Slashdot Mirror
SCO Versus Novell Going All the Way
Robert writes "Computer Business Review reports that ownership of the Unix System V code copyrights is set to be decided in court after a US District Judge rejected Novell Inc's second request that SCO
Group Inc's slander of title case be dismissed." From the article: "Novell's second motion to dismiss SCO's slander of title claim was prompted by an apparently positive response from Judge Dale Kimball to its first request to throw out the case, although he rejected it having concluded that the arguments about the agreements at the heart of the case would be more properly heard on potential later motions for summary judgment or trial."
IMHO, this could end up being a serious embarrasment to to SCO. Maybe now, they'll crawl away and die.
Don't be a looter...and yes, I know that it's spelled with an "A" instead of an "E".
does SCO actually legitimately create anything, anymore?
I used to work with several ex-SCO people in Santa Cruz. Great people to work with. They were all hardcore Linux/and/or/BSD people who were disgusted with the direction/erection that Darl McBride and his sad, Lindon, Utah ward members had taken the company they helped build.
This suit is a joke, and I hope that Caldera gets theirs in the end.
I also will firmly place my tinfoil hat on and assume that M$ has something to do with this...
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
What if the judge ruled against Novell still owning the copyrights? We've all seen stranger things happen in the Amercian court system.
to keep this case going.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars just evaporating in court and lawyer costs every month this thing goes on. Is Novell so well-off this won't affect their bottom line every quarter?
If there's any SCO left when they get to the end, they declare bankruptcy. Then what does Novell have? Satisfaction in being right? I wish I could feed my family by just being right.
Or maybe the IP issues are better clarified. Well, Novell can't use that to their exclusive benefit. So where's the money?
What does Microsoft get? One less competitor.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
Certainly few (other than some unethical lawyers of course) want more frivolous lawsuits, but for my part, I would like to see the matter settled on the merits of the case rather than simply throwing it out on a narrow definition of malice. Otherwise this could keep coming back. Let's just have it out and leave a good precident to follow.
TSCOG's first suit was dismissed (without prejudice) because Novell pointed out they did not claim any actual damage. TSCOG's second suit still did not claim any actual damage, only elaborated on their potential damages, but Novell totally ignored that in their motion. I don't know why, it was the most severe deficiency in TSCOG's suit and after their first suit was dismissed for exactly that reason, Novell totally ignored it in their second motion.
What is it with this anti-lawyer hostility?
/me sighs.
Pure and simply, lawyers have destroyed the commonsense relation between justice and the citizenry, erected themselves as an indispensible middleman layer pushing bits of ruling that are every bit as obscure as chicken entrails, and turned "justice" into a paid-for benefit proportional to the size of your wallet.
In other words, they are not only a waste of space within the area of human endeavour, but positively inimical to it.
And you ask "Why the hostility"?
I'd like to ask you a question. This is not a troll, I honestly want some information.
I am a long time Mac developer. I have written or contributed to many commercial software applications for older versions of Mac OS and also for MacOS X. I have some experience with Unix (and getting more all the time with OS X). I am not, nor have ever been a system admin. I don't think I really "grok" the kinds of issues that system admins have to deal with.
So, my question is this: what specifically is better about suse 9.3 (or any other distro) than MacOS X?
To my non-system administrator eye, the X Serve looks pretty damn cool. I watched the webcast of the event where they introduced them and I was impressed with the ease at which you could "get at" the hardware other features of the system. In the past, I have "administered" (purchased, helped setup, etc.) a Mac file server running MacOS 9 for a Mac development team. I can easily see that some of the features of the XServe would have been very helpful in overcoming problems we had then. For example, the XServe runs nicely when "headless" whereas our old desktop Mac cum server did not run well at all when headless - we had to buy a special piece of hardware into tricking it to run headless and it didn't work very well. The ease of setting up RAID on the XServe would have been nice. Our (3rd party) backup system did not work very well on our "server" (which was a plain G4 tower). We mainly used it to serve some internal web pages, hold our source code repository, and hold various files for the group to access. For our needs an XServe, had it been available at the time, would have been better.
I have heard, though, that real system admins are *not* impressed with the X Serve and think its either a joke or way overpriced for what you get.
I would be very interested in hearing specific things that my non-admin mind can understand about what kinds of features system admins are looking for in Unix systems.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score