View source for SCO Group

{{short description|Defunct American software company}}
{{About|the owners of the SCO name beginning 2002|the original SCO company|Santa Cruz Operation}}
<!-- Specific dab to cover difference reader may be unaware of -->
{{Use mdy dates|date=December 2021}}
{{Infobox company
| name = The SCO Group, Inc.
| logo = SCO Group logo.svg
| image = SCO Group offices in Linden Utah December 2002.jpg
| image_caption = Headquarters office in [[Lindon, Utah]], featuring the new SCO logo, pictured in December 2002
| type = [[Public company|Public]]
| traded_as = {{NASDAQ was|SCOX}} (later pink sheets as SCOXQ.PK)
| founder = <!-- none -->
| foundation = 2002
| location_city = [[Lindon, Utah]]
| location_country = United States
| locations = {{ubl|[[Murray Hill, New Jersey|Murray Hill]]/[[Florham Park, New Jersey]]|[[Santa Cruz, California|Santa Cruz]]/[[Scotts Valley, California]]|[[Delhi, India]]|several regional offices}}
| key_people = {{ubl|
[[Darl McBride]], CEO |
[[Ralph Yarro III]], Chairman |
Ken Nielsen, CFO |
Ryan E. Tibbitts, General Counsel |
Chris Sontag, head of SCOsource |
Jeff Hunsaker, President of SCO Operations Inc |
Sandy Gupta |
Andy Nagle
}}
| successor = [[Xinuos|UnXis/Xinuos]]
| fate = {{ubl|2011, sold off Unix and mobility assets, existed only via bankruptcy trustee|2012, filed for Chapter 7 liquidation}}
| defunct = 2012
| num_employees = {{ubl|340 (peak, 2003)|63 (2009)}}
| industry = [[Computer software]]
| products = {{ubl|[[UnixWare]]|[[OpenServer]]|SCOoffice Server|Me Inc. mobility products|SCO Mobile Server| HipCheck}}
| revenue = {{ubl|$79 million (peak, 2003)|$16 million (2008)}}
| net_income = {{ubl|$3.4 million (peak, 2003)|$−8.7 million (2008)}}
| homepage = {{URL|www.sco.com}}
}}
'''The SCO Group''' (often referred to '''SCO''' and later called '''The TSG Group''') was an American software company in existence from 2002 to 2012 that became known for owning [[Unix operating system]] assets that had belonged to the [[Santa Cruz Operation]] (the original SCO), including the [[UnixWare]] and [[OpenServer]] technologies, and then, under CEO [[Darl McBride]], pursuing a series of high-profile legal battles known as the [[SCO–Linux controversies]].

The SCO Group began in 2002 with a renaming of [[Caldera International]], accompanied by McBride becoming CEO and a major change in business strategy and direction.  The SCO brand was re-emphasized, and new releases of UnixWare and OpenServer came out.  The company also attempted some initiatives in the e-commerce space with the SCOBiz and SCOx programs.  In 2003, the SCO Group claimed that the increasingly popular free [[Linux]] operating system contained substantial amounts of Unix code that [[IBM]] had improperly put there.  The [[SCOsource]] division was created to monetize the company's intellectual property by selling Unix license rights to use Linux.  The ''[[SCO v. IBM]]'' lawsuit was filed, asking for billion-dollar damages and setting off one of the top technology battles in the history of the industry.  By a year later, four additional lawsuits had been filed involving the company.

Reaction to SCO's actions from the [[free and open-source software community]] was intensely negative, and the general IT industry was not enamored of the actions either.  SCO soon became, as ''[[Businessweek]]'' headlined, "The Most Hated Company in Tech".  SCO Group stock rose rapidly during 2003, but then SCOsource revenue became erratic and the stock began a long fall.  Despite the industry's attention to the lawsuits, SCO continued to maintain a product focus as well, putting out a major new release of OpenServer that incorporated the UnixWare kernel inside it.  SCO also made a major push in the burgeoning [[smartphone]]s space, launching the Me Inc. platform for mobility services.  But despite these actions, the company steadily lost money and shrank in size.

In 2007, SCO suffered a major adverse ruling in the ''[[SCO v. Novell]]'' case that rejected SCO's claim of ownership of Unix-related copyrights and undermined much of the rest of its legal position.  The company filed for [[Chapter 11, Title 11, United States Code|Chapter&nbsp;11 bankruptcy protection]] soon after and attempted to continue operations.  Its mobility and Unix software assets were sold off in 2011, to McBride and [[UnXis]] respectively.  Renamed to The TSG Group, the company converted to [[Chapter 7, Title 11, United States Code|Chapter&nbsp;7 bankruptcy]] in 2012.  A portion of the ''SCO v. IBM'' case continued on until 2021, when a settlement was reached for a tiny fraction of what the SCO Group had initially sued for.

== Initial history ==
=== Background ===
[[File:Mount Timpanogos and Utah Valley, Utah (67181503).jpg|thumb|right|The Utah Valley was where Novell, Caldera, and the Canopy Group were all based, each of which would play a part in the story of The SCO Group, also based there]]
{{main|Santa Cruz Operation|Caldera International}}
The [[Santa Cruz Operation]] had been an American software company, founded in 1979 in [[Santa Cruz, California]], that found success during the 1980s and 1990s selling [[Unix]]-based operating system products for [[Intel x86]]-based server systems.  SCO built a large community of [[value-added reseller]]s that eventually became 15,000 strong and many of its sales of its [[SCO OpenServer]] product to small and medium-sized businesses went through those resellers.  In 1995, SCO bought the [[System V Release 4]] and [[UnixWare]] business from [[Novell]] (which had two years earlier acquired the [[AT&T]]-offshoot [[Unix System Laboratories]]) to improve its technology base.  But beginning in the late 1990s, SCO faced increasingly severe competitive pressure, on one side from Microsoft's [[Windows NT]] and its successors and on the other side from the free and open source [[Linux]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=SCO UnixWare Operating System |url=https://www.bus.umich.edu/kresgepublic/journals/gartner/research/90000/90038/90038.html |access-date=2020-06-03 |publisher=University of Michigan |archive-date=May 1, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170501153120/http://www.bus.umich.edu/KresgePublic/Journals/Gartner/research/90000/90038/90038.html |url-status=dead}}</ref>  In 2001, the Santa Cruz Operation sold its rights to Unix and its SCO OpenServer and UnixWare products to [[Caldera International]].

Caldera, based in [[Orem, Utah]],<ref name="sublease">{{cite web |url=https://contracts.onecle.com/sco/south520.lease.2002.01.10.shtml |title=SCO Group Inc. Contracts: Office Sublease ... January 10, 2002 |publisher=Onecle |access-date=November 2, 2019}}</ref> was founded in 1994 by several former Novell employees who saw promise in Linux as a technology and failed to convince Novell management to move forward with it.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/ransom-love-back-to-the-linux-future/ | title=Ransom Love: Back to the Linux future | author-first=Stephen | author-last=Shankland | publisher=ZDNet | date= November 21, 2003}}</ref> Caldera's early funding came from [[Ray Noorda]], the former CEO of Novell, and the [[Utah Valley]]-based [[Canopy Group]] investment fund that Noorda started for high-technology firms.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/76090532/ | title=Norda Founds Firm in Utah to Help Companies Market High-Tech Ideas | agency=Associated Press | newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune | date=June 22, 1995 | page=B-4 | via=Newspapers.com}}</ref> The company had been in the business of selling its [[Caldera OpenLinux]] product but had never been profitable. It attempted to make a combined business out of Linux and Unix but failed to make headway and had suffered continuing financial difficulties.  By June 2002, after it had moved to nearby [[Lindon, Utah|Lindon]],<ref name="sublease" /> its stock was facing a second delisting notice from NASDAQ and the company had less than four months' cash for operations.<ref name="Wired"/>  As ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'' magazine later wrote, the company "faced a nearly hopeless situation."<ref name="Wired">{{cite news |url=https://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.07/linux.html |title=The Linux Killer |magazine=[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]] |date=July 2004 |author-first=Brad |author-last=Stone}}</ref>

On June 27, 2002, Caldera International had a change in management, with [[Darl McBride]], formerly an executive with [[Novell]], [[FranklinCovey]], and several start-ups, taking over as CEO from Caldera co-founder Ransom Love.<ref name="cw-darl">{{cite news |url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2575775/caldera-ceo-steps-aside-to-focus-on-unitedlinux.html |title=Caldera CEO steps aside to focus on UnitedLinux |author-first=Todd R. |author-last=Weiss |magazine=Computerworld |date=June 27, 2002}}</ref><ref name="cnet-darl">{{cite news |url=https://www.cnet.com/news/struggling-linux-company-swaps-ceos/ |title=Struggling Linux company swaps CEOs |author-first=Stephen |author-last=Shankland |publisher=CNET | date=June 27, 2002}}</ref>

=== Back to a SCO name ===
Change under McBride happened quickly.  On August 26, 2002, he announced at the company's annual [[SCO Forum|Forum conference]]{{snd}} relocated from Santa Cruz to Las Vegas{{snd}} that Caldera International was changing its name to The SCO Group.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2578171/sco-name-returns-as-caldera-rebrands-itself.html |title=SCO name returns as Caldera rebrands itself |author-first=Todd R. |author-last=Weiss |magazine=Computerworld |date=August 26, 2002}}</ref>  He did this via a multimedia display in which an image of Caldera was shattered and replaced by The SCO Group's logo, which was a slightly more stylized version of the old Santa Cruz Operation logo.<ref name="lj-namechange-1">{{cite news | url=https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6292 | title=A Rose by Any Other Name—Is It Still the Same? | author-first=Jeff | author-last=Gerhardt | magazine=Linux Journal | date=August 27, 2002}}</ref>  The attendees at the conference, most of whom were veteran SCO partners and resellers, responded to the announcement with enthusiastic applause.<ref name="lj-namechange-1"/><ref name="reg-namechange"/>  McBride announced, "SCO is back from the dead", and a story in ''[[The Register]]'' began simply: "SCO lives again."<ref name="reg-namechange"/> As part of this, the company adopted SCOX as its trading symbol.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.deseret.com/2002/8/27/19674115/caldera-international-plans-name-change-to-sco-group |title=Caldera International plans name change to SCO Group |newspaper=Deseret News |date=August 27, 2002}}</ref>{{notetag|The final legal aspects of the name change did not become complete until May 2003.<ref name="jdk-113-rn">{{cite web |url=http://ftp.sco.com/pub/unixware7/714/other/java_131_13/ReleaseNotes.html |title=Release Notes: Java 2, Standard Edition, v. 1.3.1_13 for SCO UNIX Operating Systems |publisher=Xinuos |date=June 15, 2004 |access-date=December 26, 2021 |archive-date=March 21, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220321210148/http://ftp.sco.com/pub/unixware7/714/other/java_131_13/ReleaseNotes.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>}}

The change back to a SCO-based name reflected recognition of the reality that almost all of the company's revenue was coming from Unix, not Linux, products.<ref name="starts"/>  For instance, [[McDonald's]] had recently expanded its usage of OpenServer from 4,000 to 10,000 stores; indeed, both OpenServer and UnixWare were strong in the replicated sites business.<ref name="starts"/>  Furthermore the SCO brand was better known than the Caldera one, especially in Europe, and SCO's large, existing reseller and partner channel was resistant to switching to Caldera's product priorities.<ref name="reg-namechange">{{cite news | url=https://www.theregister.com/2002/08/27/sco_lives_caldera_reinvents_itself/ | title=SCO lives! Caldera reinvents itself under the old brand | author-first=Gavin | author-last=Clarke | agency=ComputerWire | website=The Register | date=August 27, 2002}}</ref>

[[Image:Strategy discussion at The SCO Group in Linden Utah December 2002.jpg|thumb|left| A high-level strategy meeting being held among executives, product managers, and engineering personnel of The SCO Group, in the company's Lindon, Utah offices in December 2002]]

McBride emphasized that the OpenServer product was still selling: "What is it with the OpenServer phenomenon? We can't kill it. One customer last month bought $4&nbsp;million in OpenServer licenses. The customers want to give us money for it. Why don't we just sell it?"<ref name="reg-namechange"/>  As a historical comparison for his strategy of building back up the brand and being more responsive to customers, McBride used a model of the [[Harley-Davidson#Restructuring and revival|revival of the Harley-Davidson brand]] in the 1980s.<ref name="lj-namechange-2"/>  Besides McBride, other company executives, including new senior vice president of technology Opinder Bawa, were heavily involved in the change of direction.<ref name="reg-namechange"/>

The product name Caldera OpenLinux became "SCO Linux powered by UnitedLinux" and all other Caldera branded names were changed as well.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.osnews.com/story/1615/caldera-changes-name-to-the-sco-group-plans-sco-linux-40/ |title=Caldera Changes Name to the SCO Group, Plans SCO Linux 4.0 |author-first=Eugenia |author-last=Loli |work=OSNews |date=August 26, 2002}}</ref>
In particular, the longstanding UnixWare name{{snd}} which Caldera had changed to Open UNIX{{snd}} was restored,<ref name="reg-namechange"/> such that what had been called Open UNIX&nbsp;8 was now named in proper sequence as UnixWare 7.1.2.  Announcements were made that a new OpenServer release, 5.0.7, and a new UnixWare release, 7.1.3, would appear at the end of the year or beginning of the next.<ref name="reg-namechange"/><ref name="eweek-namechange"/>  Moreover, through a new program called SCO Update, more frequent updates of capabilities were promised beyond that.<ref name="eweek-namechange"/>  Caldera's Volution Messaging Server product was retained and renamed SCOoffice Server,<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.cnet.com/news/scos-linux-grabs-for-microsoft-e-mail/ |title=SCO's Linux grabs for Microsoft e-mail |author-first=Stephen |author-last=Shankland |publisher=[[CNET]] |date=January 22, 2003}}</ref> but the other Caldera Volution products were split off under the names Volution Technologies, Center&nbsp;7, and finally Vintela.<ref name="vol-tech">{{cite web |url=https://searchdatacenter.techtarget.com/answer/Authenticating-Linux-with-LDAP |title=Authenticating Linux with LDAP |publisher=[[TechTarget]] |date=March 3, 2003 |access-date=December 26, 2021 |archive-date=August 24, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170824181422/http://searchdatacenter.techtarget.com/answer/Authenticating-Linux-with-LDAP |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="osn-davewilson">{{cite news |url=https://www.osnews.com/story/9030/interview-with-vintelas-president/ |title=Interview with Vintela's President |author-first=David |author-last=Adams |publisher=[[OSNews]] |date=November 30, 2004}}</ref>
{{clear}}

=== Software releases and e-commerce initiatives SCOBiz and SCOx ===
[[Image:Bellingham data center building 2003.jpg|thumb|right|As part of the SCOBiz joint initiative, executives from The SCO Group and Vista.com inspect the latter's data center operations in Bellingham in January 2003]]

In addition to reviving SCO's longtime operating system products, the SCO Group also announced a new venture, SCOBiz.<ref name="eweek-namechange"/>   SCOBiz was a collaboration with the [[Bellingham, Washington]]-based firm Vista.com, founded in 1999 by John Wall,<!--in 2005 merged with Innuity, Inc. --> in which SCO partners could sell Vista.com's online, web-based e-commerce development and hosting service targeted at small and medium-sized businesses.<ref name="eweek-namechange"/>  More importantly, as part of SCOBiz, the two companies would develop a [[SOAP]]- and [[XML]]-based [[web services]] interface to enable Vista.com e-commerce front-ends to communicate with existing back-end SCO-based applications.<ref name="reg-namechange"/>  Industry analysts were somewhat skeptical of the chances for SCOBiz succeeding, as the market was already crowded with [[application service provider]] offerings and the [[dot-com bubble]] had already burst by that point.<ref name="reg-namechange"/><ref name="lj-namechange-2"/>

Lastly, SCO announced a new program for partners, called SCOx.<ref name="eweek-namechange"/> A key feature of SCOx was a buyout option that allowed SCOx solution providers to sell their businesses back to SCO.<ref name="eweek-namechange">{{cite news | url=https://www.eweek.com/servers/caldera-renames-itself-sco-group/ | title=Caldera Renames Itself SCO Group | author-first=Peter | author-last=Galli | magazine=eWeek | date=August 26, 2002}}</ref>  McBride stated that the program would give partners a chance at "living the American dream".<ref name="reg-namechange"/>

The company's financial hole was emphasized when it released its results for the fiscal year ending October 31, 2002{{snd}} it had lost $25&nbsp;million on revenues of $64&nbsp;million.<ref name="starts"/>

The previously announced operating system releases began appearing, beginning with a Linux release.  Caldera International had been one of the founders of the [[United Linux]] initiative, along with [[SUSE S.A.|SuSE]], [[Conectiva]], and [[Turbolinux]], and the newly-named SCO Linux 4 came out in November 2002, in conjunction with each of the other vendors releasing their versions of the United Linux&nbsp;1.0 base.<ref name="iw-sl4">{{cite news | title=Comdex: SuSE, SCO quick to jump on UnitedLinux bandwagon; Ximian also throws its weight behind UnitedLinux 1.0 | magazine=InfoWorld | date= November 20, 2002 | via= Gale General OneFile <!-- (accessed October 31, 2021). --> | url= https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A94585123/ITOF?u=wikipedia&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=32d1d026 | author-first=Ed | author-last=Scannell}}</ref>  The SCO product was targeted towards the small-to-medium business market, whereas the SuSE product was aimed at the enterprise segment and Conectiva and Turbolinux were intended mostly for the South American and Asian markets.<ref name="iw-sl4"/>  The common United Linux base (which mostly came from a SuSE code origin), and the promise of common certification across all four products, attracted some support from hardware and software vendors such as IBM, HP, Computer Associates, and SAP.<ref name="iw-sl4"/><ref name="eweek-sl4"/>  An assessment of SCO Linux&nbsp;4 in ''[[eWeek]]'' found that it was a capable product, although the [[Webmin]] configuration tool was seen as limited when compared to [[YaST]], SuSE's own operating system configuration tool.<ref name="eweek-sl4">{{cite news | url=https://www.eweek.com/servers/sco-linux-4-is-rough-around-the-edges-but-shows-promise/ | title=SCO Linux 4 Is Rough Around the Edges but Shows Promise | author-first=Jason | author-last=Brooks | magazine=eWeek | date=January 6, 2003}}</ref>  In terms of service and support, SCO pledged to field a set of escalation engineers that would only be handling SCO Linux issues.<ref name="iw-sl4"/>

The new Unix operating system releases then came out.  UnixWare 7.1.3 was released in December 2002, which featured improved Java support, the [[Apache Web Server]] framework, and improvements to the previously developed Linux Kernel Personality (LKP) for running Linux applications.<ref name="adt-uw713">{{cite news | url=https://adtmag.com/articles/2002/12/04/sco-brings-back-unixware.aspx | title=SCO brings back UnixWare | author-first= Michael W. | author-last=Bucken | magazine=Application Development Trends | date=December 4, 2002}}</ref>  In particular, the SCO Group stated that due to superior multiprocessor performance and reliability, Linux applications could run better on UnixWare via LKP than they could on native Linux itself,<ref name="adt-uw713"/> a stance that dated back to Santa Cruz Operation/Caldera International days.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/08/22/scaldera_vows_a_better_linux/ |title=Scaldera vows a better Linux than Linux |author-first=Andrew |author-last=Orlowski |work=The Register |date=August 22, 2000}}</ref> One review, that found UnixWare 7.1.3 lacking in a number of other respects, called LKP "the most impressive of UnixWare's capabilities".<ref name="osn=uw713"/>  SCO OpenServer 5.0.7 was released in February 2003; the release emphasized enhanced hardware support, including new graphic, network and HBA device drivers, support for [[USB&nbsp;2.0]], improved and updated [[Uniform Driver Interface|UDI]] support, and support for several new Intel and Intel-compatible processors.<ref>{{cite press release | title=SCO Ships SCO OpenServer Release 5.0.7 | publisher=PR Newswire | date= February 24, 2003 | url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/446983603 | id={{ProQuest|446983603}}}}</ref>

The SCOx [[software framework]] was announced in April 2003;<!-- ... so this initial SCOx is NJ work, *before* S and B join ... but it is after the lawsuits start --> its aim was to enable the SCO developer and reseller community to be able to connect web services and web-based presentation layers to the over 4,000 different applications that ran small and midsize businesses and branch offices.<ref name="crn-scox-first">{{cite news | url=https://www.crn.com/news/channel-programs/18823566/sco-group-to-roll-out-web-services-framework.htm | title=SCO Group To Roll Out Web Services Framework | author-first= Paula | author-last=Rooney | publisher=CRN News | date=April 30, 2003}}</ref>  The web services aspect of SCOx included bundled SOAP/XML support for the Java, C, C++, PHP, and Perl languages.<ref name="nw-scox-first"/>  A primary target of the SCOx framework was SCOBiz e-commerce integration, although other uses were possible as well.<ref name="crn-scox-first"/>  The planned SCOx architecture overall was composed of layers for e-business services, web services, SSL-based security, a mySCO reseller portal, hosting services, and a [[software development kit]].<ref name="nw-scox-first">{{cite news | url=https://www.networkworld.com/article/2342039/sco-web-enables-apps-for-small-enterprises.html | title=SCO Web-enables apps for small enterprises | author-first=Mark | author-last=Gibbs | magazine=Network World | date=May 14, 2003}}</ref>

But by then, these software releases and e-commerce initiatives had become overshadowed by legal actions.

== In the courts ==
=== A focus on intellectual property ===
As soon as McBride became the head of Caldera International, he became interested in what intellectual property the company possessed.<ref name="lj-namechange-2"/>  He had been a manager at Novell in 1993<ref name="lj-namechange-2"/> when Novell had bought Unix System Laboratories, and all of its Unix assets, including copyrights, trademarks, and licensing contracts, for $335&nbsp;million.<ref name="lat-novell">{{cite news | url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-12-22-fi-2406-story.html | title=Technology | newspaper=Los Angeles Times | date=December 22, 1992 | access-date=March 28, 2021 | archive-date=January 16, 2017 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170116183938/http://articles.latimes.com/1992-12-22/business/fi-2406_1_networking-technology | url-status=live }}</ref>  Novell had subsequently sold its Unix business to the Santa Cruz Operation, which had then sold it to Caldera.  So in 2002, McBride said he had thought: "In theory, there should be some value to that property – somewhere between a million and a billion [dollars], right? I just wanted to know what real, tangible intellectual property value the company held."<ref name="lj-namechange-2">{{cite news | url=https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6293 | title=Geeks on Bikes: The SCO Group/Caldera Product Development Plan| author-first=Jeff | author-last=Gerhardt | magazine=Linux Journal | date=August 28, 2002}}</ref>  Shortly before the name change to SCO, Caldera went through its existing license agreements, found some that were not being collected upon, and came to arrangements with those licensees representing some $600,000 in annual revenue.<ref name="lj-namechange-2"/>

In particular, from the start of his time as CEO, McBride had considered the possibility of claiming ownership of some of the code within Linux.<ref name="bw-hated"/>  Outgoing Caldera CEO Ransom Love had told him: "Don't do it. You don't want to take on the entire Linux community."<ref name="bw-hated"/>  During the August 2002 name change announcement, Bawa stated: "We own the source to UNIX; it's that simple. If we own the source, we are entitled to collect the agreed license fees."<ref name="lj-namechange-2"/>  But at the time, McBride said he had no intention of taking on Linux.<ref name="lj-namechange-2"/>

By October 2002, McBride had created an internal organization "to formalize the licensing of our intellectual property"; this effort was provisionally called SCO Tech.<ref name="starts">{{cite news |url=https://www.cnet.com/news/sco-fees-may-hit-some-linux-users/ |title=SCO fees may hit some Linux users |author-first=Stephen |author-last=Shankand |publisher=CNET |date=January 14, 2003}}</ref>  Senior vice president Chris Sontag was put in charge of it.<ref name="starts"/>

By the end of 2002, McBride and SCO had sought out the services of [[David Boies]] of the law firm [[Boies, Schiller and Flexner]] as part of an effort to litigate against what it saw was unrightful use of its intellectual property.<ref name="nyt-profit"/> Boies had gained fame in the industry for leading the U.S. federal government's successful prosecution of Microsoft in ''[[United States v. Microsoft Corp. (2001)|United States v. Microsoft Corp.]]'';<ref name="cw-scosource"/> as McBride subsequently said: "We went for the biggest gun we could find."<ref name="nyt-profit"/>{{notetag|Boies' record in other cases was mixed, however, including a high-visibility loss in the 2000 ''[[Bush v. Gore]]'' Florida election dispute.<ref name="lbw-ogara"/>}}

News of the SCO Group's intent to take action regarding Linux first broke on January 10, 2003, in a column by technology reporter Maureen O'Gara of ''Linuxgram'' that appeared in ''Client Server News'' and ''Linux Business Week''.<ref name="lbw-ogara"/>  She wrote that a draft press release concerning SCO's plans had been in the works for several weeks and had been quietly circulated to other companies in the industry.<ref name="lbw-ogara">{{cite news | url=http://www.sys-con.com/linux/articlenews.cfm?id=381 | title=SCO Threatens to Press IP Claims on Linux | first=Maureen | last=O'Gara | work=LinuxGram | date=January 10, 2003| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030201230524/http://www.sys-con.com/linux/articlenews.cfm?id=381 | archive-date=February 1, 2003 }}</ref>  The O'Gara report, unconfirmed as it was, caused some amount of consternation in the Linux community.<ref name="smh-ogara-reax">{{cite news | url=https://www.smh.com.au/technology/sco-denies-plans-to-act-against-other-linux-vendors-20030114-gdg3t8.html | title=SCO denies plans to act against other Linux vendors | newspaper=The Sydney Morning Herald | date=January 13, 2003}}</ref>

On January 22, 2003, creation of the [[SCOsource]] division of the company, to manage the licensing of the company's Unix-related intellectual property, was officially announced, as was the hiring of Boies to investigate and oversee legal protection of that property.<ref>{{cite press release | url=https://tech-insider.org/unix/research/2003/0122.html | title=SCO Establishes SCOsource to License Unix Intellectual Property | publisher=Tech-insider | date=January 22, 2003}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/sco-hunts-infringers/article1157011/ | title=SCO hunts infringers | newspaper=The Globe and Mail | location=Toronto | date=January 22, 2003}}</ref>  As the ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'' reported, Linux users had generally assumed that Linux was created independently of Unix proprietary code, and Linux advocates were immediately concerned that SCO was going to ask large companies using Linux to pay SCO licensing fees to avoid a lawsuit.<ref>{{cite news | title=SCO Hires Boies to Investigate Property Rights | newspaper=The Wall Street Journal | date=January 22, 2003 | edition= Eastern | url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/398818541 | id={{ProQuest|398818541}}}}</ref>  The first announced license program within SCOsource was called SCO System&nbsp;V for Linux, which was a set of [[shared libraries]] intended to allow SCO Unix programs to be run legally on Linux without a user needing to license all of SCO OpenServer or UnixWare as had theretofore been necessary.<ref name="cw-scosource">{{cite news | url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2580192/sco-to-enforce-its-intellectual-property-in-linux-world.html | title=SCO to enforce its intellectual property in Linux world | author-first= Juan Carlos | author-last=Perez | author2-first= Stephen | author2-last=Lawson | agency= IDG News Service | work=Computerworld | date=January 23, 2003 }}</ref>

The company continued to lose money, on revenues of $13.5&nbsp;million in the first fiscal quarter of 2003, but McBride was enthusiastic about the prospects for the new SCOsource division, telling investors on a February&nbsp;26 earnings call that he expected it to bring in $10&nbsp;million alone in the second fiscal quarter.<ref>{{cite press release | title=The SCO Group Reports Operating Results for First-Quarter Fiscal 2003 | publisher= PR Newswire | date= February 26, 2003 | url= https://www.proquest.com/docview/448846123 | id= {{ProQuest|448846123}} }}</ref>

=== Lawsuits begin ===
{{SCO Controversy}}
On March 6, 2003, SCO filed suit against IBM, claiming that the computer giant had misappropriated trade secrets by transferring portions of its Unix-based [[AIX]] operating system into Linux, and asked for at least $1&nbsp;billion in damages.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/88379283/ | title=Suit Alleges IBM Is Abusing Trade Secrets | agency=Bloomberg News | newspaper=Los Angeles Times | date=March 7, 2003 | page=C3| via=Newspapers.com}}</ref>{{notetag|The amount was subsequently raised to $3&nbsp;billion,<ref name="bw-hated"/> and later still to $5 billion.<ref name="slt-yarro"/> The suit initially coincided with SCO's existing relationship with IBM to sell UnixWare on [[IBM Netfinity]] systems.<ref name="ci-earnings-1999">{{cite news | title=SCO Ends Four-Year Slump With $17m Profits, New Business | work=[[Computergram International]] | date= October 27, 1999 | via= Gale General OneFile <!-- (accessed April 17, 2021). --> | url=https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A56955961/ITOF?u=wikipedia&sid=ITOF&xid=6a741805 }}</ref>}} The complaint also alleged [[breach of contract]] and [[tortious interference]] by IBM against the Santa Cruz Operation for its part in the failed [[Project Monterey]] of the late 1990s.<ref name="cnet-ibm-suit">{{cite news | url=https://www.cnet.com/news/sco-sues-big-blue-over-unix-linux/ | title=SCO sues Big Blue over Unix, Linux | author-first=Stephen | author-last=Shankland | publisher=Cnet | date=March 11, 2003}}</ref>  Overall, SCO maintained that Linux could not have caught up to "Unix performance standards for complete enterprise functionality" so quickly without coordination by a large company, and that this coordination could have happened through the taking of "methods or concepts" even if not a single line of Unix code appeared within Linux.<ref name="cnet-ibm-suit"/>  The ''[[SCO v. IBM]]'' case was underway; it would come to be considered one of the top technology battles of all time.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.itnews.com.au/news/top-10-technology-tussles-154995 | title=Top 10 technology tussles | author-first=Iain | author-last=Thomson | publisher=IT News | date=September 7, 2009}}</ref>

Many industry analysts were not impressed by the lawsuit, with one saying: "It's a fairly end-of-life move for the stockholders and managers of that company [...] This is a way of salvaging value out of the SCO franchise they can't get by winning in the marketplace."<ref name="cnet-ibm-suit"/> Other analysts pointed to the deep legal resources IBM had for any protracted fight in the courts, but McBride professed to be nonplussed: "If it takes a couple of years, we're geared to do that."<ref name="nyt-profit"/>  For his part, Boies said he liked [[David versus Goliath]] struggles, and his firm would see a substantial gain out of any victory.<ref name="bw-hated"/>

In mid-May 2003, SCO sent a letter to some 1,500 companies, cautioning them that using Linux could put them in legal jeopardy.<ref name="nyt-profit"/>  As part of this, SCO proclaimed that Linux contained substantial amounts of Unix System&nbsp;V source code and that, as such, "We believe that Linux is, in material part, an unauthorized derivative of Unix."<ref name="ap-unauth">{{cite news | url=https://apnews.com/article/0f48e3656783defbf5818999ebab1fe7 | title=SCO Group Warns Linux Users of Violations | author-first=Matthew | author-last=Fordahl | work=Associated Press | date=May 14, 2003}}</ref><ref name="nyt-profit"/><ref name="pr-copyrights"/>  As [[CNET]] wrote, the move "dramatically broaden[ed]" the scope of the company's legal actions.<ref name="cnet-letters">{{cite news |url=https://www.cnet.com/news/sco-targets-linux-customers/ |title=SCO targets Linux customers |author-first=Stephen |author-last=Shankland |publisher=CNET |date=May 15, 2003}}</ref>

At the same time, SCO announced it would stop selling its own SCO Linux product.<ref name="ap-unauth"/>  A casualty of this stance was SCO's participation in the United Linux effort, and in turn United Linux itself.<ref name="eweek-united"/>  While the formal announcement that United Linux had ended did not come until January 2004, in reality the project stopped doing any tangible work soon after SCO filed its lawsuit against IBM.<ref name="eweek-united">{{cite news | url=https://www.eweek.com/servers/unitedlinux-rip/ | title=UnitedLinux, RIP | author-first= Steven J. | author-last=Vaughan-Nichols | magazine=eWeek | date=January 23, 2004 }}</ref>

A few days later, Microsoft{{snd}} which had long expressed disdain for Linux{{snd}} said that it was acquiring a Unix license from SCO,<ref name="cnet-ms-lic">{{cite news | url=https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/microsoft-to-license-unix-code/ | title=Microsoft to license Unix code | author-first=Scott | author-last=Ard | publisher=CNET | date=May 19, 2003}}</ref> in order to ensure interoperability with its own products and to ward off any questions about rights.<ref name="nyt-myclip-2003"/>  The action was a boon to SCO, which to this point had received little support in the industry for its licensing initiative.<ref name="nyt-myclip-2003">{{cite news | title=New Economy: A Unix company hopes a Microsoft deal will strengthen its legal case against Linux. | author-first=Laurie J. | author-last=Flynn | newspaper=The New York Times | date=May 26, 2003 | page=C3}}</ref>  Another major computer company, [[Sun Microsystems]], bought an additional level of Unix licensing from SCO to add to what it had originally obtained a decade earlier.<ref name="fortune-2003"/>

On May 28, 2003, Novell counterattacked, saying its sale of the Unix business to the Santa Cruz Operation back in 1995 did ''not'' include the Unix software copyrights, and thus that the SCO Group's legal position was empty.<ref name="nyt-profit"/>  Jack Messman, the CEO of Novell, accused SCO of attempting an extortion plan against Linux users and distributors.<ref name="nyt-profit"/>  Unix has a complex corporate history,<ref name="cnet-ibm-suit"/> with the SCO Group a number of steps removed from the [[Bell Labs]] origins of the operating system.  Novell and the SCO Group quickly fell into a vocal dispute that revolved around the interpretation of the 1995 asset-transfer agreement between them.<ref name="IW_Confusing_2003"/>  That agreement had been uncertain enough at the time that an amendment to it had to be signed in October 1996, and even that was insufficiently unambiguous to now preclude an extended battle between the two companies.<ref name="IW_Confusing_2003">{{cite news | url=https://www.informationweek.com/sco-novell-deal-was-confusing-from-the-start/d/d-id/1019435 | title=SCO-Novell Deal Was Confusing From The Start | author-first=John | author-last=Foley | magazine=Information Week | date=2003-06-06}}</ref><ref name="dn-verdict"/>

In July 2003, SCO began offering UnixWare licenses for commercial Linux users, stating that "SCO will hold [as] harmless [any] commercial Linux customers that purchase a UnixWare license against any past copyright violations, and for any future use of Linux in a run-only, binary format."<ref name="pr-copyrights">{{cite press release |title=SCO Registers UNIX Copyrights and Offers UNIX License |url=http://ir.sco.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=114170 |date=July 21, 2003 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100102232443/http://ir.sco.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=114170 |archive-date=January 2, 2010 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
The server-based licenses were priced at $699 per machine, and if they were to become mandatory for Linux users, would represent a tremendous source of revenue for SCO.<ref name="bw-hated"/>  The potential for this happening was certainly beneficial to SCO's stock price, which during one three-week span in May 2003 tripled in value.<ref name="nyt-myclip-2003"/>

Another counterattack came in August 2003, when ''[[Red Hat, Inc. v. SCO Group, Inc.]]'' was filed by the largest of the [[Linux distribution]] companies.

[[Image:TRAX courthouse.jpg|thumb|left|The Frank E. Moss United States Courthouse in downtown Salt Lake City, where many of SCO's legal battles played out, as seen in 2004]]

The SCO Group received a major boost in October 2003 when [[BayStar Capital]], a technology-focused venture capital firm, made a $50&nbsp;million [[private placement]] investment in SCO, to be used towards the company's legal costs and general product development efforts.<ref name="slt-baystar">{{cite news | url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/91046282/ | title=SCO gets infusion of $50M | author-first=Bob | author-last=Mims | newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune | date=October 17, 2003 | page=D8 | via=Newspapers.com}}</ref>  In December 2003, SCO sent letters to 1,000 Linux customers that in essence accused them of making illegal use of SCO's intellectual property.<ref name="bw-hated"/>

Novell continued to insist that it owned the copyrights to Unix.  While Novell no longer had a commercial interest in Unix technology itself, it did want to clear the way for Linux, having recently purchased [[SuSE Linux]], the second largest commercial Linux distribution at the time.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.cnet.com/news/sco-sues-novell-over-copyright-claims/ | title=SCO sues Novell over copyright claims | author-first=David | author-last=Becker | publisher=CNET | date=January 21, 2004}}</ref>  On January 20, 2004, the SCO Group filed a [[slander of title]] suit against Novell, alleging that Novell had exhibited bad faith in denying SCO's intellectual property rights to Unix and UnixWare and that Novell had made false statements in an effort to persuade companies and organizations not to do business with SCO.<ref name="nw-slandertitle">{{cite news | url=https://www.networkworld.com/article/2329813/sco-sues-novell-for-slander-of-title-over-unix.html | title=SCO sues Novell for slander of title over Unix | author-first=Grant | author-last=Gross | agency=IDG News Service | magazine=Network World | date=January 20, 2004}}</ref>  The ''[[SCO v. Novell]]'' court case was underway.

Lawsuits against two Linux end users,<ref name="fortune-2004"/> ''[[SCO Group, Inc. v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.]]'' and ''[[SCO v. AutoZone]]'' were filed on March&nbsp;3, 2004.<ref name="scs-az-dc">{{cite news | url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/91040800/ | title=SCO Group reports 16-cent loss, more lawsuits | author-first=Jennifer | author-last=Pittman | newspaper=Santa Cruz Sentinel | date=March 4, 2004 | page=D-6 | via=Newspapers.com}}</ref>  The first alleged that Daimler Chrysler had violated the terms of the Unix software agreement it had with SCO, while the second claimed that AutoZone was running versions of Linux that contained unlicensed source code from SCO.<ref name="nw-surviveiflose"/>  As a strategy this move was met by criticism; as ''[[Computerworld]]'' later sarcastically wrote: "Faced with a skeptical customer base, SCO did what any good business would do to get new customers: sue them for money."<ref name="cw-chap7"/>

In any case, the stage was set for the next several years' worth of court filings, depositions, hearings, interim rulings, and so on.

=== Vultus acquisition and a change in SCOx ===
The SCOsource division got off to a quick start, bringing in $8.8&nbsp;million during the company's second fiscal quarter, which led to the SCO Group turning a profit for the first time in its Caldera-origined history.<ref name="nyt-profit">{{cite news | date=May 29, 2003 | url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/29/business/technology-software-company-s-battle-over-unix-produces-profit.html | title=Technology: Software Company's Battle Over Unix Produces Profit | author-first=Steve | author-last=Lohr | newspaper=The New York Times | page=C6}}</ref>

In July 2003, the SCO Group announced it had acquired Vultus Inc. for an unspecified price.<ref name="dn-vultus"/>  Vultus was a start-up company, also based in Lindon, Utah,<ref name="dn-vultus"/> and the Lindon-based [[Canopy Group]] was a major investor in Vultus just as it was the SCO Group.<ref name="cnet-vultus">{{cite news | url=https://www.cnet.com/news/sco-scoops-up-web-services-start-up/ | title=SCO scoops up Web services start-up | author-first=Martin | author-last=LaMonica | publisher=CNET | date=July 22, 2003}}</ref>  Vultus made the WebFace Solution Suite, a web-based application development environment with a set of browser-based user interface elements that provided a richer UI functionality without the need for Java applets or other plug-ins.<ref name="dn-vultus">{{cite news | url=https://www.deseret.com/platform/amp/2003/7/23/19736996/sco-purchase-of-vultus-also-includes-webface | title=SCO purchase of Vultus also includes WebFace | newspaper=Deseret News | date=July 23, 2003}}</ref><ref name="cw-vultus">{{cite news | url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2804829/sco-fuels-web-services-play-with-acquisition.html | title=News SCO fuels Web services play with acquisition | author-first=Amy | author-last=Bennett | agency=IDG News Service | work=Computerworld | date=July 24, 2003 | access-date=December 26, 2021 | archive-date=December 26, 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211226221908/https://www.computerworld.com/article/2804829/sco-fuels-web-services-play-with-acquisition.html | url-status=dead }}</ref> Indeed, in putting together WebFace, Vultus was a pioneer in [[Ajax (programming)|AJAX techniques]] before that term was even coined.<ref name="vultus-ajax">{{cite web | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120201210845/http://itc.conversationsnetwork.org/shows/detail1010.html | archive-date=February 1, 2012 | url=http://itc.conversationsnetwork.org/shows/detail1010.html | title=AJAX Progress and Challenges | publisher=IT Conversations | date=March 1, 2006}}</ref>

The acquisition of Vultus resulted in a shift of emphasis in the company's web services initiative, with an announcement being made in August 2003 at SCO Forum that SCOx would now be a web services-based Application Substrate, featuring a combination of tools and APIs from Vultus's WebFace suite and from [[Ericom Software]]'s Host Publisher development framework.<ref name="scox-substrate">{{cite news | url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2571426/sco-to-push-web-services-with-ericom-alliance.html | title=SCO to push Web services with Ericom alliance | author-first=  Robert | author-last=McMillan | agency=IDG News Service | work=Computerworld | date=August 18, 2003 }}</ref>

A year later, in September 2004, this idea materialized when the SCOx Web Services Substrate (WSS) was released for UnixWare 7.1.4.<ref name="pr-wss"/> Its aim was to give existing SCO customers a way to "webify" their applications via Ericom's tool and then make the functionality of those applications available via web services.<ref name="pr-wss">{{cite press release | title=SCO Extends Partnership with Ericom Software through Release of SCOx Web Services Substrate (WSS) on SCO UNIX(R) | publisher= PR Newswire | date= July 19, 2004 | url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/448628760 | id= {{ProQuest|448628760}} }}</ref>  However, as McBride later conceded, the SCOx WSS failed to gain an audience,<ref name="iwk-meinc"/> and it was largely gone from company mention a year later.<ref>SCO Forum breakout session schedules list a number of WSS and Ericom sessions in 2004; only Ericom sessions and no mention of WSS in 2005; and no mention of either in 2006 and later.</ref>

=== Views on infringement claims ===
In the keynote address at its SCO Forum conference in August 2003, held at the [[MGM Grand Las Vegas]], the SCO Group made an expansive defense of its legal actions.<ref name="nw-forum03">{{cite news | url=https://www.networkworld.com/article/2336557/sco-makes-legal-case-to-its-resellers.html | title=SCO makes legal case to its resellers | author-first=Robert | author-last=McMillan | magazine=Network World | date=August 18, 2003}}</ref> Framed by licensed-from-MGM [[Production of the James Bond films|James Bond music and film clips]], McBride portrayed SCO as a valiant warrior for the continuance of [[proprietary software]], saying they were in "a huge raging battle around the globe", that the [[GNU General Public License]] that Linux was based on was "about destroying value", and saying that like Bond, they would be thrown into many battles but come out the victor in the end.<ref name="nw-forum03"/>

Linux advocates had repeatedly asked SCO to enumerate and show the specific areas of code in Linux that SCO thought were infringing on Unix.<ref name="nyt-myclip-2003"/><ref name="iw-if-3"/>  An analyst for [[International Data Corporation|IDC]] said that if SCO were more forthcoming on the details, "the whole discussion might take a different tone."<ref name="nyt-myclip-2003"/>  However, SCO was reluctant to show any such code in public, preferring to keep it {{nowrap|secret{{px2}}{{mdash}}{{px2}}}}a strategy that was commonly adopted in intellectual property litigation.<ref name="iw-if-3">{{cite news | title=Oh So Slowly, SCO Makes Its Case | author-first=Tom | author-last=Yager | magazine=InfoWorld | date=September 22, 2003 | pages=42–43}}<!-- see also online version with correction addendum https://www.infoworld.com/article/2679098/sco-stays-in-the-game.html --></ref>

However, during the company's Forum conference, SCO did publicly show several alleged examples of illegal copying of copyright code in Linux. Until that time, these examples had only been available to people who signed a [[non-disclosure agreement]], which had prohibited them from revealing the information shown to them. SCO claimed the infringements were divided into four separate categories: literal copying, [[Obfuscation (software)|obfuscation]], derivative works, and non-literal transfers.  The example used by SCO to demonstrate literal copying became known as the ''[[atemalloc]]'' example. While the name of the original contributor was not revealed by SCO, quick analysis of the code in question pointed to [[Silicon Graphics|SGI]]. At this time it was also revealed that the code had already been removed from the Linux kernel, because it duplicated already existing functions.

By early 2004, the small amount of evidence that had been presented publicly was viewed as inconclusive by lawyers and software professionals who were not partisan to either side.<ref name="bw-hated"/>  As ''Businessweek'' wrote, "While there are similarities between some code that SCO claims it owns and material in Linux, it's not clear to software experts that there's a violation."<ref name="bw-hated"/>  The legal considerations involved were complex, and resolved around subtleties such as how the notion of [[derivative work]]s should be applied.<ref name="fortune-2004"/>  Furthermore, Novell's argument that it had never transferred copyrights to the Santa Cruz Operation placed a cloud over the SCO Group's legal campaign.<ref name="bw-hated"/>  Most, but not all, industry observers felt that SCO was unlikely to win.<ref name="bw-hated"/><ref name="fortune-2004"/><ref name="iw-if-5"/>  ''InfoWorld'' drily noted that Las Vegas bookmakers were not giving odds on the battle, but the three analysts it polled gave odds of 6-to-4 against SCO, 200-to-1 against SCO, and 6-to-4 for SCO.<ref name="iw-if-5">{{cite news | title=The Latest Line on SCO |magazine=InfoWorld | date=September 22, 2003 | page=45}}</ref>

In any case, while Linux customers may not have been happy about the concerns and threats that the SCO Group was raising, it was unclear whether that was slowing their adoption of Linux; some business media reports indicated that it was,<ref name="cnn-mydoom"/> or that it might,<ref name="fortune-2003"/> while others indicated that it was not.<ref name="bw-hated"/>

=== "The Most Hated Company in Tech" <span class="anchor" id="The Most Hated Company In Tech"></span> ===
The stakes were high in the battle the SCO Group had started, involving the future of Unix, Linux, and open source software in general.<ref name="iw-if-0">{{cite news | title=SCO Rolls the dice | magazine=InfoWorld | date=September 22, 2003 | page=41}}</ref>  If SCO were to win its legal battles, the results could be extremely disruptive to the IT industry, especially if SCO's notion of derivative works were to be construed broadly by the courts.<ref name="iw-if-1">{{cite news | title=What if SCO Wins? | author-first=Robert | author-last=McMillan | magazine=InfoWorld | date=September 22, 2003 | pages=42, 44}}</ref>  Furthermore a SCO victory would be devastating to the open source movement, especially if the legal validity of the GPL license were to be called into question.<ref name="iw-if-1"/>  Conversely, a clear SCO loss would clarify any intellectual property concerns related to Linux, make corporate IT managers feel more relaxed about adopting Linux as a solution, and potentially bolster corporate enthusiasm for the open source movement as a whole.<ref name="iw-if-2">{{cite news | title=What if SCO Loses? | author-first=Ed | author-last=Scannell | magazine=InfoWorld | date=September 22, 2003 | pages=43, 45}}</ref>

{{Quote box|quote=There's nothing like a good legal battle to whip up passions, and the SCO Group-versus-the-open-source-world dogfight is no exception. Rhetoric runs high. From the open-source advocates, it's "you're stifling free thought in the name of greed." SCO allies counter with "you're attacking the core values of capitalism."|source=—LinuxInsider, 2004.<ref name="li-groklaw-2004"/>
|width=27%|align=left|style=padding:8px;}}

Linux advocates were incensed by SCO's actions,<ref name="cnet-ddos"/><ref name="bw-hated"/> accusing the company of trying to reap financial gain by sowing [[fear, uncertainty, and doubt]] (FUD) about Linux within the industry.<ref name="nyt-profit"/>  Linux creator [[Linus Torvalds]] said, "I'd dearly love to hear exactly ''what'' they think is infringing, but they haven't told anybody. Oh, well. They seem to be more interested in FUD than anything else."<ref name="ap-unauth"/>  Open source advocate [[Bruce Perens]] said of SCO, "They don't care who or what they hurt."<ref name="ap-unauth"/>  Industry analyst and open source advocate Gordon Haff said that SCO had thrown a [[dirty bomb]] into the Linux user community.<ref name="cnet-letters"/>

Many  Linux enthusiasts approached the issue with a moralistic fervor.<ref name="cnet-letters"/>
By August 2003, McBride said that pickets had been seen at SCO offices.<ref name="nw-forum03"/>  McBride tended to compare Linux to [[Napster]] in the music world,<ref name="nyt-myclip-2003"/> a comparison that could be understood by people outside the technology industry.  The assault on open source produced intense feelings in people; [[Ralph Yarro]], chairman of SCO and head of the Canopy Group, and the person characterized by some as the mastermind behind ''SCO v. IBM'',<ref name="fortune-2003">{{cite news | url=https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2003/07/21/346123/index.htm | title=Penguin Slayer | author-first=Adam | author-last=Lashinsky | magazine=Fortune | date=2003-07-21}}</ref>  reported that back in his home area in Utah, "I have had friends, good friends, tell me they can't believe what we're doing."<ref name="bw-hated"/>  Internet message boards such as [[Slashdot]] saw many outraged postings.<ref name="fortune-2003"/>  The [[Yahoo! Finance]] discussion boards, a popular site at the time for investors, were full of messages urging others to sell SCO stock.<ref name="nw-forum03"/>

SCO suffered a [[distributed denial-of-service attack]] against its website in early May 2003,<ref name="cnet-ddos">{{cite news | url=https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/net-attack-crushes-sco-web-site/ | title=Net attack crushes SCO Web site | author-first=Stephen | author-last=Shankland | publisher=CNET | date=May 5, 2003}}</ref> the first of several times the website would be shut down by hackers.<ref name="bw-hated"/>  One that began in late January 2004<ref name="cnn-mydoom">{{cite news | url=https://money.cnn.com/2004/01/27/technology/techinvestor/lamonica/index.htm | title=Of worms and penguins? | author-first=Paul R. | author-last=La Monica | publisher=CNN Money | date=January 28, 2004}}</ref> became the most prolonged, when a denial-of-service attack coming out of the [[Mydoom]] computer worm prevented access to the <code>sco.com</code> domain for over a month.<ref name="zdn-mydoom">{{cite news | url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/sco-recovers-from-mydoom/ | title=SCO recovers from MyDoom | author-first= Munir | author-last=Kotadia | publisher=ZDNet | date= March 8, 2004 }}</ref>

{{Quote box|quote=The theater of {{nowrap|this{{px2}}{{mdash}}{{px2}}}}it's sort of beyond belief for all of us.|source=—Darl McBride, 2004.<ref name="bw-hated"/>|width=27%|align=right|style=padding:8px;}}

The general IT industry was not pleased with what SCO was doing either.  The September 22, 2003 issue of ''[[InfoWorld]]'' had a dual-orientation cover that, if read right side up, had a thumbs-up picture with the text "If SCO Loses", and if read upside down, had a thumbs-down picture with the text "If SCO Wins".<ref name="iw-if-00">{{cite news | title=Cover | magazine=InfoWorld | date=September 22, 2003}}<!-- can see most of cover it at https://books.google.com/books?id=zjkEAAAAMBAJ&pg=RA1-PA1#v=onepage&q&f=false --></ref> 
By February of the following year, ''[[Businessweek]]'' was headlining that the SCO Group was "The Most Hated Company In Tech".<ref name="bw-hated">{{cite news |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2004-02-01/the-most-hated-company-in-tech |title=The Most Hated Company In Tech |author-first=Jim |author-last=Kerstetter |magazine=Businessweek |date=February 2, 2004 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210423002322/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2004-02-01/the-most-hated-company-in-tech | archive-date=April 23, 2021 | url-status=live<!--paywalled-->}}<!-- copyvio site https://sco-vs-ibm.org/review/2004/0202.html --><!-- seems gone now, but have a txt file from a quick ^a^c of the archive site --></ref>  A similar characterization was made by the [[Robert X. Cringely]]-bylined column in ''[[InfoWorld]]'', which in March 2004 called SCO "the Most Despised Technology Company".<ref name="iw-despised">{{cite news | title=Notes from the Field: Misery Loves Companies | author-first=Robert X. | author-last=Cringely | magazine=InfoWorld | date=March 29, 2004 | page=12}}</ref>  The cover of a May 2004 issue of ''[[Fortune (magazine)|Fortune]]'' magazine had a photograph of McBride accompanied by the large text "Corporate Enemy No. 1".<ref name="fortune-2004">{{cite news | url=https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2004/05/17/369609/index.htm | title=Gunning for Linux | author-first=Roger | author-last=Parloff | magazine=Fortune | date=May 17, 2004}} Also cover of issue.</ref>  SCO's actions in suing Linux end users was especially responsible for some forms of corporate distaste towards it.<ref name="fortune-2004"/>

[[Image:Bruce Perens Belfast 2006.jpg|thumb|left|One of the most prominent critics of SCO's actions, Bruce Perens, speaking at a free and open source software conference in 2006]]

The company that had previously held that title, Microsoft,<ref name="bw-hated"/><ref name="iw-despised"/> had by February 2004 spent a reported $12&nbsp;million on Unix licenses from SCO.<ref name="bw-hated"/>  The industry giant said the licenses were taken out as part of normal intellectual property compliance for their [[Windows Services for UNIX]] product, which provided a Unix compatibility environment for higher-end Windows systems.<ref name="r-ms-lic">{{cite news | url=https://www.wired.com/2003/05/microsoft-licenses-unix-from-sco/ | title=Microsoft Licenses Unix From SCO | agency=Reuters | magazine=Wired | date=May 19, 2003}}</ref>  Linux advocates, however, saw the move as Microsoft looking for a way to fund SCO's lawsuits in an attempt to damage Linux,<ref name="bw-hated"/>  Indeed, Linux advocates had seen Microsoft's hand in the SCO Group's actions from almost the beginning; as Bruce Perens wrote in May 2003:  "Who really benefits from this mess? Microsoft, whose involvement in getting a defeated Unix company to take on the missionary work of spreading FUD [...] about Linux is finally coming to light."<ref>{{cite web | author-last=Perens | date=May 20, 2003 | url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsofts-spreading-fud-over-linux/ | title=Microsoft's spreading FUD over Linux | author-first=Bruce | publisher=ZDNet}}</ref>  The open source community's antipathy towards Microsoft only increased when it became apparent that Microsoft had played at least some role in introducing the SCO Group to BayStar Capital as a potential investment vehicle (both BayStar and Microsoft said there was no stronger role by Microsoft than that).<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.eweek.com/database/microsoft-led-sco-to-baystar/ | title=Microsoft Led SCO to BayStar | author-first=Peter | author-last=Galli | magazine=eWeek | date=March 22, 2004}}</ref>

The distaste for SCO's actions seeped into evaluations of SCO's product line and technical initiatives as well.  ''[[Software Development Times]]'' acknowledged at one point that "many writers in the tech media, which has a pro-open-source, pro-Linux bias, are subtly or overtly hostile to SCO."<ref name="sdt-edgeclick"/>
As an instance, in July 2003 a columnist for ''[[Computerworld]]'' examined the SCO Group acquisition of Vultus and concluded that the purpose was not to acquire its technology or staff but rather that Canopy was playing  "a shell game [...] to move its companies around" in order to exploit and cash in on the SCO Group's rising stock price.<ref name="CW_shell_2003">{{cite news | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gXrMKeIkx74C&pg=PA50 | title=SCO's Shell Game | author-first=Frank | author-last=Hayes | work=Computerworld | date= July 28, 2003 | page=50}}</ref>
As an analyst for [[RedMonk]] stated, "Regardless of the technology they have, there are a lot of enterprises that are going to be ticked off with them. Some of them are receiving these letters (demanding license fees for Linux). There's a perception among companies we've spoken to that SCO is really out to get acquired or to make their money off of licensing schemes rather than technologies. That's an obstacle to adoption of their products."<ref name="cw-vultus"/>  This kind of attitude was exemplified by an apologetic review of UnixWare 7.1.3 in ''[[OSNews]]'' in December 2003 that acknowledged that SCO had "earned their now nefarious reputation of pure evil" but that "SCO does actually sell a product" and that the reviewer had to assess it objectively.<ref name="osn=uw713">{{cite news | url=https://www.osnews.com/story/5416/unixware-713-review/ | title=UnixWare 7.1.3 Review | author-first=Tony | author-last=Bourke | publisher=OS News | date=December 16, 2003}}</ref>

Another group of people who found the actions of the SCO Group distasteful were some of those familiar with the Santa Cruz Operation, including those who had worked there and those who had written about it; they became protective of that earlier company's reputation, especially given the possible name confusion regarding the two.<ref name="sarai-rem"/><ref name="coursey-bad"/><ref name="stross-p5"/>  In an ''[[eWeek]]'' column entitled "SCO: When Bad Things Happen to Good Brands", technology journalist David Coursey wrote that "SCO was a good company with a good reputation. In some ways, SCO was Linux before Linux, popularizing Unix on low-cost Intel machines [...] It's a good brand name that deserves better, or at least a decent burial and a wake. But instead, its memory is being trashed by people who don't and maybe can't appreciate the fondness many of us still have for the old Santa Cruz Operation."<ref name="coursey-bad">{{cite news | url=https://www.eweek.com/servers/sco-when-bad-things-happen-to-good-brands | title=SCO: When Bad Things Happen to Good Brands | author-first=David | author-last=Coursey | magazine=eWeek | date= June 15, 2004}}</ref>  Science fiction author [[Charles Stross]], who had worked as a tech writer in the original SCO's office in England in the early-mid-1990s, called the SCO Group "the brain-eating zombie of the UNIX world" that had done little more than "play merry hell with the Linux community and take a copious metaphorical shit all over my resumé."<ref name="stross-p5">{{cite web | url=http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2009/06/how_i_got_here_in_the_end_part_3.html | title=How I got here in the end, part five: 'things can only get better!' | author-first=Charles | author-last=Stross | publisher=antipope.org | date=June 19, 2009}}</ref>  More simply, former original SCO employee turned journalist and publisher Sara Isenberg, in writing about the history of tech companies in the Santa Cruz area, wrote about The SCO Group, "I'll spare you the sordid legal details, but by then, it was no longer our SCO."<ref name="sarai-rem">{{cite news | url=https://www.santacruztechbeat.com/2015/04/23/tech-in-santa-cruz-sara-isenberg/ | title=Don't let anyone tell you tech is new in Santa Cruz! | author-first=Sara | author-last=Isenberg | newspaper=Santa Cruz Tech Beat | date=April 23, 2015}}</ref>

To be sure, not all former original-SCO employees necessarily felt that way.  The company still had developers and other staff at the original Santa Cruz location, as well as at the [[Murray Hill, New Jersey]] office<ref name="nw-surviveiflose"/> that dated back not just to the original SCO but to Novell and Unix System Laboratories and AT&T before that.<ref name="cw-init"/>  There was also a development office in [[Delhi, India]],<ref name="nw-surviveiflose"/> as well as regional offices that in many cases came from original SCO.  And in 2006, Santa Cruz Operation co-founder Doug Michels made a return to the SCO Forum stage, with McBride presenting him an award for lifetime achievement.<ref>{{cite video | url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9Vnb_omAoM | title=Doug Michels receives lifetime achievement at SCO Forum 2006 | publisher=CitizenValley.org and BayLive Media | access-date=December 9, 2019}}</ref>

[[Image:SCO Forum 2004 Darl McBride and others on video screen.jpg|thumb|right|SCO Group CEO Darl McBride speaking at a SCO Forum 2004 keynote session at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas; SCOsource division head Chris Sontag and vice president of engineering Sandy Gupta stand alongside him]]

A major factor in the SCO–Linux battle was the [[Groklaw]] website and its author, paralegal [[Pamela Jones]].<ref name="reg-groklaw"/> The site explained in depth the legal principles and procedures that would be involved in the different court {{nowrap|cases{{px2}}{{mdash}}{{px2}}}}giving technology-oriented readers a level of understanding of legal matters they would otherwise not {{nowrap|have{{px2}}{{mdash}}{{px2}}}}and pulled together in an easily browsed form a massive number of official court documents and filings.<ref name="li-groklaw-2004"/>  Additionally, some Groklaw readers attended the court hearings in person and posted their detailed observations afterward.<ref name="reg-groklaw"/>  Accompanying these valuable data points on Groklaw was an interpretative commentary, from both Jones and her readers, that was relentlessly pro-open source and anti-SCO,<!-- see also https://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2010/03/10/jury-picked-and-trial-commences-in-sco-v-novell-unix-code-copyright-ownership-dispute/ --> to the point where journalist [[Andrew Orlowski]] of ''[[The Register]]'' pointed out that Groklaw sometimes suffered badly from an [[Echo chamber (media)|online echo chamber]] effect.<ref name="reg-groklaw">{{cite news | url=https://www.theregister.com/Print/2005/04/30/groklaw_monterey_mystery/ | title=SCO, Groklaw and the Monterey mystery that never was | author-first=Andrew | author-last=Orlowski | work=The Register | date=April 30, 2005}}</ref>  In any case, such was Groklaw's influence that SCO made thinly veiled accusations that Jones was, in fact, working on behest of IBM, something that she categorically denied.<ref name="li-groklaw-2004">{{cite news | url=https://www.linuxinsider.com/story/32990.html | title=Writing Linux History: Groklaw's Role in the SCO Controversy | author-first=David | author-last=Halperin | publisher=LinuxInsider | date=March 1, 2004}} and the follow-up {{cite news | url=https://www.linuxinsider.com/story/33059.html | title=The Groklaw Story, Part Two | author-first=David | author-last=Halperin | publisher=LinuxInsider | date=March 8, 2004}}</ref>  <!-- TODO find the Groklaw bit about Darl admiring their passion -->

The personification of the SCO–Linux battle was no doubt McBride,<ref name="fortune-2004"/> who was viewed by many as a villain.<ref name="lbw-dmb-hated"/>  Columnist Maureen O'Gara, generally seen as at least somewhat sympathetic to SCO's position, characterized McBride as "the most hated man in the computer industry".<ref name="lbw-dmb-hated">{{cite news | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040529052830/http://www.linuxworld.com/story/44809.htm | archive-date=May 29, 2004 | url=http://www.linuxworld.com/story/44809.htm | title=Latest SCO News is Plain Weird | author-first=Maureen | author-last=O'Gara | magazine=Linux Business Week | date=May 14, 2004 }}</ref>  McBride acknowledged, "I know people want us to go away, but we are not going to go away. We're going to see this through."<ref name="bw-hated"/>  The ''[[Sunday New York Times]]'' business section's "Executive Life" feature ran a self-profile of McBride in February 2004, in which he reflected upon his no-nonsense father raising him on a ranch and the difficulties of being a [[Mormon missionary]] in Japan and later a Novell executive there, and concluded, "I am absolutely driven by people saying I can't do something."<ref>{{cite news | title=The Boss: Cowboy Willpower | author-first=Darl C. | author-last=McBride | newspaper=The New York Times | date=February 29, 2004 | page=10 (Sunday Business)}} As told to Eve Tahmincioglu.</ref>
McBride received death threats serious enough to warrant extra security during his public appearances.<ref name="bw-hated"/>  Asked in May 2004 to reflect upon what the preceding year had been like, McBride said "This is like ... nothing ... nothing compares to what's happened in the last year."<ref name="lbw-dmb-hated"/>

=== Financial aspects ===
<!--{{image frame
|content={{Graph:Chart
 | width = 450
 | height = 150
 | xGrid=
 | yGrid=
 | xAxisTitle=
 | yAxisTitle=
 | legend=
 | type=line
 | x=2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008
 | y1=64,79,43,36,29,22,16
 | y1Title=Revenue
 | y2=-25,3.4,-28,-11,-16,-7,-8.7
 | y2Title=Profit/loss
 | y3=0,0,0,0,0,0,0
 | y3Title=(break-even)
 | colors=#0000aa,#FF0000,#000000
}}
|width=600
|caption=SCO Group revenues and profit/loss by year (in millions of dollars).<ref name="starts"/><ref name="cw-fy2004"/><ref name="sec-ar-2006"/><ref name="cnet-fy2007"/><ref name="sec-ar-fy2008"/> No annual reports would be filed after 2008.<ref>See {{cite web | url=https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=0001102542 | title=EDGAR: Company Search Results: SCO GROUP INC | publisher=Securities and Exchange Commission | access-date=December 31, 2021}}</ref>
|border=no
}}--><!-- PREVIOUS HAS BEEN COMMENTED OUT AS A TEMPORARY MEASURE AS IMAGE ITSELF DOESN'T SHOW, ONLY THE CAPTION SHOWS -->
SCO's legal campaign coincided with the best financial results it would have, when in fiscal 2003 they had revenues of $79 million and a profit of $3.4 million.<ref name="cw-fy2004">{{cite news | url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2568609/sco-group-revenue-drops-58---losses-increase-as-legal-fight-continues.html | title=SCO Group revenue drops 58%, losses increase as legal fight continues | author-first=Todd R. | author-last=Weiss | work=Computerworld | date=December 22, 2004}}</ref>  The campaign was also initially very beneficial to its stock price.  The stock had been under $1.50 in December 2002 and reached a high of $22.29 during mid-October 2003.<ref name="street-range">{{cite news | url=https://www.thestreet.com/technology/sco-group-hit-by-double-whammy-10130633 | title=SCO Group Hit by Double Whammy | author-first=Ronna | author-last=Abramson | publisher=TheStreet | date=December 8, 2003}}</ref>  In some cases jumps in the price occurred when [[stock analyst]]s initiated coverage of the stock and gave optimistic price targets for it.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/sco-backs-off-linux-invoice-plan/ | title=SCO backs off Linux invoice plan | author-first=Stephen | author-last=Shankland | publisher=ZDNet | date=October 15, 2003}}</ref>

[[File:SCO-2001-2006-headcount-by-department.jpg|thumb|right|Falling headcounts at the SCO Group, as sourced from official company SEC filings via Yahoo! Finance message boards]]

But the stock began a downward slide soon after that, and by the end of 2003 about a quarter of all outstanding shares were controlled by [[short seller]]s.<ref name="cnn-mydoom"/>  SCOsource revenue was erratic, with the first half of fiscal 2004 being especially poor.<ref name="cw-caps"/><ref>{{cite news | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=FP-NbtUZeSkC&pg=PA12 | title=McBride Vows SCO Will Win Legal Fight | author-first=Todd R. | author-last=Weiss | work=Computerworld | date=August 9, 2004 | page=12}}</ref>
The SCO group had 340 employees worldwide when the lawsuits were first underway in 2003.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/91087286/ | title=SCO posts first-ever net income | author-first=Karen A. | author-last=Davis | newspaper=Santa Cruz Sentinel | date=May 29, 2003 | page=D-6 | via=Newspapers.com}}<!-- same paper gives the 340 figure for March 2003 and July 2003 as well --></ref>  By a year later, this count had fallen somewhat to 305 employees.<ref name="scs-az-dc"/>

During 2004, SCO and BayStar had a falling out,<ref name="lbw-dmb-hated"/> in part due to the investment firm being unhappy with SCO's constant presence in the headlines and the passionate arguments it was involved in with open source advocates,<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/22/business/technology-investor-s-pullout-stirs-doubts-about-sco-group.html | title=Technology: Investor's Pullout Stirs Doubts About SCO Group | author-first=Steve | author-last=Lohr | newspaper=The New York Times | date=April 22, 2004}}</ref> and in part due to the ongoing expenses of running a struggling software products business.<ref name="iwk-baystar">{{cite news | url= https://www.informationweek.com/software/vc-firm-to-sco-changes-needed-to-keep-money-2 | title=VC Firm To SCO: Changes Needed To Keep Money 2 | author-first=Larry | author-last=Greenemeier | magazine=InformationWeek | date=April 22, 2004}}</ref>  Both BayStar and [[Royal Bank of Canada]], which had been part of the initial placement, bought out of the investment by mid-year.<ref name="dn-baystar"/> Nevertheless, by the calculation of the ''[[Deseret News]]'', SCO had gained a net $37 million out of the arrangement.<ref name="dn-baystar">{{cite news | url=https://www.deseret.com/2004/6/8/19833466/sco-group-s-13-million-payout-to-baystar-is-good-news | title=SCO Group's $13 million payout to BayStar is good news | author-first=David L. | author-last=Politis | newspaper=Deseret News | date=June 8, 2004}}</ref>

Legal actions were a large expense, costing the SCO Group several million dollars each quarter and hurting financial results.<ref name="cw-legend"/>  For its third quarter of fiscal 2004, for instance, the company reported revenue of $11.2 million and a loss of $7.4 million, of which $7.2 million was legal expenses.<ref name="cw-caps">{{cite news| url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2566954/sco-caps-legal-costs-as-losses-mount.html | title=SCO caps legal costs as losses mount |author-first=Robert | author-last=McMillan | agency=IDG News Service | work=Computerworld | date=September 1, 2004}}</ref>  To that point, the company had spent a total of some $15 million on such costs.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.crn.com/news/applications-os/46200408/sco-puts-cap-on-legal-costs-moves-to-protect-shareholders.htm?itc=refresh | title=SCO Puts Cap On Legal Costs, Moves To Protect Shareholders | author-first=Paula | author-last=Rooney | publisher=CRN | date=August 31, 2004}}</ref>  Accordingly, in August 2004, SCO renegotiated its deal with its lawyers to put into place a cap on legal expenses at $31 million, in return for which Boise, Schiller & Flexner would receive a larger share of any eventual settlement.<ref name="cw-caps"/>

[[Image:JanpathOfficeBuildings.jpg|thumb|left|SCO development office in Delhi, as seen in 2006]]
[[Image:Entrance of SCO China office May 2006.jpg|thumb|left|SCO regional office in Beijing, as seen in 2006]]

McBride continued to come up with new ideas; at the 2004 Forum show he talked about the SCO Marketplace Initiative, which would set up an online exchange where developers could bid on work-for-hire jobs for SCO Unix enhancements that were otherwise not on the SCO product roadmap.<ref name="cw-init"/>  Besides helping SCO out, this would set up an alternative to the open source model, one where programmers could "develop-for-fee" rather than "develop-for-free".<ref name="cw-init">{{cite news | url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2812578/sco-ceo--no-need-to-sue-more-customers.html | title=SCO CEO: No need to sue more customers | author-first=Amy | author-last=Bennett | agency=IDG News Service | work=Computerworld | date=August 3, 2004 | access-date=December 27, 2021 | archive-date=December 27, 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211227123107/https://www.computerworld.com/article/2812578/sco-ceo--no-need-to-sue-more-customers.html | url-status=dead }}</ref>  McBride ultimately envisioned it becoming "an online distribution engine for business applications from a wide variety [of] companies and solution providers."<ref name="zdn-iit"/>  The SCO Marketplace began operation a couple of months later, with jobs posted including the writing of device drivers.<ref name="zdn-iit">{{cite news | url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/sco-marketplace-now-open-to-developers/ | title=SCO marketplace now open to developers | publisher=ZDNet | date=October 27, 2004}}</ref>

The stock slide continued, and by September 2004 had fallen below the $4 level.<ref name="cw-caps"/>  The company had some 230 employees worldwide at that point.<ref name="cw-caps"/> 
During the latter portion of 2004,  the California office of the company moved out of Santa Cruz proper,<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/90988201/ | title=Good deals in Scotts Valley lure local businesses | author-first=Jennifer | author-last=Pittman | newspaper=Santa Cruz Sentinel | date=December 24, 2004 | page=A-22| via=Newspapers.com}}</ref> as its longtime 400 Encinal Street office building was mostly empty.<ref name="scs-sep04"/>  The thirty employees still remaining took new space on Scotts Valley Drive<!--TODO when did the new office shut down? still going as of Aug 2005 at least ... full address 5615 Scotts Valley Drive --> in nearby [[Scotts Valley, California]].<ref name="scs-sep04">{{cite news | url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/90982426/ | title=SCO plans further cuts in Q4 | author-first=Jennifer | author-last=Pittman | newspaper=Santa Cruz Sentinel | date=September 2, 2004 | page=C-4 | via=Newspapers.com}}</ref>

By early 2005, the SCO Group was in definite financial trouble. Its court case against IBM did not seem to be going well.<ref name="scs-march05"/>  Sales for fiscal 2004 dropped by 46 percent compared to the year prior, to less than $43 million, and losses rose by a factor of three to over $16 million.  Results for the full fiscal 2004 year were bad: revenues dropped by 46 percent compared to the year prior,<ref name="scs-march05">{{cite news | url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/90979857/ | title=SCO sys quarterly statements were wrong | newspaper=Santa Cruz Sentinel | date=March 4, 2005 | page=D-5 | via=Newspapers.com}}</ref> falling to around $43 million, and there was a loss on that of over $28 million.<ref name="cw-fy2004"/>  The company had to restate three of its quarterly earnings statements due to accounting mistakes and was at risk of being delisted by NASDAQ.<ref name="scs-march05"/>  During the previous year it had laid off around 100 people, constituting a third of its workforce,<ref name="scs-march05"/> and by August 2005 the headcount had fallen to under 200.<ref name="nw-surviveiflose"/>

The company became independent of The Canopy Group in March 2005, after the settlement of a lawsuit between the [[Raymond Noorda|Noorda family]] and Yarro.<ref name="DN_FR_2005_2">{{cite news |title=Canopy Group settles with former executives |author-first=Jesse |author-last=Hyde |date=March 15, 2005 |newspaper=Deseret News |url=https://www.deseret.com/2005/3/15/19882089/canopy-group-settles-with-former-executives |access-date=2020-02-15 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200215185000/https://www.deseret.com/2005/3/15/19882089/canopy-group-settles-with-former-executives |archive-date=2020-02-15}}</ref>  As part of the settlement, Canopy transferred all of its shares in the SCO Group to Yarro.<ref name="slt-yarro">{{cite news |url=http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_2605421 |title=Canopy deal: Former CEO stays on board of SCO Group |author-last=Mims |author-first=Bob |date=2005-03-12 |newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050312233019/http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_2605421 |archive-date=2005-03-12}}</ref><ref name="ZDN_settlement_2005">{{cite news | url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/settlement-leaves-sco-board-intact/ | title=Settlement leaves SCO board intact | author-first=Stephen | author-last=Shankland | publisher=ZDNet | date=March 12, 2005 }}</ref> 
{{clear}}

== Products continue ==
=== Company emphasis ===
[[Image:SCO DRIVE mug.jpg|thumb|right|upright=0.8|Mug given to SCO Group employees around 2005 to convey the message of the "SCO DRIVE" initiative within the company]]
While there was an industry impression that the SCO Group was far more focused on lawsuits than bringing forward new and improved products,<ref name="ci-legend"/><ref name="cw-roadmap-2004"/> throughout this period, the large majority of SCO employees were not involved with the legal battle but rather were working on software products.<ref name="li-groklaw-2004"/><ref name="nw-surviveiflose"/>  This was a point that McBride never hesitated to point out, for instance saying in August 2005 that the company was spending "98 percent of our resources" on new product development, and only two percent on the active cases in court with AutoZone, IBM, and Novell.<ref name="lp-2005">{{cite news|last=Emigh|first=Jacqueline|url=http://linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reviews/5965/1/
|title=SCO Forum: Dueling with Linux & Microsoft (SCO Against the World)|date=August 15, 2005|publisher=LinuxPlanet|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060318024000/http://linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reviews/5965/1/|archive-date=March 18, 2006}}</ref>  The idea of the SCO Group becoming a lawsuits-only company had been proposed by BayStar but it was not something McBride wanted to do.<ref name="iwk-baystar"/>  Indeed, McBride expressed at least public optimism that the company could survive on its Unix and other product business even if it lost the court cases.<ref name="nw-surviveiflose">{{cite news | url=https://www.networkworld.com/article/2313214/sco-ceo--even-if-court-bids-fail--we-will-survive.html | title=SCO CEO: Even if court bids fail, we will survive | author-first=China | author-last=Martens | agency= IDG News Service | magazine=Network World | date=August 8, 2005}}</ref>

Nevertheless, there were significant challenges in the product space, as operating system revenue had been falling.<ref name="cw-legend"/>  SCO still had a market presence in some of its traditional strongholds, such as pharmacy chains and fast-food restaurants.<ref name="ci-legend"/>  But to some extent, the reliability and stability of products such as OpenServer (and the applications they were typically used for) worked against SCO, as customers did not feel an urgent need to upgrade.<ref name="cw-roadmap-2004"/>

UnixWare 7.1.4 was released in June 2004, with major new features including additional hardware support, improved security, and the abovementioned SCOx web services components.<ref>{{cite news | title=Utah Business in Brief | newspaper= The Salt Lake Tribune | date= June 16, 2004 | url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/281947188 | id= {{ProQuest|281947188}}}}</ref>  A review in ''[[Network World]]'' found that the operating system showed strength in terms of server performance and support for Apache and related open source components, but suffered in terms of hardware discovery and ease of installation.<ref name="nw-uw714">{{cite news | url=https://www.networkworld.com/article/2323441/sco-s-unixware-measures-up-with-open-source-additions.html | title=SCO's UnixWare measures up with open source additions | author-first=Tom | author-last=Henderson | magazine=Network World | date=July 12, 2004}}</ref>  The Linux Kernel Personality (LKP), which had earlier been a major selling point of UnixWare 7, was now removed from the product due to the ongoing legal complications.<ref name="nw-uw714"/>  But UnixWare 7.1.4 did come with the OpenServer Kernel Personality (OKP), which allowed OpenServer-built binary applications to run on the more powerful UnixWare platform without modification, and which had earlier been released as an add-on to UnixWare 7.1.3.<ref>{{cite press release | url=https://www.linux.com/news/sco-announces-availability-openserver-kernel-personality-unixwarer/ | title=SCO Announces Availability of OpenServer Kernel Personality on UnixWare(R) | publisher=PRNewswire | date=July 31, 2003}}</ref>

SCO announced a Unix roadmap along with the UnixWare release, intending to convince the market that it was making a strong push in software products.  Among the items talked about was [[Caldera Smallfoot|Smallfoot]], a toolkit for developing customized, small-footprint versions of UnixWare for use as an [[embedded operating system]], and an upgrade to the SCOoffice mail and messaging product.<ref name="cw-roadmap-2004">{{cite news | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QCSvxZWOn7sC&pg=PT2 | title=SCO Pushes New Unix Offerings | author-first=Todd R. | author-last=Weiss | work=Computerworld | date=June 21, 2004 | page=10}} Also sidebar "SCO's Unix Product Plan".</ref>  But a constant concern was that SCO had difficulty in attracting independent software vendors to support its operating system platform.<ref name="cwc-shoppers"/>  Perhaps the biggest such hurdle was the lack of support for current versions of the [[Oracle Database]] product.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.scosales.com/ta/kb/118106.html | title=What versions of Oracle databases are known to work on SCO Operating Systems and how do I install them? | publisher=SCO Sales | date=January 16, 2009}}</ref>  Of the problem in general, a manager at a longtime SCO replicated-site customer, [[Shoppers Drug Mart]] in Canada, that was migrating to UnixWare 7.1.4 and was otherwise happy with the product's reliability and performance, said: "[Big ISVs] are pushing SCO down to a tier-three vendor. We need a tier-one or a tier-two vendor that will do current ports and certification. We listen to vendors and watch their roadmaps and when SCO disappears that will be a signal [to move on]."<ref name="cwc-shoppers">{{cite news | author-last=Reid | author-first=Rebecca | title=SCO Laments 'Brutal' Pressure at User show | magazine=ComputerWorld Canada | date=August 20, 2004 | url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/219931563 | id={{ProQuest|219931563}} }}</ref>

The new SCOoffice release, SCOoffice Server 4.1 for OpenServer 5.0.7, came out in August 2004.<ref name="pr-soff-41">{{cite press release | url=https://esj.com/articles/2004/08/02/sco-announces-scooffice-server-41.aspx?m=1 | title=SCO Announces SCOoffice Server 4.1 | publisher=Enterprise Systems Journal | date=August 2, 2004}}</ref>  SCOoffice consisted of a mixture of proprietary code and open source components and was marketed as a drop-in alternative to [[Microsoft Exchange Server]] for small-to-medium businesses, one that would be compatible with [[Microsoft Outlook]] (and other common mail clients) but would be less expensive in total cost, be built upon on a more reliable operating system, and have a management interface that could be used by non-technical administrators.<ref name="pr-soff-41"/>  Some of the specific technology in the product for interacting with Outlook functions came from [[Bynari]].<ref>{{cite press release | title=SCO Adds SCO Insight Connector to SCO Volution Messaging Server, Providing Easy-to-use, Low Cost Alternative to Microsoft Exchange | publisher= PR Newswire | date= October 28, 2002 | url= https://www.proquest.com/docview/448923633 | id= {{ProQuest|448923633}} }}</ref> A review of the SCOoffice technology in ''[[PCQuest (magazine)|PCQuest]]'' in 2002 found its ease of installation and features to be good and that it was "a decent package for companies looking for a mail server solution."<ref name="pcq-vms">{{cite news | url=https://www.pcquest.com/fully-functional-mail-server/ | title=Other Products: Fully functional mail server | author-first=Anil | author-last=Chopra | author2-first=Sanjay | author2-last=Majumder | magazine=PCQuest | date= July 4, 2002}} Shortly after the review was published, the Volution Messaging Server was rebranded to SCOoffice.</ref>  When originally built by Caldera International, the messaging product had been based on Linux (and UnixWare via LKP),<ref name="lw-vms">{{cite news |url=http://linux.sys-con.com/node/32708 |title=Volution shows promise |author-first=Joshua |author-last=Drake |work=LinuxWorld |date=January 14, 2002 |access-date=December 31, 2021 |archive-date=April 5, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160405195658/http://linux.sys-con.com/node/32708 |url-status=dead }}</ref> but following the SCO Group's legal actions against Linux it was changed to be based on OpenServer instead,<ref name="pr-soff-41"/> with some disruption to the components that could be included within it.  The 4.1 release also contained office collaboration tools for meetings, contacts, and the like.<ref name="cwc-shoppers"/>  SCOoffice was a consistent product for the SCO Group; at least one, and usually more than one,<!-- 2, 5, 2, 1, 2, 1 --> breakout session about it was held at every Forum conference during the SCO Group era.<ref>SCO Forum Schedules, 2003 through 2008.</ref>

=== "Legend" ===
By 2005, more than 60 percent of SCO's revenue was still coming from its OpenServer product line and associated support services.<ref name="ci-legend"/>  This was despite the fact that there had been no major releases to the product in the time since the Santa Cruz Operation and Caldera Systems had merged in 2000.<ref name="ci-legend"/>  Accordingly, the SCO Group devoted a large effort, consisting of extensive research and development as well as associated product management activities, into producing the more modern OpenServer Release 6, code-named "Legend".<ref name="cw-legend"/>  After a couple of slips from announced target dates,<ref name="cw-roadmap-2004"/> it was made generally available in June 2005.<ref name="cw-legend"/>

{{Quote box|quote=The SCO Group Inc. is in the headlines more often for its legal battles than for its products these days. But last week, the software vendor wrapped up three years of development work and began shipping a major update of its Unix operating system.|source=—''Computerworld'' on the OpenServer 6 "Legend" release, 2005.<ref name="cw-legend"/>|width=27%|align=left|style=padding:8px;}}

The key idea behind Legend was to transplant the UnixWare SVR5 kernel into the OpenServer everything else.<ref name="nwc-legend"/>  This gave OpenServer 6 the ability to support 1TB file sizes, the lack of which had become a major limitation of OpenServer 5.<ref name="cw-legend">{{cite news | url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2558031/sco-upgrades-openserver-in-bid-to-keep-os-relevant.html | title=SCO Upgrades OpenServer in Bid to Keep OS Relevant | author-first= Stacy | author-last=Cowley | work=Computerworld | date=June 27, 2005}}</ref>  In addition, OpenServer 6 could support up to 32 processors, up to 64GB of RAM, had various new security capabilities such as [[SSH]], an [[IPFilter]]-based firewall, and [[IPsec]] for secure VPNs, and had faster throughput for applications which could make use of real multiple threading.<ref name="cw-legend"/>

[[Image:SCO OpenServer Release 6 Launch Event at Yankee Stadium scoreboard message June 2005.jpg|thumb|right|The Yankee Stadium scoreboard has a message of congratulations regarding the release of OpenServer 6 at the launch event held there]]

The launch event was held on June 22, 2005, at [[Yankee Stadium]] in New York City.<ref name="nwc-legend">{{cite news | url=https://www.networkcomputing.com/data-centers/sco-makes-its-pitch-openserver-6?ng_gateway_return=true&full=true | title=SCO Makes Its Pitch With OpenServer 6 | work=Network Computing | date=June 22, 2005}}</ref>  (This prompted a few industry publication headlines of the "SCO Goes To Bat With OpenServer 6" variety.<ref name="crn-legend">{{cite news | url=https://www.crn.com/news/components-peripherals/164902607/sco-goes-to-bat-with-openserver-6.htm | title=SCO Goes To Bat With OpenServer 6 | author-first=Paula | author-last=Rooney | publisher=CRN | date=June 24, 2005}}</ref>)  Hewlett-Packard noted its support for OpenServer 6 on its [[ProLiant]] systems.<ref name="cwkly-legend">{{cite news | url=https://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240074555/SCO-fuses-web-and-Unix-platforms-in-OpenServer-6 | title=SCO Group has unveiled its OpenServer 6 software, which unifies the company's web- and Unix-based operating systems to improve user productivity from a single platform | author-first=Antony | author-last=Savvas | work=ComputerWeekly | date=June 23, 2005}}</ref>  Some SCO partners were quoted as saying they intended to migrate to it.<ref name="crn-legend"/>

While some analysts, such as those for IDS and Quandt Analytics, expressed the belief that the release could help SCO upgrade and hold onto its existing customer base, an analyst for Illuminata Inc. was not so optimistic, saying, "In a word, no. Looked at in isolation, there's a lot to like about the new OpenServer. It adds a lot of new capabilities and it finally largely merges the OpenServer and UnixWare trees. But OpenServer is in wild decline – the victim of Windows, Linux and years of SCO mismanagement. Today's SCO is a pariah of the IT industry ... OpenServer is a niche product; SCO needs a miracle."<ref name="ci-legend">{{cite news | url=https://www.channelinsider.com/tech-companies/sco-openserver-6-pushes-unix-line-forward/ | title=SCO OpenServer 6 Pushes Unix Line Forward | author-first= Steven | author-last=Vaughan-Nichols | work=Channel Insider | date=June 22, 2005}}</ref>

In practice, despite the good reviews it got from a technical perspective, sales of OpenServer 6 were modest.<ref name="slt-ride"/>  The company continued to do poorly financially, with fiscal 2005 producing revenues of $36 million and a loss on that of almost $11 million, while fiscal 2006 saw revenues of $29 million together with a loss of over $16 million.<ref name="sec-ar-2006">{{cite press release | url=https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1102542/000110465907002893/a07-2060_1ex99d1.htm | title=The SCO Group Announces Fourth Quarter and Fiscal 2006 Results | publisher=Securities and Exchange Commission | date=January 17, 2007 }}</ref>  Reductions in staff continued and the Scotts Valley office was shut down in late 2006.<ref>See for instance its inclusion in the 10-K filing for FY2006 but omission for FY2007.{{cite web | url=https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1102542/000089102007000020/v26719e10vk.htm#110 | title=Form 10-K: For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006: The SCO Group, Inc. | publisher=Securities and Exchange Commission | date=January 26, 2007}} and {{cite web | url=https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1102542/000089102008000017/v37348e10vk.htm | title=Form 10-K: For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007: The SCO Group, Inc. | publisher=Securities and Exchange Commission | date=January 28, 2008}}</ref>
{{clear}}

=== Mobility and Me Inc. ===
[[Image:SCO Group offices in Murray Hill NJ April 2006.jpg|thumb|left|SCO's Murray Hill, New Jersey office building, as taken in 2006 by a Palm Treo 650 smartphone being used for some of the Me Inc. development work being done there]]

The SCO Group's biggest initiative to find a new software business came with what it called Me Inc., first announced at a [[DEMO conference]] in California in September 2005.<ref name="dn-meinc">{{cite news | author-first=Brice | author-last=Wallace | title=Network Platform Unveiled by SCO | newspaper= Deseret News | date=September 20, 2005 | url= https://www.proquest.com/docview/351405599 | id={{ProQuest|351405599}}}}</ref>

Me Inc. sought to capitalize on the emergence of [[smartphone]]s in that it would provide both [[mobile app]]s that would run on the  phones and an architecture involving a network "edge processor" that would offload processing and storage from the phones themselves and handle authentication, session management, and aggregation of data requests.<ref name="dn-meinc"/><ref name="sdt-meinc"/>  In such an approach, Me Inc. represented a hosted [[software as a service]] (SaaS) offering,<ref name="sdt-meinc"/> with the edge processor representing what would later become referred to as both [[edge computing]] and mobile backend as a service. Some of the engineering effort behind Me Inc. came from former Vultus staff, following the failure of the prior SCOx efforts to find a market.<ref name="iwk-meinc"/>  Me Inc. initially targeted the [[Palm Treo]] line of smartphones.<ref name="sdt-meinc"/>  Subsequent support was put into place for the [[Windows Mobile]] line of smartphones and some others.<ref name="iwk-meinc"/><ref name="sdt-meinc"/>

The first services from Me Inc. were Shout, in which users could broadcast text or voice messages from a phone to large groups; Vote, in which users could post surveys to large groups and quickly receive a tally back; and Action, in which users could post tasks for others to do and monitor their statuses.<ref name="dn-meinc"/>  An early user of the Shout service was [[Utah State University]], which used it for broadcasting messages to members of its sports booster organization.<ref name="dn-meinc"/>  Me Inc. services were subsequently used by other Utah organizations as well, including the [[Utah Jazz]], the [[BYU Cougars]], and Mayor of Provo [[Lewis Billings]].<ref name="kr-meinc"/>

In February 2006, SCO announced that the edge processor had the product name EdgeClick.<ref name="kr-meinc">{{cite news | author-last=Mims | author-first=Bob | title=SCO Group Unveils New Links for Computers | agency= Knight Ridder Tribune Business News | date= February 28, 2006 | url= https://www.proquest.com/docview/461331743 | id={{ProQuest|461331743}}}}</ref>  The development environment for it was branded the EdgeBuilder SDK.<ref name="slt-ride"/>  In addition, a website <code>EdgeClickPark.com</code> was announced, that would act as an Internet ecosystem for the development and selling of mobile applications and services.<ref name="kr-meinc"/>  As SCO marketing executive Tim Negris said, the idea of EdgeClickPark was to provide a mechanism for "individuals and organizations of all kinds to participate in developing, selling and using digital services."<ref name="kr-meinc"/>  Many of these services would come not from SCO itself but from SCO partners, resellers, and ISVs,<ref name="sdt-edgeclick"/> a channel it was familiar with from  the original SCO era.<ref name="sdt-edgeclick"/>  This was reminiscent of McBride's goal for the pre-lawsuits SCOBiz and the post-lawsuits SCO Marketplace Initiative, and McBride had similarly large ambitions for Me Inc. and EdgeClickPark, envisioning it having the same role for mobile software that [[iTunes]] had at the time for digital music.<ref name="iwk-meinc"/>

McBride, who had been looking at various new business opportunities for SCO to enter, saw the company's mobility initiative as something that could become a big success in both the business and consumer spaces, saying "We don't know for sure, but we have a little bit of a spark in our eyes that this will be a big deal."<ref name="dn-meinc"/>  The SCO Group's chief technology officer, Sandy Gupta, stated that for the company,  "this is clearly a big switch in paradigm."<ref name="slt-ride"/>  Industry analysts thought that Me Inc. was aimed at something there was clearly a large market for.<ref name="iwk-meinc"/>  As one said, "The operating system market is an increasingly difficult place to compete. SCO Group really does need more diversity [and] these recent pushes represent significant diversification of their product portfolio."<ref name="slt-ride"/> ''Software Development Times'' commended SCO for coming up with the EdgeClickPark idea, saying that it showed an "interesting flair" in providing a place for partnerships and business development.<ref name="sdt-edgeclick">{{cite news | title=Editorials: The Two Sides of SCO | magazine=Software Development Times  | date=June 1, 2006 | page= 32 | url= https://www.proquest.com/docview/232480079 | id={{ProQuest|232480079}}}}</ref>  The company also undertook the proposing of customized mobile applications for various businesses and organizations, using the Me Inc. platform as a starting point.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.eweek.com/mobile/sco-ventures-into-mobile-device-applications/ | title=SCO Ventures into Mobile Device Applications | author-first=Steven J. | author-last=Vaughan-Nichols | date=September 19, 2005 | magazine=eWeek}}</ref>

However, the SCO Group being able to succeed in these efforts faced somewhat long odds, in part due to their being up against many kinds of competition in the mobile space and in part due to the negative feelings about SCO that their campaign against Linux had engendered.<ref name="iwk-meinc">{{cite news | url=https://www.informationweek.com/software/this-time-sco-offers-mobile-web-services-not-lawsuits | title=This Time, SCO Offers Mobile Web Services, Not Lawsuits | author-first=Larry | author-last=Greenemeier | work=InformationWeek | date=September 23, 2005 }}</ref>
Nevertheless, it was all viewed as a positive development; as ''[[Software Development Times]]'' summarized in a subheading, "Strategy shift to mobile seen as better 'than suing people'".<ref name="sdt-meinc">{{cite news | author-last=Correia | author-first= Edward J. | title=SCO Presents a New Me to Market | magazine= Software Development Times | date=October 15, 2005 | page= 27 | url= https://www.proquest.com/docview/232485486 | id= {{ProQuest|232485486}} }}</ref>

[[Image:SCO Forum 2006 stage and mobility theme.jpg|thumb|right|"Mobility Everywhere" was the theme of SCO Forum 2006]]

SCO's mobility initiative was a main theme of the 2006 instance of its SCO Forum conference,<ref name="crn-2006"/> held at [[The Mirage]] in Las Vegas. McBride said, "Today is the coming out party for Me Inc. Over the next few years, we want to be a leading provider of mobile application software to the marketplace. ... This is a seminal moment for us."<ref name="crn-2006">{{cite news | url=https://www.crn.com/news/networking/193000193/sco-on-the-go-with-mobile-saas-platform.htm | title=SCO On The Go With Mobile SaaS Platform | author-first=Paula | author-last=Rooney | publisher=CRN | date=September 15, 2006}}</ref>  The Forum 2006 schedule, subtitled "Mobility Everywhere", held some nineteen different breakout and training sessions related to Me Inc. and EdgeClick, compared to twenty-six sessions for operating system related topics.<ref>SCO Forum 2006 Schedule.</ref>  Eager to drum up interest in the EdgeClick infrastructure and to get developers to attend the 2006 instance of SCO Forum, McBride offered a prize to the developer of the best application built from the EdgeBuilder SDK: a [[BMW M5#E60/E61 M5 (2004–2010)|507-horsepower, V10-engined BMW M5 sports sedan]].<ref name="slt-ride">{{cite news | author-last=Mims | author-first=Bob | title=SCO Group Offers a Nice Ride for New Mobile Tech Ideas | newspaper= The Salt Lake Tribune | date= June 20, 2006 | url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/282124016 | id={{ProQuest|282124016}}}}</ref>

One new mobility offering, HipCheck, which allowed the remote monitoring and administration of business-critical servers on smartphones, was given its debut announcement and demonstration at Forum.<ref name="nw-2006">{{cite news | url=https://www.networkworld.com/article/2305686/sco-aims-to-reinvent-itself-through-mobility.html | title=SCO aims to reinvent itself through mobility | author-first=Elizabeth | author-last=Montalbano | agency=IDG News Service | magazine=Network World | date=August 7, 2006}}</ref>  The HipCheck service, which gave system administrators the ability to conduct secure actions from their phone to correct some kinds of server anomalies or respond to user requests such as resetting passwords,<ref name="bb-hipcheck"/> was officially made available in October 2006, with support for monitoring agents running on various levels of Windows and Unix systems.<ref>{{cite press release | title=SCO Ships HipCheck Mobile Service for Proactive Mobile Administration of Servers and PCs | publisher= PR Newswire | date=October 5, 2006 | url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/451098282 | id= {{ProQuest|451098282}} }}</ref>  Several upgrades to HipCheck were subsequently made available.<ref name="bb-hipcheck">{{cite press release | url=https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/2007-05-24/sco-announces-new-release-of-hipcheck-tm-with-expanded-mobile | title=SCO Announces New Release of HipCheck(TM) with Expanded Mobile | publisher=Business Wire | date=May 24, 2007}}</ref>

Developed by SCO for [[FranklinCovey]], a Utah-based company that had a line of paper-based planning and organizational products, FCmobilelife was an app for handling personal and organizational task and goal management.<ref name="slt-fcml">{{cite news | url=https://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=/ci_13273255 | title=In Utah, we have an app for that | author-first=Tom | author-last=Harvey | newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune | date=September 9, 2009 }}</ref>  (In 2006, SCO had been building a similar app for [[Day-Timer]] named DT4,<ref>{{cite news | title=SCO Tries New Tack | newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune | date= August 7, 2006 | url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/282084799  | author-first=Bob | author-last=Mims| id={{ProQuest|282084799}} }}</ref> but that collaboration fell through.)  In particular, the FCmobilelife app emulated FranklinCovey's methodologies for planning and productivity.<ref name="ub-fcml"/>  Initial versions were released for the [[Windows Mobile]] and [[BlackBerry]] phones;<ref name="mdl-fcml">{{cite news | url=https://www.marketingdive.com/ex/mobilemarketer/cms/news/commerce/2725.html | title=Planning products brand FranklinCovey organizes mobile strategy | author-first=Mickey Alam | author-last=Khan | publisher=Marketing Dive | access-date=December 25, 2021}}</ref> an app for the [[iPhone]] was released in mid-2009.<ref name="ub-fcml">{{cite news | title=Salt Lake City | publisher= Utah Business | date= May 2009 | page=12 | via= Gale General OneFile <!--(accessed December 25, 2021).--> | url= https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A201865718/ITOF?u=wikipedia&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=f6e1aed9}}</ref>

In October 2008, during [[SCO Tec Forum 2008]], the last Forum ever held, the SCO Mobile Server platform was announced, which was a bundling of the Edgeclick server-side functionality and Me Inc. client development kit on top of a UnixWare 7 or Openserver 6 system.<ref name="bb-scoms">{{cite press release | url=https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/2008-10-20/sco-announces-availability-of-sco-mobile-server-sdk | title=SCO Announces Availability of SCO Mobile Server SDK | publisher=PR Newswire | date=October 20, 2008}}</ref>  By then UnixWare itself, the company's flagship product, had not seen a new release in some four years.<ref name="ars-2008-0"/>

In the end, despite the company's efforts, the mobile services offerings did not attract that much attention or revenues in the marketplace.<ref name="ars-2008-0"/>

== Life in bankruptcy ==
=== An adverse ruling ===
On August 10, 2007, SCO suffered a major adverse ruling in the ''SCO v. Novell'' case that rejected SCO's claim of ownership of Unix-related copyrights and undermined much of the rest of its overall legal position.<ref name="nyt-aug2007"/><ref name="ars-aug2007"/><ref name="dh-2008"/>  Judge [[Dale A. Kimball]] of the [[United States District Court for the District of Utah]] issued a 102-page summary judgment which found that Novell, not the SCO Group, was the owner of the Unix copyrights; that Novell could force SCO to drop its copyrights-based claims against IBM; and most immediately from a financial perspective, that SCO owed Novell 95 percent of the revenues generated by the licensing of Unix to companies such as Microsoft and Sun.<ref name="ars-aug2007">{{cite news | url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2007/08/sco-never-owned-unix-copyrights-owes-novell-95-percent-of-unix-royalties/ | title=SCO never owned UNIX copyrights, owes Novell 95 percent of UNIX royalties | author-first=Ryan | author-last=Paul | work=Ars Technica | date=August 12, 2007}}</ref>  The only SCO claims left intact by Kimball's judgment were ones against IBM related to contractual provisions from Project Monterey.<ref name="nyt-aug2007">{{cite news | url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/11/technology/11novell.html | title=Judge Says Unix Copyrights Rightfully Belong to Novell | author-first=John | newspaper=The New York Times | date=August 11, 2007 | author-last=Markoff}}</ref>  As the Utah Valley-based ''[[Daily Herald (Utah)|Daily Herald]]'' newspaper subsequently wrote, Kimball's ruling was "a massive legal setback" for SCO.<ref name="dh-2008"/>

An appeal was filed.<ref name="dh-2008"/>  Meanwhile, the company had few options left,<ref name="ars-aug2007"/> as it had not been doing well anyway – by mid-2007, SCO Group stock had fallen to around $1.56 in value<ref name="nyt-aug2007"/> – and it now potentially owed Novell more money than it could pay.  On September 14, 2008,<ref name="nw-darl-gone"/> the SCO Group filed a voluntary petition for reorganization under [[Chapter 11, Title 11, United States Code|Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code]].<ref name="bankruptcy">{{cite press release | url=http://ir.sco.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=264124 | title=The SCO Group Files Chapter 11 to Protect Assets as It Addresses Potential Financial and Legal Challenges | publisher=The SCO Group | date=September 14, 2007 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071006065244/http://ir.sco.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=264124 |archive-date=October 6, 2007}}</ref><ref name="slt-2011-0"/>  Development work continued on both the operating system and mobility fronts,<ref name="bb-scoms"/> but selling a technology product while in bankruptcy was challenging.  And from this point on, many of SCO's actions were dependent upon the approval of the [[United States Bankruptcy Court]] for the District of Delaware.<ref name="reut-auction"/>  Annual results for fiscal 2007 showed yet another decline for the company, with revenues falling to $22 million and a loss of nearly $7 million.<ref name="cnet-fy2007">{{cite news | url=https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/partners-fund-sco-groups-next-lease-on-life/ | title=Partners fund SCO Group's next lease on life | author-first=Stephen | author-last=Shankland | publisher=CNET | date=February 14, 2008 }}</ref>  And because of the bankruptcy filing, SCO was delisted from NASDAQ on December 27, 2007.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/071227/lath028.html?.v=101 |title=SCO Receives Nasdaq Notice Letter |date=December 27, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071229224718/http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/071227/lath028.html?.v=101 |archive-date=December 29, 2007}}</ref>  Downsizing continued, and the New Jersey development office was moved to smaller space in [[Florham Park, New Jersey]] in late 2008.<ref>See for instance the difference between the 10-K filing for FY2007 and the one for FY2008: {{cite web | url=https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1102542/000089102008000017/v37348e10vk.htm | title=Form 10-K: For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007: The SCO Group, Inc. | publisher=Securities and Exchange Commission | date=January 28, 2008}} and {{cite web | url=https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1102542/000095013409001443/v51236e10vk.htm | title=Form 10-K: For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008: The SCO Group, Inc. | publisher=Securities and Exchange Commission | date=January 29, 2009}}</ref>

=== Potential buyers ===
[[Image:SCO Tec Forum 2008 opening session with Darl McBride and Stephen Norris.jpg|thumb|right|Stephen Norris appearing at the SCO Tec Forum 2008 conference in Las Vegas, along with Darl McBride and Jeff Hunsaker]]

The interest of [[Stephen Norris Capital Partners]] in the SCO Group started in February 2008, when it put forward a $100 million reorganization and debt financing plan for the company, which it would then take private.<ref name="wsj-2008"/><ref name="ars-2008-0">{{cite news | url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2008/02/private-equity-firm-pours-100-million-into-sco-money-pit/ | title=Private equity firm pours $100 million into SCO money pit | author-first=Ryan | author-last=Paul | work=Ars Technica | date=February 15, 2008}}</ref>  [[Stephen L. Norris]] had been a co-founder of the large and well-known private equity firm [[The Carlyle Group]].<ref name="wsj-2008">{{cite news | url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB120301098306668879 | title=SCO Gets Up to $100 Million Financing  | author-first=John | author-last=Flowers | newspaper=The Wall Street Journal | date=February 14, 2008}}</ref>  There was also an unnamed Middle East partner in the proposed deal; the [[Associated Press]] reported that Prince [[Al-Waleed bin Talal]] of Saudi Arabia was involved.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/15/business/NA-FIN-US-SCO-Group-Investors.php|title=Software company SCO gets help from Norris and a Middle East investor, hopes to go private|date=February 15, 2008|agency=Associated Press|newspaper=International Herald Tribune}}</ref>
But after a couple of months of [[due diligence]] investigation of SCO's operations, finances, and legal situation,<ref name="dh-2008">{{cite news | url=https://www.heraldextra.com/business/sco-negotiating-new-ch-plan/article_15707ee3-d5d9-51ad-a0a1-ca9152dbe21d.html | title=SCO negotiating new Ch. 11 plan  | author-first=Grace | author-last=Leong | newspaper=Daily Herald | location=Provo, Utah | date=April 3, 2008 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191222135748/https://www.heraldextra.com/business/sco-negotiating-new-ch-plan/article_15707ee3-d5d9-51ad-a0a1-ca9152dbe21d.html | archive-date=December 22, 2019}}</ref>
Stephen Norris Capital Partners considered a different course of action, instead proposing to purchase SCO assets outright.<ref name="ars-2008">{{cite news | url=https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/04/sco-reorganization-plan-crumbles-as-company-dies/ | title=Bankruptcy trustee skeptical as SCO punts on reorg plan | author-first=Ryan | author-last=Paul | work=Ars Technica | date=April 3, 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695266913,00.html | title=Insolvent SCO scraps its reorganization plan | author-first=Steven | author-last=Church | agency=Bloomberg News | newspaper=Deseret News | date=April 3, 2008 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080407031149/http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695266913,00.html | archive-date=April 7, 2008}}</ref>
Norris appeared on stage at Forum in October 2008, where possible acquisition and investments plans were shown to attendees.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.sco.com/2008forum/ | title=SCO Tec Forum 2008 | publisher=The SCO Group | access-date=December 21, 2019}} See [http://www.sco.com/2008forum/presentations/2008_TecForum_keynote_FINAL.pdf keynote presentation], slide 39ff.</ref>

The company continued to have declining financial performance; the yearly results for fiscal 2008 showed revenues falling to $16 million and a loss of $8.7 million.<ref name="sec-ar-fy2008">{{cite web | url=https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1102542/000095013409001443/v51236e10vk.htm | title=Form 10-K: For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008: The SCO Group, Inc. | publisher=Securities and Exchange Commission | date=January 29, 2009}}</ref>   In January 2009, the SCO Group asked the bankruptcy court to approve a plan wherein its Unix and mobility assets would be put up for public auction.<ref name="reut-auction">{{cite news | url=https://www.reuters.com/article/scogroup/update-2-sco-group-plans-auction-sees-investor-interest-idUSN1338179220090113 | title=SCO Group plans auction, sees investor interest (Update 2) | work=Reuters | date=January 13, 2009}}</ref> <!-- (earlier than the one have for the UniXis article) -->

That plan did not materialize,<ref name="slt-2011-0"/> and instead in June 2009 a new proposal emerged from a combination of [[Gulf Capital Partners]], of which Stephen Norris was an investor, and [[MerchantBridge]], a London-based, Middle East-focused private equity group, to create an entity called UnXis, which would then buy SCO's software business assets for $2.4 million.<ref name="ars-2009">{{cite news | url=https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2009/06/sco-wants-to-keep-waging-legal-war-after-24m-asset-sale/ | title=SCO wants to keep waging legal war after $2.4M asset sale | author-first=Ryan | author-last=Paul | work=Ars Technica | date=June 23, 2009}}</ref><ref name="dh-2009"/>  At that point the SCO Group had fewer than 70 employees left.<ref name="dh-2009">{{cite news | url=https://www.newspapers.com/image/467096133/?terms=unxis | title=SCO to resume fight with Novell, IBM | author-first=Grace | author-last=Leong | newspaper=Daily Herald | location=Provo, Utah | date=August 26, 2009 | page=B4 | via=Newspapers.com}}</ref>  This latest plan, too, did not move forward.

=== Virtualization ===
[[Image:Interior of The SCO Group offices Florham Park NJ December 2008.jpg|thumb|left|The final offices of the New Jersey Unix work (going back to Bell Labs) was in a small portion of a building in Florham Park, New Jersey, that was used by the SCO Group in the 2008–2011 period]]

The SCO Group's last significant engineering effort revolved around capitalizing on a resurgence of industry interest in [[hardware virtualization]].  In this case, such virtualization allowed SCO operating systems to run on newer, more powerful hardware even if SCO did not have support or certification for that hardware, and also allowed SCO customers to take advantage of [[server consolidation]] and other benefits of a virtual environment.<ref name="sco-virt-preso">{{cite web | url=http://www.sco.com/products/openserver507v/Customer_Presentation_Virtualization.pdf | title=SCO Virtualization: Presentation to Customers | publisher=The SCO Group | date=2009 | access-date=December 9, 2021 | pages=19ff}}</ref>  The initial such release, SCO OpenServer 5.0.7V, came out in August 2009, with support for running on [[VMware ESXi|VMware ESX/ESXi]] hypervisors.<ref name="pr-507v"><!-- {{cite press release | url=https://www.networkcomputing.com/data-centers/sco-group-releases-virtualized-version-popular-openserver-507-unix-operating-system | title=The SCO Group Releases Virtualized Version Of Popular OpenServer 5.0.7 UNIX Operating System | agency=PR Newswire | publication=Network Computing | date=August 20, 2009}} -->{{cite news | url=https://techmonitor.ai/technology/software/sco_releases_virtualised_version_of_unix_operating_system_090819 | title=SCO releases virtualised version of UNIX operating system | work=Computergram International | date=August 18, 2009}}</ref> The technical changes involved included adding enhanced virtual drivers for storage, networking, and peripherals to the operating system as well as tuning its memory management strategies for the virtual environment.<ref name="sco-virt-preso"/><ref name="pr-507v"/>
The virtualization push also included a change in SCO's licensing infrastructure, wherein now licensing would be done on an annual subscription basis.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.scosales.com/ta/kb/127467.html | title=What are the license durations and registration requirements for Openserver 5.0.7V Licenses? | publisher=The SCO Group | date=August 18, 2009 | access-date=December 12, 2021}}</ref><!-- also Xinuos http://www.sco.com/products/unix/virtualization/faq.html -->

The company said it would make similar 'V' releases for UnixWare 7.1.4 and OpenServer 6 in the future,<ref name="pr-507v"/> but no such releases took place during the SCO Group's lifetime.  However, support for the [[Microsoft Hyper-V]] hypervisor for OpenServer 5.0.7V was added in early 2010.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.sco.com/products/openserver507v/hyperv/openserver507v_v.pdf | title= SCO OpenServer™ 5.0.7V for Microsoft® Hyper-V™ Server Getting Started Guide | publisher=The SCO Group | date=February 17, 2010 | access-date=December 12, 2021}}</ref>
{{clear}}

=== Trustee and trial ===
On August 25, 2009, [[Edward N. Cahn]], a former [[United States federal judge|United States district judge]] of the [[United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania]] and a counsel for the law firm of [[Blank Rome]], was appointed Chapter 11 trustee for The SCO Group.<ref>{{cite letter |first=Edward |last=Cahn |recipient= |subject=Appointment as the Chapter 11 trustee for The SCO Group, Inc. and SCO Operations, Inc. |language= |date=September 4, 2009 |url= |access-date= |author-mask= | publisher=Blank Rome LLP}}</ref>

In October 2009, a restructuring requested by trustee Cahn led to the termination of McBride and the elimination of the CEO position; the existing COO, Jeff Hunsaker, became the top executive in the company.<ref name="nw-darl-gone">{{cite news | url=https://www.networkworld.com/article/2251545/sco-fires-ceo-mcbride-as-it-tries-to-emerge-from-bankruptcy.html | title=SCO fires CEO McBride as it tries to emerge from bankruptcy | author-first=Jon | author-last=Brodkin | magazine=Network World | date=October 19, 2009}}</ref>  Perhaps the kindest industry press assessment of McBride's tenure came in a column from Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols in ''[[Computerworld]]'', who wrote, "You have to give McBride credit. While I dislike SCO, he did an amazing job of fighting a hopeless battle. It's a pity he was working so hard and so well for such a fundamentally wrong cause."<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2467978/sco-fires-ceo-darl-mcbride.html | title=SCO fires CEO Darl McBride | author-first=Steven J. | author-last=Vaughan-Nichols | work=Computerworld | date=October 19, 2009}}</ref>

SCO had appealed the August 2007 summary judgment against it in ''SCO v. Novell'' and eventually an appeals court had ruled that a trial had to be held on the issue.<ref name="bbw-verdict">{{cite news | title=Novell Owns Unix Copyrights, Jury Says in Defeat for SCO Group | author-first=Susan | author-last=Decker | magazine=Bloomberg BusinessWeek | date=March 30, 2010}}</ref>  A three-week trial was held in March 2010, at the conclusion of which the jury reached a unanimous verdict that the Novell did not transfer the Unix copyrights to the Santa Cruz Operation in 1995.<ref name="dn-verdict">{{cite news | title=Jury sides with Novell in Unix copyright ownership case against Lindon-based SCO Group | author-first=Lois M. | author-last=Collins | newspaper=Deseret News | date=March 30, 2010}}</ref>  The decision spelled the end for the large majority of the SCO Group's legal offensive, leaving only contractual claims against IBM to possibly still pursue.<ref name="slt-verdict">{{cite news | title=Jury says Novell owns Unix copyrights | author-first=Tom | author-last=Harvey | newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune | date=March 30, 2010}}</ref>

=== Sale of assets ===
In April 2010, SCO's mobility software assets were sold to former CEO McBride for $100,000.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/SCO-Group-auctions-UNIX-division-1080800.html | title=SCO Group auctions UNIX division | first=Detlef | last=Borchers | publisher=The H | date=September 16, 2010 }}</ref> In September 2010 the SCO Group finally put up the remainder of its non-lawsuit assets for public auction.<ref name="iw-2010">{{cite news | url=https://www.infoworld.com/article/2626062/sco-puts-unix-assets-up-for-auction.html | title=SCO puts Unix assets up for auction | author-first=Joab | author-last=Jackson | magazine=InfoWorld | date=September 16, 2010}}</ref>
Thus in February 2011, another proposal was made, this time for $600,000, with this iteration of a purchasing company being backed by Norris, MerchantBridge, and [[Gerson Global Advisors]].<ref name="slt-2011-0">{{cite news | url=https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=51223086&itype=CMSID | title=Utah's SCO in deal to sell Unix operating system | author-first=Tom | author-last=Harvey | newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune | date= February 14, 2011}}</ref>
The bankruptcy court approved this proposal, as the only other bid submitted was for $18.<ref name="slt-2011-1">{{cite news | url=https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=51388798&itype=cmsid | title=Judge approves sale of SCO's Unix system | author-first=Tom | author-last=Harvey | newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune | date= March 8, 2011}}</ref>

The sale was closed on April 11, 2011, with Stephen Norris Capital Partners and MerchantBridge being the final buyers, and [[UnXis]] was formed.<ref name="slt-unxis">{{cite news| url=http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/51606446-79/unix-sco-bolandz-bankruptcy.html.csp| title=SCO closes sale of Unix system to Nevada company| author-last=Harvey| author-first=Tom| date=April 11, 2011| newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune}}</ref>  In particular, UnXis took over the product names, ownership, and maintenance of The SCO Group's flagship operating system products, OpenServer and UnixWare.<ref name="zdnet-2011">{{cite news| url=http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/sco-is-dead-sco-unix-lives-on/8685| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110417235714/http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/sco-is-dead-sco-unix-lives-on/8685| url-status=dead| archive-date=April 17, 2011| title=SCO is dead, SCO Unix lives on| author-first=Steven J.| author-last=Vaughan-Nichols| publisher=ZDNet| date=April 14, 2011}}</ref><ref name="slt-tsg">{{cite news| url=http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=22532518&itype=storyID| title=Former SCO Group wants bankruptcy converted to liquidation| author-first=Tom| author-last=Harvey| newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune| date=August 10, 2012}}</ref>  It also took over some {{val|32000|fmt=commas}} service contracts for existing SCO Group customers;<ref name="ap-2011">{{cite news | url=https://www.newspapers.com/image/286827230/?terms=unxis | title=Las Vegas company buys Unix | author-first=Josh | author-last=Loftin | agency=Associated Press | newspaper=The Spectrum & Daily News | location=St. George, Utah | date=April 14, 2011 | page=C2 | via=Newspapers.com}}</ref> these customers represented some 82 countries and business segments such as finance, retail, fast food, and governmental entities.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://in.pcmag.com/linuxazi/31192/sco-group-assets-officially-sold-to-unxis | title=SCO Group Assets Officially Sold to UnXis | author-first=Mark | author-last=Hachman | magazine=PC World | date=April 12, 2011 | archive-date=December 21, 2019 | access-date=December 26, 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191221175647/https://in.pcmag.com/linuxazi/31192/sco-group-assets-officially-sold-to-unxis | url-status=dead }}</ref>  It would be up to UnXis to hire SCO Group employees, of whom, after years of layoffs and attrition, only handfuls were still left at various locations (for instance, at the Lindon, Utah site, only 7 or 8 people still worked, compared with 115 as recently as February 2008).<ref name="slt-unxis"/>

The SCO Group's litigation rights against IBM and Novell did not transfer, as UnXis said it had no involvement or interest in such activities.<ref name="slt-unxis" /><ref name="zdnet-2011"/>  What was left of The SCO Group renamed itself to The TSG Group.<ref name="slt-unxis" /><ref name="slt-tsg" />

== Aftermath ==
=== The TSG Group ===
The TSG Group did not have employees ''per se''; any at the Utah site not hired by UnXis were let go.<ref name="slt-appeal-2011"/>  The jury trial verdict was appealed, but in August 2011 the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit|U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals]] upheld the verdict and the judge's orders following it,<ref name="slt-appeal-2011">{{cite news | url=https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=52485155&itype=CMSID | title=Court rules against Utah's SCO over Unix copyrights | author-first=Tom | author-last=Harvey | newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune | date=August 30, 2011}}</ref> thus bringing to a final end ''SCO v. Novell''.<ref name="ars-2013"/>

However, in November 2011 the bankruptcy trustee decided to go on with the surviving contractual claims against IBM, saying that "the Novell ruling does not impact the viability of the estate's claims against IBM."<ref>{{cite news | url=https://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=/sltrib/money/52863769-79/ibm-sco-lawsuit-novell.html.csp | title=Utah's SCO Group, near dead, tries to revive IBM lawsuit | author-first=Tom | author-last=Harvey | newspaper=The Salt Lake Tribune | date=November 8, 2011}}</ref>  The ''SCO v. IBM'' case had previously been closed pending the result of the ''SCO v. Novell'' case.<ref name="slt-tsg"/>

Nonetheless, there was no actual business being conducted by the TSG Group, and in August 2012 they filed to convert their status from Chapter 11 reorganization to [[Chapter 7, Title 11, United States Code|Chapter 7 liquidation]],<ref name="cw-chap7">{{cite news | url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2725278/the-legacy-that-sco-inflicted-on-linux.html | title=The legacy that SCO inflicted on Linux | author-first=Brian | author-last=Proffitt | work=Computerworld | date=August 10, 2012}}</ref> <!--TODO cw-chap7 "The lesson from SCO is, ultimately, a lesson in hubris. They tried too much with too little." --> stating that "there is no reasonable chance of 'rehabilitation'".<ref name="slt-tsg"/>

In June 2013, a judge granted the motion of the brankruptcy trustee and reopened consideration of ''SCO v. IBM''.<ref name="ars-2013">{{cite news | url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/its-back-district-court-judge-revives-sco-v-ibm/ | title=It's back: District court judge revives SCO v IBM | author-first=Lee | author-last=Hutchinson | website=Ars Technica | date=June 17, 2013}}</ref>  The revived case moved slowly, with a ruling in 2016 being in the favorable direction to IBM,<ref>{{cite news | url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/03/linux-kernel-lawsuit-sco-v-ibm-is-alive-13-years-and-counting/ | title=Linux kernel lawsuit SCO v IBM is alive, 13 years and counting | author-first=David | author-last=Kravets | website=Ars Technica | date=March 31, 2016}}</ref> but one in 2017 favorable towards continuing the SCO claims.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/appeals-court-keeps-alive-the-never-ending-linux-case-sco-v-ibm/ | title=Appeals court keeps alive the never-ending Linux case, SCO v. IBM | author-first=Cyrus | author-last=Farivar | website=Ars Technica | date=October 30, 2017}}</ref>  Industry publications greeted these developments with headlines of the "What is dead may never die" variety.<ref name="ars-2013"/>

UnXis changed its name to [[Xinuos]] in 2013 and focused on continuing support for UnixWare and OpenServer customers as well as in 2016 releasing OpenServer 10, a [[FreeBSD]]-based product that legacy customers could migrate to.<ref name="cabuzz-2016">{{cite news | url=https://channelbuzz.ca/2016/01/xinuos-launches-modernization-of-sco-openserver-with-openserver-10-16068/ | title=Xinuos launches modernization of SCO OpenServer with OpenServer 10 | author-first=Mark | author-last=Cox | publisher=ChannelBuzz.ca | date=January 22, 2016}}</ref>  By 2022, however, the OpenServer 10 product had been dropped.<ref>Compare the archived Xinuos website [https://web.archive.org/web/20220713013523/https://www.xinuos.com/ from July 13, 2022] to the archived Xinuos website [https://web.archive.org/web/20221127092403/https://www.xinuos.com/ from November 27, 2022].</ref>

McBride turned his purchase of SCO's mobility assets into a company called Shout TV Inc., which was founded in late 2011 and provided social media engagement for sports fans during live events by offering trivia games and prize contests.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/how-to/growth-strategies/2015/09/how-darl-mcbride-shout-tv-merges-sports-and-mobile.html | title=League of Extraordinary CEOs: How this CEO used a passion for sports to build a unique social media platform | author-first=Steve | author-last=Blue | work=The Business Journals | date=September 14, 2015}}</ref>  By 2015, Shout TV had experienced some success, especially in partnership with the Spanish football club [[Real Madrid]].<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Global/Issues/2015/05/01/People-and-Pop-Culture/Hangin-With.aspx | title=Hangin' With ... Shout TV Founder & CEO Darl McBride | author-first=Tyler | author-last=Everett | date=May 1, 2015 | magazine=Sports Business Journal }}</ref>  The assets of Shout TV were transferred to a company known as MMA Global Inc. in 2018.<ref>{{cite press release | url=https://www.prweb.com/releases/mma-global-inc-purchases-mobile-gaming-platform-from-shout-tv-announces-availability-of-daily-millionaire-game-company-lands-top-25-computer-executive-darl-mcbride-856242831.html | title=MMA Global Inc Purchases Mobile Gaming Platform From Shout TV | publisher=PRweb | date=October 31, 2018}}</ref>

===Final conclusion of lawsuits===
[[Image:Tom All Alone's, Bleak House (1852-3) plate.png|thumb|right|upright=0.67|''SCO v. IBM'' only seemed to go on as long as ''[[Jarndyce and Jarndyce]]''<ref>See for example {{cite tweet | user=wood5y |number=1432678245619613696 |title=It will still have taken less time than Jarndyce & Jarndyce in Dickens' Bleak House.}}</ref>]]

In August 2021, word came of a possible final settlement in the ''SCO v. IBM'' case, wherein documents filed in the case indicated that the bankruptcy trustee for TSG Group and IBM appeared to be on the verge of settling the outstanding, Project Monterey-based, claims in the matter for $14.25 million.<ref name="reg-settlement"/>  While the amount was far less than the SCO Group had originally sought when it began the lawsuits, the trustee recommended accepting the settlement, because "ultimate success of the Trustee's claims against IBM is uncertain" and that pursuing the matter further would be expensive and that "the Settlement Agreement provides an immediate and substantial monetary recovery and creates important liquidity for the benefit of all creditors and claimants."<ref name="reg-settlement">{{cite news | url=https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/30/sco_tsg_vs_ibm_settlement/ | title=SCO v. IBM settlement deal is done, but zombie case shuffles on elsewhere | author-first=Simon | author-last=Sharwood | work=The Register | date=August 30, 2021}}</ref>  As part of this, the trustee would give up any future related claims against IBM.<ref name="zdn-settlement"/>  The matter lay with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, which had been handling the case all along.<ref name="zdn-settlement">{{cite news | url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/after-almost-20-years-the-sco-vs-ibm-lawsuit-may-finally-be-ending/ | title=That Linux lawsuit: 20 years later, SCO vs IBM may finally be ending | author-first= Steven J. | author-last=Vaughan-Nichols | date=August 30, 2021 | work=Linux and Open Source | publisher=ZDNet}}</ref>

On November 8, 2021, the settlement was so made under those terms, with IBM paying the TSG bankruptcy trustee $14.25&nbsp;million and the trustee giving up all future claims and with each party paying their own legal costs.  After 18½ years, ''SCO v. IBM'' was finally over.<ref name="settlement">{{cite news | url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/last-of-original-sco-v-ibm-linux-lawsuit-settled/ | title=Last of original SCO v IBM Linux lawsuit settled | author-first= Steven J. | author-last=Vaughan-Nichols | date=November 8, 2021 | work=Linux and Open Source | publisher=ZDNet}}</ref>

As it happened, by then [[Xinuos#Lawsuit_against_IBM_and_Red_Hat|Xinuos had filed a lawsuit against IBM and Red Hat]], reversing direction from its past disavowals of litigation interest, re-alleging old SCO claims about IBM and Project Monterey, and alleging some new claims.<ref name="tbj-apr1">{{cite news | url=https://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/news/2021/04/01/software-company-sues-ibm-red-hat.html | title=Software company sues IBM, Red Hat, claims they 'conspired' to 'crush' competitors | author-first= Lauren | author-last=Ohnesorge | newspaper=Triangle Business Journal | date=April 1, 2021 }}</ref>  Unlike the SCO–Linux battles, however, in this case few people in the industry paid the Xinuos charges much attention,<ref name="settlement"/> and in the following several years the legal action failed to gain any victories.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/xinuos-ibm-agree-to-toss-antitrust-claims-leave-ip-issue-open | title=Xinuos, IBM Agree to Toss Antitrust Claims, Leave IP Issue Open  | first=Olivia | last=Alafriz | publisher=Bloomberg Law | date=April 1, 2025}}</ref> In any case, the story of The SCO Group was complete.<ref name="settlement"/>

== Products ==
* '''SCO [[UnixWare]]''', a Unix operating system. UnixWare 2.x and below were direct descendants of [[Unix System V]] Release 4.2 and was originally developed by AT&T, [[Univel]], Novell and later on The Santa Cruz Operation. UnixWare 7 was sold as a Unix OS combining UnixWare 2 and OpenServer 5 and was based on [[Unix System V#SVR5|System V Release 5]].
* '''[[SCO OpenServer]]''', another Unix operating system, which was originally developed by The Santa Cruz Operation. SCO OpenServer 5 was a descendant of SCO UNIX, which is in turn a descendant of [[XENIX]]. OpenServer 6 is, in fact, an OpenServer compatibility environment running on a modern SVR5-based Unix kernel.
* '''[[Caldera Smallfoot|Smallfoot]]''', an operating system and GUI created specifically for [[point of sale]] applications.
* '''SCOBiz''', a  web-based e-commerce development and hosting site with [[web services]]-based integration to existing legacy applications.
* '''SCOx Web Services Substrate''', a web services-based framework for modernizing legacy applications.
* '''WebFace''', a development environment for rich-UI browser-based Internet applications.
* '''SCOoffice Server''', an [[e-mail]] and collaboration solution, based on a mixture of open-source and closed-source software.
* '''SCO Marketplace Initiative''', an online exchange offering pay-per-project development opportunities.
* '''Me, Inc.''', a mobile services platform with services including '''Shout''', '''HipCheck''', and '''FCmobilelife'''.

== List of SCO lawsuits ==
[[Image:Canopy Group buildings and dead end sign.jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.05]]
* ''[[SCO v. IBM]]'' (''The SCO Group, Inc. vs. International Business Machines, Inc.'', case number 2:03cv0294, [[United States District Court for the District of Utah]])
* ''[[Red Hat v. SCO]]''
* ''[[SCO v. Novell]]''
* ''[[SCO v. AutoZone]]''
* ''[[SCO v. DaimlerChrysler]]''
{{clear}}

==Notes==
{{notefoot}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

== External links ==
* The SCO Group, Inc. (archived web site {{mono|caldera.com}} from [https://web.archive.org/web/20020914044855/http://www.caldera.com:80/ 2002-09-14]{{cbignore}} to [https://web.archive.org/web/20040901104357/http://caldera.com:80/ 2004-09-01]{{cbignore}} and {{mono|sco.com}} from [https://web.archive.org/web/20010508190729/http://www.sco.com:80/ 2001-05-08]{{cbignore}})<!-- [https://web.archive.org/web/20041215173912/http://www2.sco.com/ 2004-12-15]{{cbignore}} -->
* {{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20031012122712/http://www.groklaw.net/ Groklaw: News and Commentary about SCO lawsuits and Other Related Legal Information]}}
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20071023185326/http://chapter11.epiqsystems.com/clientdefault.aspx?pk=8ce798da-b105-4a4c-808a-b1214f0ea6d5&l=1 SCOX Bankruptcy information and documents]
* [https://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SCOXQ Financial information for The SCO Group (SCOXQ)]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20160314084920/https://biz.yahoo.com/ic/99/99709.html Yahoo! — The SCO Group, Inc. company profile, archive reference]
* [https://www.encyclopedia.com/books/politics-and-business-magazines/sco-group-inc "The SCO Group Inc.", ''International Directory of Company Histories'', 2006, as hosted at Encyclopedia.com]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Sco Group, Inc.}}
[[Category:Caldera (company)]]
[[Category: Companies formerly listed on the Nasdaq]]
[[Category:Defunct software companies of the United States]]
[[Category:Defunct companies based in Utah]]
[[Category:SCO–Linux disputes]]
[[Category:Software companies established in 2002]]
[[Category:2002 establishments in Utah]]
[[Category:Software companies disestablished in 2011]] <!-- sold off software assets -->
[[Category:2012 disestablishments in Utah]] <!-- filed for Chapter 7 -->
[[Category:Companies that have filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy]]
[[Category:Companies that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2007]]
[[Category:Companies that filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in 2012]]

[[pl:SCO]]