Slashdot Mirror
IBM Asks Court to Toss SCO's Entire Case
Lost+Found writes "After three and a half years of case proceedings, summary judgement motions have been submitted in the highly controversial SCO v. IBM case. SCOX shares took a loss of 18.75%, or $0.39, to close at $1.69. IBM shares rose 0.97%, a gain of $0.79, to close at $82.00. From the article: 'Both sides in SCO v. IBM have filed motions for summary judgment. To be precise, SCO has filed one for partial summary judgment and IBM has filed several motions for summary judgment, one for each of SCO's claims and two more for good measure on two of IBM's counterclaims. In other words, it is asking the court to throw out SCO's entire case, and to grant it judgment on two counterclaims without even going to trial on those two.' More motions for summary judgement from SCO against IBM counterclaims are currently being uncovered at Groklaw."
This has been going on for far too long now and it's been clear to everyone for years now that even the broken patent/copyright system won't side with SCO.
They've got nothing and SCO are a joke. Noone even takes this case seriously anymore.
the more they over-think the plumbing the easier it is to stop up the pipe
Thats the beauty of having lawyers on staff. You pay them an annual salary, whether they are in court, doing research, etc. it doesn't matter. Fixed cost. Now SCO went out and got a few lawyers on retainer, so they will have a hefty bill, but I think IBM just has "regular" employees doing this on their side.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
they could have easily settled long ago - thats not the point. they do not want to settle the case and leave doubts over linux, they want to crush it completely.
...if you want to make the $'s, go to law school. It doesn't matter if anything is produced, you still make money.
Yeah? Well I think you're overrated too.
Lose the case in back-door deal whereby I would end up paying SCO almost nothing, but provide them with a precedent that would allow them to round up all of my competitors and remove them from my competitive landscape.
Why, what would you do?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
First, the legal fees are pretty much a drop in the bucket for IBM. Second, and IANAL, they might be able to go after former SCO officers if there is evidence of illegality, but not individual private investors.
Judge K. grants most of IBM's wishes.
Judge K. grants Novell a writ of replevin. That means that the funds that SCO should have turned over to Novell when it sold licenses to Microsoft and Sun go into a trust account. SCO only has ten million in the bank so it is instantly bankrupt.
All the issues in all the trials are then amicably settled by the bankruptcy trustee.
Holy smoking crater Batman, this puppy is never going anywhere near a jury.
Well maybe some stuff will go before a jury. Darl may pay dearly for flapping his gums so loudly. There are the Lanham act issues. The SEC may also step in. Many people have said that the whole scheme involved a pump and dump on the stock market. There is certainly the odor of some kind of manipulation. In fact it has become a standing joke on the Yahoo SCOX message board (and now on InvestorsVillage as well). They call it the PaintBlaster with reference to the fact that the shares seem to get predictably 'painted up'.
All well and good, but the whole business certainly produced an impressive bulge in plenty of time for SCOX shareholders to line their pockets by selling stock that had been practically worthless the year before.
The legal soap opera is interesting, but the real question is whether anyone profited from that stock bulge... and if so who and how much... and whether anyone intends to go after them for securities fraud. If not, then the whole charade may have been immensely worthwhile for SCO's insiders. IBM wins a pyrrhic victory, SCO goes bankrupt, thanks to the concept of a corporation the officers have no personal liability, and if they owned SCO stock and managed to sell it in 2004 they could well be laughing all the way to the bank.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Given that I'm IBM and have a team of lawyers who I would be paying regardless, and that SCO's next targets would most likely be the very companies that so thoughtfully provide me (for free!) with most of the software that I'm basing my hardware, support and professional services sales around, I'd crush them before they got any funny ideas about taking out the aforementioned companies and cutting my current strategy off at the knees.
It's called "enlightened self interest"; the right thing is also the best thing for yourself, no matter how many others it may also help. Any advantage gained in paying off SCO now would likely be lost in the future, especially as it's extremely unlikely that SCO would be paid off so cheaply.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
They could have easliy bought SCO before going to court. That's what they would have done before settling.
IBM's confident that this case will help them in the long run, or they wouldn't be involved in the litigation at all.
There was a bunch of speculation before the pretrial hearings even started that IBM might buy SCO, liquidate the corporation, and open-source all the software assets, and be done with the whole mess. Winning in court proves things about the GPL, the open development of software, the honesty of IBM as a corporation, and a few other things that a buyout or a settlement never could.
Put your astroturfing in your sig jackass.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
"So he has a great track record. *rolleyes*"
Actually, the Gov't won and MS found guilty. But then the administration changed, and John Ashcroft's DOJ was tasked with finding a way to let MS off the hook.
jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]