Slashdot Mirror
SCO Files To Amend Claims To IBM Case, Again
UnknowingFool writes "SCO filed a motion to allow it to change its claims against IBM. Again. A brief recap: In December 2005, SCO was supposed to finally list all claims against IBM. This was the Final Disclosure. In May 2006, SCO filed its experts reports to the court which discussed subjects beyond those in the Final Disclosure. Naturally, IBM objected and wanted to remove certain allegations. Judge Wells ruled from the bench and granted IBM's motion: SCO's experts cannot discuss subjects that were not in the Final Disclosure. Now, SCO wants to amend the December 2005 Final Disclosure to include other allegations."
This is ridiculous. I don't know why some company doesn't just put up a few Million dollars (or 10s of millions) to buy SCO and put all these stupid legal battles behind us. They'll never win any of them, but they'll continue to be a nuisance. Ugghhh.
Crack - Free with every butt and set of boobs
That big bad judge wouldn't let us tattle MORE on that big bad IBM.
Don't you hate glorious self-promotion? Visit my Blog
"oh, your Honor, we are but mere idiots drooling on our papers, we just want money. grant us our relief and give us lots of everybody else's money. also, your wallet and watch, hand 'em over."
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Maybe we're just seeing what kind of lawyers you get when all you can pay them with is stock in a company whose assets consist solely of a huge scam lawsuit against IBM.
One of the precedents that IBM should produce by seeing this travesty trial to its just conclusion is penalties for the SCO lawyers who have been wasting court time with this obviously frivolous lawsuit. Why should taxpayers subsidize those lawyers with free access to the courts for their stockmarket scam? The SEC should look at their brokers, too, to see whether they are in on the deal - almost certainly they are.
This case shouldn't end with only strong precedents clearing Linux developers and distributors from the FUD SCO has pumped into the market for years now. It should end with disbarred lawyers and delicensed brokers, and probably punitive damages (paid to the court, compensating taxpayers) exceeding the profit those professional crooks have made from the stock transactions their work has been the smoke and mirrors to produce.
--
make install -not war
The hero keeps firing his gun at the oncoming zombie, shouting "Why... wont... you... DIE!"
Jesus. Which part of "Final" are these clowns having trouble understanding?
They're using Square's definition of "Final" arn't they...
Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
I don't have detailed knowledge of the US legal system, but isn't SCO stretching it beyond it's limits in a way rarely seen before. And certainly with such high profile cases with companies of these sizes?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
This has been one big nuisance suit by SCOX *HOPING* IBM would pay them off or buy them out to silence them. IBM's attitude has been "millions for defense, not one cent for tribute". They know paying SCOX off would prompt a flood of copycat suits from other busted vendors.
At this point it's pretty well proven (a) there's no infringing UNIX code in Linux (b) SCOX likely doesn't hold the copyrights, Novell does (c) SCOX' reading of the contract they inherited from AT&T & Novell is in conflict with their predecessors', and both have said so in depositions and (d) this has been a last-ditch attempt to keep their company afloat.
SCOX DELENDA EST!!
Yeah, let's give Darl and Sontag more money for their extortion scam. That'll fucking teach them!
Belief is the currency of delusion.
Their legal liability thanks to their idiocy is enormous.
Whoever bought them could never survive the judgements that'll come down against SCO.
I think what's more interesting than SCO is what'll happen to SCO's backers that put them up to this (like microsoft who raised $86 million for SCO's lawsuit)
I agree, but good luck getting the US government to.
I love the following quote from Syriana:
"Some trust fund prosecutor, got off-message at Yale, thinks he's gonna run this up the flagpole, make a name for himself, maybe get elected some two-bit, congressman from nowhere, with the result that Russia or China can suddenly start having, at our expense, all the advantages we enjoy here. No, I tell you. No, sir. Corruption charges! Corruption? Corruption is government intrusion into market efficiencies in the form of regulations. That's Milton Friedman. He got a goddamn Nobel Prize. We have laws against it precisely so we can get away with it. Corruption is our protection. Corruption keeps us safe and warm. Corruption is why you and I are prancing around in here instead of fighting over scraps of meat out in the streets. Corruption is why we win."
I dont read
Even I know when someone asks, "is this your final answer," you know that's the last chance you get.
on what grounds?
on the grounds that it's disasterous to my case.
sarcasm:
-noun
1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
SCO paid cold hard cash for their lawyers. Cash from Microsoft and Sun that Novell is claiming should have been forwarded to Novell. But it was cash. There was an early move to make BS&F get paid in shares and a percentage of an SCO buyout. BS&F dropped that very quickly, either because they got a good look at SCO's case or because it would put them in co-conspirator type position with respect to Lanham act and racketering charges for being a direct benefit from the false valuation.
SCO paid a "fixed fee" to BS&F to manage all cases through appeals, I believe it was $29M. There is also a refillable misc-costs bucket of $5M that has already been topped up twice. The misc-cost bucket sort of puts a lie to the "fixed fee" handling of the lawsuit.
In any case SCO is now facing Novell asking for a lot of cash that SCO no longer has.
... then I realised I was just flogging a dead horse
Hmm, hadn't noticed the lawyers trading their stock compensation for "costs++" accounting.
How does the Lanham act make SCO liable for anything? Is this the "Unix" copyright argument with Novell?
--
make install -not war
It's more likely that they don't actually think this will fly in THIS court, but they might be setting up for an appeal. This case isn't going anywhere for awhile folks. Not only does the trial have to conclude, but you KNOW that SCO is going to appeal.
I wonder. if a quick buy out of the company would enable the buyer to see all paper work? It may be useful for IBM and Novell to have the goods on MS and Sun for damages as well as perhaps put those at the top who perpertraited this crime in prison. I wonder how Gates (or Balmer) and McNealy would do in a federal prison?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
No, that's not right. The buyout part is correct, but not the shares. There was an early claim made by both TSCOG and BS&F that BS&F were taking the case on contingency. That was true as far as it went, but I didn't go very far. The reality was that BS&F were taking the case on contingency or flat rate, whichever was greater. However, both groups publicly touted the contingency and were completely silent about the flat rate. The reason was plain to see; it was a conspiracy by TSCOG and BS&F to make the case appear stronger than it was, and, after all, that's what this case has been about since the beginning--appearance. As yourself, why would a legal firm take a case on contingency? They only would if they expected to make more than it cost them.
-Loyal
I aim to misbehave.
Er, not "copyright", trademark, which the Lanham Act covers.
--
make install -not war
The one where they open the book to Chapter 7.
Best Slashdot Co
Gee, my favorite line from Syriana is "BOOM!!!" ;).
One of my favorite lines from living in New Orleans was "In Louisiana, people don't expect corruption. They demand it."
--
make install -not war
FINAL disclosure as IANAL disclosure.... seems apt, if you ask me.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
SCO is essentially saying the following:
Your honor, since the trial date has been postponed to after Novell (September 2007), let us amend our "final" disclosure. IBM has lots of time to respond to this, so it causes no harm.
SCO obviously doesn't understand the word final. They also say (this is a quote):
The public interest is in having this matter resolved in a reasonable time frame. SCO had 3.8 years (from when they filed in March of 2003 until when final disclosure happened in December of 2006) to assemble their evidence. The longer this charade goes on, and that Linux is under SCO's cloud of FUD, the more damage SCO is doing.
SCO has tried to delay at every turn during this trial, so this comes as no surprise. It now seems obvious that this whole lawsuit was an attempt to delay Linux adoption by destroying Linux credibility in the marketplace. This whole thing was about delay.
1. Draw out court case as long as possible to make SCO waste more cash.
2. Crush SCO completely in court to the point even the Judge laughers at SCO.
3. Buy SCO out after they are about to declare they are bankrupt for 1$.
4. Have a big camp fire using the SCO buildings and transfer all SCO remaining staff to the "Whipping Boy" Department.
and just for kicks and giggles
5 . Profit
It seems to me that criminal prosecutions of SCO's legal team would (even if something that the law allows) set a precedent that would make it easier for large/rich corporations to seriously threaten smaller corporations or individuals who want to challenge them in court. Perhaps there could be Iis?) some kind of middle ground that would allow any party to a lawsuit to file a complaint that would result in fines, censure or some other less severe punishment for the legal team.
Similarly, putting SCO officers in jail on the basis of their legal case would have the same effect. But if it could be proved that they brought the case to manipulate their stock prices, or if they committed perjury at any point along the way, jail time would be more than appropriate.
At least IBM has big pants with deep pockets. I mean, how long has this farce been going on? ...And what, pray tell, will IBM see (in terms of monetary relief) when it's over?
I mean, SCO is floundering like a stuck pig on the end of a deep-sea fishing line. They're bleeding all over the friggin' ocean and their lawyers are sucking up the blood as fast as it's pouring out.
How soon before McBride and the boys finally run dry and succumb to their fate? Will there be any money to pay Novell for the licensing fees they are due? Will there be any money to pay IBM's legal team for this long, drawn-out court case?
Something doesn't sit right in my mind when a company can use its dying breath to unfairly inconvenience other companies. If SCO doesn't have any money left to pay its debts when the "curtain is coming down" on this case, can the judge haul off and McGwire the money from the SCO gang like candy from a pinata?
I hope so.
coding is life
What's the textbook illustration of a "vexatious litigant"?
Is SCO better or worse than that textbook example?
Is there a strategic advantage to IBM in not filing a motion for sanctions? If so, what is it?
What are some possible reasons why a judge might act as though SCO were a legitimate plaintiff?
Do SCO's lawyers have grounds for walking away from the case? Aren't attorneys entitled to "fire" their clients if the clients have materially misled them?
I'm from Europe and have witnessed this case being mentioned every once in a while. It seems like some kind of virus; the thing which you cannot kill and it just pops up every once in a while.
/change/ those laws or is this something people weren't hired to do or set in motion, resulting in nothing ever changing?
What I fail to understand is that the American justice department is allowing all this to continue. To which I'd like to immediatly add that this whole ordeal is more damaging than people might realize. For me its also portraying the whole justice system as something which you really can't take too seriously. Jury courts? Sure, try to work on their emotion. Trials with no end because no evidence is being produced what so ever? Sure; only in America so it seems.
What makes me look upon this with a little disdain for this, arrogant if you will, IMO display of incompetence is the sheer fact that SCO has also tried this in Europe just once. The only thing they ended up with was a threat for some major fines (due to plain out slander) if they pulled a stunt like that again.
What is it with these people? If they need to apply the law and it allows for grand mockeries like this wouldn't it make sense to get something in motion to actually
Guys, this isn't only hurting business. Its hurting your credibility too!
What does your post say about Al Gore?
Besides, Boies fucked up back then, too. SCO isn't the first time.
Well actually this is the only thing that SCO can do. I don't think their goal is to win. But to not get killed by IBM. If SCO can prove there case well enough to not get thrown out then they may be able to get off loosing the case and their own legal fees. Otherwise IBM can sue them back (and IBM has been asking some of its customers to keep track of any time loss due to this lawsuit including meeting discussing the matter) Asking for full compensation for there losses. IBM Legal Fees, Their customers time loss, potential loss of business. There is loosing a case where you have a legit claim and loosing a case where your claim is baseless. The first lets you save face, the latter will make the previous defendant the victim of your action and will become the plaintiff demanding reparations.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
lol "loosing". you fail at english.
IBM:
1) picks its nose at the table;
2) farts and blames it on the dog;
3) doesn't wash its hands after using the washroom;
4) is a rip-off of the shifted characters HAL;
5) secretly funding the forces of evil blocking the truth spoken by the intelligent Richard C Hoagland;
6) runs with scissors;
7) used the letters S, C, and O in a complete word;
8) smells bad.
I do not think that word means what you think it means...
--Inigo Montoya
Always value the individual over the system. --Bruce Lee "I don't need a Sig - I have a custom 191" - me
OJ Simpson is hot on IBM's trail, won't be long till they find the smoking gun.
SCO is paying him in stock
They thought of buyout defense long ago
and have the pill and the statutes. No
chance here.
JFS derived from SCO Sys V? Eh? The first IBM JFS I recall is the one that came with AIX/6000 (circa 1990), which was BSD-based, by way of SunOS. Sun happily licensed the source code for (BSD-based) SunOS to IBM, because it was in the process of replacing its old & tired BSD-based OS with it's new Solaris SVR5-based hotness. All of the header files in AIX/6000 thus had the Sun copyright statement in them...at no point did SCO Sys V come into this.
Technically, there was a time when the payment was to be some large block of stock, complete with anouncements form Blake Stowell that now BSF were partners in the company and lawsuit. Then the stock tanked and BSF decided that cash was better. The so-called "contingency" payments were not the usual kind of contingency payments in a lawsuit, I.E. the lawyer gets paid a part of WHAT you win IF you win. They were, BSF gets 20% of any money that TSG got from certain transaction types that were related to the scam. Some listeners at the conference call thought that it was funny that some of the "contingency" payments had already been made and the case had just been filed, for instance.
any time three creditors have had enough, they can flip your crackling dry carcass over the edge into chapter 7.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
The requested additions to the list are late by more than one year and would interfere mightyly with the Partial Summary Judgement motions currently being briefed and set to be heard early in March.
Not only that but the proposed additions are of the vaporous kind that lead both the Discovery Magistrate and the Trial Judge to strike 184 items from the evidentiary list.
SCOX is grasping at straws, there is nothing else within reach. I thought it was tasteless that judicial officers were taunting Saddam Hussein when hanging him. But I certainly wish to see something equivalent for the SCOX bastards some day.
All court activities would be better if they contained random likes from "What's Up, Tiger Lily?"
"Is the defendant present?"
"Yes, your honor."
"Name three presidents." Although in court it would have to be "name three precedents".
Oh boy yeah, let's intimidate the lawyers so no one with a case, just or otherwise, will dare go up against the mighty.
Now Darl's brother might well be guilty of some malfeasance. BSF is getting as raw a deal out of this as anyone else -- they're not getting paid.
Moderation +3
80% Insightful
20% Flamebait
SCO still has the money to pay asTrollMod'ers to anonymously flame Slashdot posts.
--
make install -not war
Yeah, contracting the UFCL group to handle their legal defense was probably IBM's best move.
---GEC
I'm but the humble pupil, seeking to snatch the scratchbuilt pebble from the master's fully articulated hand
They're using Square's definition of "Final" arn't they...
Appropriate since their entire case is "Fantasy".
I think they're playing the only card they've got left - the latest antics seem so silly and provocative (like trying to overturn the 'de novo' ruling) that I think they're hoping for one thing - that the judges will get (too) pissed off and make a mistake. Something that can make them turn back and say "We haven't been getting a fair trial, let's start over". It won't help their case but it's the only way they'll get the FUD started again.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
We're a fledgling corporate oligarchy. Lobbyists and corporate interests have seen to that.
Most of the laws being passed these days concern business interests. I won't get too heavily into it but a good example is to study our DMCA and see how our original ideas of freedom of speech and expression have been "curtailed" to benefit a few businesses. Or how eminent domain was recently expanded to cover business interests, not just civic ones. Plenty of examples, and this is Slashdot so I shouldn't have to get too heavy into it.
So as things are, business controls the legal system, or at least has a gigantic influence upon it. At this point in our history it isn't so much about right and wrong, so much as it's about influence and money. Given enough influence and/or money, you can pretty much get away with anything. There are exceptions - notably the Enron guys, but give us some time. We're new at being a oligarchy. Check back in 100 years or so.
And since most of the legal machinery these days involves business interests, it's disastrous when businesses conflict. A no-brainer like this SCO case can drag on for 5 years, easily. You'd be hard pressed to find a murder trial in the USA that takes that long. Why? No corporate interest. No money is at stake, or oil drilling rights, or lucrative patents. Nothing "important" is at stake, so why waste time with it?
We used to be a government by the people and for the people, but now we're a government by the elite and for the corporations.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
mostly lawyers, it appears Novell, and perhaps the water/sewer department and power company where their buildings are.
if SCO has been doing any significant business, they'd have to buy paper clips, toners, maybe even media to dash off another copy of the OS. all of those outfits would be screaming for payment, seems to me.
which logic supports the question of "has anybody bought anything from these loonies lately?" certainly Daimler-Chrysler is not a customer thanks to SCO's thrashings.
I suspect the lawyers are the main creditors, and they're superglued to SCO in a death match.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
WTF?? How is this "flamebait"??? It's extremely informative and helpful information on who's making money off SCO. Mod parent INFORMATIVE!
It's a dead horse. Either fuck it or walk away, but for God's sake STOP BEATING IT !
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." -- Voltaire
Gates is too rich to go to prison. He could easily buy the prison, it's staff, the island it's on, the airspace over it, and make it his own personal pleasure palace.
Turn a disadvantage into an advantage.
... from the old tv comedy Get Smart. When caught in a lie and nobody is buying his bullshhit, he would would try to wriggle out of it: "Whould you believe [another lie]? No. Would you believe [yet another lie]? ...
This suit is backwards. SCO brought this suit, yet they want to stall. Usually, the plaintiff wants to push the case forward, and the defense wants to stall. The system is set up so that the plaintiff pushes the case forward, which is why this is dragging on.
Bear in mind that SCO's stalling isn't a problem for IBM. Is IBM losing customers over this? No. Is it costing IBM significant amounts of money? No. (IBM total revenue for 1995: $91 billion. Gross profit: $37 billion). Can SCO afford to keep this up much longer? No. Is SCO likely to win in the end? No. Not a problem.
What's actually happening is that the summary judgment motions by IBM are about to be decided. SCO is desperately trying to distract attention from that, but that's where the real action is.
I think they're hoping for one thing - that the judges will get (too) pissed off and make a mistake.
Or, quoting from SCO's litigation strategy documents:
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
It is clear from their home website below http://www.sco.com/scosource/ that the business model is built on spreading fear and uncertainity. From the page "Many IT users are concerned about using Linux since they have become aware of the allegations that Linux is an unauthorized derivative work of the UNIX® operating system. Users have come to SCO asking what they can do to continue to run their businesses. SCO has created the SCOsource business division in response to these needs. " Its not so muach as stating this is what sco does , but rather saying you the sinner better repent.
seems to me IMHO that the judge should have whacked his gavel and dismissed with prejudice (meaning never able to file again) three and a half years ago.
it is customary in filing lawsuits to have information supporting your case, even here.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
get a life, sco
Another anonymous spelling Nazi heard from. At least have the marbles to post as yourself.
And if you're going to comment on someone else's English you may want to pay more attention to your own. Sentences and the word "English" are usually capitalized. The GP had one spelling mistake in an entire paragraph and you managed two mistakes in 6 words.
Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
Has anybody done an analysis of previous slashdot coverage of this and tabulated the number of comments per story?
Seems to me the number of comments (and thus interest) is getting smaller and smaller per SCO story.
Filmo The Klown
seems to me IMHO that the judge should have whacked his gavel and dismissed with prejudice (meaning never able to file again) three and a half years ago.
SCO would of been able to go to the appeals court and asked to have the case reinstated, then if it was it would look bad for the judge. Though it's a real hassle, with both judges letting SCO run with this case they are giving SCO a lot of rope to hang themself with.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I metamodded the Flamebait as "Fair" because I'm a metamod on crack.