|
|
| More IBM Subpoenas in the SCO Bankruptcy |
 |
|
Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 02:16 PM EDT
|
IBM has subpoenaed the following: Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Norfolk, Chad Kemp, Rene Beltran, and DTR Business Systems. This should be rich. The documents it would like the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Norfolk to provide are:
1. All documents concerning the expected testimony of Chad Kemp in connection with debtors' bankruptcy proceedings.
2. All documents concerning debtors and/or their products.
3. All documents concerning communications between SPAWAR (or anyone representing or affiliated with SPAWAR) and debtors, unXis, Stephen Norris or Stephen Norris Capital Partners (or anyone representing or affiliated with them). Chad Kemp and Rene Beltran were already deposed on July 13 and 15, respectively. Beltran, if you recall, signed as Executive Vice President of DTR, the letter to the Alan Raymond, VP at SCO, all about how vital SCO's products are to them. SCO then filed the letter with the bankruptcy court. Kemp is evidently the designated person to speak for SPAWAR. If you look at page 5 of this PDF, you'll find a Chad Kemp listed as speaking on ISEA/Tech Support at a "Navy Breakout". Here's some information on what ISEA stands for. If you recall, in that same bunch of letters about OpenServer's importance to the US Army, the letter's signee, David L. Dickerson, CISSP, a CACI contractor, said that "The OpenServer 5 UNIX operating system is used not only by the Army but also by all other US military services as well as many of the US Civil Agencies." Perhaps IBM would like to find out if that is true.
[ Update: I just checked the list of contracts SCO proposes to pass along to unXis, should that deal be approved, on the multi-parted Exhibit A and continued here, looking for a contract with the Army. The only contract even in the ballpark that I could find was this, on page 54 of Exhibit A, Part 3 [PDF]:
U.S. Department of Defense - U.S. Army Information Systems Command - Missile Command ... SOFT-02161 (Mar 6, 1992) SUB-02151A (Mar 6, 1992) - Framed Access Command Environment (Mar 6, 1992)
The DOD is also on the list for UNIX Instructional Workbench Software, Release 3.0 back in 1985. Then in part 6 [PDF], you'll find the Army quite a bit, but in each case, the contract is for UNIX System V. That's on pages 55 and 56. No OpenServer. The most recent contract I see is 1990. You'll find the Navy on pages 61, 62 and 63, but again only for UNIX System III and V.
It is such a voluminous filing, Exhibit A, it's possible I missed it, and if you notice it, let me know please. And I suppose they could get OpenServer from a third party, like Grumman. Except I see Grumman Aerospace on the list but only for UNIX. That's on page 8 of Part 5 [PDF]. This is indeed a mystery. - End update]
Beltran also was quoted in a SCO-DTR press release in 2005 when SCO announced it would "provide SCO resellers with pre-configured white box servers with SCO solutions". Beltran's quote: "We look forward to working with our SCO resellers to provide their customers with these white box solutions," said Rene Beltran, Executive Vice President of DTR Business Solutions, Inc. "Working with SCO and DTR, resellers will have a greater capability to deliver a higher standard of customer service with reliable SCO UNIX systems." The filings:
07/15/2009 - 836 - BNC Certificate of Mailing. (related document(s) 834 ) Service Date 07/15/2009. (Admin.) (Entered: 07/16/2009)
07/16/2009 - 837 - Subpoena directed to Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Norfolk. Filed by IBM Corp.. (McNeill, R. Stephen) (Entered: 07/16/2009)
07/16/2009 - 838 - Subpoena directed to Chad Kemp. Filed by IBM Corp.. (McNeill, R. Stephen) (Entered: 07/16/2009)
07/16/2009 - 839 - Subpoena directed to Rene Beltran. Filed by IBM Corp.. (McNeill, R. Stephen) (Entered: 07/16/2009)
07/16/2009 - 840 - Subpoena directed to DTR Business Systems, Inc.. Filed by IBM Corp.. (McNeill, R. Stephen) (Entered: 07/16/2009)
07/16/2009 - 841 - Notice of Service (related document(s) 837 , 838 , 839 , 840 ) Filed by IBM Corp.. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service) (McNeill, R. Stephen) (Entered: 07/16/2009)
I think we may see more subpoenas to come.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 02:25 PM EDT |
DTR is a longtime SCO distributor. They have sort of focused on Multi User
systems in the past. There also sell Micorsoft and RedHat.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 02:26 PM EDT |
| Stay tuned. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: nola on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 02:28 PM EDT |
Nazgul have saddled up.
This should be rich.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 02:29 PM EDT |
| Corrections thread.
---
For a successful technology, reality must take
precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled. --Richard Feynman [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Beltran's quote - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 02:41 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 02:30 PM EDT |
| Discuss News Picks.
---
For a successful technology, reality must take
precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled. --Richard Feynman [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 02:31 PM EDT |
| Discuss other topics.
---
For a successful technology, reality must
take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled. --Richard
Feynman [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 02:42 PM EDT |
Well I suppose that there are people in Moyock that
are *not* associated with Blackwater.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 03:08 PM EDT |
| I'm surprised that SCO hasn't moved to delay or stop these subpeona's [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 03:25 PM EDT |
That IBM use the system as SCO has, to (rightly in my opinion, but....) cause
difficulties for a project they disapprove of <gleeful, evil grin>[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 03:37 PM EDT |
Groklaw's post states, "... David L. Dickerson, CISSP, a CACI contractor,
said that "The OpenServer 5 UNIX operating system is used not only by the
Army but also by all other US military services as well as many of the US Civil
Agencies." Perhaps IBM would like to find out if that is true."
It is true. Why the services haven't moved faster to another operating system
for EKMS is beyond me. But there is an effort underway to replace EKMS. The
replacement will not use SCO software. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PolR on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 03:45 PM EDT |
If you recall, in that same bunch of letters about OpenServer's
importance to the US Army, the letter's signee, David L. Dickerson, CISSP, a
CACI contractor, said that "The OpenServer 5 UNIX operating system is used not
only by the Army but also by all other US military services as well as many of
the US Civil Agencies." Perhaps IBM would like to find out if that is
true.
So they want to know if this is true? Let's see. I imagine
how the deposition might go:
Nazgul: You wrote in this letter
OpenServer 5 Unix is used by all US military services as well as many US Civil
Agencies. Is that True?
Mr Dickerson: No.
Nazgul: Then why did you write
this letter?
Mr Dickerson: I thought it would have been a good practical
joke. My friends and I laughed for hours at the thought of what kind of funny
faces you would make when you read it.
Seriously, what would IBM
expect as an answer? If I were the Nazguls I would ask on what basis he wrote
what he wrote. Then the guy has better to show he knows what he talks about. If
the guy has to admit he made out stuff, the next line of questions is why he
wrote the letter then. Was he paid to write them? Was he promised some form on
compensation something in exchange for the letter? By whom?
I wonder what
are the legal consequences of writing the kind of letter he wrote without the
ability to back it up with facts. Is there a tort of some kind Dickerson may be
sued over? Without trying to intimidate Dickerson during the depositon, could
the Nazguls take Disckerson's lawyer apart and tell something like they have
evidence of a tort and if they ever find out reality doesn't agree with the
deposition they are going to sue? I don't know how these things work. I ask
about the possibilities.
Documents are being required. Other people are
being deposed. Dickerson doesn't know what IBM knows. You can bet that in the
deposition IBM asks a few questions they already know the answer. Performance
art is dangerous here. Was Dickerson prepared to this kind of stuff when he
wrote the letter? How will he react when in the hot seat?
Maybe I am
imagining things, but I am under the impression IBM is willing to pay more on
subpoenas than what they can hope to recover from a Chapter 7 liquidation of
SCOG. The reason is the information they are after is worth more than the money. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: overshoot on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 04:03 PM EDT |
I'm personally acquainted someone in the Army who oversees installations. SCOX
software is used on just about every Army base PX for point of sale.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 04:13 PM EDT |
They must know or think they know something about SCO's plan or actions that is
very damaging to someone.
I can see them deposing the purchaser to find out what went on in the
negotiations,
But this round of subpoena's seems to be directed at something else. The only
thing I can imagine is that there is some scheme or activity IBM has discovered
and they are looking into it to dot their "t"s and corss their
"i"s before the hearing.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 06:00 PM EDT |
A couple problems with using SCO products withing Government or DOD: it appears
that UnixWare (since v 2.x) and Openserver both lack Common Criteria Validation
and FIPS certification. In other words, neither Unixware nor OpenServer should
be purchases by (or deployed within) Government or DOD networks. It may be
interesting to get one of Novell's or IBM's lawyers to look into this.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 06:11 PM EDT |
Just noting that M Reynolds (and B Diessel) are entering for IBM. The Nazgul
gather force, and appears one from the dark realms of corporate fraud. Maybe
nothing, maybe a dark shadow on the land of SCOG, we shall see ...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: sscherin on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 06:27 PM EDT |
This must be SCO's derivative use theory in action again.
People in the Military eat at McDonalds on base..
McDonalds uses OpenServer 5..
Thus the Military depends on SCO products..[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: kawabago on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 08:45 PM EDT |
We've lots of doodoo so this must be unearthing the proverbial fan.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: webster on Thursday, July 16 2009 @ 11:12 PM EDT |
What is IBM up to?
The subpoenas to the Navy and others are more than a nuisance. They cause work
and make the recipients appreciate who they were acting for --SCO. It pins them
down for accuracy and truth. They can't easily come up with more or other
information later without looking incredible. They also have to say who asked
them to produce this, who put the words in their mouth. Was it SCO or some
partner of SCO or another large entity? They will have to explain the basis of
their comment --or retract it. As someone noted in this article, it shows a
trail. IBM can use it all to discredit the statement and undermine SCO's
argument on which it is based. Indeed the Navy may have a ready replacement for
the items, but maintain them since they function as well as ever. Presenting
this in support of the deal with Norris et al is also on the "trail"
that will help IBM show that Judge Gross ought to stop embarassing himself by
letting SCO snooker him with the "I've-almost-got-a-deal" Tease. It's
not an arms-length deal, and SCO is working both sides conniving with the other
side.
You can bet the Navy lawyers, lawyers for the other entities and parties had
something to say. The individuals may have to pay their own. They certainly
can't rely on the SCOnks or SCO lawyers to cover their own assETS. They will
think about their next favor for SCO.
They also might find a nice license that lets everyone off the hook.
~webster~[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 17 2009 @ 12:53 AM EDT |
From 1987 - 1996, for telecommunication purposes, it was AT&T Unix. I am
assuming the EKMS system, mentioned in an earlier post, was under the control of
NSA (Gawd).
krp[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 17 2009 @ 09:17 AM EDT |
Don't know if anyone has mentioned this already (looked and didn't see), about
letters and emails going out from DTR, but the discussion topic at the link
below is interesting.
SCO Group Inc has been SOLD Options [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 08:42 AM EDT |
I do recall in the early '90's setting up and using SCO Unix on x86 computers
for pushing email down to smaller Army units rather than having to rely on an
non-movable mainframe. You see an x86 can redeploy with a unit. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
