Slashdot Mirror
SCO Slammed in Slander of Title Suit
SillySlashdotName writes "Judge Kimball has stated that The SCO Group has failed to meet the requirements of the law in its complaint against Novell and has dismissed the case but gives TSG 30 days to try to meet the legal requirements. More info on groklaw." EWeek also has a story.
We just need to make sure that SCO will keep going the other way ;-)
Finally some sense out of our judicial system. Who would believe that...
And so now, it becomes clear that SCO may never provide the required evidence to prove that they are indeed correct. I believe that this is a clear signal that the SCO case is seeing the end of it's days. Everyone, rejoice! Together now!
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
"They got what they deserved"
"What? They've not been laughed away totally yet?"
"Why did they get off so easy for that much FUD"
Summary of news story: "Judge isn't buying it, put up, or shut up."
I assert that my comment is only my opinion, not that of any employer, past, present or future.
One suit down, 100000000000000000000000000 to go.
I could be wrong. I'm always wrong...
Personally I'd rather not see any of the cases (SCO vs. IBM... SCO vs. Novell... SCO vs. RedHat) dismissed. After all, a dismissed case can always be redone later. Personally, I'd rather see the cases and trials move on and see the truth told and *hopefully* IBM and Novell win. At least then we don't have a *what if* hanging over our heads.
Yet another deadline? We've seen this kind of thing before. Let's not get our panties in a bunch just yet, this is not over yet. Not by a long shot.
Call me when the case is dismissed, and the dismissal is upheld on appeal. Guess we'll be waiting for a long time.
Matter of fact, don't call me until SCO goes through Chapter 7 bankruptcy and ceases operations, cause it's only then that this monster will be dead and buried.
Yes!!! Yes!!! SCO is going DOWN baby!!!
but gives TSG 30 days to try to meet the legal requirements.
Noooooooo!!!!!!! Arrrrgggghhhhhhhhh!!!! Don't give 'em any more time--they're going to use it to stretch this bullshit even longer!!!!
***
Ok, seriously now, I think that each of SCO's cases is going to get thrown out one-by-one, and when SCO has to start paying others' legal fees (I can't wait until they have to pay IBM's), they are going to disappear, without accomplishing what Microsoft wants them to accomplish, which is to screw the Linux community over. I think they will accomplish the exact opposite, which is giving lots and lots and lots of free advertising worldwide to Linux, and then when SCO loses all these cases, it will prove to the world that Linux is legitimate, and Microsoft will have screwed themselves over. Nanny nanny boo boo!!!
Well, technically it IS dismissed, but on the basis of 'failure to plead special damages' and not on the basis of 'falsity'.
However, Novell's motion to dismiss as grated WITHOUT PREJUDICE, meaning that SCO can amend the complaint later, and the judge has explicitly given them 30 days to do so.
So... RTFA right back atcha!
..if you're gonna base all your corporate strategy on lawsuits, you better get your sh*t together and at least make the court deadlines on time.
The Wheels of Justice do grind slowly, but they are grinding in the right direction. IBM, Novell, and all the Good Guys(tm) will eventually win. And then the countersuits will destroy SCO. Hopefully, the countersuits will destroy Darl. Also, we don't want the judge to make a mistake here. If he had thrown the case out, SCO would appeal it back in and things would take even longer. We want IBM/Novell/Good Guys(tm) to win fair and square. It is a clear cut case, they just need to make sure SCO can't claim they were beaten unfairly... because they will anyway. :)
They say you should never observe how sausage or laws are made. I wish to amend that to say you should never observe how laws are litigated.
What a shameful display of the american legal system when after a year and half all the court can say is "I'll grant you another extension and the trial won't be till september of 2005".
A five year old would have settled this a year ago.
evil is as evil does
Hilarious.
[...]
Just go there and read it. I think the press is going to gang up on SCO and really kick them. What goes up, must come down.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
People have commented here that they can't understand why it's taken so long to come to this ruling with the facts so clear cut.
Just remember that it's easier for a person to prove they own something than prove that someone else doesn't own it. If SCO had a legal document showing clear ownership they could have had this wrapped up much faster. On the other hand, Novel is saying "We have these documents that do NOT show SCO ownership." which doesn't prove your side; it only disproves the other.
SCO might always find a previously unknown document showing clear copyright conveyance.
Judge Kimball:
"Accordingly, Novell's motion to dismiss SCO's slander of title claim for failure to specifically plead special damages is granted without prejudice."
And the Conclusion:
For the reasons stated above, Plaintiff's Motion to Remand is DENIED, and Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as to Plaintiff's pleading of falsity and GRANTED as to Plaintiff's pleading of special damages. Plaintiff is granted 30 days from the date of this Order to amend its Complaint to more specifically plead special damages.
What happens if there's a management turnover at Novel and the new guys in charge decide to take up the SCO litigation business model only with the added benefit that these decisions show they own the copyrights?
In some ways I find it bothersome that these cases are being fought along lines other than "Can someone who's worked on or licensed Unix ever legally contribute to Open Source".
Yes, I realize that it's an insane from the perspective of a computer scholar, but that doesn't mean that court rulings could change the legal reality.
It's great that SCO is being euthanized from these legal proceedings, but recall that it wasn't too long ago that SCO was an big open source ally and proponent. Will Novel be next to fall to bad management, investment pandering, and absurd legal advice?
Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
Oh, they're real little spin-meisters. Check this one out:
You couldn't make shit like this up!
"Oh, we're sooo happy with the ruling. This is great for us. We really wanted to get our claims dismissed. Yes sir. That was the plan all al.. LOOK A WOOKIE!!!!"
Belief is the currency of delusion.
Judge grants "Novells motion to dismiss SCO's slander of title claim for failure to specifically plead special damages is granted without prejudice".
But, also grants "SCO thirty days leave to amend its Complaint to plead special damages specifically in accord with Rule 9(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure".
Because, if it dismissed without prejudice, SCO will probably just change it's pleadings and file another lawsuit. But, if they can't change their pleadings in accordance with Rule 9(g), then they could be dismissed with prejuduice.
INL I ROBOT
Damn, this was some heavy reading! Here's my armchair legal analysis.
First, Novell sold a lot of Unix(tm) intellectual property rights to TSG. Novell and TSG signed a contract for this, the Asset Purchase Agreement (APA). Later on, Novell and TSG signed an amedement, APA Amendment 2 (APA-2). Dunno whatever happened to APA Amendment 1.
The original APA says that no copyrights are transferred as part of the sale. APA-2 says that the sale does include some copyrights -- whatever copyrights that TSG needs to enforce its other rights for the property that they paid good money for.
Fast-forward to 2003. TSG starts its campaign: "we own the Unix copyrights. Pay us $$$$$$$$$." Novell puts out its own press releases: "actually, we (Novell) still own the actual copyrights. You don't have to listen to TSG".
TSG gets pissed off about this, says that Novell is lying about TSG's Unix copyrights and that Novell is fucking with TSG's business of selling licenses to those copyrights. TSG sues Novell about this.
TSG: "We paid for those copyrights, see APA-2"
Novell: "No, actually, APA-2 says that we promise to give you whatever copyrights you need later, APA-2 doesn't actually transfer specific copyrights."
The case ends up in Federal court, Judge Kimball. TSG wants the case to be in State court. Novell wants the case to stay in Federal court.
Kimball says: "this case is about whether APA-2 actually transferred the copyrights or not. That's a federal issue. So it stays here in federal court."
Next, Novell says: "it's so CLEARLY OBVIOUS that APA-2 does not transfer copyrights that it's okay for us to state publicly that TSG doesn't own the copyrights. Please tell TSG to stuff their lawsuit and go screw."
Kimball says: "not so fast, Novell. It's not OBVIOUS at all. Maybe APA-2 actually transferred the copyrights but MAYBE NOT. We're going to need a trial to figure that out. Since we're going to need a trial, I'm not going to dismiss the lawsuit on those grounds at this stage."
Next, Novell says: "and oh yeah, TSG's lawsuit is deficient because they weren't specific about how they were damaged -- just because they are trying to license this Unix(tm) property, and we issue press releases pissing all over the idea that Unix(tm) is THEIR property after they paid $100 million for it, that's not enough. See FRCP mumble."
Judge Kimball says: "Novell's got a point. SCO, your legalese has syntax errors and fails to validate. I'm not saying your content is bogus, I'm saying your syntax is wrong. You have 30 days to re-format your lawsuit so that it's valid FRCP".
So, the deal is:
TSG can continue to sue Novell for dumping on TSG's claims that TSG owns the Unix copyrights. TSG must pursue this lawsuit in federal court, because it's a federal issue whether those copyrights actually transferred or not.
Novell's claim that "Novell still owns the copyrights" might be legally potent or it might not. It will take a trial to determine this. But Novell can't make TSG's lawsuit go away at this stage just by claiming this. It might be true, but it's not OBVIOUS that it's true.
TSG has the right to sue Novell for slandering TSG's title to Unix(tm). But their current complaint is defective. They have 30 days for their lawyers to submit a new, more specific complaint. Then the case will proceed, in federal court, and the court can actually do some more work on the question of whether APA-2 transferred the copyrights or not.