Slashdot Mirror
SCO Puts a Cap on its Legal Expenses
prostoalex writes "The SCO Group reached an agreement with the lawyers to limit the litigation expenses to $31 million until the IBM lawsuit is resolved. The company already paid $12 million to Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP, Kevin McBride and Berger Singerman, which provide legal services to the company."
SCO Caps Legal Expenses At $31 Million
Posted by timothy on Wednesday September 01, @10:08AM
from the nice-prime-number-of-millions dept.
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
News.com story
Yes. His brother.
Shady...
5468652047616D65
And afterwards, Boies et al will be able to buy SCO outright, for all it will be worth. With plenty of change left over.
Not quite....they have reached an agreement with the lawfrm to cap their bill at 31m. Not that they will fire their attorneys and call it quits once the bill hits 31m. Their attorneys may get a little less enthusiastic once they hit the cap, but the litigation itself will continue.
The above mentioned, Kevin McBride, is brother to Darl McBride acording to this Computer Shopper News article.
So even if Darl fails in his quest to sue every sentient being (and SCO dies), he will have kept lots of money in the family.
So this can go on approximately 1 1/2 times as long as it has so far? That's good news?
A wet sponge would make for a more effective killing machine, a dry sponge (at least as presented theatrically in The Green Mile) makes it less efficient at killing, so there's a lot more pain/torture.
500GB of disk, 5TB of transfer, $5.95/mo
Yesterday David Boies (SCO's lead attorney) was on the Ronn Owens show on KGO-AM, taking calls from listeners. The topic was supposed to be his new book, but I couldn't pass up the opportunity to hear his justification for his horrible work with SCO. So I called and asked him.
He seemed a little daunted by my opening, in which I told him I had lost all respect for him. When faced with the question of "Why!?", he predictably said "everyone's entitled to a defense". Never mind that SCO's on the *offense*... His justification basically boiled down to the simple, "the courts will decide if SCO's claims are legitimate". In other words, he doesn't give a shit. He just wants the money, win or lose.
I have worked with attorneys before, more than once, and the ones I worked with didn't want a case unless it seemed somewhat meaningful, and definitely very winnable. The money was important, but reputation was moreso. Bad reputation translates to less money for the shortsighted, quite often.
I guess this simply shows he's a whore, moreso than most attorneys.