Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 9th Oct 2006 17:30 UTC, submitted by JCooper
SCO, Caldera, Unixware A declaration by SCO's backer, BayStar has revealed that the software Giant Microsoft had more links to the anti-Linux bad-boy. The declaration made by from BayStar general partner Larry Goldfarb has turned up as part of IBM's evidence to the court. Goldfarb says that Baystar had been chucking USD 50 million at SCO despite concerns that it had a high cash burn rate. He also claims that former Microsoft senior VP for corporate development and strategy Richard Emerson discussed "a variety of investment structures wherein Microsoft would 'backstop', or guarantee in some way, BayStar's investment". Thanks to The Inq for the summary.
Thread beginning with comment 169993
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Groklaw?
by NotParker on Mon 9th Oct 2006 18:24 UTC
NotParker
Member since:
2006-06-01

Groklaw? You trust an article on Groklaw?

Very funny!

Sounds to me more like Larry Goldfarb is making stuff up to cover up incompetence.

50 million and no written guarantee? Get real.

Reply Score: -3

RE: Groklaw?
by deb2006 on Mon 9th Oct 2006 19:07 in reply to "Groklaw?"
deb2006 Member since:
2006-06-26

May I kindly ask why I shouldn't trust an article on Groklaw? You don't offer any substantial reason and therefore your posting seems to be more FUD than anything else.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Groklaw?
by TaterSalad on Mon 9th Oct 2006 14:20 in reply to "RE: Groklaw?"
TaterSalad Member since:
2005-07-06

Because PJ is not much of a journalist and has a strong bias against Microsoft. These are the reaons I do not visit Groklaw.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Groklaw?
by NotParker on Mon 9th Oct 2006 20:28 in reply to "RE: Groklaw?"
NotParker Member since:
2006-06-01

May I kindly ask why I shouldn't trust an article on Groklaw?

Pamela Jones (a pseudonym I think) the founder of Groklaw "took a job as director of litigation risk research at indemnification firm Open Source Risk Management in February 2004, but resigned in November 2004 after a speaker at a SCO road show in the UK suggested there was a conflict of interest in an anti-SCO campaigner working for a Linux indemnification firm."

http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=91D095F4-556D-4EB7-8...

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE: Groklaw?
by grat on Mon 9th Oct 2006 22:54 in reply to "Groklaw?"
grat Member since:
2006-02-02

Groklaw? You trust an article on Groklaw?

Very funny!


Yeah, 'cuz all Groklaw's got to go on is legal documents filed with the courts.

And in this case, it's just a sworn declaration of someone deposed by IBM.

Can't trust that at all.

Idiot.

Reply Parent Score: 0