SCO Postpones Lawsuit, Now Threatening Two 532
zzxc writes "In a surprise turn of events, SCO says that they need more time to prepare an announcement of who they are going to sue. According to SCO, the lawsuits will be announced tomorrow morning shortly before a phone-in conference in which will be outlining their financial report. You can call 1-800-818-5264 code 141144 Wednesday at 9:00am MST to join in with your questions, or listen to the webcast. They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses. (EV1.net servers or Lindows?)"
Oh my God (Score:3, Insightful)
No Surprise (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:No Surprise (Score:5, Funny)
And so? What exactly do they have to loose in the process?
Re:No Surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
SCO has nothing to lose, that's the main reason they are doing this.
They just found a loophole in our legal system and are abusing it. They didn't get that 50M infusion to piss it away trying to sell a product. They already proved they couldn't make money doing that.
But they can can take that 50M into court and cause a lot of problems and increase the FUD.
Re:No Surprise (Score:4, Funny)
I did, because SCO has a history of doing the dumbest thing possible, and suing another huge company is even dumber than not suing after they said they would.
Re:No Surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately the worst enemy is one who has nothing to lose. SCO knows all their bases belong to IBM and if they lose (which they will) there will be nothing else left.
This example should have people questioning the protection that a corporation provides. When it comes to reckless and slanderous behavior the liability needs to extend to the perpetrators personally and the officers of the corporation.
If the board felt that their own fortunes could be threatened by Darl and crew's actions you would see some a very different course of events.
Re:No Surprise (Score:5, Funny)
Quoth the poster:
Unfortunately the worst enemy is one who has nothing to lose. SCO knows all their bases belong to IBM and if they lose (which they will) there will be nothing else left.
Excuse me, sir, but I must ask you for your geek card.
All their base are belong to IBM.
IBM to SCO: "You have no chance to survive make your time."
IP Confusion (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Confabulation (Score:4, Insightful)
#1 To talk casually; chat.
#2 Psychology. To fill in gaps in one's memory with fabrications that one believes to be facts.
I'd say number 2 is without a doubt the correct use for the word. Also Sco can be realistically refered to by the euphemism number two
Re:No Surprise (Score:4, Informative)
For example, let's that about the time SCO announced this whole fiasco, I had gone out and bought some SCO stock (I didn't, ain't go no money, but let's say for the sake of argument that I had).
First, I have not invested in SCO per se. I have invested in stock, but SCO didn't get my money, the person I bought the stock from got it. Whatever money SCO got from that stock came the first time they sold it. They got nothing from any sale after that. Now, if my buy was part of a general pattern of buying, then that pushes the price up and Darl can sell some of his stock and make money, or SCO could issue some new stock (AFAIK the didn't), although that would tend to push the share price down (supply and demand).
So, here I sit with some SCO stock that I bought, but I have not really invested any money in SCO. The money is invested in the stock, but SCO doesn't get any of that money.
Now, am I crooked? Or do I just think that whatever SCO's chances, some fool is going to come a long later and be willing to pay a lot more per share for this stock than I did, allowing me to sell it at a profit before the trial is over and walk away. SCO later goes down in flames and the stock is worthless. I made my profit, and SCO benefited not at all from my ownership of their stock.
Is anything about that crooked, or even supportive of SCO? No, not at all. Is it a gamble? Yes. Perhaps less of one than sitting down at a table in Las Vegas, but a gamble nevertheless. I suspect that most of the holders of SCO stock are not particularly supporters of SCO, except to the extent that their hope of having the stock go up makes them hope that SCO prevails; most of them are probably simply people who believe (or at least hope) that the stock will go up and they will therefore profit.
Oh, and in the meanwhile, my owning stock would give me voting power in shareholders' meetings; a hostile takeover of SCO could have stopped this suit dead in its tracks. Imagine if Linux supporters had bought all available SCO shares
Now, of course, it would be a bad time to buy. However, anyone who could and did buy SCO stock back when this first started to brew up made a shrewd move, and if they have since sold, a tidy profit. There's nothing wrong with that, and certainly no support of SCO in it. It's just buying a thing and later selling it for more than the purchase price. SCO gets nothing of either.
Re:No Surprise (Score:4, Insightful)
The action of you buying the stock supports the price or even raises it.
SCO and their employees own the same stock.
Thus : you buying the stock helps SCO and can even make them money if you are one of many such buyers who push the price upwards by generating demand.
Re:No Surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh yes they do. Companies with an inflated market price can use issue new stock as payment for real assets. Witness AOL buying Time Warner.
SCO can use its new found wealth to buy next-to-worthless Canopy group assets theyreby rewarding Canopy in a method which passes muster at the SEC.
Re:Oh my God (Score:5, Insightful)
We can only hope (Score:5, Insightful)
All this would take is the press paying any attention to anything not directly from SCO's mouth. But maybe that's wishful thinking.
Sounds exactly right (Score:5, Insightful)
Since they scheduled the announcement for their earnings call, the numbers must be truly awful this quarter. If they had good numbers to report, they wouldn't need a distraction like this.
SCO won't Sue Lindows (Score:5, Informative)
Lindows later went their own way and pursued a more debian focused route, however the contract still stands, though is ulimately open to interpretation
Re:Oh my God (Score:5, Funny)
S=(1+X)i
where
S= number of Lawsuits they're going to file
X= number of days following the original announcement
i= no explanation needed
Thus, S is always going to be an imaginary number.
I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I hope they sue those 2 Quiznoes monsters.... (Score:5, Funny)
My parents were mystified as to where those guys came from when they saw the Quizno's commerials... me being the regular FARK guy I am these days of course I had the explanation for them in full.
"Yeah the guy who did those animals really is a weird guy."
End of story.
I'm scared hold me (Score:5, Funny)
Wha? (Score:4, Funny)
Huh? That can't be right. How could they be suing EV1 when they've already paid their extort^K^K^K^Klicense money.
Re:Wha? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Wha? (Score:5, Funny)
"We'll have at least one suit that's filed today before the end of the day," Stowell said Tuesday, with two suits more likely. "There is a high possibility we will be announcing two."
Now, where I learned to count (and you can correct me if I am wrong here) that would be three suits (?). But it does follow SCO logic... Look at the wookie....
Oblig Info Minister Comment (Score:5, Funny)
Knunov
Re:Oblig Info Minister Comment (Score:5, Funny)
irresponsible (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:irresponsible (Score:5, Interesting)
I would LOVE to see the Slashdot effect at work on this conference call. I don't suppose we're so lucky as for SCO to have set this up on a system where they pay per user connected, are we?
That and it would be great having 10,000 slashdotters heckling them
Mechanik
Won't work (Score:5, Interesting)
No sense in upsetting the investors with those questions they don't want to answer...
Jay (=
Re:Won't work (Score:5, Interesting)
SCO's conference call (Score:5, Informative)
Do you want to ask Darl McBride an embarrasing question or two in front of most of the financial world? Sure, we all do!
The problem, however, is this: In a financial results call, not just anyone is allowed to ask a question. The people presenting the call get to pick and choose who gets to speak. Usually, private investors, media, and anyone from a company that has generated bad press do not get called on. So what can we do to weasel our way to the front of the question queue?
Well, if SCO has set up their call intelligently, nothing. The access code, 141144, might be the public access code, with a different code (or even a different phone number) given to people who can be trusted to ask "good" questions. But if everyone is coming in on the same number, then we have a chance.
You'll know you have a shot at a question if, instead of being joined to the call immediately after entering your access code, you instead talk to an operator. The operator will most likely ask you your name, your company's name, and maybe your phone number. If this happens, lie to them. Make up a name and phone number, and tell them that you are with an investment firm. Just pick something: CIBC World Markets, Deutsche Bank, Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse First Boston, Goldman Sachs, anything like that will do. Bonus points if you pick a company that has invested in SCO. Write down your information so that you can remember it! The trick is to make yourself look like you'll ask a safe question, so that they'll look at you in the queue and say, "Hey, let's take that Eddie Smith from CSFB next..."
If you do get called on for a question, remember:
1) Be polite. "OMG Darl SUXXORZ!!!" will just generate a "There are no further questions at this time" from the operator.
2) Ask a difficult question that Darl hasn't answered before. Let him hang himself, it'll sink in better with the investors that way.
3) Keep going until they cut you off. They're not likely to let many more unfamiliar names ask questions after this.
4) If anyone asks, you didn't get any of these ideas from Slashdot.
Here's hoping for a great conference tomorrow!
My bet. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:My bet. (Score:5, Insightful)
Lindows is a technology company, and isn't in the Fortune 1000, which doesn't seem to match the profile of the targets announced yesterday.
Of course, SCO has said one thing and done another many, many times. If they did attack Lindows.com, then that would certainly dismiss any notion that they aren't shilling for Redmond. Given the potential multi-year delay in the MS trademark litigation, there are probably more than a few experienced IP lawyers on retainer by Lindows.com that are looking for someone else's leg to chew on. And certainly Robertson would love to squeeze more than a little PR out of such a suit.
I know I need to suspend logic with SCO... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not exactly case of biting the hand that feeds you, but it certainly be a case of alienating an ally that probably doesn't need to be alienated.
Suing SCO licensees? (Score:3, Insightful)
They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses.
When a company or organisation starts suing its own customers, then it's a sure sign that its business model is completely fucked. Look at the RIAA: suing Joe Teenager, to try and offset the fact that their profits are dropping like a lead balloon.
Re:Suing SCO licensees? (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no SCO before Unix in that sentance.
Further up the article you will see
It's a safe bet that who ever they are going after is in that list.
Re:Suing SCO licensees? (Score:5, Funny)
>> after is in that list.
I'm not sure about that. Does the Vatican run Linux? That's about as close as we can get to: "SCO sues God" which seems to be the logical conclusion to all of this.
Re:Suing SCO licensees? (Score:5, Funny)
It appears, Yes..
Lets see what SCO does with this one...
sh-2.05a$ telnet www.vatican.va 80
Trying 212.77.1.243...
Connected to www.vatican.va.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET / HTTP/1.0
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 04:11:56 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.8.9 OpenSSL/0.9.6g PHP/4.2.2
Last-Modified: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 15:30:18 GMT
Re:Suing SCO licensees? (Score:4, Funny)
Connected to www.vatican.va.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET / HTTP/1.0
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 04:11:56 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.8.9 OpenSSL/0.9.6g PHP/4.2.2
Well, there it is, folks, final proof: God runs UNIX. You Windows folks had better repent, and right soon.
Re:Suing SCO licensees? (Score:5, Interesting)
My personal guess is SGI and HP. Sun already bought a license and SCO is already suing Novell and IBM. I doubt they would go after a university, they want a quick settlement to fuel their pump and dump scheme and a university might fight longer.
Anyone got odds?
Please, Let It Be McDonald's.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:your sig... (Score:4, Funny)
I think this is an unfair generalization. Geronimo, Cochise, and Sitting Bull are some of my favorite figures in history.
It's as bad as saying we're totally US centric. Sheesh.
News? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:News? (Score:5, Funny)
In any case, I'd explain how you can set your preferences so you don't have to waste your time on SCOldera stories if you don't find them interesting, but since you're "ObviousGuy", I don't have to point out something so obvious to you, do I?
Hello, my name is George (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Hello, my name is George (Score:4, Funny)
Hello George.
My name is Anonymous Coward. I spend all my time on slashdot, groklaw and the yahoo SCOX board reading and writing about newSCO.
Unlike you, I'm not addicted. I can stop any time, it's just that I don't want to.
This makes me a better person than you. HTH.
slashdot the telecon? (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously though, I hope the company that is hosting the telecon has a lot of lines reserved.
Top 5 comments you'll hear. (Score:5, Funny)
5. "Darl McBride, -1 Troll!"
4. "New SCO docs at www.tubg...."
3. "Can someone help me fix a Perl script?"
2. "Bad news everyone, Stephen King is dead."
And the number one comment will be:
"Fuck you Darl!"
BTW, I'll be the one with the air horn.
The only logical choice.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The only logical choice.... (Score:4, Funny)
Basically (Score:5, Interesting)
Meanwhile PJ at Groklaw [groklaw.net] is busy tearing them a new one over mentioning her in one of their propaganda blasts. Good reading. Hate to have her as one of my enemies.
Re:Basically (Score:4, Informative)
I was afraid we wouldn't have more SCO Stories (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I was afraid we wouldn't have more SCO Stories (Score:4, Insightful)
No kidding.
Racketeering is alive and well here in the good old USA, and frankly I am about fed up.
I have no idea what the fuck our legal system is doing even entertaining these crooks..
Haha! (Score:5, Interesting)
EV1.net or Lindows? (Score:4, Funny)
They also have said that these first two lawsuits will be against companies that hold SCO Unix licenses. (EV1.net servers or Lindows?)"
Since EV1.net is in the process of climbing into bed with Microsoft, and SCO has been warming itself under the same blankets for quite some time, I think it more likely that Lindows will be sent to the doghouse.
Then again, in a vain attempt to turn back the tide of hatred directed at it, SCO might turn around and sue Microsoft. What a twist that would be!
Re:EV1.net or Lindows? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:EV1.net or Lindows? (Score:4, Funny)
If SCO sues Microsoft, who do we cheer for??
Mutually-Assured Destruction!!!
Still (Score:3, Informative)
Bagholders Inc. (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, they're known as "bagholders". These are the imbeciles that know nothing about the company, the case(s) or in fact anything, except a) that the PR says "We'll sue" and b) When companies announce that they'll sue, they go up. Also, there was the "We sold an IP license" thingy, you might remember? The one that noone know if it brought in any money for SCOX, but it sure made a lot of PR!
Anyhow; The bagholders are then sold into by insiders, which make a tidy profit.
The job of the bagholders then is to sit around and watch the stock slowly fall down again.
Typically they'll panic and sell at a big loss. Some bagholders are smarter and hang around for the second wave of bagholders and make it out at plus/minus zero.
It's like the source code all over again... (Score:5, Funny)
Prediction of tomorrow's announcement (Score:5, Funny)
So the logic is... (Score:3, Insightful)
Wired News 2004 Vaporware list... (Score:5, Funny)
SCO for their "still pending" lawsuit! Congratulations guys!
license didn't indemnify (Score:5, Insightful)
Now because of the fact these people signed up for their license that shows they "admit guilt". So not only did they pay SCO the $799 (or whatever it is now) extortion fee, they also paid SCO to sue them. That's how the legal system works, my friends. EV1 and Lindows (if it's actually true) will get a first hand lesson now.
In a sense, buying a license under these methods and terms is basically the same as signing a confession to a crime that wasn't even committed.
SCO Unix != SCO IP (Score:5, Interesting)
Seems like they are saying they are going to sue someone who has already licensed Unixware or some other SCO-sold Unix OS, and *not* someone who has already licensed their "SCO IP," like EV1.
I bet they go after someone who has used SCO's OS in the past, but has been migrating to Linux. Nothing like a little retribution.
Of course, it's hard to tell with these bastards. They don't seem to be too.... stable. Mentally. Financially. Whatever.
Meeting Notes (Score:5, Funny)
Investor: "Can I just say that I love what this latest release had done to stock prices. I'm sleeping on a bed of money at home right now."
Darl: "That's great to hear. We're glad your happy, but please hold your comments until I'm finished speaking."
Investor: "..."
Darl: "Right now I'd like to announce a couple more features that we've added to Turbo Litigation Plus."
Listeners: A hush....Pent up excitement...Maniacal greed...
Darl: "First, we've decided to add Hasbro to our list of targets. We've discovered that the substance that give's Nerf(TM) toys their "Nerfiness", if you will, is actually part of the Intellectual Property of SCO in a very literal sense. It's what makes up 90% of our brains over here."
Investor: "Excellent!"
Darl: "Please man! *slaps the table* Let me speak!"
Investor: "..."
Darl: "Secondly, after a toss up between Ronco, the maker of the indespensible Door Saver(TM) which of course was actually invented by Billy over here, and McDonalds, maker of the McDarl, we've chosen to add, wait for it, ourselves!"
Listeners: Gasp!
Darl: "Yes folks, we're going to sue ourselves. I mean think about it, we own all our own Intellectial Property, we only have to pay half as much in lawyer fees, and I love to cross examine myself."
Listeners: Applause
Darl: "Thank you all for your time. SCO Rules!"
Advisor: "Darl..."
Darl: "Sorry."
AutoZone (Score:5, Informative)
Re:AutoZone (Score:5, Insightful)
For autozone, the claim that IBM copied libraries from SCO Openserver, to allow their old apps to work in Linux. Okay, there is some logic there.. that could feasibly violate licensing terms.
But, they also claim that IBM violated their software licensing agreement with Sherwin Williams and Target, by inducing them to switch to Linux. What the hell kind of License do they have?? It forbids users from switching to competitive products? I kind of doubt it.
The hilarious part is that customers are fleeing from SCO as quickly as they can. And, SCO claims it is because of IBM's involvement - not the fact that SCO have abandoned any hopes of competing with their products and switched the whole company focus to litigation. You would have to think that any responsible organization currently using SCO is putting together plans or actively moving to another OS.
Not unheard off (Score:5, Interesting)
Granted this was using two different products at the same time but close enough.
In Other News, Calculus Teachers Thrilled (Score:5, Funny)
Although SCO's actions have attracted some negative attention from the Open Source Community, many High Scool teacers are exhuberant about the company's recent actions. Bob Frampton, High School calculus teacher at Frederick Davis High said of SCO's recent actions, "It's just great, they're literally changing the way we teach mathematics to our future leaders. It's only thanks to SCO that we can ask exciting new problems such as, 'If every day SCO doubles the number of lawsuits they claim to file the following day, how many days will it take before nobody cares?' or, 'If SCO doesn't play this thing out right, how long will it take before the Fed nails them with fraud? Extra Credit: how many board members will get caught? Support your answer by proof.'"
Not just math teachers are thrilled, though. Says Jane Yargood of another local High School, "Darl McBride really deserves a cookie, it's so great that we can teach students about logical fallacies through real world context!" With the end of this somewhat less than momentous case nowhere in sight, it's good to see that some of our educators can find the silver lining in any situation.
They said they'd announce on Tuesday... (Score:5, Funny)
This reminds me of the "Free Ice Cream Tomorrow" sign that a guy had at his ice cream store in the early 1900's... when asked about why he wasn't giving ice cream away even though the sign had been up for over a day already, his response was always the same "because it's not tomorrow yet... it's still today".
Hotline (Score:5, Funny)
Darl's an ass (Score:5, Interesting)
And the reason why Darl is the way he is?
"I am absolutely driven by people saying I can't do something."
Read more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/29/business
Let's Dare Darl (Score:5, Funny)
Remember that kid we all knew when we were growing up that would take any dare? It was fun at first but you had to watch what you said around him after a while. Who wanted to explain to the kid's mom that he dared him to jump in front of a train? Darl seems to be just that sort of easily manipulated hothead.
Darl is no little kid. He's a rather nasty adult. He's already walked up to the biggest bully on the block and punched him in the nose. What else can we goad him into doing?
I like another poster's suggestion.
Hey Darl! We know you read Slashdot. So I'm going to make a dare with you. McDonalds is your largest customer. They even have a contractual relationship with you. And we all know what SCO says contracts are for. McDonalds has also been piloting Linux POS terminals in Germany at least.
Slashdot the 800 number? (Score:5, Interesting)
The slashdot-effect on an 800 number?
Interesting Darl interview video on news.com (Score:4, Informative)
Look for it on the right side of the front page.
Re:Interesting Darl interview video on news.com (Score:4, Interesting)
Darl actually suggested that if Drug companies come up with a new formula for a drug on a linux machine they would have to license the formula under the GPL.
This guy clearly wins the "No Clue" award when it comes to licenses. Now at least we know that he most likely has misintepreted the Unix contracts
dvnull
SCO sues two more of their own customers (Score:5, Interesting)
At the same time, they're claiming that the best way to avoid litigation with them is to sign a contract that acknowledges that they have more power over you (and Linux code) than most people believe they have any hope of proving in court.
I'm going to guess McDonalds (Score:5, Interesting)
Who's up first? (Score:4, Informative)
Who's up first [groklaw.net]
Higly entertaining content.
You just have to love SCO (Score:5, Funny)
I have more and more emphaty for this company, because they turn out to be just like me...
So, as I've said, I just have to love SCO, because they are just like me. In fact they are just like most of us working here on Duke Nukem Forever. We are working forever...
Listen to the conference call online (Score:4, Informative)
http://biz.yahoo.com/cc/3/39693.html [yahoo.com]
Shit, I can't take part in phone conference (Score:5, Funny)
You should only accept the security information if you trust "www.thescogroup.com" and "www.sco.com".
Advice from a lawyer:Buy a bundle from SuSE/Novel (Score:4, Informative)
If SCO or their Lawyers show, up show them that you are using this system, and friendly point towards the case between Novell and SCO, and that once the issues have been resolved between those 2 parties, you would be willing to comply with whatever the outcome is.
Re:Ummm.... (Score:4, Informative)
And im an American =\
Re:Ummm.... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ummm.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ummm.... (Score:5, Informative)
Ahh the magic of the linked article:
Google, which uses thousands of Linux servers to power its search engine, is not the target of the initial suits, Stowell added.
Besides, I don't know what legal principle they can use to sue any Linux user. Copyright violation? No. Contract violation? No, most don't have any contracts with SCO. Patents? They've never said anything about those. Trade secrets? Nope.
So, what are they mumbling? Anyone they can sue has to have a contract with them, i.e. be a licensee, so they can allege a contract violation (like IBM). Maybe SGI? Novell? Sun? Who knows. They have exactly nothing to go after Linux users in general.
Re:Ummm.... SGI (Score:5, Interesting)
Then again when you assume you make an ass out of u and me, and assuming that Sco is smart is risky.
Re:Ummm.... (Score:5, Interesting)
The whole thing that SCO is trying to "sell" is a binary runtime license(WTF-TM). Yet SCO will not distribute the binary to you, nor will it supply any support for the "product". Notwithstanding that there is no legal grounds to support SCO's ownership of said intellectual property (yet).
Is this a new business model or a non existant one?
Re:Ummm.... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a brilliant business model. They don't have to actually claim ownership of anyone else's product because they aren't distributing or granting anything related to that product. They don't have to follow the terms of the GPL, because they aren't actually using the GPL. They don't have to cease distributing GPLed products, because they aren't actually violating the GPL, just loudly and constantly threatening they will violate it.
They are selling you a license from SCO to use someone else's product. Can they do this? Well, yes, they aren't actually licensing you anything. It's just a piece of paper that says "SCO says it's okay for you to use Linux". And they can certainly give you a piece of paper that says SCO says you can use something. The trick is that they're then trying to create the impression you're required to have an SCO license to use linux but never actually *DIRECTLY* saying those words-- and seem to be pulling it off.
It is like McDonalds was selling licenses to eat Subway sandwiches and strongly implying it was illegal to eat at Subway without one of these licenses and doing absolutely everything possible to convey this impression without actually saying the exact words "it is illegal to eat at subway without one of these licenses" (which would open them up to a preliminary injunction).
Re:Ummm.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I can see it now...
"McDonald's has proof that Subway sandwiches incorporate trade secret and copyrighted elements of the Secret Sauce(TM). Because it is a trade secret, we cannot divulge this proof. Consider this notice that consumption of Subway sandwiches is tantamount to theft of McDonald's intellectual property. By the way, because of Subway's use of the 'lose weight' advertising gimmick, all of their sandwiches are now public domain."
"McDonald's is now prepared to release information that will demonstrate incontrovertibly that Subway is in violation of our Secret Sauce(TM) copyright. We can demonstrate that Subway uses this particular pickle recipe in their sandwiches, which is clearly the same used in the Secret Sauce(TM)."
- Followed by announcement from Heinz Corp. that those pickles are their product, have always been their product, and predate the birth of Ray Kroc.
Re:.. the aftermath.. (Score:5, Funny)
Masturbate furiously.
Huzzah!
Re:.. the aftermath.. (Score:4, Funny)
Why do you think so many Slashdotters are aware of the one-handed Dvorak keyboard layout?
Re:.. the aftermath.. (Score:3, Interesting)
No, but I do wonder what
(I'm not saying that it's likely to happen, but it would be amusing to watch the bleating.)
Re:Why "may be EV1" ? (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, so that means they're one of very few companies that's stupid enough to be a suitable defendant.
Re:Why "may be EV1" ? (Score:5, Insightful)
So? (Score:4, Insightful)
I bet if they announced they were suing EV1, their stock price would hit 40 before the call ended.
Re:How the lawsuits are going to go in court (Score:4, Informative)
And how many times do you need to repeat [slashdot.org] this posting before everyone gets your point, Mr. Karma Whore?