Appeals Court Rules: SCO v. IBM Case Can Continue (arstechnica.com)
Long-time Slashdot reader Freshly Exhumed quotes Ars Technica:
A federal appeals court has now partially ruled in favor of the SCO Group, breathing new life into a lawsuit and a company (now bankrupt and nearly dead) that has been suing IBM for nearly 15 years.
Last year, U.S. District Judge David Nuffer had ruled against SCO (whose original name was Santa Cruz Operation) in two summary judgment orders, and the court refused to allow SCO to amend its initial complaint against IBM. SCO soon appealed. On Monday, the 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals found that SCO's claims of misappropriation could go forward while also upholding Judge Nuffer's other two orders.
Here's Slashdot's first story about the trial more than 14 years ago, and a nice timeline from 2012 of the next nine years of legal drama.
Last year, U.S. District Judge David Nuffer had ruled against SCO (whose original name was Santa Cruz Operation) in two summary judgment orders, and the court refused to allow SCO to amend its initial complaint against IBM. SCO soon appealed. On Monday, the 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals found that SCO's claims of misappropriation could go forward while also upholding Judge Nuffer's other two orders.
Here's Slashdot's first story about the trial more than 14 years ago, and a nice timeline from 2012 of the next nine years of legal drama.
Well, I guess its still not time to say "Goodnight PJ, wherever you are."
Owing for the most part to this ongoing SCO saga, the web was once gifted with the presence of Groklaw and the inimitable Pamela Jones, who brushed aside direct and very personal attacks from Darl McBride, Maureen O'Gara, and others as she provided insights and clarity for computer geeks on what tends to be a quite opaque judicial system. The comfort bar amongst FOSS supporters was raised significantly by her.
Now please, SCO, die already. Just die.
I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
What copyrights? As the article indicated, it was discovered at the end that SCO never owned the copyright to UNIX, they'd just bought for about 5% the value of that the right to administrate the licencing of it. And they demonstrated they knew this just before starting SCO v. The World by trying to get the rights from Novell.
> ruled against SCO (whose original name was Santa Cruz Operation)
There was a company called "SCO (whose original name was Santa Cruz Operation)" but this isn't them, they changed their name to Tarantella when they sold the business to Caldera. Caldera changed their name to 'The SCO Group'.
SCO did not litigate against IBM, that was TSG.
This is different SCO - SCO Group.
This SCO Group was originally called Caldera. Caldera purchased *some* intellectual property for SCO Unix from the original Santa Cruz Operation. Santa Cruz Operation then renamed itself to Tarantela and the new SCO proceeded with their racketeering scam against IBM and Linux users in general.