Slashdot Mirror
SCO's claims Against Daimler-Chrysler Thrown Out
Zak3056 writes "According to eyewittness reports published on Groklaw, SCO has been all but thrown out of court in their suit against Daimler-Chrysler.
In a hearing that lasted 18 minutes with the judge ruling from the bench, all of SCO's claims, save that DCC failed to file their required certification with 30 days, were dismissed."
For a free car. It was all they really wanted anyway.
Let the crumbling begin...
Three to go. :-)
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.
I was waiting for this to start. Meritless lawsuits have taken the SCOmbags way further than they ever should have gotten.
It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
Why'd it take so long?
Sigs cause cancer.
First death to SCO post. Looks like they are on the decline.
And there was Much Rejoycing, Now lets all go out and buy a hemi.
serves them right.
glad to see "justice" is being done.
would like to see them thrown out of the entire country myself (not just court)..
Good precendent to set though..
anime+manga together at last.. in real time.
Have the SCO made any money from all the legal actions they have taken? How do they still have the money to do all this?
Boxing Equipment Reviews
This should get the ball rolling nicely on getting their other claims thrown out.
Check out SCOX. Down 7.2% for the day already.
Pwn'ed.
WANNAWIKI Wannawiki WannaWiki WANNAWIKI!
"SCO's claims Against Daimler-Chrysler Thrown Out"
:)
"SCO has been all but thrown out"
Which one is it?
no
Many more to go.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Well this isn't surprising. But whats the status of SCO's other lawsuits, such as the one with IBM? Who else are they suing? I noticed AutoZone was on the list...anyone else?
would would be interesting to see is if this will drastically effect what happens now with their other lawsuits...
I hope to see a lot of the other judges reading the brief and throwing out the other cases too... Goodbye SCO.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
This is looking a little bit to the future, but if a company goes bust... can't the remaining individuals still sue if they believe their copyrighted code is being misused?
I guess ultimately my question is, does SCO going belly up mean the end of these lawsuits?
Their stock price took another dive in the past few hours? $4.20 at the time of this posting. I'm still waiting for it to go below a dollar. I actually expected it sooner, but it's been sticking near 5 for way too long.
Speak for yourself.
New yearly lows. Heck of a business plan
DNT
SCO thrown out of a Daimler-Chrysler? I see a faulty-door/locks-suit in the near future.
But SCO tried to file a TRO against the Circuit Court of Michigan. It appears the court uses Linux Servers, to handle all of the court dosument distribution. SCO claimed that a TRO was in order because the issuance of the Dismissal would result in irreperable harm. The Judge promptly dismissed the TRO in 2 minutes. The remaining 6 minutes were taken up with everybody in the courtroom ROTFLTAO.
Time for SCO to deploy that famous Iraqi spokeperson.
We have destroyed the Chrysler infidels and their heads now adorn pikes along all interstates leading into Utah.
In China, it takes only a week from accusation to execution, but here we let SCumO blather on for so long before crumbling slowly! Why can't we be more like ... oh, wait, nevermind.
IBM, Autozone, and Daimler-Chrysler. SCO's future was shaky, but they claimed with victory in the three cases mentioned, they would be rock solid.
And lo, the FUD'ed tripod stood firm against the gales of disbelieving laughter, and failed FUD attacks.
First, AutoZone gets an indefinite stay. (uh oh.. SCO's only got two legs left, it's wobbly, a gust of wind will blow it over)..
And now the judge rips out every avenue of attack in the Daimler-Chrysler case. The judge also made it pretty much impossible for SCO to extort^W license their technology to all their old customers who now use Linux..
There's an image for you. SCO's tripod only has one leg left. There's a technical term for that.
BROKEN.
People Talking in Movie shows.. people smoking in bed.. people voting republican.. GIVE THEM A BOOT TO THE HEAD!
I, for one, am not.
INSERT INTO comment VALUE('Doh!') WHERE user='you';
that companies such as SCO think that they can get away with patent fraud like this.
Additionally, I think that if someone wants to give away something for free (like linux distributions) then they shouldn't have to worry about patents and such. Only if they are selling the product for profit should they be liable for lawsuit
I think this should have been "Sc0wned, beginning of the end"
Eyewitness Reports from the DC Hearing - SCO Trounced
Wednesday, July 21 2004 @ 12:23 PM EDT
I have just heard from two readers who did attend the DC hearing. The eyewitness accounts are subject to later clarification, simply because neither is a lawyer and that can lead to missing certain details, as they disclaim in the reports. But with that disclaimer, this is what they say happened. I know we all wish to thank them both for attending the hearing, so we can get a fast report.
What they are telling me is that DaimlerChrysler's motion for summary disposition was granted in all particulars except one, which is whether they replied fast enough or should have done so within 30 days. What that means is SCO's action against DC is over in all meaningful senses. I can't believe they will wish to spend the money to litigate over something so trivial with no conceivable damages or useful relief, even if they were to prevail, and I doubt they could anyhow. Still, this is SCO, so we will have to wait and see. They were, by both accounts, trounced.
So you can get the full flavor of the day, here are both reports.
------
REPORT 1, from eggplant37:
Well, like a wolf at a corpse, Judge Chabot has eviscerated SCO's case against Daimler. Here's my narrative of what happened in court:
I arrived at 0800 to the courtroom and found that SCO v DC was 18th on the motion callsheet, nearly close to the end of the session, as there were only 22 cases to be heard this morning. . . . DC's lawyers were rather jovial during the checkin period prior to court being called into session, and SCO's attorneys looked rather concerned but cool about it. Mark Heise reminded me of Superman actor Chris Reeves in appearance. Ryan Tibbits reminded me of a big, blocky Marine drill instructor as to his appearance.
The courtroom didn't open up until 0820 and I watched the various attorneys, both from the SCO v DC case and several other cases being heard this morning, as they checked in. At 0841, the clerk called the SCO v DC attorneys up for a brief discussion, during which I was able to overhear the clerk tell them that he would "like to get [them] in and out."
At 0850, the clerk came over to the SCO side of the bench and spoke briefly with them, telling them "five minutes", I think stating the amount of time that each side would be granted for arguments. DC's attorneys came over and confirmed with the SCO attorneys what the clerk had to say.
Court was called to session at 0905. Judge Chabot is a petite woman with a very short, close-cropped hairdo, and looked determined and no-nonsense in her affect. Judge Chabot heard and ruled on a motion in the first case heard in less than 30 seconds, which seemed to surprise both attorneys in that case. One attorney in that first case jokingly commented that she hoped that this ruling would set precedence in how speedily cases would be heard this morning, which was met with laughter throughout the courtroom.
Second case was heard at 0906, third case at 0917, fourth case at 0921, fifth case at 0931, 6th case at 0940 and 7th case at 0942, so this shows that Judge Chabot is one speedy lady who doesn't muck about while running her courtroom.
SCO v DC was called at 0942. Barry Rosenbaum arguing for SCO and James Feeny arguing for Daimler, and motions were heard to admit Heise and Steven Prout?? pro hac vice for SCO, and also to admit Mark Masuchak from Massachussetts pro hac vice for Daimler, which the Judge granted.
Mr. Rosenbaum argued Daimler's summary dispo motion, noting from the outset that this was a more technical case, dealing with software and licensing agreements, and that he would frame the case briefly, in about 30 seconds. Chrysler says that the case is about whether or not section 2.05 of the SA requires a certification of compliance with detailed enumeration of extraneous facts outside the agreeement, or whether it simply requires a brief certification that licensee has complied with the terms of the license
SCO provides much wanted recreation ...to my busy days. These guys are down right funny, when it comes to how they are running their business.
$65.02M. About 0.04% of IBM's.
IBM can drain SCOX dry without missing a cycle.
Very cute but you've distorted the Y axis by selecting a two year time frame. How's your stock doing in the last 6 months?
Heed these words: though this is "the beginning of the end" of the anti-Linux-FUD-by-litigation campaign, it is only the prelude to the Patent Wars. Oh, and BTW - Darl, your Masters in Redmond are not happy with you. Better get busy on that pro-SCO spin press release...
The following is the eyewitness account report #1 by eggplant37 from the groklaw article but without the stupid commentary.
SCO v DC was 18th of 22 cases on the motion callsheet for the morning. At 0841, the clerk called the SCO v DC attorneys up for a brief discussion, during which I was able to overhear the clerk tell them that he would "like to get [them] in and out."
At 0850, the clerk came over to the SCO side of the bench and spoke briefly with them, telling them "five minutes", I think stating the amount of time that each side would be granted for arguments. DC's attorneys came over and confirmed with the SCO attorneys what the clerk had to say.
SCO v DC was called at 0942. Barry Rosenbaum arguing for SCO and James Feeny arguing for Daimler, and motions were heard to admit Heise and Steven Prout?? pro hac vice for SCO, and also to admit Mark Masuchak from Massachussetts pro hac vice for Daimler, which the Judge granted.
Mr. Rosenbaum argued Daimler's summary dispo motion, noting from the outset that this was a more technical case, dealing with software and licensing agreements, and that he would frame the case briefly, in about 30 seconds. Chrysler says that the case is about whether or not section 2.05 of the SA requires a certification of compliance with detailed enumeration of extraneous facts outside the agreeement, or whether it simply requires a brief certification that licensee has complied with the terms of the license agreement.
Mr. Rosenbaum then went on to recite the language of Section 2.05. He stated that the letter requesting the certification from SCO went quite far outside the unambiguous language in section 2.05 when it asked to enumerate information regarding DC's use of Linux. Daimler didn't file the certification until after SCO filed it's lawsuit, which on its face appeared to be about the contract provisions being breached due to DC not giving SCO their compliance certification in a timely fashion.
Mr. Rosenbaum then went on to recite paragraphs 2 & 3 of DC's response letter, stating that there were no cpu's running SCO's software, that not providing a list of cpu's that weren't in existence and hadn't been used in more than 7 years was more than sufficient to comply with the language of 2.05. Since the language of 2.05 is unambiguous, there is sufficient grounds to grant summary judgement on all assertions in SCO's complaint.
Mr. Rosenbaum finished by stating that the original letter didn't request a list of CPU's running SCO's software. Since there were no CPU's running SCO's products, DC felt it was immaterial as to whether or not they responded within 30 days.
At 0951, Mark Heise then argued the SCO side of the case. He felt that DC's SA gave them full access to the source code and that DC had been given the right to use, modify and create derivatives for their own internal use, and that the SA required that they keep the software confidential, that it should not be exported outside the US -- which in this case seems to be a concern since Chrysler's recent merger with Daimler Benz of Germany.
Heise went on to argue the point that DC's answer to the request for certification was not timely nor was it adequate in that SCO has fears that the source code still lives on disk on some computer somewhere at DC and they are entitled to know where it's stored. He also stated that DC is not alleviated from the terms of the SA once they have decided to take the CD's or tapes or whatever of the source code and toss them in a closet somewhere, and that they needed full certification that the software had been held in confidence by DC.
He went on to recite the terms of section 6.02 of the SA, stating that Chrysler, upon ceasing use of the software, was bound to either destroy all copies or return the software and to notify SCO that they did same. Again, he expressed his concern that in DC's use of the Linux software they were worried that they may b
Speak truth to power.
The judge set up a trap for poor old SCO by not ruling on the issue of not complying within 30 days. By dismissing all the other charges, she essentially cut off any meaningful avenues in discovery that SCO would have likely pursued. This is not going to be a fishing expedition for SCO.
OTOH, the 30 day compliance issue actually keeps open several key discovery paths that DCC might want to take. For instance, why wasn't DCC contacted after the letter was sent and before the lawsuit was filed? DCC could easy state who the hell is SCO? What happended to AT&T/USL? When did SCO get the rights? Hey, okay, we knew about that Novell deal, but SCO?
Additionally, why wasn't DCC contacted prior to the lawsuit when a simple phone call would be have cleared things up (I know that SCO addresses this issue in their complaint)? The judge could point out that SCO is wasting court resources by filing lawsuits without making any attempt to resolve the dispute outside of the courts, which in itself sends a message about launching surprise lawsuits.
See SCO.
See SCO Tank
Tank, SCO tank!
SCO lawyers: The code was stolen from us
...
...
...
Daimler-Chrysler lawyers: Sir please look at exhibit A. It clearly shows...
SCO lawyers: Fsck you!
Daimler-Chrysler lawyers: Your honor the code is not...
SCO lawyers: STFU. You stole our code.
Daimler-Chrysler lawyers: Excuse me but...
SCO lawyers: I saw you steal it.
Daimler-Chrysler lawyers:
SCO lawyers: I have a video tape of it, but my dog ate it.
Daimler-Chrysler lawyers:
SCO lawyers: Show me the money. Show me the money!!!
Daimler-Chrysler lawyers:
SCO lawyers: (In LOTR voice) Your code is Mine!
In America, Daimler-Chrysler is pronounced "Daym-ler Cry-sler".
In Germany, however, the Chrysler is silent.
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
... and they will be less inclined to aggressively pursue (translation: throw more money at) loosely concocted scams er lawsuits.
I wish this case was handled by someone like Judge Judy who would entertain all of us with her insulting tirade about how SCO has wasted everyone's time and money and how they should be ashamed of themselves.
Welcome to the beginning of the end.
So is the rest of the NASDAQ today.
Check Motorola for example!
...but it doesn't suck to be now!
August 4th, SCO faces a IBM motion for summary judgement that IBM's contributions to Linux are "non-infringing".
If the judge grants that (and it looks 50/50).. it's game, set and match.
People Talking in Movie shows.. people smoking in bed.. people voting republican.. GIVE THEM A BOOT TO THE HEAD!
It's traditional to post such text anonymously.
License for 1 processor server Linux from SCO:$699
License for desktop Linux from SCO: $199
License for embedded Linux from SCO: $35
Judgement that will make this ridiculous house of cards begin imploding: Priceless
There are some things that money can't buy.
Even Microsoft's money.
You teach a child to read and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test. - George W. Bush
As evidenced by the fact that they have stolen BSD code and BSD is dying
(it's funny...laugh)
A website with more information about the judge in this case, along with a picture. http://www.co.oakland.mi.us/circuit/judges/chabot- rae.html
the (snicker snicker wink nudge) "SCOSource" "revenues"?
IIRC, last quarter they spent waaaay more than they took in with their bogus we-sell-'em-but-we-ain't-got-'em "Linux licenses".
exactly, would this DaimerChrysler thing have on the Autozone case? Weren't the Autozone and DaimerChrysler suits very similar in nature?
When you say RedHat and Autozone are stayed until the "copyright issues" are resolved, does that mean that they could potentially start moving again once the August 4 judgement comes in the IBM case? When you say it's "scheduled", do you mean the judge will release a decision or do you mean that there will be a hearing and the decision will come about a month later?
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Time required for /.ers to complete self-congratulation: 1/2 hour.
Time until SCO regains a semblence of dignity: one Eon.
"A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
"d'Oh!" ~Homer
No. SCO's financial demise will not put an end to frivolous lawsuits.
The complete and humiliating loss of these lawsuits and the jailing of those responsible for the stock scam they represent will end this class of software rape. Indeed, the jail time might reach back to the source, those at Microsoft who concocted it. The memos have been leaked. The money trail and motives are known. The cases are being ruled on their merits, independent of motives. Those who invested in SCO are losing their shirts as greedheads oft do. A criminal investigation will be able to pick up from there.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
as SCOG shills and insiders desperately work to keep their SCOX shares viable...
I'm waiting for the desperate, WWF-style infighting to begin.
You know what I mean - when the SCO execs start battling it out to see who can make it out the door and to the SEC office first, in order to seek immunity by ratting out their criminal co-conspirators on the insider trading charges which will inevitably follow this fiaSCO,...
Should be better than BattleBots...
This is great news! However, SCO will certainly drag things out for along time to come. Their bussiness model is failing, and the only avenue for profit they have open seems to be lawsuits. They have $50 million to play with and with that cash comes the means to make life very unpleasent for those in its path. Their FUD machine is crumbling, but it can still infilct harm on its way down.
And take a look at their stock price. My guess it the precipitous drop starts at about the time the judge walked out of the room.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
RH or Novell could step up to the plate with a transition plan for SCO shops about to be orphaned - something like "Are you tired of your software vendor spending more time in court than addressing your issues? It's time to switch. Call for our free migration plan."
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
of the hearing: "All other claims were dismissed and she acknowledged that the contract doesn't require certifications that are outside the language of the contract." Assuming that is an accurate acountof Judge Chabot's ruling, it utterly eviscerates everything SCO hoped for from every single one of those letters they sent. Section 2.05, by this ruling, ONLY requires a lsit of CPUs on which SCO softwares is running, and nothing more. SCO can not use that clause to go fishing for Linux or other activities. This of course is not binding in other courts, but you can bet it will be a centerpiece in the arguments in any other court where SCO might try this scam again.
The annoying thing is how mainstream press translates this into - "Linux allegedly violating Unix copyrights" sensationalistic reporting. I bet they are generating more hits that way. What you would hope for is that press gets its facts straight and cut down on "OMG -- you HAVE TO read this!!!" type articles.
... well, to give an equivalent example, if an author of a book included some infringing content, it's like holding every person that read the book liable. Eben Moglen's shot this down, it's been raked through the coals on Slashdot and Groklaw ... but because SCO does a better job of managing the press than the "Linux community, as a whole", nasty disinformation about open source is rapidly spreading around the world and seeping into end users' heads.
As I pointed out yesterday in another SCO discussion:
The mainstream press is buying into SCO's claims just (AFAICT) based on the weight of how often they repeat them and the fact that they have an easy contact point, whereas there is no general "Linux" contact person.
Take a look at one of CNN.com's front page articles from yesterday. They sport lovely quotes like the following:
"The communal aspects of open source can lead to thorny legal questions, particularly when a company claims its proprietary code has seeped into a project. Because developers typically don't offer warranties, end users could be held liable for infringements."
Wow. It's like saying that all code under the GPL is held to a legal standard that's as harsh as
Sad. And probably not fixable.
May we never see th
sound a lot like the Iraqi information minister's claims that there were no troops in Bagdad.....aired right before the video of troops toppling statues of Sadam. SCO makes these loud ludicrous claims about their guaranteed success, while getting their motions struck down, and admiting in court documents that they are unable to win the motion for summary judgement without more discovery (fishing).
Mod points are pointless when you browse at -1.
The domino's are falling....
What are *you* smoking today?
Nothing could be more on topic! That is unless you want to keep the Patent War that m$ is soon to start out of the public eye...
It's inevitable, it's their last defense against eroding market share. It's even been covered on Groklaw, moron.
...when it goes below $0.50 a share. I want to frame one and put in on my wall, but I would not want to waste my money doing so. I remember something about the Law firm holding interest in the company and I'm not into "feeding" lawyers, with the notable exception of IBM lawyers since they *are* performing a public service in taking out the trash!
Anyway, the company (SCO) is a great example of what NOT to do in the business world, and that little piece of paper is all they will have to show for all their legal efforts after the fire sale. By then they won't be worth the paper they are printed on, but it will have a special meaning that you simply *can't* put a price tag on!
Is related to a Republican congressman.
Ha Ha !
don't forget SCO's defensive cases as well. Novell says SCO never recieved those copyrights, and RedHat is suing them to shut up or prove their case.
"Let him go, Ralph. He knows what he's doing." --Otto Mann (simpsons)
I'd feel sorry for them. Good thing that they are scumbags 'cause I hate feeling bad!
ROFLMAO!
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Some SCO news. I was almost going crazy wondering what they were up to! Kept looking around behind me to see if they were sneaking up on me... Wondering what venerable ideal they would attack next to bolster their bottom line... A lot of stress relieved here!
Everything I need to know about copyrights I learned from Slashdot.
Sometimes you do find facts here, however. I find the opinions of the "IT community" to be worth reading; the general tone (and some specific comments) can be very interesting.
On this particular story, we will soon find out (from several sources - e.g. CNN, "linux" news sites) if the groklaw story is right or wrong. My guess is that it is correct. Even if we are kind of tired of SCO stories, "we" are still interested in seeing SCO die and will always find stories like this interesting or, at least, entertaining.
As other people have mentioned, this sets an interesting precedent. Everything but the length of time it took for Chrysler to register is dismissed. I wonder what's going to happen to the other cases.
This sig no verb.
Creditors can get the lint from under McBride's keyboard if they want it. It will be worth more than the copyrights to obsolete software they hold when the rest of these lawsuits play out.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I still haven't figured out on what basis SCO is sueing DaimlerChrysler. I mean, they are not a goddamn software company AFAIK. It's as if you buy a book and then someone sues you because the book contained text that the mystical someone thought he had copyright for. Instead of the actual "bad guys" (from SCO's point of view) they sue the unsuspecting customers of the "bad guy". What Else?
Obviously there are mod points to burn since the most banal, redundant, sophomoric posts are being modded insightful. Can't wait for the meta-moderation.
since the hearing sco's stock have dropped 70 cents
rm -rf sco
bwahahahaha
If I were an employee of theirs, I'd make damn sure my retirement fund was secure (Look what happened to those poor bastards at Enron, etc...)
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
As a matter of fact, DC were extremely prompt in their response to SCO, sending them well within 30 days the complete list of all the CPUs that they have running the relevant SCO software.
It was of course the empty list, but DC cannot be held to blame for SCO's failure to detect the arrival of this perfectly valid list at their premises.
Ain't that special?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
They have to say that to keep themselves in the money and out of jail. It's obvious that their goofey plan with SCO is failing. Rather than own up to it, they are saying, "but they did it wrong!" I imagine this is to save face and to protect similar M$ shenanigans. Someone make money on this stock kite and they will defend it as legitimate until jailed and then some.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
File suit against a large multinational corporation: $$$
Dismiss corporation's declarations as inadequate: $1000 (4 hours of lawyer's time)
Go to court to try for the big $$$: at least $10,000 (4 lawyers present and all the legal preparation)
Spend 18 minutes in front of the judge:
clerk announces judge's arrival: 1 minute
judge repositions herself in chair: 1 minute
clerk announces case number : 1 minute
parties walk to tables: 1 minute
judge reads over case notes: 2 minutes
judge questions SCO about claims + SCO response: 5 minutes
judge questions DCC about claims + DCC response: 3 minutes
judge reams out SCO and tells them they are stupid by ruling 99.5% in DC's favor: 3 minutes
SCO walking out with their tail between their legs : 1 minute
only to get trounced in the courtroom...
Priceless!
Whenever something even remotely spinnable happens in one of these cases, SCO is there with a prepared press release that is sent out to the media almost immediately.
Its now 4PM EST so they have had a few hours to come up with SOMETHING, but their website only has two PRs so far today... one about a new release, and another about a partnership with Ericom.
Maybe even they dont know how to spin this one...
"Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
Don't forget the Slander of Title action against Novell - which is just barely hanging on, since as I understand it from yesterday's Forbes.com article, they've alleged that the "Special Damages" are their court costs in all of the other cases.
Law is whatever is boldly asserted and plausibly maintained. -- Aaron Burr
when's stuff gonna start shipping for the next ninja death club? its been a few months since i signed up and sent out money; and i've not gotten an email or anything regarding it. i'm all about supporting independant internet artists, it'd be nice to get some kind of info about my ROI :p
And to rub it in SCO's face Chrysler announced today it will be releasing their own Crossfire Linux available for free download at chrysler.com
The appropriate acronym for DaimlerChrysler is DCX, not DCC. They seem to have a Yankee scholarship fund called the "DCC Fund," but that's the only place I've caught them using the wrong acronym.
Also, it's DaimlerChrysler, not Daimler-Chrysler. The hyphen is never correct.
The article gets the name right, if not necessarily the acronym.
Recently I have been following the trading and near the closing each day there is a significant trade raising the closing value. This is despite severe drops during the major part of the trading day.
This has not yet reversed the general trend downward. Moreover, the average trading volume also has been declining nearly steadily, hence, a realitively small trade can reverse the day's trend.
I want to bear this judge's baby.
Can someone loan me a uterus?
Can someone please change the icon representing SCO stories? Caldera was never this evil... Anybody using a Mikey Mouse ear for their logo couldn't be.
Also...0 3dmcbride_plyr.jpg0 1.jpg
http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/zdnn/cm/2003/07/0715
http://www.recorder.ca/cp/technology/030810/z0810
...So pardon me if I do not udnerstand why after a big volume trade the price drop (ok) but after a smaller volume about 2 hours later the price go exactly back where it was. Check for yourself it is back at 4.6, even highier that it was the previous day.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Judge Roy Bean.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
OSS is not defeatable in the manner that MS^H^HSCO is trying to do it.
OSS is the future. Its a rising tide and it can't be stopped. OSS is a true world-wide grass roots movement that is sweeping into the mainstream like a summer wildfire. The media is a tool of the rich and the powerful so it will always reflect those interests initially. As soon as they "get the picture" they will change their tune en masse.
We are really just waiting on the courts to define the boundaries that Groklaw, et. al. have been theorizing about.
Is the juice worth the sqeeze?
tricycle - unicycle
tripod - unipod?
SCO walking out with their tail between their legs : Priceless.
It is not DCC.
The correct abbreviation for Daimler Chrysler is DCX.
This post comes to you from Detroit, Michigan.
There are a couple of aspects not discussed by other replies. These include the legal precedents established in the current rounds of lawsuits and the fact that IBM has some very damaging countersuits pending.
The IBM countersuits more or less ensure that SCO will not be acquired without the permission of IBM. So we should look at the scenario of dissolution. Remember, IANAL.
It is possible that someone who ends up with these copyrights during such a dissolution could try to sue someone on similar grounds in the future. However, the court by that point will have determined what the state is today (of course, they could always sue IBM saying that they started adding SysV code to Linux after the conclusion of this lawsuit).
Secondly, it is not clear whether SCO or Novell have the actual title to the copyrights. So this muddies the waters quite a bit.
My own suggestion is that if it comes to the point of asset dissolution, I could see a party such as IBM buying the copyrights for a small sum and then promptly disowning them (contributing what rights are actually posessed into the public domain and allowing other rights to revert to their respective owners). This would forever ensure that such would never happen again and that the Curse of the AT&T Source Code would forever be broken.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
nt
...SCO who?
Groklaw is seriously /.ed. SCOX stock is still following it's downward trend closing at 4.38 a share with a percentage loss of 0.15 (3.31%).
Now BayStar is dealing with the SEC investigation related to the PIPE deal and it's bid to get out as clean as possible. Seems TSG is holding it's own corporate investors hostage as well. What needs to seriously happen in the rest of the cases is for courts to get SCO to finally decide what their case is about. I mean let's be realistic here, SCO has been on a "fishing" expedition essentially from day one. The lawyer that introduced himself to the DCC team is most likely from one of the three (IBM, Novell, Rhat) but regardless you can bet they're taking notes.
As this case is all but concluded (save for the 30 response time - which means what, a small and meager fine at worst?) I am hoping that it will at least hopefully set a trend. A trend wherein the judges in the other cases see SCO for what is really going on. The fishing expedition is mostly secondary to the primary goal of Darl and company - that is to pump and dump and then do it again. Speedy resolution to SCO's contention is counter to this since it lays to rest the controversy and leaves SCO with no "time" to play the market. Chances are fair that the judge has some inkling of this and didn't appreciate SCO's attempt to manipulate the courts for it's own gains, based on a case that has little if any merit.
The longer this crap floats around on court dockets the more SCO can play the stocks. The quicker the "SCO Question" is answered and layed to rest the quicker SCO's stock will tank and we can all go about get on with making a competitive OS that is stable, robust, and feature ladden, which is exactly what SCO is trying to kill.
Good Luck Darl, you'll need it. Not that it is likely to do you any great benefit. Just a clue Mr. McBride. You might have at least had something (no matter how small) tangible to pull out of your hat if things get sticky. The time to claim that revealing the code would destroy your case is gone. Your case is going down the tubes and waiting of the other foot to drop is most likely a waste of time. There ain't gonna be any other surprises - your case is vaporware. You know it, we know, and soon the judges will know it. Better hope that that sleeping dragon called the SEC doesn't wake - if it does you're most likely going to find yourself up shit creek, and not only without a paddle, but in a very leaky boat.
The question I have is this. When SCO finally tanks, and there investors find out that it was essentially a scam, how is Darl and company going to pay for a legal team? I mean all those investors filing torts and class action torts against SCO, Darl and the rest of the TSG clan, the legal fees are going to seriously start getting very expensive. Then there's the counter suits filed by.... hmmmm, let me think..... IBM, RedHat, Novell, and likely a few other corporations. All that money that Darl and his cavalcade of investors have made is essentially already spent - So what was the point again?
is at:
n t/ legalissues/story/0,10801,94664,00.html
www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/governme
One of several quotes:
"I think the judge just sort of saw through what SCO was doing, particularly its public comments around copyright violations, and I think she took the prudent course here," said Dion Cornett, an analyst at Chicago-based Decatur Jones Equity Partners LLC. "SCO hasn't provided any evidence out there to convince IT managers that Linux violates its intellectual property rights."
... is good for the country!
Factoid on relative sizes of the two organizations:
SCO revenues, last 12 months: $61 million.
Daimler-Chrysler revenues, last 12 hours: $230 million.
If you look at SCO's complaint against Daimler Chrysler, the only thing SCO wanted was a agreement of compliance which the judge allowed them. The suit was about UNIX not about Linux.
0 31 82714835
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200403
If you look at the original complaint, SCO got exactly what they wanted.
Dammit, I was expecting a to hear 'brothers' and 'bourgeois' and something about 'The People's Media' before your post was done. :\
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
* Yes I know, Linux is only the kernel, please educate me how this makes sense... or is there some other init than /sbin/init?
Too bad there are not 71 million Linux users out there. We could all pitch in a dollar each and do a hostile takeover of SCO.
Actually there's another release being finished up right now, when I last talked to Joe a couple days ago he was finishing up the packaging. I will yell at him to hurry up. I am sorry about the inconvenience, we need to be better about keeping people up to date on these things.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
What would you do if you had a contract to provide a bushell of corn to your neighbor at most once a year. Then a guy that lives a mile down the road sends you a letter saying he bought the contract from your neighbor and that you have to get him a bushell of apples and wants you to certify that you are not growing peaches. How would you respond if you were growing peaches? Would you go ahead and send him a bushell of oranges assuming that his claim to have taken over the contract is valid and that is what he is entitled to?
I think this should have been thrown out as well. They didn't even request what they were entitled to. I don't think ignoring a request for something they aren't entitled to is out of line. At the very least, SCOX should have made a good faith effort to contact them again. All they did was send a letter in December and then file suit in March. Come on, not even a second letter, a phone call, or a fax to see why they haven't responded yet? Who does business like that?
This a letter sent from Daimler Chrysler to SCO (Broderick) on April 6, 2004 after the lawsuit was filed. It is part of DCC's April 15 filings with the court.
Dear Mr. Broderick:
-----snip-----
The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") believes that:
1. SCO "owns" certain rights under the Software Agreement referenced about ("SA") and,
2. SCO's referenced letter was a proper request for a certified statement under Section 2.05 of the SA.
SCO is not a party to the SA, and Daimler Chrysler has no knowledge of any assignment of the right of the Licensor under the SA to SCO. According to our records, the SA was assigned from AT&T Information Systems, Inc. to UNIX System Laboratories, Inc. on or about November 1, 1990. Notwithstanding these facts, SCO has filed its suit against Daimler Chrysler. SCO's suit appears to be based on an uninformeed and inaccurate assessment of Daimler Chrysler's conduct. As a result, and without waiving any of its rights under the SA or under applicable law, including without limitation its right to assert that SCO has no rights under the SA, that SCO has no right to seek the certified statement under the SA, and that SCO has intentionally filed a meritless lawsuit for purposes of restraining competition, Daimler Chrysler provides the attached information to SCO.
---- attachment ----
The attachment is a letter sent to USL certifying compliance (i.e., no designated CPU's.
Your move SCO. Doesn't this letter tell you what DCC's is thinking? That's right, you're screwed.
Hmmm. DaimlerChrysler already said that since they didn't use any SCO products and haven't for 7 years, they didn't feel it was a priority to certify or respond. It's that simple. Nothing to read into it.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
What we all want to know is if they were laughed out court like every slashdotter had predicted :)
Suck it.
The share price I hope.
You don't need a lab to make mud.
Hopefully the end of the SCOundrel will now follow quickly.
When you bring a pack of lies and no actual evidence to court, what can you expect?
Come on, you people with mod points to use, these are good reports, they deserve to be modded up, and up, and up.......
"DCC" is actually referred to as DCX, at least in Detroit.
"We're satisfied that DaimlerChrysler did finally certify their compliance with the software agreement, but we are still interested in gaining some information on why they didn't certify within the allotted time," Stowell said. The case "is not completely over yet, because the judge still held out the possibility that we could pursue trying to find out information from DaimlerChrysler on why they took so long to certify."
Uhh, yeah - if that's *really* all you were looking for, why the lawsuit? Why didn't you pick up the damn phone and *call them*.
Anyone else notice SCOX had a rally in the last 30 minutes and finished up for the day? What's up with that?
hope the good people at sco are buried under molten lava
Sounds like you work for SCO ;-) So let's pretend you do.
Your biggest mistake was not to hire the right lawyers.
Don't even think about it anymore, it's too late. You're going DOWN DOWN down. Bye bye, adios, adieux!
I shamed to say, I didn't get this at first.
Very apropos!
It's about time some decisions start being taken. This has gone on far too long, SCOX has ridden this much further than they ever should have, and it's time to pay the devil his due. Daimler-Chrysler is effectively over and AutoZone temporarily stayed.
With the Associated Press reporting "Judge Dismisses Most of SCO Group Lawsuit", it's not likely that the latest attempt to support the price will work any better than the last three.
Some months ago, I quoted Churchill's line from WWII, from the point when the Allies first started winning - "This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning". Well, now we're past that point. This is the beginning of the end.
Coming up, the August 4th summary judgement hearing in SCO vs. IBM. If IBM wins, it's essentially over. If not, it just takes longer.
On reflection, just having the case thrown out is not NEARLY sufficient here. At the very least, SCO should have to pay for all of the legal costs incurred by the other side for this baseless lawsuit, but it should go beyond that to cover all the damaged reputations, harmful FUD, etc. It's time for the first installment on paying the piper.
However, in good news, it looks like this result has cracked the glass floor that was holding their stock price up. Or maybe the short options were finally absorbed, as someone else suggested? Anyway, if they move solidly below $5 (and they're at $4.59 now), there should be no stopping them until they hit the decorative origami from stock certificate level. In a couple of weeks there may not be anything left for IBM and the others to clean up.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
Thats like buying land in Hell.
I am checking now, they are back to where they started yesterday.
The important thing is the medium term tredn, which is dicededly an spiral death.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Why the obsesion with looking at the minutae of share price fluctutations?
At this moment, the price is back to where it started yesterday, well, so what?
The medium term trend is clearly downwards, quoting instant quotes is completely useles, it tell us nothing about where a share is going.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Sorry... forgot the "" tags!
How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?
Several companies paid up when they were told that they had to pay SCO licensing fees if they were using Linux. Was SCO in violation of the GPL when the companies paid? Do the companies get their money back? What are the penalties of violating the GPL license?
Nick Powers
Encryption: I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to encrypt it...
Cost of Legal Team for SCO: $3M Cost of Legal Team DCC: $5M Seeing SCO Legal Team with newly reamed rear-ends: priceless!
~. Tank you
a judge that gets it? a judge that didn't even waste the courts time on things computer?
i tell ya, its sign of the apocalypse!
Just a case of you lose. 'Tard.
Thanks for explaining it all to the rest of us. We'd all still be lost on Usenet if it weren't for heavy movers such as yourself who know everything.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.