SCO Asks Court To Reconsider IBM's Dismissal
VE3OGG writes "The SCO Group — the litigation firm currently in dispute with, among many, IBM, over supposed copyright infringing code in Unix — has quietly asked the courts to reconsider IBM's request to toss the case out. SCO argued that the court's November decision was procedurally and substantially flawed and they say 'the rules of procedure do not support such a result under the circumstances of this case.' If allowed to reopen the case, the SCO Group argues, that new evidence would present itself through the deposition of several IBM programmers who had previously been interviewed."
Wait, didn't the court just tell them that no, you can not introduce new evidence into a case years after discovery is over? And then tossed their case out saying they have no leg to stand on? And now they say "if only we were allowed to add this new evidence, there would be a case" ???
Are they trying to pull a Microsoft here - annoying the judge until he says something stupid and they can get him replaced? Or are they simply dumb and hard of hearing?
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Since /. is so slow on this, it should be noted that Judge Kimball rejected the request on a technicality that they filed as a request what should be a motion. Armchair analysis seems to indicate that the rejection might be his way of saying "You really don't want to do this" to SCO. This request basically calls the judge a liar or too incompetent to understand what a de novo review is. It's like SCO is trying to get found in contempt...
I never said I was smart, I just said I was smarter than you
I don't know - What about the counterclaims? SCO may have bankrupted itself fighting this battle, but IBM still plans to rape the corpse.
Which is too bad since their twisted and distorted delusional logic would certainly support such an argument.
Fortunately, I don't think corporations can plead insanity.
I say "fortunately", because by their very raison d'etre, corporations very much exhibit antisocial PD (what people normally mean by the phrase "criminally insane"), as defined by the DSM-IV (having three or more of the following traits):
Letting corporations plead insanity would amount to giving them carte blanche to rape, pillage, murder, and burn the planet.
This is an example of the Casablanca Dilemma, which works like this.
You're in Casablanca. If you are not out of Casablanca on tommorow's flight, you're a dead man. You have your tickets, but you need Captain Renault to provide you with papers. Louis charges a thousand francs for this "service",and you can only raise five hundred.
The only way to double your money overnight is to win big a Rick's roullette tables, which would be very unlikely at an honest table -- which Rick's decidedly are not. Sometimes Rick has been known to take pity on a hard luck case, but there's no special reason for him to help you out of all the other desperate folks. You beg Rick for help, but it's no use. He's already helped one hard luck case tonight, and for some reason he is too distracted to pay attention to anything you have to say.
So you put down your bet at Rick's crooked table, knowing that you are almost certainly a walking dead man. But it's better to keep playing than to stop, and remove all doubt.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I always found it particularly ironic that the film was made by Big Picture Media Corporation, according to their website - a subsidiary company of British Columbia Film. I think BC's Annual Report speaks volumes:
I think it's really good to see that an American Corporation has helped meet the niche needs of slashdot users, to give them some nice ideas to put in their posts, while at the same time turning a healthy profit ($4.5m) for the Canadians. Capitalism at it's best.