IBM's Counterclaim 10 Outlines 5 Ways SCO's Wrong

ColonelZen writes "My article at IPW reads: But, however slowly, the wheels of justice do grind on. The discovery phase of SCO v. IBM is now complete, and as per the court's schedule the time to raise Summary Judgment issues is now. And IBM has indeed raised them ... such that it is very possible that all of SCO's claims against IBM could wind up dismissed piecemeal in those motions. ... Yesterday, IBM's redacted memo in support of CC10 hit Pacer. ... This is 102 pages detailing five independent but overlapping, direct and powerfully detailed reasons why SCO's claims of Linux infringement against its code are nonsense."

Comments

Claims?

[nine-times]

Wait, so SCO actually had claims? As in, they claimed that IBM actually was doing something wrong? Funny, from everything I've read, I thought SCO had brought IBM to court on account of "nanny-nanny boo-boo."

Re:Claims?

[nine-times]

According to the consensus here on Slashdot, I thought the purpose was to drive SCO stock prices up so the executives could pump and dump, meanwhile getting funding from Microsoft so that they could stall and keep the whole thing in court as long as possible so that CIOs would be nervous about Linux.

It just me, or does this read like spam?

[HomerJ]

I read the title then the little blurb.......this whole summary reads like something a spammer would stick to the end of an email to try and get past a filter.

Re:It just me, or does this read like spam?

[suv4x4]

I read the title then the little blurb.......this whole summary reads like something a spammer would stick to the end of an email to try and get past a filter.

FTFA: ...Those pronouncements and the antagonism of the Linux aficionados has raised the various lawsuits above prosaic tedium... ...the imbroglio will Novell which seems to indicate that they do not even own the code which they assert some Linux may infringe upon ...

Nope, I think paragraph long sentences and stuffing yout text with rare words in inappropriate locations is a very good way to get your message accross.

Dear SCO,

[Anonymous Coward]

How much can I have a 'linux license' for now?

You filthy teabaggers.

Refund for Microsoft?

[hey]

Does this mean Microsoft should get a refund for the "license" they bought
from SCO to use some Unix code.

Re:the US system

[gbulmash]

I think the main problem with the U.S. system is the judge can't impose sanctions like making the plaintiff's counsel get a Cleveland Steamer from Courtney Love.

If you risked that evert time you filed a frivolous lawsuit, you'd think twice, wouldn't you?

- Greg

Re:the US system

[Linker3000]

In other news, SCO has requested a full source code dump of the soon-to-be-released blockbuster game 'Duke Nukem Forever', claiming to have evidence that certain aspects of the game closely resemble (or may have been copied) from their seminal (but also as yet unpublished) game 'Nuke Ducks Forever' - an innovative 'first person shooter' designed to appeal to fans of the growing-in-popularity sport of extreme small-game hunting.

Re:Reason why is probably $$$

[Sillygates]

Don't forget about the SCO linux users...

Re:Maybe IBM has also slowed progress.

[dbIII]

A couple of years from now, when we have a new president, the Microsoft antitrust settlement could be re-visited.

I can't see Rumsfeld doing that.

The dog is laughing at SCO

[tepples]

And then Nintendo sues SCO, alleging that "Nuke Ducks Forever" is based on Nintendo's "Duck Hunt" game for NES. Even the dog is laughing at SCO.

Re:Reason why is probably $$$

[Fred_A]

Yes, both of them.