SCO Slammed in Slander of Title Suit 336
SillySlashdotName writes "Judge Kimball has stated that The SCO Group has failed to meet the requirements of the law in its complaint against Novell and has dismissed the case but gives TSG 30 days to try to meet the legal requirements. More info on groklaw." EWeek also has a story.
The Beggining of The End for SCO (Score:5, Insightful)
One down (Score:3, Insightful)
Please don't let it get dismissed... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet another deadline (Score:5, Insightful)
Call me when the case is dismissed, and the dismissal is upheld on appeal. Guess we'll be waiting for a long time.
Matter of fact, don't call me until SCO goes through Chapter 7 bankruptcy and ceases operations, cause it's only then that this monster will be dead and buried.
Not over yet (Score:2, Insightful)
You know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Puff, puff, pass... (Score:1, Insightful)
Just an FYI. The crack culture and the MJ culture are very different.
Know what I learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if it is the entree to a lucrative career selling Linux insurance to the paranoid and lazy.
Here's to hoping they get drawn and quartered (Score:5, Insightful)
About the only people that will make money in the short term are a select few corporate types and lawyers.
Re:Puff, puff, pass... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh come on, surely you know The Rules. Rule #1 is, in its totality, "Never Admit Anything. Anything."
This is exactly the sort of thing that caused the creation of the Cluetrain Manifesto [cluetrain.com]; it's not a perfect document but there's a lot of truth in it, like #14: You know they lost. I know they lost. They know they lost. But The Rules say they must not admit it, not even a little.
Re:SCO is the suxx0rz (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:PDF (Score:5, Insightful)
Question: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:SCO is the suxx0rz (Score:5, Insightful)
is good publicity. Fact is, until this whole thing
it looked like Linux was a plaything not matched
against REAL Unices. Then those morons come out and
claim that Linux is industrial strength and how can
that have happened so fast. Then all these big corps
start throwing major money at Linux defense with
HP going so far as to indemnify customers. Now the
perception is that Linux is indeed big and capable
and has major commercial backing. If nothing else
this has forced many players in the field to
declare their stand.
This has also led to a reexamination of code submission
procedures. Now rogue code will be harder to slip
into Linux (at least kernel).
So if the intention was to damage Linux then this
has done the exact opposite methinks. The one thing
that remains to be seen is whether IBM is willing
to use its patent portfolio to pressure Microsoft
not to suffocate F/OSS with its patents. If this
is the case then full-blown OS competition may be
right around the corner.
Novell (Score:5, Insightful)
In some ways I find it bothersome that these cases are being fought along lines other than "Can someone who's worked on or licensed Unix ever legally contribute to Open Source".
Yes, I realize that it's an insane from the perspective of a computer scholar, but that doesn't mean that court rulings could change the legal reality.
It's great that SCO is being euthanized from these legal proceedings, but recall that it wasn't too long ago that SCO was an big open source ally and proponent. Will Novel be next to fall to bad management, investment pandering, and absurd legal advice?
Re:You know... (Score:3, Insightful)
-(don't ask me how that's supposed to make 'em money)
Case dismissed ; Sco gets 30 day leave (Score:5, Insightful)
But, also grants "SCO thirty days leave to amend its Complaint to plead special damages specifically in accord with Rule 9(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure".
Because, if it dismissed without prejudice, SCO will probably just change it's pleadings and file another lawsuit. But, if they can't change their pleadings in accordance with Rule 9(g), then they could be dismissed with prejuduice.
INL I ROBOT
Re:Novell (Score:2, Insightful)
IBM has been very careful that it's case deals with Linux infringing on any of the code SCO asserts is infringing.
Basically, IBM's case does not hinge on Novels case. SCO could win that hands down and it will not help them win their case against IBM. Really, SCO's case against IBM is boiling down to a pure contract claim that twists the idea of derivative rights.
Wall Street Closed (Score:5, Insightful)
Before the bottom falls out Monday, of course. Thursday's 10% slide will probably look rosy compared to what is about to hit them.
Re:Puff, puff, pass... (Score:5, Insightful)
Which may be what he's thinking, but it's not actually practical to say it in public...
IBM and patent portfolio -- outlook seems good (Score:3, Insightful)
One can never be sure with corporations, but it sure LOOKS like IBM, as a part of their business plan, wants F/OSS to succeed, and plans to ride that wave. (Farsighted of them if they do, 'cause F/OSS is already a major player in software, and it ain't going away.) It's certainly a better plan than trying to stop the wave (see SCO vs. world+dog).
Re:How did this get past the editors? (Score:2, Insightful)
So, for the umpteenth time, this thing is FRICKIN' DISMISSED!
Re:Puff, puff, pass... (Score:2, Insightful)
This makes sense.
The problem is, it is too wordy, and open to interpretation.
Re:The Beggining of The End for SCO (Score:2, Insightful)
Getting to hate journalists (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, after watching just about every U.S. paper and news channel turn into a miniature propaganda ministery during the Iraq War, only to crawl back tearfully when things start hitting the fan, the question is why anyone still bothers.
Thank God for PJ.
Re:Puff, puff, pass... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not that SCO "failed to prove" special damages. That has the connotation that SCO came to court and presented its evidence and the court didn't believe their side. Instead, the situation is: SCO didn't explicitly list the special damages, so the judge told them they had to file a new complaint with an explicit list of special damages. When the court gets the new filing, THEN it will proceed to hear motions and evidence about SCO's special damages.
SCO just has to come back with a new filing where they claim exactly how they were damaged, and the suit proceeds from there.
To draw an analogy
Re:Puff, puff, pass... (Score:3, Insightful)