Slashdot Mirror
Judge in SCO Case Notes Lack of Evidence
In a follow-up to yesterday's story, Allen Zadr writes "Computer Business Online has an article up today entitled 'Judge astonished by SCO's lack of evidence against IBM'. From the article: "Viewed against the backdrop of SCO's plethora of public statements... it is astonishing that SCO has not offered any competent evidence..." This is exactly what Groklaw has been saying all along, and they have commentary on the news as well."
The real surprise is that their shares are not going down faster. It annoys me.
This is totally insecure, but very convenient.
Implications/Postmortem report at Groklaw
Attorney Reactions to the Kimball Order
The ticker symbol is SCOX
--fatboy
There's a couple of major differences between civil and criminal cases.
Things carry on longer in civil suits during the trial phase, but don't frequently take as long in the jury deliberations because of the differences in requirements. You can present most anything you think might help your case in the civil court. In the criminal court, if it's irrelevant or has too many doubts, you don't want to bring it forward, because it makes the prosecutor look desperate.
OCO is Loco
You're confusing your terms. I know you're not a legal geek yourself, so I'm not flaming. Just for educational purposes...
Why are civil suits allowed to proceed at all without any evidence from the prosecutor?
Civil suits don't have prosecutors, they have plaintiffs.
[A]t no point did SCO provide any evidence what so ever of there charges.
They did not provide evidence for their claims.
By definition those are not frivolous lawsuits because the people were actually found guilty!
They would be found liable, not guilty.
With regard to your rant, no one is proposing to cap damages. The Administration has proposed capping non-economic damages, which is just one type of award. This would mean that if you were injured, and you were forever unable to return to work, you would still be able to claim damages for your salary for the number of years you had left before retirement, plus any medical bills you incurred, plus extra for legal fees. It would just cap awards beyond those economic damages.
With regard to your original question, I think the sibling has it right--the Judge doesn't want this case to be reopened on appeal.
Oh yeah, IANALBIAMTO.
I'll think that you'll get much better informed answers elsewhere. The major focus of Slashdot is to sell advertisement, and this is very evident in the tabloid style stories. Groklaw.net quite simply wants to inform and have thoughtful threads,
No, SCO, as a legitimate company, is already dead. My current project is a SCO OpenUnix -> Linux migration for, perhaps, the last major customer of SCO.
Real life is overrated.
SCO is abusing a system which is made to protect the little guy. Sometimes not all of the evidence is available in the begining, and will come out in discovery. The Plaintiff (this includes plaintiff's attorney) has an obligation to perform due diligence, especially in intellectual property cases, to find enough evidence to support a good faith belief of infringement before bringing a suit. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11 imposes sanctions on those who do not perform this due diligence.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule11.htm
If SCO cannot show a good faith belief of infringement before filing suit, IBM's next move will be a motion for FRCP Rule 11 Sanctions against SCO and SCO's attorney.
We don't need "tort" reform, SCO's action isn't even a "tort", we just need courts to enforce FRCP Rule 11 sanctions. Courts have not done so until recently out of fear that "the little guy", with a meager amount of evidence to begin with, would not file suits and stick with it long enough to get to discovery and get the evidence which proves thier case.
I can't wait to see how Rob Enderle and Maureen O'Gara and Laura Didio are gonna spin this one in the trade press...
Read and laugh: http://www.linuxbusinessweek.com/story/48199.htm.
Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
Maureen O'Gara spin on it.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
The replies you got mostly addressed the historical usage, though they don't talk about the really ancient days when you did it yourself. I actually think the first <Backspace> keys may have simply been hardware shortcuts for ^H.
These days in HTML you should use the strikethrough tag for the same effect, but it doesn't seem to be supported here on /. (per my limited testing).
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
He declined IBMs motions for now because he's a professional and he knows how to craft an airtight decision that will be impossible to overturn on appeal. IBM will have further opportunity later, after discovery is complete.
Also, technically it is too early for summary judgment. That can't happen until after discovery is complete.
Read this analysis by Marbux over at Groklaw.
Note to Zonk: If you're going to be an editor, it would be nice if you actually read Slashdot. At least glance through the stories of the past week before you post submissions.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.