> So there it is. It was not greed but fighting for survival that made them
> do
> it. Cornered with a slump in sales they signed a deal with the devil to
> stay
> alive, so to speak.
I think it raises some questions of business ethics. Is it ok for a
company to do *anything* in order to stay afloat? Was it ethical for SCO
to sue IBM based on non-existent Unix code in the Linux kernel? Was it
ethical for Microsoft to finance the SCO suit? I mean, SCO was just
trying to stay in business and the Microsoft money invested through
Baystar was just a way to keep the doors open long enough for a buyout.
That's ok, isn't it? Even if you destroy other companies in the process,
as long as you're still in business "it's all fair" is the message I'm
getting here.
v/r,
Rich Morgan
Open Addict.com
Linux + BSD 24/7
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked
Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages
posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 15:44:35 EDT