Hearing Date Set for SCO vs. Novell

duh P3rf3ss3r writes "According to Groklaw, a hearing into seven summary judgement motions in the SCO vs. Novell case has been set for 31 May at 9 am before Judge Dale Kimball. Groklaw's PJ speculates that David Boies may have to show up for SCO just to keep their case alive."

Oh boy

Enough time to get popcorn and coke then :D

Re:Oh boy

I'd have to liquidate all my SCO stock to afford the concession stand prices!

Re:

Just the SCO stock? Then it ain't too expensive.

Re:Oh boy

Hmm.. Microsoft now controls both the Plaintiff *and* the Defendant. I don't envy that Judge. I guess MS couldn't purchase enough puppets in Congress. I wonder what the game plan is after this one?

Re:

Kinda reminds me of that old cartoon where England was in war with France, with both sides praying to God to win, and above, in a cloud, there is a huge hand, flipping a coin...

Re:

Don't be silly, unicorns [invisiblepinkunicorn.com] have hooves, not hands.

Re:Oh boy

It's noodly appendages [wikipedia.org], heretic!

Lapidate him! Lapidate him!

Re:

At $0.88 a share. You must have a lot of stock.
I would sell it now before it drops further. It has only been going up latly because no one except for bots were trading it.

Re:Oh boy

If you think this is a good movie, sure. It has the most extreme lack of plot advancement I've ever seen, no matter how good the ending is it won't make up for it. Not unless it involves an execution squad.

Re:

I'm not one to hold a grudge. I say we should have Darl chased off a cliff by topless women. Seems the humane thing to do.

Re:

I am wondering how much the rights for UNIX System V will go for at the liquidation auction. IBM certainly has the deep pockets to win any bidding war.

Aw man...

...that really bites. Where will we get our schadenfreude after the SCO thing has been laughed out of court?

Re:

Where else but from Microsoft? Mr Ballmer is positioning himself to take up where Darl McBride left off regarding baseless allegations against Linux - as a matter of fact, he's begun already.

Stay tuned, the Chair-Throwing FUD Special is just warming up.

Re:

Also, in the shorter term, there's Jack Thompson's recent letter [slashdot.org] to Bill Gates. That should provide some entertainment for a bit.

Re:

Yeah, but a big problem with getting schadenfreude from MS is that they're *very likely to keep making money hand over fist for quite awhile. A big part of the fun of watching SCO implode was seeing them burn through their "investors" cash while sales

Re:

Dear god,
I know I've talked bad about creationism, fundamentalists, and the rest of the neo-con prayer comittee, heck I've even called you a spaghetti monster, but if I was wrong, then I am sorry. I just realized that even though I am a young man, I may

Re:

Where will we get our schadenfreude after the SCO thing has been laughed out of court?
Novell - when they start the same thing all over again six months later ...

This could be dramatic

It is possible that Judge K. will rule on Novell's request (from four months ago iirc) that all the money in SCO's possession be put in a trust account. That would bankrupt SCO and SCO's management would be replaced by a bankruptcy trustee. All the court cases would be negotiated by the trustee and this whole mess would come to a screaming halt.

Re:

this whole mess would come to a screaming halt
 
But, where would we go for a good laugh then?

Re:This could be dramatic

You think we'll run out of FUD spreading companies any time soon? We still have MS and the mafiaa, and I doubt they'll vanish any time soon, as much as I'd enjoy it.

Last week alone was good for a few laughs with MSs list of 235 communists in the IT department ... no wait, that was something else...

Re:This could be dramatic

I hope that doesn't happen, I want to see SCO lose in court on everything they have claimed.

Re:This could be dramatic

I think you mean the SCO v IBM case. This is the one where Novell end up owning SCO (literally).

My understanding is that all money that Microsoft gave SCO to get involved in a legal battle with IBM was in the form of some sort of Unix license. Novell reckon they are legally entitled to a cut of this money as they sold the Unix licenses to SCO in the first place.

The problem is that SCO have spent the money fighting IBM and RedHat. If SCO lose the will go belly up as the amounts involved far exceed the worth of the company. If that happens SCO will probably be in administration before the end of the day.

Please someone correct me if I do not understand this correctly.

Re:This could be dramatic

Novell reckon they are legally entitled to a cut of this money as they sold the Unix licenses to SCO in the first place.

Technically not correct. Novell is arguing that they sold SCO the right to license Unix on their behalf (i.e distributor). As Novell's distributor, SCO must give them 100% of any Unix license revenue which Novell will refund them 5% as part of their licensing agreement.

Re:

If that happens SCO will probably be in administration before the end of the day.

Right, which means that IBM wouldn't get the chance to triumph over SCO, because the trust administrator would settle. IMO, this is a bad thing, because I want SCO vs. IBM to

Re:

SCO losing would make quite a few unknown things an established fact. If MS were smart, they'd buy up SCO for a few pennies in the near future and drop the case; not only would it produce a big 'huh?' from our side; the outcome of any litigation might not

Re:

The only problem with your suggestion is the liability of IBM's counterclaims that any buyer of SCO would inherit. As it stands now, IBM will collect next to nothing, as SCO has almost no value, especially after Novell gets the $25 million owed to it by S

Re:This could be dramatic, but probably not.

It is possible that Judge K. will rule on Novell's request (from four months ago iirc) that all the money in SCO's possession be put in a trust account.

While it's possible that Kimball will rule from the bench, it has not been his style to do so with anything major. He tends to assemble rulings that cover every point raised in the hearing, including some he claims weren't really worth listening to in the first place. For example, in the IBM case, SCO argued that a ruling had to be reviewed from the starting point ("de novo"). Kimball said SCO was wrong and that a de novo review wasn't required, but that he did one anyway "out of an abundance of caution" and still found against SCO. Best guess is that he's doing it so the outcome of the case is bulletproofed against appeals; probably a good idea because SCO fights every detail tooth and nail, regardless of how hopeless the situation.

I do expect the hearing to at least generate some humor, especially item 180 [groklaw.net]. This is where SCO tells the court (apparently with a straight face) that "the parties' intent under the APA and Amendments thereto is undisputed in SCO's favor." In English, they are saying there is no way the contract did not transfer copyrights in spite of the fact that the contract explicitly includes the copyrights in the list of things not transferred. I'm really looking forward to hearing their explanation of that one.

Unlikely

It is possible that Judge K. will rule on Novell's request (from four months ago iirc) that all the money in SCO's possession be put in a trust account. That would bankrupt SCO and SCO's management would be replaced by a bankruptcy trustee. All the court cases would be negotiated by the trustee and this whole mess would come to a screaming halt.

Throughout this process we've seen that neither judge often issues rulings from the bench, and the more important the ruling the more careful they are to thoroughly research and clearly lay out their written ruling. The hearing will probably be very int

Re:

All the court cases would be negotiated by the trustee and this whole mess would come to a screaming halt.

That would be unfortunate because the trustee would settle, which would fail to set precedent. I would much rather SCO fight to the bigger end and th

David Boies?

For a second there I thought it said David Bowie. I suppose if he showed up it would help too.

Re:

It would take more than a man falling to earth to save them at this point.

Now is the time...

...to invest heavily into Put-options of SCO. Then again, with them already listing in the penny-stock area, maybe rather invest in the spam companies that send out the pump'n'dump mails...

Re:Now is the time...

...to invest heavily into Put-options of SCO.

No one is writing options on SCOX, and never has.

The best you could do is short shares of SCOX, but you will have to find a brokerage that has SCOX shares that you can short.

About 17% of the "floating" shares (i.e. ones that are being traded and aren't held by insiders or institutions) are already shorted. And at average daily trading volumes, the shorted shares represent about 38 days worth of trading.

Re:

Rats. Another get-rich-quick scheme foiled.

Re:

...to invest heavily into Put-options of SCO. Then again, with them already listing in the penny-stock area, maybe rather invest in the spam companies that send out the pump'n'dump mails...

Good recovery. You do of course realize that being OTC means th

Re:

Gah. For the n-th time (ok, 2nd time), yes, it is a joke. Meant to be funny. NOT a supersecret inside investment tip.

Heck, what did I do wrong that people start taking me serious?

Re:

The pump'n'dump spam is about to get out, don't you dare damaging my revenue stream by informing people it's not a good idea to take investment tips from boards that are in no way any kind of reliable source for investment tips!

Folks. Seriously. This was m

Blink-blink

Judge Dread and David Bowie must appear? Wait, I think the coffee has brewed. (SCO stories are always at least a two-cup problem and I'm down a cup this morning. Fill'er up, premium!)

Judge Dread ?

Rude boy SCO, I sentence you to 100 Years ! Don't cry, rude boys don't cry.

Unhealthy

Thank you /. for my (almost) daily '2-minute hate'... although am I the only one who thinks we are in danger of making an Orwellian Emmanuel Goldstein-type character out of McBride? I mean, it's all just business litigation, right?

Re:

Defending Darl McB.? You must be new here...

Re:Unhealthy

McBride shares few traits with the Goldstein of 1984.

Basically he's trying to keep a company afloat on a pice of driftwood, and he is about to lose that plank. It's not that we hate him, hey, I don't even know him. Privately he may even be a quite cool guy, dunno.

We hate FUD. It's got nothing to do with McBride himself, that could be anyone from the list of FUDders. We hate it when people come out with nebulous, dubious threats the only goal of which is to create an air of wariness towards the technologies they try to antagonize. You can have the same with people claiming WiFi APs are dangerous to their health. If this was 1907 instead of 2007, we'd probably go after the guys claiming that riding by train or car is unhealthy because it's too fast.

I don't hate McBride. Not even Steve or Bill. I hate people who see their business model crumble and try to keep it up by instilling FUD in their customers, so they stay with them out of fear, not because they have the better product. I hate people who hamper progress and development for their personal gains. I hate people who want to keep their customers shackled by threats rather than offering them the better product.

I hate people who kill the market economy.

Re:

I don't hate McBride. Not even Steve or Bill. I hate people who see their business model crumble and try to keep it up by instilling FUD in their customers, so they stay with them out of fear, not because they have the better product. I hate people who hamper progress and development for their personal gains. I hate people who want to keep their customers shackled by threats rather than offering them the better product.

What a great summary of most of the stories that we get to read these days.

Instead of great new product announcements or enhancements to existing product ranges (hi Google), we simply see nebulous legal threats (SCO's bizarre attempts, Microsoft's recent

Re:

If this was 1907 instead of 2007, we'd probably go after the guys claiming that riding by train or car is unhealthy because it's too fast.

Judging by the number of readkills each year, I'd say they are right after all.

Re:

Fear, uncertainty and doubt [wikipedia.org].

Ain't it funny how wikipedia replaced the usual place you direct people to for explanations? 5 years ago, I'd probably have sent you to some google page...

Your out of order he's out of order

SCO Attorney: Your honor, we'd like to rectify the use of our patents but since they are propietary information we cannot disclose them publicly.
Novell Attorney: Your honor there are no infringements. If SCO could present the infringments they would. Their use of the word "propietary" is solely FUD based manipulations
Prosecutor Attorney: Did you say Fud?
Juror Attorney: *whispers to another juror* I didn't even know they infringed on Warner Bros, patented Looney Tune character Elmer Fudd"
Judge Attorney: *Watching Judge Judy in the background*

Sucks to be SCO.

They have dug themselfs so deap that their only option is to keep digging and hope to reach Australlia.
If they continue their case they will loose. If the stop their case they will loose. The only option they have is streach things out and continue their

I hope they lose

I mean, SCO's evil. . . no, wait, Novell's evil! No, SCO! Novell!

AAAAA!!! I don't know who to hate anymore! ;-)

Msft, scox , and bsf, are winning

IMO: those who think otherwise don't understand the case.

This scam is now in it's 5th year, and that is the point of the scam. The idea is not win in a final judgement, the point is to keep the scam alive. As long as these cases continue: scox, msft, and bsf, keep winning.

Before the scam, scox had a market cap under $10, about half what it is now. The mcbride boys, darl and kevin, are each taking in about $250K - $300K a year, which is not bad for small-time Utah scammers. BSF has raked in, at least, $30M. For msft, the cost of this fud doesn't amount to pocket change.

The scam was yet another smart move by msft. Msft may not be fooling anybody here, but it's the PHBs that matter. The PHBs must believe that Linux is a legal mine-field.

So gloat all you want, but the bad guys are laughing up their sleeves.

Re:

This scam is now in it's 5th year, and that is the point of the scam. The idea is not win in a final judgement, the point is to keep the scam alive. As long as these cases continue: scox, msft, and bsf, keep winning.

This isn't precisely the case. My gu