SCO Names.... AutoZone. Press Pounces, Everyone Yawns

from the wrong-place,-wrong-time dept

It seems like the further along this whole thing goes, the deeper a hole SCO is digging for themselves. While they made a big stink Monday by announcing one incredibly gullible Linux licensee, they've now officially announced their publicity stunt lawsuit against randomly chosen AutoZone (with plans to name a bigger company later). The only reason they're doing it today, of course, is because today is earnings day, and there's been quite a bit of evidence, that all this ridiculousness has been timed for the purpose of selling stock. Both stories seem like SCO is acting a bit prematurely. They're asking people to pay for something where there's serious doubt as to whether or not SCO actually owns what they're trying to sell. There are some troubling legal issues here. The basis of both of these stories is that the companies still would have bought the same number of Linux licenses at the SCO-induced higher prices - something that basic economics tells you is likely to be untrue. However, by assuming that's the case, then the business strategy just about any software company should take would be to gain some intellectual property protection over something but keep it fairly quiet. Then go out and figure out a way to push some software that uses that intellectual property as far as possible by giving it away free. Then, once it's established, run around and bill everyone for it. That seems somewhere between bait and switch and extortion. Hopefully a court will step in and tell SCO they can't sue companies until the intellectual property claims with IBM and others are settled. At the same time, I'm also wondering why ZDNet is publishing SCO FUD as if it's a news story by itself? Darl McBride's letter to Congress is so laughably bad, however, that you wonder how this guy can actually keep a straight face when he tries to portray a world that simply doesn't exist. It's unfortunate for AutoZone, who is basically just being caught in the line of fire from a suicidal company trying to take down random innocent bystanders. Update: They've now named the second company: DaimlerChrysler. What's with the auto focus?


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    beck, Mar 3rd, 2004 @ 7:14am

    No Subject Given

    The SCO executives better take a look at the Enron big shots, they need to realize that they can go to jail for criminal actions. Not just extortion, but also stock manipulation, etc.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Curmudgeon, Mar 3rd, 2004 @ 7:22am

    Toss it

    I hope the judge simply throws this case out. There is also a basis for a charge of malicious prosecution against SCO.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 3rd, 2004 @ 7:43am

    No Subject Given

    Picking Autozone is pretty calculated: they have to be one of the lowest-tech companies in the Fortune 1000, thus they are more likely than many others to fold under the pressure.

    To the other commenter: malicious prosecution is a charge leveled against prosecutors who abuse their power. There is no such equivalent in the private sector. You can sue anyone you like as often as you like. What a country!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 3rd, 2004 @ 3:52pm

    Malicious prosecution IS a civil action

    "Malicious prosecution" is often used to refer to the actions of a prosecutor, but it's the traditional term for a civil tort. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malicious_prosecution

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Mar 4th, 2004 @ 9:59am

    Re: Malicious prosecution IS a civil action

    Yes, you're right, but it is the Easter Bunny of civil procedings. Search your local docket and you'll find it is one in a million.

    In the similarly rare category is a civil case for racketeering. The RIAA has triggered one such action, and SCO could find themselves staring one down if they continue.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This