SCO Proposes Sale of Assets To Continue Litigation

gzipped_tar sends in this excerpt from the Salt Lake Tribune: "The embattled SCO Group Inc. is proposing to auction off its core products and use proceeds to continue its controversial lawsuits over the alleged violations of its copyrights in Linux open-source software. The Lindon company has filed a new reorganization plan with the federal court in Delaware where it sought bankruptcy protection from creditors after an adverse ruling in the Linux litigation. If approved by a bankruptcy judge, the plan could mean SCO's server software and mobile products lines are owned by other parties while SCO itself remained largely to pursue the lawsuits under the leadership of CEO Darl McBride. 'One goal of this approach is to separate the legal defence of its intellectual property from its core product business,' McBride said in a letter to customers, partners and shareholders. Jeff Hunsaker, president and COO of The SCO Group, said the litigation had been distracting to the company's efforts to market its products. 'We believe there's value in these assets and in order for the business to move forward it's imperative we separate it from our legal claims and we allow our products business to move forward,' he said Friday."

Comments

Re:They don't want to be able to pay Novell/IBM

[jbengt]

A substantial number of us thought the bankruptcy trustee would put an end to SCO's shenanigans. Sadly, this hasn't turned out to be the case.

That's one of the reasons so many companies incorporate in Delaware.

Re:Is groklaw aware of this new development?

[MarkvW]

Facts are SETTLED in the trial court. Once the trial court enters its judgment, those facts are set in stone.

Facts can be undone on appeal only if no reasonable factfinder could have found the challenged facts AND if the party appealing has complied with all the procedural requirements. Thanks to the lawyers, Groklaw, and others, that just isn't going to happen in this case because there is too much evidence supporting the decision of the trial court.

Facts almost NEVER get rewritten on appeal. The rules are tremendously slanted against that. If a fact gets undone on appeal, the issue gets sent back to the trial court for a new fact determination.

Groklaw's purpose was help in the development of a factual record in the trial court against SCO. As discussed above, there is no need for factual development on appeal. If the trial court must in the future decide some new facts, Groklaw will doubtless spring into action, but that isn't likely.