[linux-elitists] Info on SCO Lawsuit
Karsten M. Self
Thu May 29 14:05:55 PDT 2003
on Fri, May 30, 2003 at 04:22:33AM +1000, Jeff Waugh (email@example.com) wrote:
> <quote who="Karsten M. Self">
> > It would seem SCO admits here to licensing Novell's technology for SCO's
> > Unix products, and actually realizes little revenue from Unix licensing as
> > it is -- save the 5% "administration fee".
> The passage doesn't make the reality entirely clear - thi arrangement
> applies only to existing Novell licensors when the deal was struck. SCO
> just administers those payments (Novell wanted to continue making money on
> these licenses). New licensors pay full $$$ to SCO, and according to their
> Asia Pacific managing director, Kieran O'Shaughnessy, they're making a good
> sum on those.
It would be illuminating to get a comment from Novell about this.
This explanation also fails to account for why the 10K note describes
the activity as technology licensing rather than managing existing
Novell business relationships. Actually, re-reading the note, it's
vague on the point: "[SCO] acts as an administrative agent in the
collection of royalties for customers who deploy SVRx technology.". Is
the technology SCO's or Novell's? If it's SCO's, why isn't this
described in terms appropriate for managing ongoing business, rather
than (apparently) technology licensing?
Karsten M. Self <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
zIWETHEY: Provocative, super smart, and oh yeah, just a little sexy.
More information about the linux-elitists