Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Files For Declaratory Judgement In SCO Case

Posted by timothy on from the raising-the-hammer dept.

Some Bitch writes "IBM has filed for declaratory judgement in the SCO case. They want the court to declare that "IBM does not infringe, induce the infringement of or contribute to the infringement of any SCO copyright through its Linux activities, including its use, reproduction and improvement of Linux, and that some or all of SCO's purported copyrights in Unix are invalid and unenforceable.". If the judge grants the motion then SCO effectively has no case and the whole thing is over." spafbnerf notes that "SCO has filed a motion for the patent infringement claim to be split into a separate case." fr0z adds a link to Groklaw's always-excellent coverage.

4 of 390 comments (clear)

  1. Re:SCO, IBM, and my employer - TROLL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's the typical "the case must have merit because the guys who filed it are smart" argument often given by the trolls on the Yahoo SCOX board. Yes, McBride has gotten wealthy by filing groundless lawsuits. He sued a previous employer that fired him for incompetence. It's called "greenmail", where the respondent would rather settle than face and expensive and costly trial process.

    Another troll tactic used in this post is saying there are "compelling" pro-SCO information, without saying what it is. Hey, if there was such great pro-SCO stuff on Groklaw, repeat some of it here!

    Troll! Dirty, slimey troll!

  2. /. suppression ;) by griblik · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those of you who (like me) regularly check groklaw for updates and news, they've got a cut down headlines-only page.

    http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page= Headlines

    That page puts less stress on their server, so if you'd like to help reduce their bandwidth costs...

    --
    Warning: May contain nuts
  3. Re:Life after SCO? by Arker · · Score: 5, Informative

    If the judge grants the motion then SCO effectively has no case and the whole thing is over.

    The article is incorrect. The writer appears to have confused a 'declaratory judgement' with a 'summary judgement' - but it's the former, not the latter. It just means that this declaration is part of the remedy IBM is asking the court to provide, when the case finally comes to a conclusion and they win.

    A summary judgement would be a motion for the Judge to declare that there is no need for a trial, that he can rule based on the facts already in evidence and stipulated. That's a very different thing, even though a lot of people seem to be confusing them.

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
  4. Re:MSFT und SCOX by Some+Bitch · · Score: 5, Informative
    Linus Torvalds set out simply to add functionality to his own version of Minix (the copyright allows use to do so for your own personal use, but you cannot sell or distibute it).

    Untrue, Linus originally wrote a terminal emulator to access the university Unix box, it was after expanding this that he realised he had effectively started his own OS. It was driven by the limited nature of Minix but was not an expansion of Minix in any way, originally it was just meant to be a terminal emulator.

    Torvalds had originally called it freax, for "`free' + `freak' + the obligatory `-x'. The operator of the FTP server where Linus' new kernel made its debut didn't like the name and simply called it Linux (Linus + Unix). People seemed to like the name so it stuck.

    Close, Linus originally called it Linux on his own system but decided to rename it for release. Ari Lemmke decided the new name sucked and kept the directory on ftp.funet.fi as linux