Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SCO Adds Copyright Claim to IBM Suit

Posted by michael on from the double-or-nothing dept.

An anonymous reader writes "News.com.com reports that the SCO Group has significantly widened its Unix and Linux lawsuit against IBM, adding a copyright infringement claim to the already complicated case." There's also another story discussing the copyright claims.

7 of 444 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe this'll speed things up by Supp0rtLinux · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is good news. IBM surely has the money to fight the defense. Granted, who knows... maybe IBM did commit some heinous act of open source, but at least SCO's ammending the copyright issue will bring the entire issue to the forefront and get us all a resolution faster. Certainly, its better than waiting for the breach of contract issue to get resolved, then waiting through a copyright case.

  2. Supreme Irony in the Making by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 5, Interesting
    IBM has filed NO motions to dismiss. This is pretty much SCO's only out at this point, and IBM aren't offering it.

    I'm no lawyer, but so far as I understand, if this carries through and the verdict is against SCO and the judge feels the case had no merit, IBM should be able to turn around and sue for (very significant!) damanges.

    The only asset SCO has that's worth dirt right now is UNIX licensing. Wouldn't it be poetic if the outcome of SCO's market gaming were that IBM sued SCO for all assets, including that, then turned around and freed UNIX once and for all? :)

    (Just kidding. This is Darl, and Linux is bad, you smelly hippy.)

  3. dodging the bullet by senzafine · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I watched Darl's presentation at Harvard in its entirety last night. He (and the CIO at SCO) dodged so many of the questions it was getting boring. Namely Linus' claim of remembering two write 2 of the 70 header files submitted as "infriging" by SCO.

    You'd think that after hearing a CEO of a company speak...I'd at least give more validity to their claims. But after hearing Darl...it felt like he was struggling to stay afloat.

    --
    Better than Flickr - Manage, Share, Archive
  4. New Copyright Claim by richg74 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From a quick read through the story on Groklaw, the copyright infringement claim has to do with IBM's continuing distribution of AIX, after SCO supposedly revoked their Unix license.

    IBM has told the judge that SCO did not comply with her earlier order to specify their claims precisely (in terms of what Linux code was involved). There was apparently a ~30 minute conference with counsel in chambers before the open hearing. It doesn't sound like the judge was too sympathetic to SCO; from one witness's notes:

    The judge said "The problem is, unless you identify those codes, then IBM is not in a position to have a response. We're at an impasse, and the case cannot continue with an impasse, that's why there was a court order".

    From other comments the judge made (see the Groklaw write-up), it sounds like SCO may get one more really final order to lay out the specifics of their case. (Ha!)

    IBM did not move for dismissal, to the surprise of some observers. My theory is that IBM thinks they have SCO on the run, and want to make sure there is nothing left of them but a glowing crater when this is all done.

  5. Re:You'd think... by Supp0rtLinux · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So the question is... will Novell sit on the SCO side of the courtroom or the IBM side? Better yet... if Novell is claiming they own the copyright, won't the Novell/SCO issue have to be resolved before the now ammended complaint against IBM can be resolved? My understanding is that once a case is ammended, it must be resolved in full. SCO can't now try to get the contract dispute handled separate from the copyright issue, but the copyright issue is still just that... an pending issue. It'd be pretty sad if SCO had to first deal with Novell, then IBM. They might run out of money first... then they have to start selling the Linux and Unix again.

  6. Re:Bluff bluff bluff by FatRatBastard · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh, and I should add that the copyright infrigement isn't about Linux, its about AIX being distributed by IBM after SCO revoked their license.

    But remember, SCO revoked IBM's license due to trade secret violation...

    Violations that SCO isn't going to legally persue

    Which rhymes with Catch 22

    Which sums up SCO's claims now quite nicely.

  7. Re:You're all missing SCO's trick by lax-goalie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    >SCO's comments in the media are not SCO's legal case. That's another
    >matter entirely, and one that has been considerably more carefully
    >orchestrated.

    Interestingly, IBM referenced SCO's public statements in their filing today: http://pacer.utd.uscourts.gov/images/203cv00294000 00103.pdf

    The document states that "SCO has identified no more than approximately 3,700 lines of code", then quotes Darl McBride comments at Harvard this week saying "[T]here is roughly a million lines of code". IBM concludes that if McBride's statement is true, "then SCO should have identified them in response to the Court's Order."

    Bottom line, SCO's public statements are now in play. Their "more carefully orchestrated" media comments are now a major liability.