An honest, complete, responsive, answer to Complaint paragraph 74 would have been something such as: IBM denies the averments of paragraph 74 as stated. IBM admits that Linux is a computer operating system and that it is popular among computer enthusiasts. IBM further admits that Linux is used on personal use, educational-based organization, and not-for-profit organization computers. IBM further states that Linux is an Unix-like operating system. Additionally, IBM states that Linux also is popular for server/enterprise computer systems. IBM denies that Linux is derived from Unix.
Although IBM in its 30 April court filing states that it does not have sufficient information to make such a responsive answer, that is 100% fabrication. Case in point is IBM's Linux Web-pages tree, Linux at IBM. (Link in the Resources section at the end of this article.) You will find more than sufficient information regarding just about every issue raised in SCO Complaint paragraphs 74 to 86 there.
Here is the lead-in paragraph for the Linux at IBM Web-pages tree:
That sure sounds as though IBM knows lots about Linux, or at least claims that it does -- certainly enough to either admit or to deny each allegation contained in SCO-Caldera Complaint paragraphs 74 through 86. IBM has more than enough information upon which it can form a belief as to the truth of each allegation contained in SCO-Caldera Complaint paragraphs 74 through 86.
Then at the bottom of the page it is written: Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds -- geeze IBM, that ought to provide some sort of clue to you that Linus Torvalds has something to do with the creation of Linux.
One of the links in that Linux at IBM Web-page tree is a link to a 3 March 2003 article, The Linux Uprising in Business Week. (Link in the Resources section at the end of this article.) There is lots of information there upon which IBM could have drawn to form a belief as to whether SCO-Caldera's allegations are true.
As those crafty trial lawyers say in court when they are exposing a lying witness, were you (IBM) lying now when you say you do not know anything about this stuff or were you lying when you published the Linux at IBM Web pages? Either way, IBM comes out a liar. (Please see the Note in the right sidebar.)
All IBM would have had to do to answer honestly the Complaint's allegation was to have looked at its own Web site. Heck, IBM should not even have to look there. IBM publishes that Web-page tree. Thus, it ought to know what is the content of its own Web site -- without needing to look.
Actually, IBM Chairman and CEO, Samuel J Palmisano, knows enough about Linux and open source software to honestly answer SCO-Caldera's Complaint without even needing to surf IBM's Web site. However, he apparently chose not to do so. For example, in an 8 May 2003 article, IBM chief hardsells Linux platform, Business Standard reports that:
Samuel J Palmisano . . . on a three-day visit to India, has raised the pitch for open source software, . . . with the information technology . . . minister, Arun Shourie, today in Delhi . . . Palmisano's hardsell of Linux was based on the advantages that the use of Linux can generate, especially cost savings compared with proprietary software such as Microsoft technologies.
"He [Palmisano] elucidated the benefits of using Linux . . . "Palmisano discussion [sic] with employees, customers and the government the importance of Linux and how it fits in with e-business on demand and the future of the it [sic] industry,"
Oh, and by the way for all you out of work Americans and about to be out of work Americans, here is where your jobs have gone and are going: The company [IBM] also wants to use its development centres [sic] in India to undertake key technology development work for its global requirements.
It's great that Sam Palmisano and IBM are doing such a terrific job of evangelizing and promoting Linux. This is just one of many reasons why the Linux community has pretty much lined up on IBM's side in its dispute with SCO-Caldera.
What is not so great is that IBM Chairman and CEO Sam Palmisano did not tell the truth in IBM's Answer to SCO's Caldera v IBM Complaint. If you are thinking that he is not responsible for IBM's Answer we believe he is.
Moreover, if Sam Palmisano is not personally tracking and approving IBM's defense moves in the SCO-Caldera lawsuit, he is being irresponsible and derelict in his duties. In the unlikely event that SCO might prevail in the lawsuit, IBM could face losing more than one-billion dollars to SCO. It also could lose it's contractual right to sell and support its Unix-based AIX operating system. Those possible outcomes certainly indicate that the SCO lawsuit is something that IBM Chairman and CEO Sam Palmisano should be monitoring very carefully.
Unfortunately, the law as it is now does not require corporate CEO's to verify under oath lawsuit complaints and answers. The U.S. government recently closed that loophole for corporate financial filings; now requiring CEO's to vouch for financial filing accuracy.
If corporate CEO's were required to verify under oath lawsuit complaints and answers, there likely would not be so many lies in SCO's Caldera v IBM Complaint. And IBM Chairman and CEO Sam Palmisano would have had to make a more honest Answer to SCO's Complaint. The law needs to be changed so as to require corporate CEO's to verify under oath lawsuit complaints and answers.
It's pretty much the same sort of evasive and dishonest IBM responses to Caldera's Complaint throughout much of the IBM Answer to Caldera's Compliant. Consider paragraph 75 for example:
Please remember that at the bottom of the Linux at IBM Web page it says: Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds -- geeze IBM, that ought to provide some sort of clue to you that Linus Torvalds has something to do with the creation of Linux.
One of the links in that Linux at IBM Web-page tree is a link to a 3 March 2003 article, The Linux Uprising in Business Week. (Link in the Resources section at the end of this article.) The matters of fact alleged in SCO-Caldera's Complaint paragraph 75 are all explained in that article -- an article of which IBM clearly is aware.
If you want to parse this Complaint paragraph it goes something like this:
So what IBM is saying here is that it does not know if (a) Unix is an operating system and (b) Linus Torvalds started the Linux thing. Ha!
Even more stupid and dishonest is IBM's claim here is that it does not know if Linux comes from the names (c) Linus and (d) Unix. Anyone that cannot make that connection is an idiot or a liar -- or both, a lying idiot!
Please see the first two parts of our series about SCO-Caldera's IP claims plus its intentions to enforce and license its intellectual property rights.
Related MozillaQuest Articles
SCO-Caldera v IBM: