Slashdot Mirror
Caldera vs. Microsoft Court Documents To Be Shredded
Geste writes "As now being reported in this brief story and on my local (Seattle) NPR affiliate, 3 million court documents from Caldera's unfair competition suit against Microsoft are to be shredded in Utah. The timing relative to Microsoft's recent licensing of SCO Unix IP is undoubtedly a complete coincidence.
"
And available here.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
Ryan T. Sammartino
"Ancora imparo"
...Is it even legal to destroy cour documents? To save space? Couldn't they digitize them? This just seems like a way to hide information, and information like this could hardly have a good reason to be hidden.
If your theory is different from practice, then your theory is wrong.
Now I'll wonder, every time I use the john, if this piece of paper once made Microsoft embrace Unix...
(okay, so I'm stretching things just a little)
The Spoon
Updated 6/28/2011
it should make for a more comfortable wiping experience than the Windows 95 cd I currently use. Not as satisfying though.
Why? Do you really want that stuff up your ass? Don't MS products already cause enough pain in that region as it is?
Because I just did, and a few things just leap right off the page:
/. post, it somehow seemed that I should find a picture in the article showing Darl McBride feeding reams of paper, all entitled "Damning Internal Documents of Antitrust Violations", into an industrial-strength shredder while Bill Gates, dressed in a Halloween Satan costume, danced in glee in the background. Funny how /. doesn't mention that some of the documents are being preserved.
/. thinks this is somehow important or damning to Microsoft or SCO, why wasn't this mentioned two weeks ago? Or in October, when SCO obtained permission to shred the documents?
::adjusts asbestos underwear::
1)In October, the company persuaded U.S. District Judge Dee Benson to order their destruction.
Because, as we all know, in October Microsoft and SCO were already in collusion to cause this big ruckus. Or maybe SCO was just tired of shelling out the cash to store the documents related to a long-finished case, and was trying to save a little money.
2) However, just as the shredding was to begin, Sun Microsystem's attorneys halted it with a subpoena. The company, seeking evidence that might help in its own antitrust suit against Microsoft, eventually pulled out 40 boxes of the computer giant's secret internal communications for digital imaging.
That's funny, by reading the
3)Meantime, the shredding and pulping of the remaining records has been under way for about two weeks.
So, if
Look, guys, I'm all for the downfall of Microsoft and the phoenix rise of Linux (and OS X, but hey, I'm weird), but couldn't we try for maybe just a teensy bit of objectivity?
Okay, flame away.
Arr! The laws of physics be a harsh mistress!
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Why is this modded +5? All you have to do is search for "murberry slocomb" on google and you'll get: "Your search - "Murberry Slocomb" - did not match any documents. " As a matter of fact, just search for any page with the two words "murberry" and "slocomb" and you'll still find 0 hits. According to switchboard.com, there is not a single business in the US with "murberry" in its name, and only one (listed) person in the US has a last name of Murberry. None of your links tie your statements together. You link to a generic page which shows SEC filings for VA, but nothing on that page ties it to "Murberry". You link to the board of directors for VA, but again, you don't link them in any way to "Murberry". And why didn't you provide a link to any page which links OSDN to "Murberry?" You claim that you found these links using lexis-nexis because you know that most people don't have a (very expensive) subscription to that database. Nice try. Anyone with an educational/legal subscription to lexis-nexis: Please do a quick search and refute this guy's claim completely.
I just did a rather (I'm sorry to say) extensive search of Lexis Nexis, and nothing came up. I looked through the regular news (nothing relevent came up) and business news. I also checked the Lexis-Nexis company listings, which also showed no results for "mulberry slocomb". You can tell it is a hoax just by reading the post though. It looks very similar to many other expose posts that have appeared on slashdot. I'm just pissed that I can't get myself to do some quick research on my final papers, but of course, I'll do some research on a fictional company that some guy on slashdot made references to. Oh well.