Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FSF Subpoenaed by SCO

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the you-can't-make-this-stuff-up dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Bradley M. Kuhn on the FSF website: Late last year, we were subpoenaed by SCO as part of the ongoing dispute between SCO and IBM. Today, we made that subpoena available on our website. This is a broad subpoena that effectively asks for every single document about the GPL and enforcement of the GPL since 1999. They also demand every document and email that we have exchanged with Linus Torvalds, IBM, and other players in the community. In many cases, they are asking for information that is confidential communication between us and our lawyers, or between us and our contributors."

4 of 432 comments (clear)

  1. New docs out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Related docs which could make the subpoena irrelevant: Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintoff IBM's Memorandum In Support of its Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgement on its claim for Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement (phew).

  2. Teaser. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "SCO has advised the court that it has provided complete and detailed responses to the Court's orders. If that is true, then summary judgement is appropriate because SCO has no evidence of IBM's alledged infringement (as SCO has adduced none). If it is not true, then summary judgement is appropriate because SCO has not only defied two orders of the Court, but it has also falsely certified that it has provided complete, detailed and thorough answers to IBM's interrogatories and the Court's orders. Either way, the Court should forthwith enter summary judgment in favor of IBM."

  3. Re:Non issue by sphealey · · Score: 5, Informative
    So lawyers are petitioning for confidential information from other lawyers, knowing it is confidential?

    Why, preytell, have there been no petitions to have SCOs lawyers disbarred yet?

    Oldest trick in the book is to stamp every document you create "confidential attorney-client work product" and claim all your documents are immune to subponea.

    So, when subpoea'ing, you ask for every document the other guys has. Then your lawyer and his lawyer agree on what is confidential, or if they can't agree, the judge decides (I am told judges despise litigants who can't come to agreements on that sort of stuff).

    sPh

  4. Support the FSF! by Henrik+S.+Hansen · · Score: 5, Informative
    If we fight the subpoena, it means substantial legal fees associated with litigation. If we produce materials, it means substantial effort to gather the relevant documents. Even though we'll be reimbursed for the direct costs, the indirect costs in staff time will be ours to bear.

    Now is the time to support the FSF, so they can fight this thing. It'd be awful if they had to give out private emails and other communication.

    Become a member of the FSF and support them financially. (I am already a member). You can also send anonymous donations, or buy something from GNU Press.