SCO vs. Linux: On the way from Aurora to ....

[...]

Now SCO had to admit in court that no comparison between the Linux and UNIX code had taken place before or after filing the lawsuit. Only an analysis made by software developers for internal use in 1999 existed. The public announcements of SCO CEO Darl McBride and others about thousands of copied lines of code were based on this analysis according to SCO. Because this analysis was done at a very early point in the development of Linux, SCO now demands a kind of road map from IBM, that shows any development efforts in AIX and Dynix (as successors of UNIX). Only then would a search for the incriminating code be possible.The court transcript reads:

"MR. FREI: What we need from IBM is the information that will constitute a road map, that will enable us to zero in on particular parts of Linux to compare with particular parts of Unix. That's what we need from IBM as to their AIX and Dynix contributions.

THE COURT: One might conclude, from some statements previously made, that a lot of these comparisons had already been done before the lawsuit was even filed.

MR. FREI: I believe that many of those statements referred to that 1999 report that you were just given, and that was when Linux was half the size of what it is now. That was when Linux was maybe two-and-a-half million -- 2.9 million lines, and now it's, I think, 5 million. So there's double the amount since then. There's everything that IBM put in since then. So I read those statements in IBM's brief. And most of them, if not all of them, seem to relate to what was done in that 1999 report."

In the hearing from September 15th, the SCO lawyers tried to explain the urgency of their request to the judge with an analogy. When you want to drive from Aurora, New York to Los Angeles, you need a road map to be able to start at all. After all there are no road signs in New York showing the way to LA. Similarly SCO needs a road map from IBM with all development branches to find the way by which Linux from IBM's software.

According to the logic of this argumentation, IBM is at fault that SCO is unable to find clear proof of the code theft and is still roaming around the streets of Aurora looking for help. That even the SCO lawyers have problems with this argumentation in court is shown by this passage, where SCO asks the judge for help:

"THE COURT: Mr. James.

MR. JAMES: Your Honor, I fear you turn the gun on me for standing up, and I didn't know where Aurora, New York was either.

THE COURT: What did you expect me to do when you stood up? I didn't think you were going out to go to the bathroom. I thought you were coming up to answer questions.

MR. JAMES: I thought you might tell me to sit down, candidly, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Stand up and tell me about this motion.

MR. JAMES: We desperately -- we need some help, Your Honor."

[...]

The whole transcript of the hearing can be found on Groklaw (sanitized because comments might get nasty).