Is SCO lost for words in 2009?


SCO's chief operating officer Jeff Hunsaker seems to be short on rhetoric right now, posting "Blah. Blah. Blah. Best regards" in the SCO Partner News newsletter. Presumably they are too busy finding new people to sue...

You should follow us on or Twitter

Your comments

Well considering their propensity for suing their own customers:

Who cares?

embarrassing to say the

embarrassing to say the least.. they obviously think so - it has now been pulled!


Since when has Darl been an anonymous penguin?

Wow, that's a badly written comment

Foaming at the mouth a bit?

SCO got what they deserved -- a very expensive ride to BANKRUPTCY! Why? Because they didn't understand their own contracts and the histories of both UNIX and Linux enough.

I guess Microsoft got what they paid for, eh? Enough noise to slow the traction of Linux a bit while they dropped that pig of an operating system Vista on the market, only to fail miserably. Now, all I read in the press are articles about how Linux is stealing Microsoft's breakfast, lunch and dinner.

No, Groklaw had the story right all the time. How do I know? I wrote the Groklaw articles describing events at the Oakland County (MI) Courts when they sued Daimler-Chrysler. That had to be the stupidest part of the whole show, executed with the finesse of a bull elephant at a ballet.

No, SCO deserves all they got -- a big bag of NOTHING and a devastated shell of a company as the result.


Now the linky goes to a "document not found" page.

About the only thing the SCO Group was good at was shooting its own feet.

SCO deserves all they got -- a big bag of NOTHING...

Wait until SCO presents the case in front of a jury.

There'll be probably some pretty upset pinguins when that happens. Too bad there'll be no Pamela to guide them back to Antarctica.

We've waited quite a few years already -- still NOTHING

Actually I think we've been waiting for quite a while for this to go to trial. While we waited we saw SCO produce, um nothing, realise it didn't own anything and then go bankrupt.

All this time we've been waiting for that real court case. Instead SCO didn't pass begin and didn't collect $200. They sat instead missing turns hearing that the code that they wanted to base their case on was owned by someone else. Ooops.

Now if they can convince a jury that they own the stuff they'd then still need to take the next step and prove that something got stolen. Oh wait but from all evidence they've produced to date nothing to stolen. And the only way I see them doing that in front of a jury is if they can convince a judge that they're not talking through their own A$$, they don't seem to be able to do any of that.

In the mean time they still need to pay Novell.

Too bad, I once thought SCO stuff was quite cool. I did my first Unix training on SCO. I thought it would be amazingly cool to work for them.

I wonder what its like to work for SCO now...

They've been in front of one jury already.

And? They LOST.

They had their chance.

Still pining for their "confuse-a-cat" courtroom ploy, huh?

Listen, the only way you get to court is with evidence; you've had 5+ years to prove your case, and every time you try to claim something, it's ripped to shreds on message boards like Yahoo or InvestorVillage, or on blogs like Groklaw; we've seen through your fraudulent extortion scheme, and your days are numbered, both as a company, and as free individuals. Besides, if you were so confident as to the outcome of this farce, why did Ralph Yarro try hiding his assets by putting his house under his wife's name?

The confuse-a-cat legal scheme only worked for O.J. - once; look where he is now. That's your future, SCOXQ.PK. I hope you all enjoy your stay at the Graybar Motel.

Re: Great sources of misinformation

Thst's SCO in a nutshell - FUD and nothing else.
Congratulations -couldn't have put it better myself.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Username:   Password: