAPâ„¢, [which] € helps investors € achieve their financial € goals by structuring non-recourse loans using the securities in their portfolio as collateral) and € "virtually API's entire business from € API and its founder, Mark Robbins" (Pelican claim € to own the relevant rights). It then goes € on to explain the € whole sorry story of € a techie (Robbins) investing four years and apparently € all of his money into development of € a product, € being approached € by seasoned € businessmen € (Brazell & McBride) € as potential € partners, the € subsequent formation € of € a new business € (Talos) € and theft € of € everything € from € AIP's products € to website to employees (Ramachandran) with the help of AIP's own lawyers (Bryan Cave LLP) who ultimately blew the whistle with an "astonishing" conflict of interest waiver.

The truly € mindblowing part of the € whole story though € is the Skyline Cowboy site they € claim is run by McBride and € Brazell: "Finally, in a heinous effort to obliterate AIP's business and deflect their misdeeds [they] have over approximately the € last 60 days littered the Internet with scurrilous postings on www.skylinecowboy.com, a website they used primarily for € that purpose, and € on Yahoo, Twitter and € other message boards."

If that's € true it's like coming back € to stab the guy € in the carpark after € you've robbed him € of everything € he owns. € Not only € have they posted a € video of the € guy's wife being € served what they claim € is a $109,627 check fraud € judgment following a $1,000 bounty € as well as a $20,000 reward for arrest and $1,000,000 reward for "full restitution" (save that both € appear to be impossible - and likely € a result of the claimed highway robbery), but now they've offered $30,000 for the true identity of € GrokLaw's Pamela Jones (PJ) € who they claim € is a "Secret IBM Shill Blogger". Let's not € be too quick to forget the relationship to SCO € Group and € their apparently Microsoft € funded attacks € on IBM, Novell and Linux in general.

Anyway you can € see the juicy details for yourself € in the filings and if you're a GrokLaw member, the article and associated discussion (the article has since € been updated "Now that I've read € it, I've made the article € Members Only € for now." € and unfortunately € "creation € of new accounts has been temporarily disabled"). I have but one question: Who the %!#$ do € these cowboys think they are? It's € amazing to think that our society routinely jails people for petty theft while leaving [what appear € to be] € career conmen € free € to enrich € themselves at € others' expense. Anyway € at least Bernie Madoff got € his comeuppance... you've heard my opinion - what's yours?

A lot can be learned from this about trust (and antitrust) in Microsoft.

In relation to this, Slated adds: "Microsoft € is €  the € criminal organisation € that € Miguel de € Icaza evangelises for. I wonder if, € like his gangster heroes in Redmond, he also € supports SCO's agenda? Or € is that € one of € those uncomfortable "black and white" things he doesn't like to talk about?"

Here is a comment about "Microsoft's impunity", posted in reference to our evidence of Microsoft misbehaviour in sub-notebooks:

It amazes me how much Microsoft is able to get away with in terms of anti-trust crimes that go unpunished while others get punished for much less.

I suspect that this is down to Microsoft's core business strategy. Unlike the others, Microsoft is an abusive monopoly first and foremost - that is the core to its being and the core to its business strategy. The others are business first and monopolies incidentally, and where it occurs, the abuse is not systematic. Hence Microsoft's abuse of monopoly is effected and sustained in a far more meticulously planned way, with the subversion of DOJ (possibly through Bill Gates' father's law firm's influence within the DOJ), corruption of politicians, bureaucrats, individuals in companies, the media etc. - all part of the core corporate ideology.

Is the legal system potent enough to respond to more massive crimes rather than shoplifting and doping? Or would an effective system be described as "Utopian" at best? ⬆

"...Microsoft wished to promote SCO and its pending lawsuit against IBM and the Linux operating system. But Microsoft did not want to be seen as attacking IBM or Linux."

--Larry Goldfarb, Baystar, key investor in SCO