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.
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.
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.
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?
Probably neither, I wouldn't come to slashdot looking for facts.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
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
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.
While I would love to rejoice as much as the next Slashdotter, isn't anyone worried about appeals? Remember that we are talking about SCO. They will drag things out, it's their M.O. Don't forget they have that $50 M to play with. IANAL, of course, so maybe appeals aren't possible in this case. Could someone that knows fill us in?
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!
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.
They'd have to come up with something good to get this back. But in the end, SCO's 2nd biggest mistake was fucking with the auto industry. They have great lawyers and know how to use them. They are not going to be intimidated by some 2 bit operation like SCO. (and yes, I do even mean SCO in it's heyday). To mess with the auto industry you have to be right, have ALL your ducks in a row, and be very, very lucky.
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!
This is not about patents, it's about copyright. And the fact that you give something away for free, does not mean you should be allowed to infringe on copyright (otherwise e.g. Microsoft would be allowed to infringe on the GPL by incorporating GPL'd code in a closed source Internet Explorer, back when they were giving it away for free).
Donate free food here
In America, Daimler-Chrysler is pronounced "Daym-ler Cry-sler".
In Germany, however, the Chrysler is silent.
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
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 Just because you don't profit from something doesn't mean you are exempt from patent laws. (I am NOT saying Linux is doing this!) You can't stay out of jail because you gave cocaine away but didn't sell it...
Gravity is not just a law, it's also a good idea.
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.
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!
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
But in the end, SCO's 2nd biggest mistake was fucking with the auto industry. They have great lawyers and know how to use them.......
As opposed to the incompetent, understaffed legal team at IBM?
(/chuckles inwardly)
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
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
I think maybe that's why it's their 2nd biggest mistake.
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...
Well, he did say their *2nd* biggest mistake...
:)
I'd say fucking with IBM, the annual #1 patent receiver (among other legally-interesting habits) probably knows a thing or two about getting and using great lawyers as well
Taking on Linux via legal tomfoolery is a mistake, but not the biggest one (lots of companies shirk their GPL responsibilities but most come to see reason, for example).
Fucking with the deepest-pocketed, and one of the most veteran, companies in the computer industry, was (IMHO) their biggest mistake.
Maybe they'll sue Ford next, claiming they invented the production line automobile...
Xentax
You shouldn't verb words.
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
Uh, IBM is three times the size of Diamler Chrysler ($145B market cap vs $45B) and is the largest IP holder in the world (by a large margin). They have more patent and IP attourneys on retainer that probably the entire auto industry combined. SCO is not afraid of losing, they are hoping that one of the torrent of suits would pay off in a jackpot win, in the mean time the tops suits were also enriching themselves by pumping the stock by selling this stupid story to investors and selling their options.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
" If they do have $50 million like you say, perhaps they can't burn it all before stockholders get really angry and basically vote to withhold confidence in the leadership."
You haven't been following the SCO news, have you?
This has already happened. BayStar pulled their investment (well, okay, converted the stock) and said SCO was incompetent because they couldn't win their lawsuits with the management they have. (BayStar is actually stupid enough to think SCO could win and actually make money sueing people.) This doesn't seem to have affected SCO management much (Darl is still there), but things are not going well on the cash front, either.
SCO is on its last legs - by this time next year, it should all be over and UNIX IP (if SCO actually HAS any) should be picked up for pennies on the dollar at the assets auction.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
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
Well, they don't quite have their $50 M anymore, more like $20 M. Baystar put $30 in, and got preferred stock. Then they asked for it back. In the agreement, SCO bought it back for $13 and then issued 2.1 M shares of stock to cover the difference (I assume Baystar accepted this as most ventures have high risk involved, so the 2.1 M shares wouldn't work out to $17, but with the expectation that the price go up). So, to reiterate:
SCO gets +$30M (BS) +$20M (RBC)
BS buys out RBC's share
SCO loses -$13M
SCO issues 2.1M shares of C.S.
=SCO has an extra $37M in cash with an extra 2.1 M C.S. shares outstanding.
BS no longer has preferred stock, so when SCO goes belly-up, they will have no rights to any remaining assets beyond what their percentage stake in the company is based on C.S. holdings.
IBM beat the US government in an anti-trust trial. The US government who has a virtually unlimited budget for lawyers and investigators. Why a 20 man operation decided to try to sue them and hoped to be successful, I'll never know.
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
Yes, but her brother's friend's sister's step-daughter's uncle's godfather's boyfriend's hairdresser's dogwalker's co-worker's dad has a potato chip that looks like Bill Clinton.
Voting them all out of office, now that's change I can believe in.
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
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
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.
...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
Sorry, you can't get a stock scam going by saying you're going to sue Ma and Pa Kettle for $50billion. Now maybe if they went after Uncle Jed.....
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
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?
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.
The Senate will be killing that bill in committee, the house is where hot headed bills like that get passed. I agree that the economy is a bit cooler than most in power will admit but Greenspan's testimony today was a much bigger driver of perceptions that MS cash return (they've been telegraphing this for more than a year).
The timing is more a result of two factors. First there is a healthy chance that Kerry will win the election and pull the dividend tax cut. Getting the deal done now means that something like 8 billion of the 30 doesn't go to Washington. Also interest rates are at 40 year lows and very likely to head higher in the next year. MS cash is mostly in short and long term bonds which have gone way up in value as interest rates declined and would go way down in value if interest rates rose. So they decided the timing was right and got the cash out to owners while bond values would still be high and taxes wouldn't get charged.
MS may be big on the stock market, but the IBMs and HPs of the tech world have a much bigger effect on the economy since they employ so many more people.
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
Great idea! Let's give the scumsucking "IP"-terrorists our money. That'll show them!
Belief is the currency of delusion.