IBM Gives it to SCO (Code Turnover)

www.groklaw.net ^ | 2005-05-05 | www.groklaw.net

[N3WBI3]

Here's the Todd Shaughnessy affidavit [PDF] from IBM that Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells requested they file when they turned over all the code and paperwork to SCO, which we now find out happened on schedule on March 18.

[amigatec]

Ping Please!!

[Incorrigible]

Now we'll get to the truth! Not all input into Linux was voluntary!

[shadowman99]

9. In accordance with the Court's January 18, 2005 Order, IBM identified and extracted from CMVC all of the source code, documentation, and other information related to the AIX operating system, built an AIX server loaded with the appropriate version of CMVC along with the source code and documentation related to the AIX operating system, tested the system to ensure it was functional, and delivered and installed the server to allow access to SCO.

10. The server contained a fully functional version of the CMVC tool, one hundred percent (100%) of the source code in CMVC that is part of or related to AIX (including the operating system itself, development tools, documentation, and test programs) and one hundred percent (100%) of the documentation in CMVC that is related to AIX, including programmer's notes and design documents. One CMVC design document was redacted to protect attorney-client privileged information. After redaction, IBM was unable to restore the document into the database in electronic form. IBM produced the redacted version of the document along with the CMVC server. The code and documentation that IBM produced from CMVC represent more than 62 GB of data.

IBM delivered EVERYTHING requested during discovery. On a server. With instructions on how to search the code. IBM seems really scared. Quaking in their boots.

SCO, on the other hand, has delivered NONE of the discovery requested by IBM, in spite of two court orders. And SCO seems to have 'lost' 16,209 documents it declared in the privilege log.

You can hope and pray and wish something and that doesn't make it true. You can accuse IBM and Linux developers of being theives, but where's the beef?

[zeugma]

Now we'll get to the truth! Not all input into Linux was voluntary!

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Would you care to elaborate?

[ShadowAce]

[Salo]

Linus Torvalds turned me into a newt. I got better.

[ShadowAce]

Burn the witch! Burn the witch!

[shadowman99]

One more thing. If(When) SCO loses this case, are you man enough to apologize for accusing us of code theft?

[N3WBI3]

We will get to the truth when and *if* sco finds all their missing documents and complies with a court order to produce discovery for IBM...

[antiRepublicrat]

I think IBM is saying "Okay, that's it, NO MORE WHINING that you didn't get everything!" But as usual I don't think it'll work. SCO will find some other way to whine and delay.

And did you see that? 4,700 hours of work? At a total cost of, say, $60 an hour that's $282,000 just to comply with SCO's request, not counting consultants and lawyers.

And I wonder if they'll ever get that computer back.

[shadowman99]

That computer is evidence. It has been entered into the court record. If SCO does anything to modify the system or it's configuration, IBM could bitchslap SCO for tampering with evidence.

I bet IBM is hoping SCO digs out the hard drive and plugs it into another system. ;) In combination with SCO's behaivior to date, it would be "end of game".

[N3WBI3]

And I wonder if they'll ever get that computer back.

bwhahahahahaha great line..

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I wonder if the Exec lawyers know what to do with what they just got?

[shadowman99]

Remember back when SCO said they had a team of "MIT rocket scientists" do "spectral analysis" on Linux source code. That they found "millions of lines" of infringing lines of code.

Certainly SCO has more experts with such unique qualifications to help with IBM's disclosure.

Don't they?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

The only experts they would recognize are those that talk Fast!

Spectral Analysis???

Isn't that a Physics kind of thing?

ROFL!!

[ILurkedIRegisteredIPosted]

I hate to burst your bubble, but you're probably not going to get to become a member of Microsoft's Team 99 blogger group no matter how hard you try like this...

[Golden Eagle]

IBM delivered EVERYTHING requested during discovery.

No they didn't. They were supposed to turn over all email from their CEO regarding Linux, and no sooner had they made their submission did SCO have proof of an email that had been sent but wasn't included. You should now verify this on your own, retract your comment above, apologize for making it in the first place, and be careful not to do it again. That's the price for making unsubstantiated and incorrect comments on the forum, time to clean this place up a bit.

[Golden Eagle]

If(When) SCO loses this case, are you man enough to apologize for accusing us of code theft?

Do you have any proof of anyone saying that SCO was definitely going to win this case? In any event, this is only the first lawsuit that Linux will have to face, to think otherwise is laughable. How many lawsuits have IBM, Microsoft, Apple, HP/Compaq been through already? The industry has more of a recent history with litigation than any other. And Linux has a huge target on itself. The OSRM (open source resource management) group that employs Pamela Jones from Jokelaw and Bruce Perens has already admitted that Linux infringes on about 300 patents in the kernel alone. The only question is when those new lawsuits will begin, according to everyone, including Red Hat's CEO today. Your best hope is to have the laws here in the U.S. overturned completely. Which is exactly what these open source leaders like Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman want. Otherwise, better keep hiring lawyers.