We also request that SCO apologize to the entire Linux industry by way of a statement on their web site, and by email to all parties against who any of the above actions have been taken.
The use of unsubstantiated legal claims to demand money from others has to one of the most despicable, unethical, and irresponsible business practices yet invented. Statements, which provoke fear, uncertainty and doubt, are threatening to undermine the Linux software industry, in which SCO once claimed to be a participant and supporter, when we committed to investment in SCO, then known as Caldera International. Now, instead of participating in the industry and supporting Linux through honest competition in the marketplace, it is attempting to destroy it.
SCO has made vague accusations of legal liability. SCO has showed limited evidence (i.e., code resemblance) which falsely suggests that their lawsuit has substance, but refuses to provide definite evidence or make precise claims (for which they would obviously bear responsibility); which could easily settle the issues at stake; for example, SCO won't admit that sections of code that were copied so they can be removed.
Numerous companies have demonstrated the baselessness of SCO's intellectually property claims, by indemnifying their customers, and publishing legal and commercial documents relating to SCO's lawsuit. Early on in this activity, Microsoft Corporation, the well-known former monopoly, which Linux is now threatening and competing with, paid a substantial sum of money to SCO; SCO cannot honestly support Linux when they are financially subsisting on a monopolistic competitor; simply put, it is a conflict of interests.
In essence, SCO is demanding money from Red Heat and other Linux businesses, without producing actual evidence that SCO is owed anything.
As a result, SCO is undermining the Linux operating system and the entire computing industry, which depends upon the healthy competition it creates in the operating system market.
Furthermore, SCO's activities have caused a severe instability of their stock price and made it a target for speculation, which is against the interests of sound investment and business strategy.
It is not our wish or purpose to remove any genuine legal rights SCO may have, in particular, its contractual claims with IBM, some of which do appear to be valid; only that they drop all legal claims and all suggestions of legal claims for which they do not promptly provide prima facie evidence.
Notwithstanding the self-interested recommendations of the directors of SCO, we urge all shareowners to vote for this proposal.