Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

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

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the darlure-to-launch dept.

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."

5 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. the US system by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Very sad that european courts can deal with utterly absurd claims so very quickly in corporate cases (and have done so for SCO's), while the SCOX vs. IBM and SCOX vs. Novell still drag on even though by the judge's comments it's clear they know the thing is a farce.

    1. Re:the US system by belmolis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your general point is well taken, but I doubt that the SCO case will establish a precedant of much interest since as far as I can see there are no interesting legal issues at stake, just an essentially fraudulent complaint.

    2. Re:the US system by killjoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To me the main problem is that the judge can't ask questions. In a better "justice system" I would see a conversation like this.

      SCO: They stole our code.
      IBM: Did not!.
      Judge: SCO, what code did they steal?
      SCO: Huh? Wha? We don't know. Did we say they stole code? No, they did not steal code, we meant they broke a contract.
      Judge: Which contract did they break?
      SCO: Well we don't really know and the contract wasn't signed with us.

      Judge: Case dismissed.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  2. Re:Claims? by Generic+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    My guess is SCO didn't expect it'd go this far. They were hoping they'd get settlements...

    And this I believe is why IBM decided to take their time, go through the entire court process, despite the increased costs involved -- this time -- to make an example out of SCO. Otherwise, IBM would be inviting multitudes of other lame and unsubstantiated lawsuits from all sorts of "IP" firms with no products. IBM is spending the time and cost now grinding SCO into salt to send a clear message to anyone else in the tech/patent business -- Don't mess with us!

    It actually shows a long-term kind of thinking which is sorely lacking in most of the corporate world today.

    --
    { - Generic Guy - }
  3. Re:Refund for Microsoft? by killjoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    IBM requested full discovery of all documents that mentio MS and SUN. There will be more lawsuits that IBM can initiate against MS from that pile. This gives IBM an excellent tool to leverage against sun and MS in the future.

    This suit was a huge tactical mistake by MS. They already regret funding it and they will regret it even more in the future.

    --
    evil is as evil does