Newsgroup: it.fan.marco-ditri
Titolo: Che gentaglia!!!

Nel fausto dě di Wed, 03 Mar 2004 15:48:21 +0100, il prode _Michele Nicosia_
presente alla corte di _it.fan.marco-ditri_
cosě ebbe l'ardire di pronunziarsi:
| 
http://news.com.com/2100-1014-5168921.html
|
  Oh beh:
The sales situation
Separately, SCO announced on Wednesday a wider loss for its fiscal first
quarter. It said its net loss, after paying preferred dividends, was $2.25
million, or 16 cents per share, compared with a loss of $724,000, or 6 cents
per share, a year earlier.
Revenue for the quarter, which ended Jan. 31, fell to $11.4 million from $13.5
million in the same period a year ago.
One analyst--the only one listed by Thomson First Call, which surveys
financial expectations--had predicted that SCO would turn in a loss of 22
cents per share for the quarter. Revenue projections for SCO from a pair of
analysts were for $10 million and $14.4 million.
But SCO's efforts to sell licenses haven't made many gains. In the quarter,
SCO garnered $20,000 in revenue from its SCOsource effort to license its
intellectual property to Linux users, an amount dwarfed by the $3.4 million in
SCOsource expenses.
  Ad occhio e croce potrebbero non avere il fiato necessario per arrivare al
verdetto senza doversi prima rammendare i calzoni.
  Sandro
-- 
"In a world without walls and fences
you would not need windows and gates."
(Confucius)

 SCOsource expenses.
Questo significa che qualcuno ha pagato SCO licenze Linux?????????????

Nel fausto dě di Wed, 3 Mar 2004 21:58:12 +0000 (UTC), il prode _Antonio Gallo_
presente alla corte di _it.fan.marco-ditri_
cosě ebbe l'ardire di pronunziarsi:

  Probabilmente un nipote di Zio Darl!  :-)


Nel fausto dě di Wed, 03 Mar 2004 15:48:21 +0100, il prode _Michele Nicosia_
presente alla corte di _it.fan.marco-ditri_
cosě ebbe l'ardire di pronunziarsi:
| 
http://news.com.com/2100-1014-5168921.html
|
  Ah, leggete un po' qui:
http://slashdot.org/articles/04/03/04/0049203.shtml
Judge Orders SCO, IBM To Produce Disputed Code
  Ora voglio vedere cosa s'inventano.


 Questo significa che qualcuno ha pagato SCO licenze Linux?????????????
Questa fonte propone un memorandum interno di SCO dal quale si evincono
informazioni sui passaggi di denaro da Microsoft a SCO nell'ottobre
2003. L'attendibilità è da valutare attentamente.
http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween10.html
Blau

 Questo significa che qualcuno ha pagato SCO licenze Linux?????????????
A me sembra che qualcuno sia stato pagato per comprare le licenze sco
(che tra l'altro sono del tutto ipotetiche):
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1542043,00.asp
-- 
Vincenzo

Nel fausto dì di Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:38:05 +0100, il prode _Blau_
presente alla corte di _it.fan.marco-ditri_
così ebbe l'ardire di pronunziarsi:
|
| Questa fonte propone un memorandum interno di SCO dal quale si evincono
| informazioni sui passaggi di denaro da Microsoft a SCO nell'ottobre
| 2003. L'attendibilità è da valutare attentamente.
|
| 
http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween10.html
[...]
This continues to be SCO's party line. Their response acknowledges that the
memo is authentic but claims that Anderer  the consultant they hired to find,
handle, and brief the Board Of Directors about this kind of Transaction (see
the Statement of Work in his contract with SCO), was mistaken about the deal.
They would have us believe that Anderer wrote this memo to Chris Sontag
expecting to collect a commission for bringing in Microsoft on a deal that,
according to SCO, didn't involve Microsoft at all.
SCO's response is of the form "the memo is genuine, but..." It's a valiant
attempt to put something after the "but" that might possibly make some sort of
difference, but...they are rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic when they
quibble about the specifics. OK, Perhaps Blake Stowell isn't lying through his
teeth, but was kept out of the loop so he could honestly deny all knowledge of
Microsoft's involvement. If so, we wonder what else SCO's director of PR
doesn't know...
  A quanto pare, l'autenticità è confermata.


  Godetevi anche questa:
http://news.com.com/2100-7344_3-5170073.html
  Metadata di un documento uord SCO indica che avessero intenzione di portare
in tribunale la "Bank of America" e Linus Torvalds:
«In the original version that listed Bank of America as a defendant, the focus
was copyright infringement and violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright
Act, which would be the domain of the federal courts.
[...]
In the original version identifying Bank of America as a defendant, the
document also included these allegations against the bank and Linux
developers, including leading Linux figure Linus Torvalds:
[...]
 "(C)ertain of plaintiff's copyrighted software code has been materially or
exactly copied by Linus Torvalds and/or others for inclusion into one or more
distributions of Linux with the copyright management information intentionally
removed."»
