Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Predicting SCO's Actions Post Bankruptcy

Posted by kdawson on from the litigious-doesn't-begin-to-cover-it dept.

eldavojohn writes "SCO lost last year and began the bankruptcy filings a long time ago but PJ has some speculative bad news on what they retain through the bankruptcy proceedings. SCO proposes to sell a number of assets to an outfit called UnXis, which PJ characterizes this way: 'It starts to hint that this is more a renaming, taking in some new management who seem to have financial expertise, and SCO keeps skipping along as unXis, with the dangerous litigation spun off safely into a litigation troll.' In their filings SCO says they retain 'their litigation and related claims against International Business Machines Corporation, Novell, Inc., AutoZone Corporation, Red Hat and certain Linux users which are not material customers of UnXis (excluding certain large-scale users of Linux servers) that are claimed to have infringed against UNIX copyrights.' So that's still a possibility they could go after anyone who is a 'certain Linux user.' And what's even worse is that they'll retain a patent for running multiple Java applications on a single Java virtual machine. We may not be out of the SCO litigation woods yet."

8 of 102 comments (clear)

  1. Why worry? by gilesjuk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    SCO or whatever they become will keep losing cases. Those who are supporting them are treating it like a high risk investment and hoping it pays off.

    They're a parasite with no turnover of any significant amount, you can't keep a business going if the sole source of income is from court cases.

    1. Re:Why worry? by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      However, the RIAA was filthy rich to begin with. On the other hand, SCO is about as broke as a college student, with no way to get revenue. Really, unless you have a really, really, really, really solid case, you can't gamble with stuff like that unless you have money to burn like the RIAA does.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Why worry? by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 4, Insightful

      you can't keep a business going if the sole source of income is from court cases

      There is about a billion law firms out there that beg to differ

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  2. Bet on it! by BCW2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Whatever they do, it will be the most ridiculous, idiotic, and/or moronic and asinine thing possible!

    Pretty much nobody here is warped enough to predict it right!

    --
    Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
  3. RIAA vs. SCO by qbzzt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    RIAA attacks consumers, typically middle class or lower individuals who can't afford to fight back.

    SCO attacks large corporations. IBM, for example, can't afford not to fight back. IBM has deep pockets, and a very diversified business. If it was known as an easy target, anybody and their cousin would sue it for the money.

    Note: I am an IBM employee, but my job doesn't get me anywhere near legal strategy. This is purely my own opinion, and does not represent IBM in any way, shape or form.

    --
    -- Support a free market in the field of government
    1. Re:RIAA vs. SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Note: I am an IBM employee, but my job doesn't get me anywhere near legal strategy. This is purely my own opinion, and does not represent IBM in any way, shape or form.

      What has the world become to be, when you have to write such a statement on your post.

  4. Issue Preclusion / Claim Preclusion by MarkvW · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A lot of issues and claims have already been resolved in prior cases. A thorough analysis of the risk of future SCO-Spawn-Litigation depends upon the preclusive effect of those cases. In other words, SCO's children don't get to relitigate things that SCO has already litigated (and lost) once.

    The instant discussion isn't very informative because it appears to omit a thorough discussion of the effect of SCO's previous defeats on SCO's children's future prospects.

  5. Re:So... by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The ability to provide Linux FUD. It's helped them stay funded so far, if you follow the "Microsoft Partnership" sponsorship that kept them alive, and their interference with IBM and Novell and RedHat have been significant.

    They aren't producing new usable products, and their old market niche of rock-solid x86 server class UNIX systems has evaporated in the face of Linux and other, more technically progressive and less lawsuit driven companies.