IBM Motion to Limit SCO Claims Granted 195
Kalak writes "IBM's motion to limit SCO's claims to those that have specific version, file and line numbers has been granted, in part. At the end of last year, SCO made 294 allegations. IBM asked for dismissal of 198 of them due to lack of this information, 1 SCO withdrew, 1 IBM withdrew from the request, and 185 of them have been dismissed from the case. This leaves 107 of the charges are left to be addressed by means other than lack of specificity (such as public domain, BSD code, who owns it, etc.) As usual, Groklaw, has discussion, as well as the Order and an excellent chart of the history of alleged violations has been created as well."
Re:There's SCO business... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:There's SCO business... (Score:5, Interesting)
There's two possible reasons behind this particular lawsuit. One is because the SCO execs want to go after IBM for extortion. The other reason is because Microsoft is trying to go after Linux.
If the second is true, any actions from here may be oriented towards preventing Microsoft from being revealed as the Man Behind The Curtain, rather than winning.
Pro-SCO (Score:5, Interesting)
This isn't all that great... (Score:4, Interesting)
To a non-legal mind, this could be portrayed as "losing on a technicality". So my worry is that anti-Linux FUDders can point at this and say "Well, Linux dodged a bullet based on shoddy lawyering/poor rulings, so it's still risky". Granted, we know (and have known for a while) that SCO has a very weak cases, but PHBs don't, and Joe Average doesn't.
My worry is that SCO dies quietly when it suddenly announces bankruptcy, screws it shareholders, and abruptly the lawsuits all vanish.
Re:This isn't all that great... (Score:4, Interesting)
Go to the bankruptcy auction.
Bid a dollar for any of SCO's remaining IP claims.
Contribute them to EFF.
B-)
Can you IMAGINE anyone - with the possible exception of Micro$oft - actually CONSIDERING pressing those claims after SCO was driven into bankruptcy trying it?
For that matter, can you imagine Micro$oft even bidding on them, after all their antitrust suit losses?
SCO bankruptcy (Score:1, Interesting)
It's not guaranteed to happen but there's a good chance that Darl will go to jail.
Re:Granted IN PART (Score:4, Interesting)
Judge Wells allowed *11* of IBM's 198 disputed claims (23, 43, 90, 94, 186-192) and barred the rest.
Re:A very thorough piece of work. (Score:4, Interesting)
Red Hat and Novell Cases? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:IBM saw it for what it is. (Score:5, Interesting)
I hope they go after the company directors (I want to see them do some jail time), I want IBM to press a complaint with the bar against SCO's lawyers (I hope they never practice law again). I hope SCO's expert witnesses get prosecuted for perjury. I hope IBM turns on Baystar and forces some answers out of them (I'd love to see Baystar go down too).
Even the more peripheral individuals and companies around this case deserve a good kicking. I hope forums like this won't let anybody forget which companies supported SCO or bought "Linux Licences" and which journalists backed their case (in particular - let's make sure every time DiDio makes some pronouncement everybody remembers what she said about how solid SCO's case was).
It's time make sure everybody who assisted SCO suffers. It's time to make some examples. It's time to get vindictive.
Re:Key extracts from the Judge's order (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, they did, however they have since apparently changed their mind, and tried inserting copyright claims back in (at the 14th hour*) through "expert" reports filed last month.
Willful vs Bad Faith (Score:4, Interesting)
The judge is simply trying to avoid wasting appellate judges time by not giving SCO anything they can reasonably dispute (i.e. "it wasn't bad faith because she can't read our mind").
Re:IBM- doing the right thing? (Score:4, Interesting)
Think of it like a farmer caring for his soil. Sure, he might squeeze a little more yield out in the short term, but he'll pay down the road.
Re:this emascualtes SCO's case (Score:5, Interesting)
More importantly, the big patent holders don't want patent wars before software patents are properly established in Europe.
Re:A very thorough piece of work. (Score:5, Interesting)
She's also entertaining. I would have expected most legal decisions to be dry and technical, but she uses some layman concepts that suggest she's well aware her audience includes a lot of non-lawyers. My favorite item is on page 34:
Re:Not quite. (Score:3, Interesting)
They're only still in business because they've had several rounds of additional funding since the beginning of the trial, most of which looks as though it can be traced to a certain company whose name begins with "M" and which complains about Linux a lot. As of their last financial statement, they're hemorraging money at a rate that will bankrupt them shortly before opening statements in the IBM trial. Even if Bill Gates manages to send SCO some more money, they are going to lose at trial and IBM is going to be awarded damages that substantially exceed the net worth of the company. SCO's defeat won't be a quick one, but it's going to be most painful when it finally arrives.
Re:Pro-SCO (Score:3, Interesting)
"SCO is anticipating that it will use this site as the future home for all information relating to SCO's pending lawsuits and related issues. For current information about SCO's suit against IBM, please visit www.sco.com/ibmlawsuit, and about SCO's suit against Novell, please visit www.sco.com/novell."
Both the links in there are 404s now.