m$ funded scos legal battle

http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween10.html , a memo that sco has said is authentic has surfaced , m$ has been the funds behind sco. Yes virginia m$ is run by greed and anticompetitive actions. A tid bit :

I realize the last negotiations are not as much fun, but Microsoft will
have brough in $86 million for us including Baystar. The next deal we
should be able to get from $16-20, but it will be brutial as it is for
go to makerket work and some licences. I know we can do this


ps. do YOUR homework pooh, i know what i am talking about

Hmmm, how did I have this strange feeling MS might be behind this? I mean Linux is a serious threat to MS's power, and SCO is just the right player that is the third man out that can be the bad guy in case something goes wrong. Maybe this is another "off the balance sheet partner..." and the conspiracy thoery ensues.

Thanks for the info on that.

And oh yeah. SCO sucks balls.

Hmmm.......................

1. Contempt of court? M$ are supposed to behave?

2. Time M$ was broken up under anti-trust legislation..............they got a reprieve..............now full sentence is due?.........Gates and his hangers on need the stock to nosedive to bring them into reality

"A leopard does not change its spots?"

and "scum always rises to the surface?"

Oh Well....................welcome to laissez faire capitalism?

Cheers

Quote:

---

ps. do YOUR homework pooh, i know what i am talking about

---

What in god's name are you talking about? I never even knew about this until an hour ago?

I don't think M$ is crazy enough to do this. If this is true, I don't think the general public would accept it at all.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by pooh sun tzu
What in god's name are you talking about? I never even knew about this until an hour ago?

---

it was in response to your "do your homework" comment on an ap assingment for calling M$ business based off of greed.

lumpy, you can't possibly tell me you have forgotten MS is split into two seperate entities... right?
So thus I must also assume since you have not forgotten, you are already aware that the one side alone will be held accountable? And it is "Microsoft", not M$. Both you and I are well aware of your ability to write proper English. No need to insult one another, because if you did do your homework it would also have entailed the study of when Microsoft split up and into how many segments the company operates seperately.

I'm not saying the segment of Microsoft that did this was in the right. In fact it has upset me very much. But you can't lump completely different branches of a company, which were seperated by law, into a singular "M$ IS SUXOR" when only one branch is at fault.

I had no idea MS was seperated into two entities. I will have to look that up.

alittlebitnumb: A few resources to get you started:

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-241578.html?legacy=cnet

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/in_depth...oft/645918.stm

I was under the impression that the breakup never happened.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/microsoft/...548139,00.html
:cool:

It looks like appeal after appeal before this case goes before the Supreme Court... I cannot see MS sitting quietly. After all, they still dominate.

rcgreen:

Nice catch :) That's all I can find on it for any news regarding their breakup so thanks for the link. Any more information/documents I can read over? Thanks!