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."

11 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. there is only one SCO filing left. really. by swschrad · · Score: 5, Funny

    "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?
  2. Re:Buyout SCO to rid us of problems by Vengeance · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No.

    The SCO Group (NOT the Santa Cruz Operation, by the way, they're now called Tarantella) must be crushed into an unrecognizable mess of lies and hopelessness. There is no other way. Their attorneys should be disbarred, their officers should all spend a few decades in Federal prison, and anyone who bought stock in them because they saw the hope of a payout from this extortion scheme should rot in hell.

    --
    It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
  3. Like a bad zombie movie by Frequency+Domain · · Score: 5, Funny

    The hero keeps firing his gun at the oncoming zombie, shouting "Why... wont... you... DIE!"

  4. Final? by techpawn · · Score: 5, Funny

    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
  5. That's what they've wanted all along... by rkhalloran · · Score: 5, Informative

    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!!

    1. Re:That's what they've wanted all along... by Oriumpor · · Score: 5, Informative

      Danegeld
      IT IS always a temptation to an armed and agile nation,
              To call upon a neighbour and to say:--
      "We invaded you last night--we are quite prepared to fight,
              Unless you pay us cash to go away."

      And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
              And the people who ask it explain
      That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld
              And then you'll get rid of the Dane!

      It is always a temptation to a rich and lazy nation,
              To puff and look important and to say:--
      "Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.
              We will therefore pay you cash to go away."

      And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
              But we've proved it again and again,
      That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
              You never get rid of the Dane.

      It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
              For fear they should succumb and go astray,
      So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
              You will find it better policy to say:--

      "We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
              No matter how trifling the cost;
      For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
              And the nation that plays it is lost!"

  6. Re:Buyout SCO to rid us of problems by ciw42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I read a quote from Darl somewhere a good while ago saying that in all honesty, when they started their legal endeavours, they fully expected IBM to just buy them out. Guess IBM decided that it'd be more fun to bury them. Big time. And in the long-run of course, the case has actually done a good deal to strengthen the GNU/Linux community.

    Even without a buyout, those involved in this nonsense have actually made a good deal of money - the lawyers, Darl and the other execs (who are on hefty salaries) who have done rather well from all this, thank you very much. The people I feel sorry for the actual engineers at SCO, as there can be no doubt the company won't come out the other end of this in any fit state to carry on. It used to be a damn good little company, providing a good product at sensible prices. Now look at them. They're just a bad joke.

  7. Actually, it may have one advantage by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
  8. Re:Buyout SCO to rid us of problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    The SCO Group ... must be crushed into an unrecognizable mess of lies and hopelessness. There is no other way. Their attorneys should be disbarred, their officers should all spend a few decades in Federal prison, and anyone who bought stock in them because they saw the hope of a payout from this extortion scheme should rot in hell.


    Don't forget the bit about "the lamentation of their women", that really needs to be worked in there somewhere.
  9. This is damaging credibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    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 /change/ those laws or is this something people weren't hired to do or set in motion, resulting in nothing ever changing?

    Guys, this isn't only hurting business. Its hurting your credibility too!

  10. Re:Buyout SCO to rid us of problems by wrook · · Score: 5, Interesting

    All of the money made by the insiders is public knowledge. I quickly looked through the records last week (you can just do a google search for "insider trades SCO" and you will find a service that will list them all). From what I can tell, Baystar dumped about a million shares or so at between $3.50 and $4.00 at the end of 2004 (They were making 5 or 6 sell trades a day for months). I'm not sure if this ended up being a profit or a loss though (I forget the details... and the whole Bank of Montreal involvement made everything kind of complicated anyway).

    The executives exercised stock options all the way up until the end of 2004. It seems they were mostly granted at between $1 and $2 and excercised for between $10 and $20, but there are some exceptions. I didn't add up all the money, but it was definitely in the multi-millions of dollars.

    There are huge stock grants to a law firm (about 10 million shares), which I think is the law firm representing them (I assume for services rendered). So the absolute big winners seem to be the lawers, but the executives and Baystar seem to have made millions as well. The losers are the people who invested at anything over $4 (or the morons who sold short, not understanding that it takes *time* for a stock to fall).

    As a disclaimer, I only quickly reviewed this material, so there may be errors in my summary. If you care about this stuff, I suggest you compile it properly yourself.