Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IP Attorney - Why SCO Has No Case

Posted by Zonk on from the we-who-may-be-about-to-die dept.

OSS_ilation writes "In an interview over at SearchOpenSource.com, IP attorney Thomas Carey shoots down SCO's cases against IBM and Novell, but predicts that SCO will fight a losing battle to its last. IT directors shouldn't worry about SCO Group's latest sallies in its legal war on Linux vendors IBM Corp. and Novell Inc., Clarey says, and explains why SCO has no case, predicts the open source legal fields of battle for 2006 and discusses SCO's claims against Novell. Carey chairs the Business Practice Group of Bromberg & Sunstein LLP, an intellectual property law practice in Boston, Mass." Groklaw, as always, has additional details and commentary on this.

5 of 138 comments (clear)

  1. Everybody knows that... by bubulubugoth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The question is: Why is taking so long to the court to dismiss the case?

    --
    Â_Â
    1. Re:Everybody knows that... by temojen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To prevent a flood of appeals.

    2. Re:Everybody knows that... by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Why is taking so long to the court to dismiss the case?

      This question reveals a common misunderstanding about the function of the US legal system, especially in civil matters.

      The legal system is primarily designed to make money for the legal profession. Once litigation is concluded, the lawyers stop receiving money. Read Bleak House by Charles Dickens and realise that, while certain details have changed, the general situation remains the same.

      Unfortunately, I am serious. Many members of Congress are lawyers and they ensure laws are framed to maximise the profession's profits. Logical reforms never see the light of day.

  2. Time to move to the other targets by IamGarageGuy+2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Time to start finding out the real reasons for this happening. The investors that have been pumping money into SCO knowing full well there is no merit to the case. This deserves an investigation. I can't think of any investors, even the most dim-witted that would put money into propping up this boondoggle unless there is another motive involved. The old adage of follow the money comes to mind.

    --
    Stay tuned for new sig...
  3. Re:Clearly Clarey is not Carey by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 3, Insightful
    SCO is fighting this losing battle for what?

    You must distinguish (1) why they started the war, from (2) why they are still fighting in spite of the fact that they are clearly losing.

    They started the war, with their business otherwise failing, as a gamble. They hoped for a quick settlement or a buyout from IBM to avoid the expense of litigation and potential damage to the Linux business. In that, they miscalculated, but may have felt they had little to lose anyway. The major miscalculation will be if individuals end up going to jail for perpetrating this clear scam. We shall need to wait about 10 years to know the answer to that question.

    Why do they continue to fight now, when it is clear they are going to lose? Quite simply, to delay the total dismemberment of their business. The counterclaims in the IBM case, the claims for damages in the Red Hat case, and handing over the bulk of the revenues from the SCO Source scam to Novell are going to bankrupt SCO many times over. Meanwhile, management continues to make money from their salaries and probably other opportunities.