I read the transcript of this latest court session and it makes a lot more sense then the Groklaw article. If I'm interpreting this part correctly, SCO is trying to say that IBM is going back on their word and defying the court by refusing to provide documents. The court's response is simply "Don't put words in our mouths, you got exactly what you asked for.".
"The Court finds that based upon what's before me, the memorandums, the review of the transcripts, the affidavits, the correspondence, I find from that as well as from the argument of counsel that IBM did not agree as argued by SCO to provide the information related to Linux."
"Further, I find that the issue of discovery as SCO now argues should be included in the order as it relates to Linux was not raised before the Court. It was not understood by the Court as part of the request. It was not contemplated in the orders that have been prepared by the Court. And IBM has appropriately interpreted the Court's orders. And that I find specifically that SCO's interpretation of the orders takes out of context the Court's what I believe to be clear meaning."
"And I also find that Mr. Shaugnessy's affidavits are sufficiently in compliance with the requirements of the Court to explain those efforts made and those documents not produced."
"So I find that IBM has, in fact, complied with the orders of the court and I would deny except as has been now acknowledged will be provided SCO's motion to compel."
Isn't this like the 4th or 5th time that they've tried this? Seriously.. how much longer is this joke of a case going to continue?
Considering the problems their web server is having though, here's the link to the technical paper (In PDF Format) so you can skip the website altogether.
Singularity PDF
Once again, the title is completely off the mark from the actual story. If you actually read the release the New York Attorney General, all they are checking is the names of the chat rooms. There is nothing about age verification listed anywhere.
"Under the agreement, one of the nation's leading internet service providers, Yahoo!, has removed and barred the posting of user-created chat rooms with names that promoted sex between minors and adults."
"Among the illicit chat rooms removed were those with labels such as "girls13 & up for much older men," "8-12 yo girls for older men," and "teen girls for older fat men." Many of these were located within the "Schools and Education" and "Teen" chat categories."
There is a second source.. News.com has a story about this with quotes from TurboLinux's CEO.. It looks like TurboLinux will be absorbing LinuxCare in a stock-for-stock transaction.. here's the story..
Slashdot Mirror
Come on media people, this isn't hard to figure out..
This is A Shield
This is A Point Defense System using a gun.
Skyguard (or THEL as the Israelis call it) is A Point Defense System using a High Energy Laser.
It may only be semantics, but that makes it no less irritating..
That's not the only one missing.. how about Guild Wars? It only won a few awards..
--Court Transcript--
Isn't this like the 4th or 5th time that they've tried this? Seriously.. how much longer is this joke of a case going to continue?Considering the problems their web server is having though, here's the link to the technical paper (In PDF Format) so you can skip the website altogether. Singularity PDF
If you actually read the release the New York Attorney General, all they are checking is the names of the chat rooms. There is nothing about age verification listed anywhere.
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2005/oct/oct12a_
--
There is a second source.. News.com has a story about this with quotes from TurboLinux's CEO.. It looks like TurboLinux will be absorbing LinuxCare in a stock-for-stock transaction.. here's the story..