AutoZone Granted Limited Stay in SCO Copyright Case

michael path writes "From Yahoo: Judge Robert C. Jones on Monday denied AutoZone's request to transfer its copyright case with The SCO Group from Nevada to a Tennessee court, but also granted a limited stay to the auto parts chain."

Comments

Yawn... must be a slow geek news day.

[LostCluster]

The "stay" has very little power to it. It basically says that there will be no more major courtroom events for the next 90 days, meanwhile the discovery phase of the case is still ongoing and SCO can still try to peer into AutoZone's operations through that process. All we know for sure now is that it won't be going to trial nor be dismissed in the next 90 days, unless the judge doubles back on his own ruling which is also possible so... uhm, what does this tell us?

This is not any ruling on the merits of the case, nor a firm concurance with AutoZone's agreement with SCO's own request that the case be delayed until IBM v. SCO is settled. There's really not much news in this... but this is Slashdot where any action in the SCO lawsuit is reported.

Wake me when it's over...

Re:Yawn... must be a slow geek news day.

[LostCluster]

SCO *only* gets to do discovery related to a preliminary injunction.
For the most part, that's a distinction without a difference... to win a preliminary injunction you need to prove that 1. There'd be an ongoing harm and 2. that your case has at least some merit. Since SCO is still looking for it's first shred of merit...

The judge told them not to bother with the discovery if they're not going to try for a preliminary injuction - which sets a trap for them.
Only if SCO forgets to hand in their legal homework. There's no question they're going to swing for it just because they can given their past history.

tantrum?

[Anonymous Coward]

AutoZone had used SCO's OpenServer Unix until 2001, when it started to switch over to Red Hat Linux. AutoZone completed its migration to Linux in 2002.

it kind of seems like this lawsuit is really just a way for SCO to punish AutoZone for no longer using SCO's product.

Re:tantrum?

[Antique Geekmeister]

Let's be very clear on SCO's motives. They're being a puppet to cast FUD on Linux while getting money from Microsoft to stay afloat. In the meantime, their executives are trying to rape the company for golden parachutes, salary, and sales of stock options. Extending the lawsuits is *good* for SCO, because the purpose of the lawsuits at this point is not to win: the grounds of their lawsuits are frankly too weak to actually win in court. Failing in any way that discredits the suits or reduces the cost or risk of the lawsuits to their chosen targets is *BAD* for SCO, because it reduces the effectiveness of their lawsuits and reduces the likelihood of an out of court settlement and reduces Microsoft's willingness to continue funding them.

Re:I wonder

[Lord Kano]

IANAL, but extortion, abuse of process and malicious prosecution all come to mind.

LK

Re:Whew that was close

[Anonymous Coward]

None of those reasons stopped Autozone from incorporating in Nevada.

Re:I wonder

[macdaddy]

We don't want SCO to go bankrupt yet. We want them to lose the case, uphold the GPL, prove Microsoft's involvement and then, ONLY THEN do we want them to be squashed like the bugs that they are.

new busines model

[Anonymous Coward]

hey here is an idea - one of our former customers has started using a better product than ours.

Instead of trying to make a better product lets just sue them.

We are geniuses - wuaaahhhahahahhh!

-Darl & Bill