Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DaimlerChrysler/SCO Case Winds Down

Posted by michael on from the running-on-empty dept.

kuwan writes "It was previously reported that SCO moved for and was denied a stay in their case agains DaimlerChrysler. (Remember that all of SCO's claims against DaimlerChrysler were thrown out except for the issue of whether or not DaimlerChrysler made its certification in a timely manner.) The opposition and reply memos for that motion are now available and apparently SCO's motion was so weak that DaimlerChrysler is asking SCO to pay the cost of preparing their opposition memo. A nice summary of the latest maneuvers is available at scofacts.org."

4 of 317 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Fall of SCO by FyRE666 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, there's been no confirmation from Netcraft yet...

    --
    Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
  2. #1 sign your business is in trouble: by physicsphairy · · Score: 5, Funny

    It is actually profitable to be sued by you.

    --
    When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
  3. Re:DaimlerChrysler's Certification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    They were an old UNIX licensee from the AT&T days - one of thousands. A while back SCO sent requests to all of those ancient licensees requesting that they certify that they're only using the code in a proper way (and implying that using linux might be in violation; probably an attempt to drum up business for their lawsuit protection racket) Of course the license are for really old versions of UNIX so the question is pretty silly (it'd be like Microsoft suddenly doing a license audit of all Windows 3.0 customers) so almost noone bothered to actually reply.

    DCC was one of the thousands that didn't reply. For whatever reason SCO decided to sue them as an example or something. DC basically replied with "We haven't used the software we licensed from AT&T for over seven years; there we've certified now go away" A judge ruled that this was a valid certification and threw 99% of the case away. They left SCO the option to continue the case soley on the basis of whether DC certified promptly enough (the contract between AT&T and DC didn't mention a deadline for this certification)

    Amazingly SCO decided to continue the case in that vein -- probably so they don't have to admit defeat quite yet. Of course now they're trying to put the case so far on the back burner that it will never actually go to trial. DC is fighting that and trying to get SCO to go to trial now.

  4. Re:From back in June 2003 and Beyond competence by IANAAC · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd give you a pat on the back, but your hand is in the way :-)