Some excellent points. I did not know that he was working on contingency and that certainly makes a difference in my theory. I think "fog" is an apt description. As long as the claims remain nebulous the case probably continues to look good. It is not until you go through the code one line at a time that you find out how good a case you have.
As for Boies I can offer another motivation: exposure. If someone is trying to build their firm and their rep it might make it worth it to take a case like this in the long run. At least I can see the logic behind it.
I am mainly thankful that I don't have to work on it;-)
You're right. Dunno know how I forgot the most obvious part.
That's it. Time to go home.
Re:If they really believed..
on
Today's SCO News
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
These guys say they have hundreds of lines of infringing code. That's evidence.
They have hundreds of lines that they claim to be infringing. That is the sticky wicket. Just because they say it infringes does not mean that it does.
Someone is going to have to prove that code wasn't cribbed.
Just the opposite. They are going to have to prove that it was cribbed and that they held the IP rights to it at the time. That in and of itself is a question very much up in the air.
Sounds to me like a court can only agree that they were wronged.
Two letters O-J. Courts can rule any number of ways depending on what is and is not allowed into evidence, how the jury is selected and yes, even which side has the better lawyer. The law is not black and white. It is logrithmic iterations of grey on a dynamic grey background. SCO has confused many facts in their case and their ownership is also in question.
Ownership, infringement, intent, license terms, previous exports, and a wide range of other issues can all be argued ad naseum for a veeeeeeeeeeeeeery long time.
This won't take ten years
Ten years? Of course not. SCO will be dead by then. Will it last over 2? Almost certainly. The lifespan for IP cases in Federal Court are on average 3-4 years. I know because I have worked on them. Lawyers can drag out anything that they put their minds to. Even assuming that both sides push for a quick trial date it will still be over a year before a slot open up for them to take. The court system is very much backed up and almost nothing has been done to rectify it. So it will, unless a settlement occurs sooner, be a case measured in years.
It's not like the IBM or AT&T or Microsoft monopoly cases, which risked their corporate existence
Actually SCO is risking their corporate existence. They will not survive a defeat and their stock is indicitive of investors knowing that as well. Only through victory or hanging on long enough to force a buyout at a higher price will SCO be able to survive.
But you can bet they won't spend a second protecting anyone else using linux.
Nor should they be obligated to. the claims against Linux are an attempt to interfere with Linux sales as a means to help their own products. If SCO wants to go after Linux users than they need to file a complaint to that effect. I doubt that IBM will just roll over and settle because it sets a bad precedent for every other hack corporation that can superglue a complaint together.
Remember, just because a company says something does not mean it is true. Lawyers go to school for three years so that they can manipulate facts, opinions, and language in the support of their client. The job of the other lawyer is to point out the manipulation while attempting to do the same thing.
Re:If they really believed..
on
Today's SCO News
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
An excellent point. I was actually going to explain myself a bit better but distraction, well, distract.
Here's the theory. The company executives convince themselves that they have been wronged and find a lawyer who willingly agrees. What they don't have (and why I originally titled it "Negative Feedback") is someone pointing out their errors. In other words, they don't have any negative feedback internally for their claim. I have no doubts that their attorney knows its a non starter. Saying its a non starter, though, means no more gravy train of legal fees. So he goes ahead and prosecutes the percieved injustice as strongly as ever.
Now, for the lawyer to keep billing the case has to be kept going. The more FUD spread, the longer it goes, and the less tangible the claims made, the easier it will be to pursue the case. Once SCO gets pinned down to the nitty gritty of their case, it will probably be game over. Discovery will force SCO to disclose the exact nature of their claim to IBM. Once that happens, IBM can subpoena Novell, and maybe even Lindows from what I have seen from some of the comments, for their documents related to ownership and can review the work that IBM put into the Linux kernal. IBM can then move for Summary Judgment based on the fact that a) the code in question is not owned by SCO (and hence has no standing) b) that the code was not incorporated into the Linux kernal (and hence the case is moot) and possibly even c) that SCO GPL'd it through Lindows (and is, again, mooted).
It is in the Discovery process that SCO will drag out the case. There will be constant objections, motions to compel, motions for protective orders and every last line is going to be contested. SCO's lawyer will probably be able to extend the discovery process for years. Even longer if a Special Master is appointed.
Throughout this process the SCO atty is going to be reinforcing to SCO how wronged SCO is and how everything that IBM is doing is merely a trick to continue to steal from SCO. Again there will be a distinct lack of opposing voices. At the end of the day IBM will have won, Linux will be vindicated (but not without serious sales disruption), MS will point to the whole 2+ year debacle as further evidence of OS unreliability, SCO will be bankrupt, and their lawyer will own a couple new houses, boats and cars.
At least that's my take on it (and I am only a cynical paralegal- not a lawyer!), though the reality is I know less about it than a lot of the other posters here. SO be sure and add some NaCl before ingesting;-)
IANAL but I am a paralegal and I have attended and supported a few trials. Something to remember about this is that SCO does actually believe that they are in the right. It pretty blatant to me that there is not a whole lot there for them to rely upon, but they have obviously convinced themselves of their own victimhood. So this is not going to go away any time soon and it is certainly not going to end until SCO is broke, bought, or busted in court.
I saw the same thing in each of my trials. No matter what facts may be on your side, the other side has their own spin on them and, as part of ourcourt system, they have the right to express that spin.
Wouldn't it be interesting if all the Linux users got together and bought out the SCO stock as a way to thwart this? And then vigorously saw to the enforcement of the MS license? Am I really so uncaffeineted that I actually typed those dreams?
McBride added that unless more companies start licensing SCO's property, he may also sue Linus Torvalds, who is credited with inventing the Linux operating system, for patent infringement.
IANAL but it seems that the above quote seems like great fodder for attorneys. One of the main arguments going against SCO's claims (other than the obvious Novell claim that SCO owns diddly/squat) is that this is a money making gimmick and not a "real" lawsuit. With McBride throwing out gems like this it'll be fun to read the answer brief!
A NY lawyer nonetheless! NY is the only state that allows double billing. So, for example, if a NY attorney is flying to a deposition they can bill the client their travel costs. If they work on another case while while on the flight, they can bill that case too. In essence billing two clients for the same "hour" of work. At least that is the explanation that my attorney gave me once.
I'd be surprised if there is anything left at SCO after he gets finished with his billing. I'm not saying anything against him personally (couldn't say that I know him from Adam) but that seems to be the rep that NY lawyers get. And, as I said before, if SCO is dumb enough to pay him that much $$$ on a loser of a case, well, who can really blame him?
Re:Lawyers to the rescue!
on
Today's SCO News
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I haved worked in a couple of law offices now and I have to say that you are correct for at least part of the legal field. The attornies that I have (thankfully) worked for really did have their clients interest in mind. Unfortunately about half of the other firms out there milk cases for all that they are worth. They do this by using "tactics" that draw out the process. They fight bitterly over trivial matters (such as the wordage on the case caption- think title page) and they delay and delay and delay.
All the while they shoot letters out complaining about this and that and constantly attacking. They will justify their actions through self righteous indignation and that they are only looking after their clients best interest. In reality it means they can double or triple the billable hours (which at $200 to $400 can mean a lot of the green stuff). They sell the clients on it by saying that they are going to be super aggressive and wear down the other side.
I worked on a case once in which our client was sued for something like $300 million. The bulk of the claim though was smoke and mirrors. Things that looked legitimate on paper, but wouldn't hold up in court under cross examination. Well, they drug the case out for a couple years constantly changing the claim and making frivilous demands and grievances. All of which we had to counter to the tune of an eventual $10 million bill.
As kharma wuld have it, though, at the end of the day the Judge saw through it. Not only did they lose their claim- they got a whopping $0, but they also ended up having to pay our legal fees (remember that inflated $10 mil that they caused?) in addition to their own. That must have been a fun one to explain to the board!
"So did we get the $200mil?"
"Noooo, but we do have to pay them $10mil, in addition to the $15mil we blew on our lawyers."
"So you spent $25mil to get $0?"
"Well..."
If SCO is stupid enough to pursue something this flimsy, you better believe that there is an atty out there more than willing to take as much of their money as he can (does anyone know who is representing SCO?). And brother, it will be a lot. IBM might even be thinking that if the case is so poor for SCO that they will go ahead and move for Summary Judgment and then try to recover all of their fees for putting up with the action. In fact, they might even think of counter suing for the filing of a frivilous lawsuit. Due to their size IBM could probably grind SCO down until its teetering on bankruptcy and then buy them out, send McBride to McDonald's and be done with it. But then again IBM has not seen fit to ask my opinion (yet);-)
One source close to SCO confirmed that IBM lawyers are in "discussions about possible discussions" with SCO's legal team.
Its nice to see that the two sides are moving closer together. It seems like only last week that they were only discussing the possibility of disscussing discussions regarding the discussion of case discussions.
Nail on the head. I have taken classes on carving stone, playing the Native American flute, and piano. I also dabble in water colors, writing, and am a licensed pilot. Next on the list is learning gardening and making a compost pile. After that I am leaning towards glass blowing and making my own hot sauce.
My theory is that geeks have more imagination than the average bear. They look at lines of programming but see not only the code, but also the manipulation of the screen. If you think about it, all a computer really is is a device for changing pixel colors on a screen. Geeks see how the pixels ought to look.
Its that same imagination that makes reading so popular within the geek community. They "see" what the words convey. That's also why SciFi and fantasy is so popular as well. Every piece of fiction written involves a choice by the author. For something like 90% of them, they choose to set their story in either the world we know or the world we knew. The remander toy with the setting. It is that, I think, which so appeals to the geeks. The boudries are no longer boudries.
The point of all this, then, is that geeks like to use their imaginations. What better way to do that than to try a variety of different hobbies each of which provides a different sort of stimulous and memory? In so doing it also allows the imagination to be that much more real when it comes to dealing with any of the skill sets involved in the hobby.
Of course the really funny part is that souffle is one of maybe 3 French words I know. The only reason I know it is that when I found out that souffle was the French word to blow in High School, I promptly started asking girls if they wanted to souffle me;-)
"Souffle moi?"
*Slap*
Maybe this explains why I only really dated Rosie Palm and her five sisters in High School...
piracy. But DRM, like a soufflé, is incredibly hard to get right
So...
DRM = soufflé
soufflé = to blow (in French)
Therefore, DRM Blows!
And thats a wrap!
Re:The Hon. Member is *not* a yappy cocker spaniel
on
Spam, Milord
·
· Score: 1
That's hilarious! I remember my history teacher telling us once that for the early history of the US Congress the Representatives and Senators would always show up armed!
He also told us about an incident that took place in the years shortly before the Civil War wen tensions amongst Northern and Southern Congressmen would run high. The way it goes, a Northern Representative made a disparaging remark about a Southern State. the Senator for that said State, along with 3 or 4 other Senators proceeded down to the House chamber whereat they grabbed the Northern Rep and proceeded to bull whip while he was held across his own desk. Now that is what I call legislation!
It makes sense that the harder they push and the more aggresive they are, that the less business they will get. In case you hadn't noticed, most of the world isn't eactly singing the accolades of the US right now. Part of that can easily be attributed to the arrogant self righteousness of our foreign policy.
So now one of the US's foremost companies is going to try and squeeze other countries to use their system? Other countries can do little about our government's arrogance, but they sure can do something about Microsoft's!
Besides which, investing in open source allows them to grow their own in house experts to learn and take care of the software.
House of Lords
on
Spam, Milord
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
While visiting England many a year ago I had the distinct privilege to watch a debate from the "Strangers Gallery" (gotta love English names) about public noise laws. It was great the way they all insulted and belittled one another in pompous and correct language. Most of my anti-PC attitude came from listening to that session. What they said was perfectly polite and respectful. How they said it is where the fun took place!
I didn't see a price tag on the thing, but with all the cutting edge features, this doesn't look like an easy purchase for the kids, and I'm not sure that hardcore gamers want portability. Could be wrong, but methinks they may have some problems pushing Nintendo out.
Sports are all relative. I know many who are addicted to any sport, some to just one or two, and some who would like nothing more than the entire genre to get whiped out by a freak black hole. I only follow Football and Baseball but have a respect for other sports.
Racing on the hand, now that's what I call boring!
"Hey, are they still going in a circle as fast as they can?"
In the interest of compromise and back compatability, do you think we can merge the red and blue technologies for something more purplish? That way, everyone's happy!
Slashdot Mirror
As for Boies I can offer another motivation: exposure. If someone is trying to build their firm and their rep it might make it worth it to take a case like this in the long run. At least I can see the logic behind it.
I am mainly thankful that I don't have to work on it;-)
That's it. Time to go home.
They have hundreds of lines that they claim to be infringing. That is the sticky wicket. Just because they say it infringes does not mean that it does.
Someone is going to have to prove that code wasn't cribbed.
Just the opposite. They are going to have to prove that it was cribbed and that they held the IP rights to it at the time. That in and of itself is a question very much up in the air.
Sounds to me like a court can only agree that they were wronged.
Two letters O-J. Courts can rule any number of ways depending on what is and is not allowed into evidence, how the jury is selected and yes, even which side has the better lawyer. The law is not black and white. It is logrithmic iterations of grey on a dynamic grey background. SCO has confused many facts in their case and their ownership is also in question.
Ownership, infringement, intent, license terms, previous exports, and a wide range of other issues can all be argued ad naseum for a veeeeeeeeeeeeeery long time.
This won't take ten years
Ten years? Of course not. SCO will be dead by then. Will it last over 2? Almost certainly. The lifespan for IP cases in Federal Court are on average 3-4 years. I know because I have worked on them. Lawyers can drag out anything that they put their minds to. Even assuming that both sides push for a quick trial date it will still be over a year before a slot open up for them to take. The court system is very much backed up and almost nothing has been done to rectify it. So it will, unless a settlement occurs sooner, be a case measured in years.
It's not like the IBM or AT&T or Microsoft monopoly cases, which risked their corporate existence
Actually SCO is risking their corporate existence. They will not survive a defeat and their stock is indicitive of investors knowing that as well. Only through victory or hanging on long enough to force a buyout at a higher price will SCO be able to survive.
But you can bet they won't spend a second protecting anyone else using linux.
Nor should they be obligated to. the claims against Linux are an attempt to interfere with Linux sales as a means to help their own products. If SCO wants to go after Linux users than they need to file a complaint to that effect. I doubt that IBM will just roll over and settle because it sets a bad precedent for every other hack corporation that can superglue a complaint together.
Remember, just because a company says something does not mean it is true. Lawyers go to school for three years so that they can manipulate facts, opinions, and language in the support of their client. The job of the other lawyer is to point out the manipulation while attempting to do the same thing.
Here's the theory. The company executives convince themselves that they have been wronged and find a lawyer who willingly agrees. What they don't have (and why I originally titled it "Negative Feedback") is someone pointing out their errors. In other words, they don't have any negative feedback internally for their claim. I have no doubts that their attorney knows its a non starter. Saying its a non starter, though, means no more gravy train of legal fees. So he goes ahead and prosecutes the percieved injustice as strongly as ever.
Now, for the lawyer to keep billing the case has to be kept going. The more FUD spread, the longer it goes, and the less tangible the claims made, the easier it will be to pursue the case. Once SCO gets pinned down to the nitty gritty of their case, it will probably be game over. Discovery will force SCO to disclose the exact nature of their claim to IBM. Once that happens, IBM can subpoena Novell, and maybe even Lindows from what I have seen from some of the comments, for their documents related to ownership and can review the work that IBM put into the Linux kernal. IBM can then move for Summary Judgment based on the fact that a) the code in question is not owned by SCO (and hence has no standing) b) that the code was not incorporated into the Linux kernal (and hence the case is moot) and possibly even c) that SCO GPL'd it through Lindows (and is, again, mooted).
It is in the Discovery process that SCO will drag out the case. There will be constant objections, motions to compel, motions for protective orders and every last line is going to be contested. SCO's lawyer will probably be able to extend the discovery process for years. Even longer if a Special Master is appointed.
Throughout this process the SCO atty is going to be reinforcing to SCO how wronged SCO is and how everything that IBM is doing is merely a trick to continue to steal from SCO. Again there will be a distinct lack of opposing voices. At the end of the day IBM will have won, Linux will be vindicated (but not without serious sales disruption), MS will point to the whole 2+ year debacle as further evidence of OS unreliability, SCO will be bankrupt, and their lawyer will own a couple new houses, boats and cars.
At least that's my take on it (and I am only a cynical paralegal- not a lawyer!), though the reality is I know less about it than a lot of the other posters here. SO be sure and add some NaCl before ingesting;-)
I saw the same thing in each of my trials. No matter what facts may be on your side, the other side has their own spin on them and, as part of ourcourt system, they have the right to express that spin.
Wouldn't it be interesting if all the Linux users got together and bought out the SCO stock as a way to thwart this? And then vigorously saw to the enforcement of the MS license? Am I really so uncaffeineted that I actually typed those dreams?
Yeah, guess I am..
n-dimensional beans do that to me, too.
IANAL but it seems that the above quote seems like great fodder for attorneys. One of the main arguments going against SCO's claims (other than the obvious Novell claim that SCO owns diddly/squat) is that this is a money making gimmick and not a "real" lawsuit. With McBride throwing out gems like this it'll be fun to read the answer brief!
If you can't pronounce it, you probably shouldn't be building it;-)
Yeah, my work day is done.
I'd be surprised if there is anything left at SCO after he gets finished with his billing. I'm not saying anything against him personally (couldn't say that I know him from Adam) but that seems to be the rep that NY lawyers get. And, as I said before, if SCO is dumb enough to pay him that much $$$ on a loser of a case, well, who can really blame him?
All the while they shoot letters out complaining about this and that and constantly attacking. They will justify their actions through self righteous indignation and that they are only looking after their clients best interest. In reality it means they can double or triple the billable hours (which at $200 to $400 can mean a lot of the green stuff). They sell the clients on it by saying that they are going to be super aggressive and wear down the other side.
I worked on a case once in which our client was sued for something like $300 million. The bulk of the claim though was smoke and mirrors. Things that looked legitimate on paper, but wouldn't hold up in court under cross examination. Well, they drug the case out for a couple years constantly changing the claim and making frivilous demands and grievances. All of which we had to counter to the tune of an eventual $10 million bill.
As kharma wuld have it, though, at the end of the day the Judge saw through it. Not only did they lose their claim- they got a whopping $0, but they also ended up having to pay our legal fees (remember that inflated $10 mil that they caused?) in addition to their own. That must have been a fun one to explain to the board!
"So did we get the $200mil?"
"Noooo, but we do have to pay them $10mil, in addition to the $15mil we blew on our lawyers."
"So you spent $25mil to get $0?"
"Well..."
If SCO is stupid enough to pursue something this flimsy, you better believe that there is an atty out there more than willing to take as much of their money as he can (does anyone know who is representing SCO?). And brother, it will be a lot. IBM might even be thinking that if the case is so poor for SCO that they will go ahead and move for Summary Judgment and then try to recover all of their fees for putting up with the action. In fact, they might even think of counter suing for the filing of a frivilous lawsuit. Due to their size IBM could probably grind SCO down until its teetering on bankruptcy and then buy them out, send McBride to McDonald's and be done with it. But then again IBM has not seen fit to ask my opinion (yet);-)
Its nice to see that the two sides are moving closer together. It seems like only last week that they were only discussing the possibility of disscussing discussions regarding the discussion of case discussions.
My theory is that geeks have more imagination than the average bear. They look at lines of programming but see not only the code, but also the manipulation of the screen. If you think about it, all a computer really is is a device for changing pixel colors on a screen. Geeks see how the pixels ought to look.
Its that same imagination that makes reading so popular within the geek community. They "see" what the words convey. That's also why SciFi and fantasy is so popular as well. Every piece of fiction written involves a choice by the author. For something like 90% of them, they choose to set their story in either the world we know or the world we knew. The remander toy with the setting. It is that, I think, which so appeals to the geeks. The boudries are no longer boudries.
The point of all this, then, is that geeks like to use their imaginations. What better way to do that than to try a variety of different hobbies each of which provides a different sort of stimulous and memory? In so doing it also allows the imagination to be that much more real when it comes to dealing with any of the skill sets involved in the hobby.
So, like, what happened to c-f? Did those like totally suck, or what?
[Scotty] Agh Cap'n! It went straight to visual! I couldna get the shields up in time... [/Scotty]
And just this morning I was asking myself, what's Fawn Hall up to these days?
Buy it now for only $5,500!
"Souffle moi?"
*Slap*
Maybe this explains why I only really dated Rosie Palm and her five sisters in High School...
So...
DRM = soufflé
soufflé = to blow (in French)
Therefore, DRM Blows!
And thats a wrap!
He also told us about an incident that took place in the years shortly before the Civil War wen tensions amongst Northern and Southern Congressmen would run high. The way it goes, a Northern Representative made a disparaging remark about a Southern State. the Senator for that said State, along with 3 or 4 other Senators proceeded down to the House chamber whereat they grabbed the Northern Rep and proceeded to bull whip while he was held across his own desk. Now that is what I call legislation!
So now one of the US's foremost companies is going to try and squeeze other countries to use their system? Other countries can do little about our government's arrogance, but they sure can do something about Microsoft's!
Besides which, investing in open source allows them to grow their own in house experts to learn and take care of the software.
While visiting England many a year ago I had the distinct privilege to watch a debate from the "Strangers Gallery" (gotta love English names) about public noise laws. It was great the way they all insulted and belittled one another in pompous and correct language. Most of my anti-PC attitude came from listening to that session. What they said was perfectly polite and respectful. How they said it is where the fun took place!
I didn't see a price tag on the thing, but with all the cutting edge features, this doesn't look like an easy purchase for the kids, and I'm not sure that hardcore gamers want portability. Could be wrong, but methinks they may have some problems pushing Nintendo out.
Racing on the hand, now that's what I call boring!
"Hey, are they still going in a circle as fast as they can?"
"Yep."
"Yeehaw!"
In the interest of compromise and back compatability, do you think we can merge the red and blue technologies for something more purplish? That way, everyone's happy!