Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Judge Calls SCO On Lack of Evidence

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the like-it-is-judge-like-it-is dept.

Rob writes to mention a CBR article on Judge Wells' assessment that SCO just hasn't made its case against IBM in the well-known and long-lasting legal battle. The magistrate called the lack of evidence inexcusable. She further likened their claims to a shoplifter being handed a catalog for a store after being stopped, and being told 'what you took is in there somewhere, figure it out.' From the article: "In the view of the court it is almost like SCO sought to hide its case until the ninth inning in hopes of gaining an unfair advantage despite being repeatedly told to put 'all the evidence... on the table' ... given SCO's own public statements... it would appear that SCO had more than enough evidence to comply with the court's orders." Groklaw has coverage of the decision, and the complete text from the judge. Update: 06/30 15:14 GMT by Z : This story bears more than a passing resemblance to this one from Wednesday. Sorry about that.

11 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. How did SCO get to sue IBM in the first place? by DRM_is_Stupid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I thought that US law requires the defendant to provide reasonable amount of evidence in order to get a court case started in the first place.

  2. The judge's analogy isn't quite right... by brother_b · · Score: 5, Interesting
    She further likened their claims to a shoplifter being handed a catalog for a store after being stopped, and being told 'what you took is in there somewhere, figure it out.'

    No, it's more like a store manager stopping someone who owns a competing business leaving the store, accusing them of shoplifting with no proof of anything being stolen, and then giving them the catalog to sort it out simply to harass them and take up their time.

  3. Re:This is still going on? by heinousjay · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ah, yes, the court of public opinion. I'm shocked the judge hasn't just deferred to that and sentenced Darl to be hanged by the neck til he be dead, dead, dead. Stupid rule of law.

    --
    Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  4. Re:This is still going on? by IAmTheDave · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wonder what the board room meetings of SCO are like with the lawyers that have undoubtedly drained SCO's coffers of every red cent...

    "Na guys, we're feelin good about this thing. The judge keeps giving me a vibe - I'm so gonna hit that. But back to the case, na, we're doing well. I'm feeling judgement for us, no problem. IMB is (what's that? oh, IBM) IBM is SO gonna pay through the teeth. Leanux is going down!

    "Oh, um, here's your bill. Pay that whenever. No rush."

    --
    Excuse my speling.
    Making The Bar Project
  5. Not at the evidence part yet. by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Merits are not under consideration yet. This ruling is strictly on the fact that SCO did not specify what exactly they are claiming IBM did wrong. IBM has spent three years saying "What did we steal/contribute unlawfully? What code? What 'methods and concepts'?" It'll be later this year that they say "No, we didn't do that stuff."

    And I agree it's sad that a co. can game the system this much for this long, without providing detail about the alleged wrongdoing. It's basically a Gitmo approach to suing.

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  6. Re:SCO's mistake by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fuck off, troll.

    Since nobody outside SCO except perhaps the MoGTroll, Didiot, and a few people who were paid to look at it, have seen it, I call bullshit - or should I say backinfullforce-shit.

    1. Both SCO and Linux can legally take anything they want from the BSD code base - so they would have the exact same comments, etc.
    2. The LKP module that SCO had to yank is a good indication that copying went from Linux to SCO Unix, and not vice versa;
    3. Header files? Sure, for things like POSIX, they WOULD be the exact same. No copyright infringement.
    4. Those "millions of lines of code" in Blepp's suitcase seem to have disappeared.
    Stock scam. That's all it ever was, after the extortion attempt failed.
  7. Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? by yo_tuco · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "maybe buy one of their logoed signs and mount it on a trophy plaque. (well, a man can dream, can't he?)"

    Better yet, How about we get in line and call in McBrige's offer to take our best shot! You do remember is famous words:

    "We're either right or we're not. If we're wrong, we deserve people throwing rocks at us."

    Okay big-mouth Darl McBride. I'm ready! I'm waiting! It's time!
  8. Summation of the PDF by a_karbon_devel_005 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In quick summary, SCO did not provide line number, VERSION and FILE information for many of it's claims. Some of their claims they did not even find source code for (roughly 2/3rds of claims). IBM warned them very early on that if they didn't receive these specifics, they would seek court intervention.

    SCO also claimed that "methods and concepts" do not need source code to back them up. However, the Judge decided that this was incorrect and that methods and concepts could, in the most basic of terms, be boiled down to source code. Even the SCO technical witnesses attested to this, and furthermore SCO repeatedly requested the SAME LEVEL of specificity from IBM when requestiong source codef regarding AIX, LINUX and other products throughout the trial.

    Basically the Judge finds it unacceptable that even though SCO has had since 2003 to substantiate it's claim with LINE, FILE and VERSION numbers for each claim, it has failed to do so.

  9. Shoplifting by corby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The shoplifting analogy isn't quite there.

    Actually, it's as if you walked out of Neiman Marcus, a security guard accused you of shoplifting, and then refused to tell you what you shoplifted.

    Then, the guard pulls over his buddy, respected Yankee Group Laura Didio. She looks in your bag, then looks at the Neiman Marcus catalog, and announces on national media that you have stolen something from Neimann Marcus but she won't say what it is.

    Three years later, during trial, the guard is still unable to explain what you stole from the store.

  10. Re:This is still going on? by LoyalOpposition · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Normally you'd be right. However, I still think the parent has a point. Several things SCO has done make it appear that the whole purpose of the lawsuit was to slow the uptake of Linux. In other words, a trial in the court of public opinion. It's a though there's someone pulling SCO's strings. Someone with deep pockets; someone who would greatly benefit by Linux's demise. However, I can't imagine who that might be.

    -Loyal

    --
    I aim to misbehave.
  11. Re:This is still going on? by schon · · Score: 5, Informative

    SCO's financial reports show no such income.

    Umm, yeah, except for that $16,000,000 cheque that MS wrote them for something MS had already paid for, and the $50,000,000 "gift" from the PIPE fairy, which was brokered by MS.

    <sarcasm>
    No, no such income at all.
    </sarcasm>