Stay Lifted, Novell Vs. SCO Can Go Forward 161
A number of readers suggest we check out Groklaw, where PJ is reporting that a bankruptcy judge has granted Novell's request to lift the stay so that its trial against SCO can proceed in Utah. The judge concluded that Judge Kimball is the best one to decide how much SCO owes Novell, and that SCO cannot make any "reorganization" plans — including any "fire sale" of assets — until it knows this figure.
So... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is IMO a perfect example of how to make lots of personal profit while totally screwing your shareholders.
Patience, Mr. Plugwash (Score:3, Interesting)
The matter of disbarment and other "lying through your teeth when there was no evidence at all" sort of lawsuits is yet to come.
Then again, many may play the Ken Lay Gambit, and simple die out from under the charges.
Re: (Score:2)
This only works in Texas. In other states, the claims hold after death.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Had SCO chosen an opponent with shallower pockets, the system would probably have failed."
The system HAS failed.
Pump-and-dump for McBride and his cronies, FUD-fest for Microsoft, and Novells' money being illegally converted to fund all this. Justice? Only when McBride is in an orange jump-suit, and rats on those behind the "corporate veil".
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
1. an ingenious device for creating personal profit without personal responsibility
Nope, not even then (Score:2)
Sun (Score:2)
Hummmmm. (Score:2)
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
How many businesses were on the verge of trying out a Linux distro at their office, but became became convinced that open source software was some kind of "poison?" How many might still think that way due to a lack of education or a residual feeling of unease? On the plus side, the old saying is "there's no such thing as bad advertising", right?
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
In this case, the connections to Redmond are there for anyone to see. The advertising comes from the desperation efforts of MS continuing from all angles, regardless of how it reflects on them. We have the SCO funding, the "Get the FUD" campaign, the efforts to subvert the standards organizations, the patent suits from Acacia, licensing "deals" with Linux vendors, and now the patent suit in Nigeria against OLPC [marketwire.com].
Those are the things that scream loudly that MS believes in FOSS enough that everybody ought to take a look at it.
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
Needless to say, Telstra are still predominantly Windows based, and many Telstra employees blame the SCO scaremongering.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
And remember, we're talking about the same lumbering flat-footed behemot
Re: (Score:2)
I worked with the Telstra architects for almost 3 years and there was never a serious push to do linux for anything but serverside.
Re: (Score:2)
Even assuming that Telstra might have had better intentions... is wierd for a fellow Aussie!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
SCO's attempts to claim ownership of so much Linux IP seemed like the sleaziest of technicality-mongering I've ever seen. To use another governmental parallel, it wasn't much better when Cheney tried to claim that, since he's the VP, he is a member of congress when people say he's beholden to executive branch rules, and he's an
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now newspaper columns are much more aware; listing where to download liveCD's, the different releases (Ubuntu, Fedora, Knoppix, etc... ) and the different desktops (KDE, Gnome).
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously... that was a lead story in the local news today. If you asked these bozos what Linux was, they would probably do AOL keyword search and think that they made stuffed penguins or something.
Re: (Score:2)
The system is b0rked! (Score:5, Informative)
"The system works..... it works slowly, it costs huge amounts of money, but it does work......"
Three simple reasons to say "the system" does NOT work:
Justice my arse! If the software industry worked as slowly as justice, and as expensively, we'd be using a $5,000 abacus instead of a computer.
Think of it - there's still all the BS appeals. Justice isn't looking all that appealing now, is it, unless you, like justice, are blind AND slow.
Justice is blind, slow and dumb (Score:2)
Re:The system is b0rked! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously the good guys won here, but could you imagine if it had been startups or midsi
Re: $5,000 abacus (Score:2)
The software industry works exactly that slowly and expensively. Where's my reliable handwriting recognition, voice recognition, artificial intelligence, robot maid, and automatic car? Software is still so primitive that keyboards are a wide-spread input device and buffer-overruns are a major security risk. What has saved us is the great work by the hardware industry, improving pow
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Keep in mind that although the system works slowly, this case has been exceptionally slow. SCO has been able to drag this one out far more than is normally possible.
The reason SCO was able to do that is that while the system is designed to thwart foot-dragging by defendants, it doesn't do as much to prevent foot-dragging plaintiffs. The theory is that the guy who files the suit is motivated to push the issue -- or else why would he have file the suit? So, the system largely puts the plaintiff in the driver's seat, and SCO has taken every opportunity to stand on the brakes.
In bankruptcy, that's reversed. (Score:4, Informative)
The reason SCO was able to do that is that while the system is designed to thwart foot-dragging by defendants, it doesn't do as much to prevent foot-dragging plaintiffs.
Right. But in bankruptcy court, that's reversed. The debtor isn't in charge. The court, the U.S. Trustee, and the creditor's committee are. Notice how, since SCO declared bankruptcy, their wierd legal moves have been shot down fast. SCO's "emergency motion" for a quick sale - deferred by judge without even asking SCO. Quick asset sale to York under wierd conditions - withdrawn once the creditors objected. Novell lawsuit - unstayed.
Judge Kimball's calendar has an open day on December 11.
Re: (Score:2)
Right. But in bankruptcy court, that's reversed. The debtor isn't in charge. The court, the U.S. Trustee, and the creditor's committee are. Notice how, since SCO declared bankruptcy, their wierd legal moves have been shot down fast.
Yep, and both the IBM and Novell cases have already been dragged out about as far as they can -- Kimball was just about ready to empanel a jury in SCO v Novell when the stay was ordered, and it won't take long to get that trial back on track.
Things will move quickly now.
Re: (Score:2)
Kimball was just about ready to empanel a jury in SCO v Novell...
There's no jury. At this point, that case is down to claims for "equitable relief", and Judge Kimball ruled that a jury trial wasn't necessary. [groklaw.net]
It might not take five days of trial, either.
Re: (Score:2)
Kimball was just about ready to empanel a jury in SCO v Novell...
There's no jury. At this point, that case is down to claims for "equitable relief", and Judge Kimball ruled that a jury trial wasn't necessary. [groklaw.net]
It might not take five days of trial, either.
Thanks. I missed that one.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:there is no PJ (Score:4, Funny)
Look you mentally insufficient SCO hack, your company lost because it had a business plan that was nothing more than extorting ill-conceived licensing fees.
It must be tough to be a dim-witted SCO astroturfer when the company barely exists and is about to be delivered lock, stock and barrel to Novell.
What a pathetic rube you are, you twisted piece of rotting monkey flesh.
don't lose your head over it (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, he's lifting the stay, much like one would lift the active portion of a guillotine.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:don't lose your head over it (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"A walking penis capable of intelligent speech! You know, a dickhead!" - Eve, Blast From the Past
Re: (Score:2)
It happens automatically when they chop off his arse prior to putting it on a plate that can be handed to him.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly! (Score:4, Interesting)
Now it will get REALLY interesting when we see how Darl's comments about the Utah judge come back to haunt him when they all have to go back there...
SCO has been a dead man walking for a long time now. It's just that we're finally about to watch their cremation. Anyone remember to bring marshmallows?
but .... (Score:2)
SCO's next step? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:SCO's next step? Not a chance (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That would be a very big risk considering she dosn't suffer fools gladly and attempting to confuse her is more likely to just annoy her...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Judge Judy... Re:SCO's next step???? (Score:5, Interesting)
WTF are you talking about? "Judge Judy" was very much a "real" judge up until her retirement in 1996, albeit a small claims judge. She got her television show thanks to a large amount of press about her outspoken nature in real courtrooms. While the "court" in her show is merely an agreed-upon arbitration session, she is demonstrating much of the same behavior that she became famous for when in public service.
More to the point, Judith is not the only judge known for rather outlandish behavior. Judge Samuel B. Kent [wikipedia.org] is also well-known in the legal community for his humorous and razor-sharp wit, especially in his written orders. One of his more famous incidents was when he dismissed a case for being "asinine tripe".
Last but not least, you do not "disbar" a judge to remove him/her from office. Judges are either elected or appointed officials. Disbarring means they can't practice as a lawyer anymore. (Annoying, but not a huge problem for someone not appointed by the Bar.) Judges must be impeached or dismissed from office like most other government officials. Disbarment usually follows impeachment or dismissal to prevent the Judge from continuing to practicing law after being dismissed.
Well good. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Well good. (Score:5, Interesting)
People call all of this a victory. It's not, it's a goddamned shame that crooks like McBride can use the court system like this. I'm not saying you should have all the evidence for your claims, but SCO did claim to have all these lines of code, which they never actually produced, and so far as I'm concerned day one before the judge should have gone something like this:
SCO Lawyers: We have all these lines of code demonstrating that our intellectual property was stolen.
Judge: Please provide the code.
SCO Lawyers: Well, we don't actually have it, so to speak. You know, it's code, and it's a lot of pages, and we want IBM to release their code so we can compare it to our code to show what we claim.
IBM Lawyers: Your honor, here's the complete Linux source code, as well as a complete revision history. We downloaded it off the Net just like SCO can.
Judge: So, provide the infringing code.
SCO Lawyers: Well, we can't at this moment...
Judge: Case dismissed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Gerry
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Well good. (Score:4, Informative)
I'm not going to defend SCO by any measure, but they would probably say that they didn't have any evidence because Novell was hiding it all. And that they need discovery to get the incriminating emails, meeting agendas, testimony from employees, etc. So there's a lot of discovery for you.
The whole process sounds very odd and wasteful from the outside, but there is a legit reason for the way things work. A cheaper alternative is arbitration, which we all agree to whenever we click "I accept." So maybe that will change soon, but I don't necessarily think that will be to consumers' benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
The REAL question... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"We're happy that we'll be able to demonstrate that we owe nothing to Novell, put this speculation to rest, and get on with the daily tasks of maintaining 'business-as-usual' here at SCO."
She'll talk about the constructive trust. (Score:4, Informative)
In any case, just because Judge Gross is reserving the right to order a constructive trust for himself doesn't mean he won't decide to order one once Kimball rules anyway.
I think she already has (Score:2)
Horrible things? (Score:4, Informative)
I'm interested to read just what Darl McBride said. I just Google searched for it and didn't find anything.
Could someone please post links to some of the "horrible things"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Horrible things? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"So it's back to Utah they go. I'm sure SCO's lawyers can't wait to see Judge Kimball again, after all the horrible things SCO's CEO Darl McBride said about Judge Kimball to the press."
More like lyin' lyons - the fake steve jobs [arstechnica.com], or pretenderle (Ron Enderle), or the MogTroll. [slashdot.org]
Here's a link (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
In short, there won't be anything to appeal *on*. It's all been said, it was all allowed them, they had every chance to make a real case.
They never proved anything substanti
Beyond bankruptcy? (Score:2)
So, it seems fairly clear to this non-economist that SCOX is royally screwed. However, are there fates worse than bankruptcy? There have been a lot of (mostly wishful thinking) suggestions that SCO's board was doing all this as a big pump-and-dump and that it's only a matter of time until the SEC folks move in. As I'm wholly ignorant of such things, how likely is something like that to happen? I mean, it certainly appears to me that they committed a long list of sins, but are any of those likely to tran
Re: (Score:2)
You betcha. The SEC is going to have a field day with the pump-n-dump aspect of this, at some point - unless Darl and friends are politically connected, and get protection from prosecution - which is VERY unlikely.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft vs. Microsoft? (Score:3, Funny)
Microsoft will buy SCO (Score:3, Interesting)
1. SCO will owe Novell a bunch of money (money that it doesn't have)
2. Microsoft will purchase the remaining 'assets' from SCO. It doesn't really matter if they pay $1 or $1Million
3. Microsoft will do so to get closer to the following goals:
3a. MS now has a hand in the Linux game (possible bump in their stock)
3b. MS can now renegotiate/strengthen their position with Novell
3c. MS can now possibly resurrect the lawsuit or dredge up other scary FUD-alicious items out of what they get (remember it's the appearance of a problem, not an actual problem that makes corporate lawyers CIOs think twice about going open source)
3d. MS pisses off some open source zealots that already hated them (meh)
4. ???
5. Profit!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ain't gonna happen. (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh, wait . . .
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft funneled money beyond the licenses to SCO. This whole affair was beneath the dignity of a professional company. Getting in bed with a company like SCO...what does that say about MS?
If Microsoft put the effort into providing value to their customers that they put in trying to undermine competitors they wouldn't need to worry about their market.
Pathetic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft will buy SCO (Score:5, Interesting)
Novell will end up taking the remains of SCO in payment, including getting Unix back (the rights to sell it, since they already own the IP). They may even end up open-sourcing Unix just to forever lay such claims to rest. After all, Unix now has no real value, as recent (lack of) sales indicate.
Since this is in Bankruptcy Court, the Bankruptcy Judge will determine if SCO has enough cause to justify spending someone else's (Novell's) money (which, when put in a Trust pending appeals, would kill SCO by itself) to spend on lawyers for an appeal. Since by this time SCO will have no operating capital, and no future, the Judge will say no, hand the remaining assets to Novell and tell everyone else, "Sorry, there's nothing left for you!"
Constructive trust? though (Score:2)
OTOH, since SCOx can no longer dispose of it's assets without approval by the bankruptcy court, a constructive trust may be less needed...perhaps.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
As Utah court case goes, it seems
The fat lady sings (Score:2)
Employment at SCO (Score:5, Interesting)
Darl (Score:2, Funny)
Stay lifted. Waaaay ahead of you (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tags : "linuxstolescocode" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"This means that SCO (and its investors) will actually have to atone for their ridiculous claims and the resources they have caused supporters of Unix and OSS to squander. Finally, they can pay back the world what they owe"
Do you really believe that? They're not "paying back" Jack Shit. They don't have any money of their own - all they have left is Novell's money. Chapter 7. End of story.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that SCO doesn't have enough money to "make Novell whole." If the bk judge can claw back money from thse fraud artists at BFS, from the corporate officers who fed like pigs at the trough, from the PIPE Fairy, etc., THAT would be justice.
My money is on IBM to pierce the corporate veil vis. Microsoft.
Re: (Score:2)
"they can sue the SCO executive and its lawyers for breach of fiduciary duty because SCO did not do enough due diligence before starting the lawsuit."
Justice won't be served unless they go to jail. Having to give back a portion of their ill-gotten gains is not punishment. If you steal $50 million, and have to give back half, then theft is profit and the fine is just a cost of doing business.
Ask Microsoft - they've been operating that way for decades.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If I buy your car for 75K when it was only worth 5k, so that you can use the money to build a new house, and then it's discovered that the car was really your Uncle Ned's, guess who get the money? Yep, Uncle Ned, as you're not allowed to steal his property and sell it. It doesn't matter that the car was only worth 5k, I bought it for 75K, and that purchase price belongs to the rightful owner.
Re: (Score:2)
Having been in this situation myself (a creditor to a bankrupt company) back in my younger and dumber days, I'll say that I feel limited sympathy for them, because you shouldn't ever let yourself be put in such a position. The *FIRST* time your employer even makes noises like they can't make payroll, get thee the hell out - if they can't make payroll, they're also not paying their taxes, and the IRS will get first c
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)