Slashdot Mirror
SCO Possibly Delisted from NASDAQ
canfirman writes "Reuters is reporting that SCO could be delisted from the NASDAQ because "it has not filed its annual 10-K report with the SEC". The company claims it's because "it is examining matters related to stock issued as part of its compensation plans". SCO Stock is sitting at $4.30 at opening today. It'll be interesing to see where it goes from here."
Since SCO has stocks issued to the public, aren't they required to fill out the proper paperwork? How does one who own SCO stock supposed to sell his stock? Can they do this w/o getting sued by their share holders?
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
The rules that lead to being delisted are pretty cut-and-dried. However, a company with a solid business plan to rescue themselves will more often than not be given a break and allowed to remain listed while they work things out. Failing to file your 10-K is almost never an "accident". Add to that the fact that SCO really has no business plan beyond lawsuits and I think we'll likely be seeing them de-listed fairly rapidly.
It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.
Not filing your SEC filings is always bad. When it gets so bad NASDAQ delists you, it means that you are about to get sued, and get sued hard. I can pretty much guarantee a Section 10(b) fraud class action gets filed against SCO in the near future. And I also am willing to bet the SEC will start investigating them as well... Good thing they have plenty of lawyers....
Armchairgenius.com - Where everyone is a genius.
After Enron crashed, their stocks certificates actually became worth more as souvenirs than any possible redemption value (little or none.)
anyone else notice that under "products and services", SCO lists its court cases?
very funny and depressing at the same time.
SCO's paying their lawyers in stock, which explains their entire strategy: keep the stock price elevated, and cash them in, before they inevitably lose the case and it all collapses. Delisting SCO right away could castrate that strategy, if the lawyers haven't sold any stock yet. Maybe those sharks won't be able to afford to defend themselves from an SEC investigation of that criminal strategy, and get disbarred.
--
make install -not war
Getting buried in a countersuit that completely bankrupts your company without even getting all the way through trial is about the biggest deterrent that I can imagine. The next SCO wannabe will think twice before suing Big Blue. Once SCO is gone the entire question of whether or not Linux is tainted with illegal UNIX code becomes moot. With SCO out of the way the only company that has even a little bit of a shot of using UNIX copyrights against Linux becomes Novell, and Novell has essentially bet the future of the company on Linux.
It was a stretch for Caldera (now SCO), a long time Linux distributor to pretend that they didn't know that their copyrighted code had been included in Linux. After Novell's involvement in the SCO vs. IBM case even the dimmest jury would find it impossible to believe that Novell didn't intend to distribute Linux under the terms of the GPL.
In essence, as long as the folks who own and control the old UNIX copyrights are actively distributing Linux the community has very little to fear.
It would be nice if the GPL was tested in court, if only to shut up all of the GPL naysayers, but that would simply be a bonus.
Remember that some months ago there was a "Senior accounting position" open in SCO? And we, in usual /. fashion, speculated that it might be due to inability to find somebody willing to sign his/her name under the mess that was going on?
Hmmm...