Slashdot Mirror


SCO Goes Private With $100 Million Backing

AmIAnAi writes "Just when you thought it was all over, the SCO story takes a new twist. SCO has received $100 million financing from Stephen Norris Capital Partners to get them out of Chapter 11 and go private 'The move gives Stephen Norris, whose namesake founder was a co-founder of private equity giant The Carlyle Group, a controlling interest in SCO, which now has a platform to continue its court battle with Novell Inc. over royalties from the Unix server operating system, SCO's main business ... According to a statement from the company, SNCP already has a business plan for SCO that includes pursuing its legal claims.'"

57 of 411 comments (clear)

  1. Look for more Microsoft money behind by Scareduck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... the Stephen Norris group. When do the judges get sick of barratry?

    --

    Dog is my co-pilot.

    1. Re:Look for more Microsoft money behind by josephdrivein · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I may believe you, but it would surely help if you would be kind enough to provide some proof.

    2. Re:Look for more Microsoft money behind by Clover_Kicker · · Score: 4, Funny

      Anyone who wants those lawyers busy on THOSE suits, and not THESE suits... Yeah, there's such a shortage of lawyers.
    3. Re:Look for more Microsoft money behind by Otter · · Score: 5, Informative

      My recollection is that the bin Laden family (not Osama) had a trivial stake in Carlyle, and that both President Bushes have served on its board. The GP's "the Carlyle Group is mostly Bush and bin Laden money" is wildly exaggerated, to put it mildly, although I'd be curious to hear more of his theories about "who might actually be doing what, and what's at stake".

    4. Re:Look for more Microsoft money behind by deanoaz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >>> The GP's "the Carlyle Group is mostly Bush and bin Laden money" is wildly exaggerated, to put it mildly

      So, you're saying Michael Moore is not a trustworthy source?

      Who'da thunk it!

      --
      If 'the people' in Amendment 2 are 'the state' then Amendments 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10 benefit the state, not you.
    5. Re:Look for more Microsoft money behind by AHuxley · · Score: 5, Interesting
      http://www.uwec.edu/geography/ivogeler/w111/articles/carlyle.html

      Where top Bush administration types meet the members of the family of Usama bin Laden.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    6. Re:Look for more Microsoft money behind by Amiga+Trombone · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, the Carlyle Group is mostly Bush and bin Laden money, or at least it used to be. Sort of makes you wonder who might actually be doing what, and what's at stake...

      Especially considering Lou Gerstner, former CEO of IBM, is on the board of the Carlyle Group. That's a bit of a WTF moment right there...

    7. Re:Look for more Microsoft money behind by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Funny
      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    8. Re:Look for more Microsoft money behind by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps an LOLZ cat with some sort of SCO gear near it:
      I'm in y0ur patentz, stiflin' your inn0vations
      Here it is, with McBride himself. Good enough?
      ~ http://img88.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lolmcbridelj8.jpg
    9. Re:Look for more Microsoft money behind by iocat · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're looking at this the wrong way. Don't think of it as SCO getting funding to continue to irritate all of us, think of it as a new lease of life for GrokLaw!!

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

  2. damn Damn DAMN! by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    Man oh man...

    This news completely ruins my day.

    I just know that tonight while my lady is receiving the annual ~Valentine Fisting~ my mind will be on SCO and their ridiculous lawsuits, not on the work at hand. She'll know something is bugging me, get pissed off and make me stop. I'll have KY to my elbows for nothing.

    Thanks SCO.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:damn Damn DAMN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just make it into a fantasy game. You're SCO, she's the open source community, the KY is SNCP's contribution... oddly enough, the image hash to post this comment anon is "uncouth". Interesting. :)

    2. Re:damn Damn DAMN! by Nimey · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'll have KY to my elbows for nothing. That's no lady, that's a goatse!
      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
  3. Brilliant! by TheOldSchooler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What kind of genius investment group thinks sueing IBM is a winning proposition?

    1. Re:Brilliant! by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not about winning money. It's about making sure SCO's corporate veil isn't pierced.

      If that hive of villainry fails, some of their dealings could see the daylight. And at least a couple of big companies are really interested in making sure this doesn't happen. So they funnel money into the sinking ship to keep it afloat or make it sink in a secluded place -- it's better to lose some cash than have the dirt revealed.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    2. Re:Brilliant! by eln · · Score: 4, Funny

      They're business plan isn't ONLY suing IBM. From what I can gather from the article, it's a brilliant and guaranteed to succeed three-pronged approach involving suing IBM, suing Novell, and selling a product no one has used for 15 years. They can't lose!

    3. Re:Brilliant! by Nimey · · Score: 4, Funny

      Chairs. Lots of chairs.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
  4. Obligatory by Philodoxx · · Score: 5, Funny

    Step 1. Pile money onto a sinking ship

    Step 2. ???

    Step 3. Profit!

    I have a very poor financial outlook for the near future, why can't somebody give me $100 million? Hell, I'll use that to make legal claims about somebody else's IP! I can probably even develop an operating system nobody in their right mind would use.

    --
    Oh, a lesson in history from Mr. I'm my own grandpa.
    1. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Step 1. Pile money onto a sinking ship

      Step 2. ???

      Step 3. Profit! Enough with the vista jokes already!
  5. Calm down, everyone by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Informative
    It's abundantly clear that SCO's court case isn't going anywhere and this is a really poor investment. I agree that we should look for who is back-stoping the investment (as last time), because nobody in their right mind would make this investment expecting to make a profit. I don't think it's even worthwhile for FUD value any longer. We've essentially won this case already, there isn't really any going back.

    Bruce

    1. Re:Calm down, everyone by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think, in a backwards way, it's a good thing. There's some concern in some quarters that SCO evaporating before the questions it raised would leave those questions unanswered, and that someone might try this stunt again. Now everything, including what SCO owes Novell, will get a full hearing.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  6. Norris? by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 4, Funny

    When I mis-read it, I thought: "Chuck Norris can make SCO viable!".

    I'm glad it's just *Stephen* Norris.

  7. $100 Million by C_Kode · · Score: 5, Funny

    Lets take inventory.

    * Taking a beating in court.
    * Its only valid business is a dying operating system.
    * Your customers and pretty the entire tech industry hates you.
    * The company is in chapter 11.
    * The company has a negative cash flow.
    * The judge in your case appears to hate you because of your court practices.
    * I hate you.

    Yeah, lets throw $100 million at them...

  8. Connect the dots by RichMan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    -----
    Thanks to spacelifeform on GL:

    http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/12/bloomberg/bxfour.php

    NEW YORK: Four Seasons Hotels, the manager of 74 luxury hotels, said Monday that it had agreed to be taken private by Bill Gates, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal and the chief executive for $3.8 billion, including debt.

    Coincedence?
    ----
    Who is Stephen Norris,

    http://www.snpartners.com/norris.html

    Looks like there could very easily be some behind the curtain financing of this through foreign nationals.

    ---
    Mr. Norris acted as a principal financial advisor to Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal Al Saud of Kingdom Holding Company, in structuring and negotiating the re-capitalization of Citibank, which returned over $15 billion in profits on about $590 million of equity invested. He also advised or played a key role in other Kingdom Holding Company investments. He was appointed by former president George H.W. Bush and confirmed by the U.S. Senate to serve as one of five governing members of the $100 billion Federal Retirement System Thrift Investment Board.

    Since 1997, Mr. Norris, and certain members of his team, have worked on a number of investments including real estate investments in Europe and the United States. They were involved in amongst others the privatization of Thompson CSF, the recapitalization of Suez, the acquisition of portions of Credit Foncier's real estate portfolio in Paris by the German firm of IVG, the formation of Nomura's (London) bid for a Dutch mortgage bank, the offer by a major Saudia Arabian investment firm for Lamborgini in Italy, and the formation of a bid by Leucadia International's for the Labouchere Bank in Holland. He also negotiated and structured investments in Synxis Corporation, which was backed by George Soros and Mr. Norris, and MARC Global Holdings.
    ---

  9. Oh good by Morkano · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh good, looks like Novell and IBM can acually get some money out of SCO now.

    --
    Victory or awesome!
  10. Re:Yikes by milsoRgen · · Score: 4, Informative

    Does SCO even produce anything anymore? Well yes... UnixWare, OpenServer and Smallfoot.

    Certiainly doesn't look like a winning product portfolio, well not in their hands at least.
    --
    I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
  11. Well, there's one bunch that's going to be happy.. by Jay+Maynard · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Novell is now assured of getting every penny they've got coming to them.

    --
    Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
  12. Re:Yikes by samkass · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When looking at companies, the products are important but only as indicators as to the people behind them. When Amazon was losing money hand over fist, its shares were still sky-high because people believed that Jeff Bezos and his team were a good bet. I can't imagine how anyone could feel that, after everything, SCO could possibly have assembled a $100M team. I don't know how to say this without offending the dozens of people left at SCO, but you'd have to have some form of brain damage, or be really, really desperate for gainful employment to still work there.

    --
    E pluribus unum
  13. Wrong. That's the Bushes behind that move. by leftie · · Score: 5, Informative

    "The Big Guys Work For The Carlyle Group
    What exactly does it do?

    To find out, we peeked down the rabbit hole.

    FORTUNE Monday, March 18, 2002

    The Carlyle Group, a Washington, D.C., buyout firm, is one of the nation's largest defense contractors. It has billions of dollars at its disposal and employs a few important people. Maybe you've heard of them: former Secretary of State Jim Baker, former Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci, and former White House budget director Dick Darman. Wait, we're just getting warmed up. William Kennard, who recently headed the FCC, and Arthur Levitt, who just left the SEC, also work for Carlyle. As do former British Prime Minister John Major and former Philippines President Fidel Ramos. Let's see, are we forgetting anyone? Oh, right, former President George Herbert Walker Bush is on the payroll too..."

    http://www.carlylegroup.net/thebigguys.htm

    So now the Bushes are going to send Jim Baker to court to steal Linux.

    1. Re:Wrong. That's the Bushes behind that move. by sentientbeing · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh yeah? Well weve got Linus, the south African spaceman dude and that guy with the long hair
       
      The presidents are toast.

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    2. Re:Wrong. That's the Bushes behind that move. by CrazedWalrus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Holy shit. The Carlyle Group is the Illuminati! ;-)

    3. Re:Wrong. That's the Bushes behind that move. by Alsee · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's just what they want you to think.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    4. Re:Wrong. That's the Bushes behind that move. by pionzypher · · Score: 3, Funny

      Dear sentientbeing,

      Thank you dear sir for the shower of soda.

      Yours Truly,
      pionzyphers keyboard.

      --
      I'll believe in corporations having personhood when Texas executes one... - advocate_one
  14. quoting Groklaw by christian.einfeldt · · Score: 3, Informative
    Pamela Jones wrote:

    "Hahahaha. Maybe this is the key?

    SNCP has developed a business plan for SCO that includes unveiling new product lines aimed at global customers. This reorganization plan will also enable the company to see SCO's legal claims through to their full conclusion.
    That's code, I think, for 'this will enable the company to continue to attack Linux'."
  15. Groklaw Coverage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080214125705140

    Can't believe they forgot the Groklaw link!

  16. bad slasher flick by russ1337 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Its like some really bad slasher flick where the bad guy just..... won't.... fucking.... die...., and the audience gets tired of all the inventive ways in which they are bought back to life....


  17. Only thing left... by WarJolt · · Score: 5, Funny

    After a nuclear holocost the only thing left will be cockroaches, twinkies and SCO. If you chop off the heads of SCO lawyers they continue to live for a week. Just when you think they're dead those tiny little litigating arms start moving again.

  18. Norris won't sue Novell or IBM by Peter+Trepan · · Score: 5, Funny

    He'll just roundhouse kick them until they sue themselves.

    --

    Step into a huge movement. Don't Tread In Me.

  19. I am worried by syphax · · Score: 3, Insightful
    There's that old saying,

    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

    Stupidity cannot adequately explain this move, which leaves...
    --
    Simple Unexpected Concrete Credible Emotional Stories
  20. THe ??? bit by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hire your brother (Kevin McBride) as a lawer and pay him a pile of legal fees (thereby getting the money out of the sinking ship and back onto dry land, but out of reach of the investors).

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  21. Re:Yikes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't know. I was talking to someone whose spouse still worked there. We mentioned the lawsuit (peripherally, not really wanting to bring it up since I figured it would be a sore subject).

    They started talking about how IBM and Novel stole a whole bunch of their Intellectual Property and put it into Linux, and how Linux is nothing but a bunch a thieves.

    I just sat there biting my tongue and changed the subject quickly, but it was really odd talking to someone "on the other side of the fence" who was a developer, and not in management.

  22. One clarification by drgould · · Score: 5, Insightful

    SCO is proposing to go private.

    Right now they can't buy paperclips without Judge Gross's permission (ok, I'm exaggerating, but only a little).

    The US Trustee, Novell and IBM are all going to over the plan with a fine-tooth comb and the judge isn't going to approve it just on SCO's say-so. This could be like the York deal that SCO tried to push though last year, all smoke and mirrors.

    So don't go getting your shorts in a bunch just yet.

    1. Re:One clarification by fermion · · Score: 3, Informative
      Further clarification. I believe this deal, if it happens, is initially only worth $5 million.

      My first impression is that the bankruptcy are having, or are about to have, some expanding negative effect. This seems a relatively cheap way to solve the problem. If SCO is private, pays off all debtors, then they can defend against external scrutiny, and are free to do as they wish.

      The $ 100 million dollar pledge is simply there to say that the company will be funded well enough to pay off future obligations, should they manifest. Furthermore, the additional monies do not seem to be an investment, but a line of credit that the firm will have to repay.

      So, in effect, this is appears to be some sort of fancy consolidation loan. Certainly likely done as some sort of personal favor, but I bet no one losses money on it. One hears about these kind of tax shelters all the time.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  23. SCO Sitcom by EEPROMS · · Score: 4, Funny

    Watching the shenanigans of SCO has turned into the geek equivalent of Dallas for geeks.

    This week on SCO
    Novel "oh my god!, Im sure I killed him"
    SCO "Im baaaaack and I have 100 million dollars"
    Red Hat "what crack monkey gave him money ?"

    1. Re:SCO Sitcom by EEPROMS · · Score: 4, Funny

      Meanwhile in the Valley

      IBM "Im going to fist you till you scream Oracle"
      Oracle "your disgusting, say you truly want me again that turns me on"
      IBM "I....."
      [PAUSE]
      Oracle "whats wrong ?"
      IBM "I just felt a stirring in the source.... almost like millions of programmers said WTF!!"

  24. Wrong by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Informative

    > SCO has received $100 million financing

    SCO has received nothing except offer (which is probably contingent on many conditions). They cannot accept it without permission of the bankruptcy court. To read some actual facts go to Groklaw.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  25. Hey SCO is in Bankruptcy Court by kilgortrout · · Score: 5, Informative

    And you can't do a deal like this without authorization from the Bankruptcy Court. This will probably all be part of a Chapter 11 plan of reorganization the details of which have yet to be filed by SCO. The devil is in the details with these things and you can be sure SCO will be out to screw all general unsecured creditors; that's pretty much par for the course in all Chapter 11 plans. Also, expect a lot of Bankruptcy Court litigation over the status of Novell's claim, i.e. SCO will attempt to lump them in with the other general unsecured creditors and Novell will assert its trust theory. At any rate the post petition funding here will not be available to SCO's pre-petition creditors, including Novell. All those claims are dealt with in the CH 11 Plan and are discharged by the approval of the Plan.

  26. Re:It gets better by Marcos+Eliziario · · Score: 4, Funny

    US$100m isn't already serious money?
    Poors.... They always amaze me with such comments.
    When I read such statements, I seriously consider stopping reading /.
    A life of yatches, women, Lamborghinis, women, gulfstream jets, women, casinos and women is already hard enough without seeing such kind of king.
    --
    Your ad could be here!
  27. No Patents by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    None of SCO's claims in any of their lawsuits involve patents.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  28. Capital expects returns. by gnutoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is not capitalism at work, it's predatory behavior and something anti-trust lawyers should sink their teeth into. There is no reasonable expectation of return on SCO's "business" because SCO is full of shit and every decision has been against them. This is just another $100 million that M$ does not mind pissing away. The "investment" harms the reputation of all involved.

    1. Re:Capital expects returns. by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "This is not capitalism at work, it's predatory behavior and something anti-trust lawyers should sink their teeth into."

      Then it *is* capitalism at work by its very definition. Why do you think you need anti-trust laws but because growing monopolies is a known ill-effect of capitalism in action?

      I don't think I need to say anything about the relationship between predatory behaviour and capitalism, do I?

    2. Re:Capital expects returns. by hardburn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How many companies exist that would invest in a company that has no actual customers, already in chapter 11, and stuck in drawn-out legal proceedings that it almost certainly won't win? Microsoft has already undeniably helped SCO before, and they do have enough money to throw around that $100 million isn't too much to spend on a longshot.

      So even if there's not direct evidence, there's also a very short list of people with $100 million sitting around who would want to invest in SCO. If it's not Microsoft, then I'd like to know who, because I've got a Perpetual Motion Machine for them to invest in next.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    3. Re:Capital expects returns. by nebosuke · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Capitalist free markets, as described in every econ text I've studied, assume the objective, universal enforcement of market regulations on all participants, not a total lack of regulation (that would be anarchy, not capitalism). Capitalism thus differs from socialism or communism not by lacking market regulation, but in that the latter two advocate a privileged, active market role for the state.

      A 'pure' free market does not refer to a lack of regulation, but a market in which the government enjoys no special privilege over private enterprise. The logical conclusion of such a system would result in privatized police forces, fire companies, etc. competing on equal terms with the analogous government entities. Both government and private enterprise would still be subject to regulation.

      Consequently, capitalist arguments against anti-trust laws are not inherent to capitalism in general, but are made from the position that that class of regulation does not result in a more productive economy. In contrast, regulations that capitalists generally consider to be necessary for a healthy free market economy would be contract law and property law.

      Then it *is* capitalism at work by its very definition. Why do you think you need anti-trust laws but because growing monopolies is a known ill-effect of capitalism in action? No. The existence of anti-trust laws does not provide an argument either for or against the efficacy of capitalist free markets, as there is nothing anti (or pro) capitalist about them.

      I don't think I need to say anything about the relationship between predatory behaviour and capitalism, do I? Predatory behavior is alive and well in all socio-economic systems. They simply provide different mechanisms by which one becomes either predator or prey.
  29. Re:It gets better by DrSkwid · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm so poor, I've never even heard of yatches!

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  30. Re:Irrational exuberance... or? by phrostie · · Score: 5, Funny

    maybe they want a tax credit for donating to a non-profit organization

  31. Perhaps there is some insider knowledge here. by WebCowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nobody running a successful LBO firm is stupid enough to make this ridiculous lawsuit the central part of an execution plan.

    The Statements in the release are quite lawyerly indeed. The funding is in place, IN PART, to "see SCO's legal claims through to their full conclusion". PJ interprets this to mean "continue to attack Linux", and indeed the deal suggests that is something these investors would like to see returns from: the vast majority of this $100M is not hard cash to be handed over in one lump sum loan, it is a "line of credit" to fund continued operations and part of financing this line of credit would be, IIRC, 17% of any monetary judgments in SCO's favour.

    However, I cannot believe that the smart people behind SNCP sincerely think they have a good chance of actually WINNING the lawsuit. I think it's more of a "lottery ticket"--lawyers make sure their butts are covered, and that they'll be able to screw ove...errr I mean "receive compensation" under all circumstances. "Continue to pursue" litigation "to their full conclusion" could very well be code words for "finally put it to rest". They apparently have a plan that includes the legal stuff but haven't released details (and taking SCO private would mean they don't ever have to do so). That plan very likely incorporates (or entirely consists of) a contingency plan. It looks pretty bleak to reverse the decision on copyright ownership, but they can appeal a judgment on royalties owed to Novell and get out of paying tens of millions. The same goes for any counter-suits from the likes of IBM or Red Hat. SNCP may think they have the ability to get SCO out of hot water without paying out as much (or any) money.

    In short, their legal strategy might (wisely) be a defensive strategy to cut their losses and move on. To paraphrase that cute song "if I had a (hundred) million dollars", well, I'd "buy me a SCO" too actually, and that would almost be my legal plan, though I'd be more apt to not put too much effort in "cut the losses" and settle out of court. If I was some LBO billionaire dude I'd buy SCO, and when judgment came I'd say "here's your money Novell", and subsequently settle all other disputes quickly. Then I'd promptly GPL UNIXWare and OpenServer and use what's left of the technical people to refocus SCO as a "solutions provider" to target the thousands of SCO users around the world with UNIXWare/OpenServer-to-Linux migration plans. Anything of redeeming value in the newly-GPLed legacy OS products would then be incorporated into a "LinuxWare" distribution tailored to be as close as possible to a drop-in replacement for existing SCO customers.

    The background of SNCP and their "middle eastern partners" really make me uncomfortable though. Those stated partners include the Saudi prince who is Bill Gates' investment partner in the Four Seasons hotel chain. These are legally-savvy business tycoons. I cannot see them taking the "Mark Shuttleworth act of benevolency" approach that I'd take. They are no doubt acting with convincing insider knowledge. I think that there might be a few motivators for this investment:

    * They might have a convincing legal argument to overturn some of the judgements against them--for example they might be able to retain copyright to at least portions of UNIX, and that would at least allow the IBM lawsuit to move forward and keep the FUD coming for Microsoft.

    * They are trying to stem customer migrations to Linux. I have no doubt that even if Microsoft isn't tied to this deal that BillG *is* in some capacity, and he obviously has the betterment of Microsoft in his self interest. The business plan outside the legal battle may be in fact to steer SCO customers towards Microsoft solutions, and perhaps to eventually have MSFT absorb SCO entirely. If you combine that with the first point, that would mean MSFT could end up with some UNIX copyright ownership--a great piece of IP to leverage if you wished to embrace, extend and extinguish *real* UNIX operating systems of all kinds (like

  32. This doesn't really help SCO much by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    This doesn't do that much for SCO. It gives Novell, IBM and Red Hat cash to go after. Remember, there are substantial legal claims against SCO, and those claims are on much stronger grounds than SCO's claims against anybody.

    SCO is headed for their day in court:

    U.S. District Court - District of Utah - Court Calendar
    Honorable Dale A. Kimball
    Tuesday, 04/29/2008
    08:30 am: SCO Grp v. Novell Inc (2:04-cv-00139-DAK-BCW) Bench Trial

    The only question in that trial is how much money SCO owes Novell. SCO will appeal, but they are unlikely to win.