Yahoo stock chart for SCO shows a big drop after the ruling in Novell case on Friday, 10 August 2007. It’s trading at about 30-something cents a share, whereas a Deutsch Bank analyst had predicted a value of about $50.00 a share at the start of the litigation. Dan Lyons of Forbes, Rob Enderle and Lara Didio, so called ‘analysts’, all ridiculed Pamela Jones and her blog Groklaw throughout the litigation for her repeated assertions that SCO didn’t have a very strong case. PJ maintained that she was neutral, and was just calling it as she saw it.
So how did the respected and widely quoted analysts and professional journalists from Forbes stack up against an amateur journalist (who also happens to be a paralegal) running her own blog?
First, how the case stands today, for those interested:
As reported on Groklaw 10 August 2007:
So we haven’t heard a peep out of: Rob Enderle or Maureen O’ Gara. Daniel Lyons seems to have forgotten his earlier predictions, too. And then there was that Yankee Group analyst Lara Didio. All the media respected ‘analysts’ turned out to be: wrong!
So just to remind all of what their positions were:
Dan Lyons: “In other words, like many religious folk, the Linux-loving crunchies in the open-source movement are a) convinced of their own righteousness, and b) sure the whole world, including judges, will agree.
They should wake up. SCO may not be very good at making a profit by selling software. (Last year the company lost $24.9 million on sales of $64.2 million.) But it is very good at getting what it wants from other companies. And it has a tight circle of friends…These guys in Utah are no dummies. The crunchies in the Linux community should be paying more attention. “
Laura Didio: SCO hired three separate teams of code experts, including a group from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. According to SCO, these groups all found code in Linux that purportedly originated in the Unix System V kernel and not BSD.
It now remains to be seen whether IBM and its teams of legal experts can refute the findings of SCO’s experts in court. Expect reams of documentation and lots of minutiae!!!! I’m glad I’m not the judge on this case. As an aside, I give SCO credit for getting the best legal and technical advice. Their attorney David Boies is top notch and spent 31 years working for IBM’s attorneys and you don’t find a group with more technical prowess than MIT (though the great minds at Stanford University in California would beg to differ!).
Seriously though, the fact that legal and technical experts of this calibre are willing to take SCO on says something. In an age of “experts for hire” it’s still questionable whether people of this calibre would lend their names to a case that lacked merit.
And what was SuSE saying when the litigation started:
From a Dan Lyons article, back in June of 2003: “SuSE Linux, a German company, claims customers aren’t scared by the SCO lawsuit. ‘Everyone has seen through this,’ a SuSE spokesman says.” Indeed.