2 ms·
Didn't Microsoft do this with SCO vs Linux though? In that case, it was big incumbent interested in squashing a scrappy start-up disrupting the industry. In a
by tacotuesday 11y ago
Didn't Microsoft do this with SCO vs Linux though? In that case, it was big incumbent interested in squashing a scrappy start-up disrupting the industry.
In a case like that, it seems like a tool to perpetuate economic inequality.
- cornellwright 11y agoYes, but how do you stop that? Isn't any investment in a company involved in litigation implicitly an investment in the litigation? (Or at least a bet that the litigation isn't material to their business.) The whole SCO vs IBM case was pretty unscrupulous, sleazy, and opportunistic, I agree. I'm not arguing that I have the solution to stop abuses like this. I'm saying that limiting financing is not it.
- JoshTriplett 11y ago> Yes, but how do you stop that? Not by limiting financing, but by recognizing and shutting down barratry and stunts.
- magila 11y agoMicrosoft only needed to go through SCO to hide their involvement in the case. If they hadn't cared about a possible DoJ investigation MS could have simply bought SCO and brought the suit themselves. Also, SCO's main lawsuit was against IBM, the complete opposite of a "scrappy start-up".