SCO Files for Stay of Execution

An anonymous reader writes "SCO has filed for another delay in the case against IBM. The article reports that 'According to filings in the case, SCO is looking to buy time until the court can hear its arguments compelling IBM to release more information. SCO lawyers argue the information -- namely source code they claim was lifted from AIX and Dynix to bolster the open source Linux kernel -- is necessary in getting a successful ruling.'"

Comments

The words of REM come to mind. . .

[Excen]

"It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine!"

Re:The words of REM come to mind. . .

[kraada]

Did anybody else read this and expect some sort of BASIC or batch file joke?

Or is it just me . . .

SCO tactic

[Nichotin]

Their strategy is simple, delay, delay, delay until IBM goes bankrupt.

Re:SCO tactic

[Fishead]

Kinda like the scottsman who saw the add stating "Drink Canada Dry", so he went out to see if he could.

Re:SCO tactic

[RsG]

Whereas their law firm's strategy is even simpler: take the money and run.

I can see it now; suit-and-tie lawyers making a mad dash from Utah to Texas and then Mexico, with Darl and a fleet of cops cars in hot pursuit. Their ties flapping in the dusty wind, case files and "source code", that is on closer examination shredded newspaper, fluttering as it's thrown out the window. Banjo music plays as the lawyer's Mercedes pickup truck rattles down offroad trails, the lawyers finally escaping in a mad stunt that involves getting the stylish rustbucket airborne.

Sort of the dukes of hazard meets law and order, with that special surreal Utah flavour that Darl seems to be snorting.

Re:SCO tactic

[Anonymous Coward]

You are ignoring their other lawsuits (Redhat, Novell...). It's obvious their strategry is to lose lawsuits... how do they make money? Simple: volume!

Re:SCO tactic

[KilobyteKnight]

Oh...wait. Didn't SCO cap their legal funds. Looks like they're the ones who will go bankrupt!

Yes. I believe it was at $35M. The SCO lawyers haven't reached that yet. I think they'll give up when they do.

I can see it now:

SCO Lawyer: Judge Kimball, I'm a little embarrassed here, but it looks like we really don't have a case. You know how complicated these computer things are. It turns out the line "for( i=0; imax; i++)" is actually not SCO IP. Can we just forget this silly lawsuit, please?

Re:SCO tactic

[SoTuA]

Yes. I believe it was at $35M. The SCO lawyers haven't reached that yet. I think they'll give up when they do.

Of course they'll give up. Lawyers don't have a problem with pushing frivolous cases and/or putting people on the street, but they don't do it for free ;)

(Now here's hoping my wife doesn't read /., being that she is a lawyer and all that... )

Re:SCO tactic

[vsprintf]

Yes. I believe it was at $35M. The SCO lawyers haven't reached that yet. I think they'll give up when they do.

1st Lawyer: Your Honor, I have here in my hand undeniable, irrefutable, incontrovertible evidence that IBM willfully and knowingly appropriated immensely valuable SCO intellectual property and gave it to those communist hippy Linux riffraff.

2nd Lawyer: Objection!

Judge: On what possible grounds? You are also SCO counsel.

2nd Lawyer: The money just ran out, this ain't pro bono, and those SCO execs have lied to everyone including us since day one.

1st Lawyer: Your Honor, we rest our case.

Stay of execution

[Anne Thwacks]

No, No... excute them now!

Re:Stay of execution

[Anonymous Coward]

"would you like to shoot me now or wait 'til you get home?" -- Bugs Bunny

Or put another way...

[EtherAlchemist]

I KNOW there's something illegal here, I just need more time to find it.

Yeah, it's aold news to groklaw..

[TiggertheMad]

..but we need something to gossip about on /.

THE SCENE: A COURTROOM. IT IS FILLED WITH MANY TENSE LAWYERS IN EXPENSIVE SUITS, HALF OF THEM ARE BLUE.

SCO SHILL: Your honor, most wise, humble and double wicked cool dud-
JUDGE: Get on with it.
SCO SHILL: *Ahem* In accordance with the 1887 ruling of the federal government vs. Keanu Reves, we would like you to summarily find for the plaintiff, SCO, and award damages to the tune of-
JUDGE: I'm not familiar with that ruling. Keanu Reves? 1887? If this is another delaying tactic counselor...
SCO SHILL: We request a three month period to shake down more, er, find um, evidence!
JUDGE: Denied. You haven't given a reason that there might be new evidenc introduced.
SCO SHILL: WE REQUEST A RECESS!
JUDGE: Denied. You just got back from one.
SCO SHILL: WE REQUEST AN EMERGENCY BATHROOM BREAK!
KEANU: (from the back of the courtroom) Woah.

Re:Yeah, it's aold news to groklaw..

[Svennig]

"HALF OF THEM ARE BLUE"

Yeah, and the suits were ugly too.

Re:SCO shows infringing code???

[Em Ellel]

January 12, 2004 SCO hands infringing code to IBM

Did I miss something?


Yes, now they want it back! ;-)

Misquoted...

[helmespc]

SCO was misquoted... the actual quote was... "Our evidence against Linux doesn't exist... oh shit... did I say that out loud... spin doctor that, wouldya?"

eh?

[Xzzy]

Stay of Execution? Come on, can't we just kill them now!?

Best line:

[underpar]

"[SCO's]Lawyers point to...IBM's failure to produce information that back up SCO's breach of contract and copyright infringement claims."

Execution.exe

[Tokerat]

The only thing SCO has that isn't going to be executed is their code...

Execute SCO(software)

[Anonymous Coward]

No need to execute SCO. No need to execute any of their code.

Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week. Be sure to try the veal.

Re:When will they learn?

[antiMStroll]

"...is like watching a completely preventable train wreck in the slowest possible motion.."

We like to call it the legal system.

Article Summary

[mod_parent_down]

"...So if Chewbacca is from Endor, you must convict!... er, I mean acquit! Dammit, how did it go again? Your honor, can we have a little more time to uh, research?"

I got damn close.

[Gordonjcp]

Things went perfectly during the rehearsal, too.

Re:When will they learn?

[Anonymous Coward]

2038. Then the SCO UnixBeWare clock will probably crash.

Re:Is it possible Microsoft wants the code?

[GreySeal2k01]

Exactly, the reason SCO wants to see IBMs source is so they can actually put some new technology into their antiquated OS.

Re:groklaw!

[Gentlewhisper]

Bah, for a short while I misread the headline as "SCO... executed.."

Re:SCO shows infringing code???

[Anonymous Coward]

like this?

Again?

[mehaiku]

Darl could not sink any lower
He's tops as a bullshit thrower
But Darl showed his ass
Which is now only grass
And IBM is the lawnmower.

Re:What the Nazgul have been up to.

[Alsee]

It wasn't a slashdotting problem, your original link was to "yro.slashdot.org/%94".

Here is the correct link to the PDF. The relevant letters are from pages 9 to 23, though several are blank.

I made a specific effort to read it witout predjudice, and at first SCO's side sounds plausible if you assume their refferences to other events are credible. However it becomes most comical at the end when it becomes obvious that sole dispute actually being addressed here is SCO requsting IBM give a delay to a deadline for filing a delay request. And if IBM does not agree to SCO's request to delay the deadline for filing their delay request then SCO is threatening to go to the judge to file a request to delay the deadline for filing a request for a delay.

Chuckle.

-

Re:Bunch of us shorted the snot out of SCO stock

[SpaceLifeForm]

Don't send a card linuxguy. They will drag you into court because you didn't pay for a license that 'allows' you to thank them.

Of course, you don't need a license to say:
Go fuck yourself SCO!

I heard the veep say something like that.

Re:Bunch of us shorted the snot out of SCO stock

[mcrbids]

Thanks to SCO I have a brand new SUV and some really really nice computer equipment. And I am not even done spending a quarter of the proceeds from my successful SCO short transanction. I would actually like to thank Darl and the gang for the money.

Bzzzzzzzt!

I call bullshit.

You mention an SUV without a model number. You mention "computer equipment" without any specifics. You mention shorting stock, without saying how much, nor do you mention annything that gives any idea how much, other than "a quarter of the proceeds".

I think you're full of it. If what you said was real, you wouldn've given SOME details on such a beneficial transaction!

How much did you invest? When? Where did you go to invest? What was your ROI? How long did you wait? What was the term of the short?

In short, you are full of crap.