SCO gets screwed (again)!
in [UK Linux]
|
Prev: Leave message utility in Fedora screensaver broken..?
Next: Ubuntu 10.04 - Change for change's sake?
From: Gordon Darling on 30 Mar 2010 18:58 <http://www.pcworld.com/article/192955/ jury_sides_with_novell_in_longrunning_sco_battle.html> Regards Gordon -- ox·y·mo·ron n. pl. ox·y·mo·ra or ox·y·mo·rons A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined, as in Microsoft Security, Microsoft Help and Microsoft Works.
From: spike1 on 31 Mar 2010 05:58 And verily, didst Gordon Darling <me(a)privacy.net> hastily babble thusly: > <http://www.pcworld.com/article/192955/ > jury_sides_with_novell_in_longrunning_sco_battle.html> Now now, I'd hardly say screwed. Screwed implies they were victims. They did it all to themselves. Fucked would be a better term, but there's no again in that, they've been fucked since 1996. -- | spike1(a)freenet.co,uk | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" | | Andrew Halliwell BSc | | | in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control | | Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
From: Daniel James on 2 Apr 2010 14:22 In article <4bb2822c$0$24121$afc38c87(a)read01.usenet4all.se>, Gordon Darling wrote: > <http://www.pcworld.com/article/192955/jury_sides_with_novell_in_longrunning_sco_battle.html> SCO? Haven't they gone bust yet? I don't see this as "SCO gets screwed" so much as "courts laugh in the face of SCO as they attempt ill-founded nuisance court actions". Cheers, Daniel.
From: unruh on 2 Apr 2010 15:38 On 2010-04-02, Daniel James <daniel(a)me.invalid> wrote: > In article <4bb2822c$0$24121$afc38c87(a)read01.usenet4all.se>, Gordon Darling wrote: >> <http://www.pcworld.com/article/192955/jury_sides_with_novell_in_longrunning_sco_battle.html> > > SCO? Haven't they gone bust yet? Yes, they have. It is now the court appointed trustee who is pushing the law suits. > > I don't see this as "SCO gets screwed" so much as "courts laugh in the face of SCO as they attempt ill-founded nuisance court actions". Something which takes 6 years to settle is hardly "the courts laugh in the face of SCO". > > Cheers, > Daniel. > >
From: Folderol on 2 Apr 2010 18:18
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 19:38:08 GMT unruh <unruh(a)wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> wrote: > On 2010-04-02, Daniel James <daniel(a)me.invalid> wrote: > > In article <4bb2822c$0$24121$afc38c87(a)read01.usenet4all.se>, Gordon Darling wrote: > >> <http://www.pcworld.com/article/192955/jury_sides_with_novell_in_longrunning_sco_battle.html> > > > > SCO? Haven't they gone bust yet? > > Yes, they have. It is now the court appointed trustee who is pushing the > law suits. > > > > > I don't see this as "SCO gets screwed" so much as "courts laugh in the face of SCO as they attempt ill-founded nuisance court actions". > > Something which takes 6 years to settle is hardly "the courts laugh > in the face of SCO". > > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel. The worst of all is that the perpetrators of this farce are apparently living very comfortably. The real instigators and fund managers remain hidden and out of reach, although I'm sure we can all guess who has the finance, and track record. -- Will J G |