I read the news, and I could not believe it.

It's April 1st, ain't it?

But then, this looks like is dated March 31. So it could be for real.

Behold: https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/31/ibm_redhat_xinuos/

The PDF also is dated March 31: https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/03/31/xinuos_complaint.pdf

It's hard to believe someone would go to the trouble of writing 57 pages of
legalese just to make a damn joke.

"
        Xinuos, formed around SCO Group assets a decade ago under the name
        UnXis and at the time disavowing any interest in continuing SCO's
        long-running Linux litigation, today sued IBM and Red Hat for
        alleged copyright and antitrust law violations.

        "First, IBM stole Xinuos' intellectual property and used that stolen
        property to build and sell a product to compete with Xinuos itself,"
        the US Virgin Islands-based software biz claims in its complaint
        [PDF]. "Second, stolen property in IBM's hand, IBM and Red Hat
        illegally agreed to divide the relevant market and use their growing
        market powers to victimize consumers, innovative competitors, and
        innovation itself."

        The complaint further contends that after the two companies
        conspired to divide the market, IBM then acquired Red Hat to
        solidify its position.

        SCO Group in 2003 made a similar intellectual property claim. It
        argued that SCO Group owned the rights to AT&T's Unix and UnixWare
        operating system source code, that Linux 2.4.x and 2.5.x were
        unauthorized derivatives of Unix, and that IBM violated its
        contractual obligations by distributing Linux code.

        That case dragged on for years, and drew a fair amount of attention
        when SCO Group said it would sue individual Linux users for
        infringement. Though SCO filed for bankruptcy in 2007 and some of
        the claims have been dismissed, its case against IBM remains
        unresolved.

        There was a status report filed on February 16, 2018, details
        remaining claims and counterclaims. And in May last year, Magistrate
        Judge Paul Warner was no longer assigned to oversee settlement
        discussions. But SCO Group v. IBM is still open.
"

Either way, some one if fooling us hard.

PS: OK, it seems it's for real: https://www.xinuos.com/xinuos-sues-ibm-and-red-hat/

I need to check my stock of pop corn, then...

My take: it's obvious they want to be a nuisance so that IBM settles the
case, so they then can go back home with some fresh cash. I hope IBM goes
ballistic on them to the bitter end, and finally sends the zombie back to
its grave. But then, IBM now has its new RedHat business to protect, so it
can get interesting.

--
Josh Good