A pump and dump scheme would have to be run by SCO execs telling Boies what to do. That just isn't happening here. The contingency fee stuff is speculation, of course, but the handwriting is on the wall and it is easy to read.
As to Boies and co. being good lawyers, well, face it, they are. They trashed M$ at the DOJ trial and, ultimately, the M$ general counsel retired b/c of the poor handling of the defense of that case. Also, the New Yorker ran a long profile of Boies in 2002 detailing his handling of the art auction house price-fixing civil case. Boies and co. took it on a contingency basis to recover damages for price fixing for buyers and sellers of art and made about $22 million for not very much work. (The owner of one of the auction houses was just sentenced to prison for price-fixing.) Boies is too good a lawyer and his firm has too much to lose to be part of a pump and dump fraud scheme.
True, Linux and Linus are not formal parties yet. But there is a significant risk they will be. If not formally joined, certainly they will be subjected to the receiving end of oppressive pre-trial discovery (paper to be produced, old e-mails, a live multi-day deposition). Linux and Linus deserve protection. Someone should pay for it. Who?
IAALS (I Am A Land Shark).
1. This isn't a pump and dump scheme. It is a contingency case. The Boies firm has obviously taken this case on a contingency basis (probably 1/3 or higher of total recovery). They are the generals here looking out for what they believe to be SCOs and their own best interests (wallets).
2. These posts assume a high level of competence by IBM's lawyers. Maybe. Maybe not. In the DOJ case, everyone assumed initially that M$ would hire top flight trial lawyers to defend them. Turned out to be the opposite (and M$ general counsel later resigned).
3. IBM's interests do not equate to Linux's interests. The Linux community (and Linus) should be represented in this case. Boies and company are very good lawyers as M$ found out.
Slashdot Mirror
A pump and dump scheme would have to be run by SCO execs telling Boies what to do. That just isn't happening here. The contingency fee stuff is speculation, of course, but the handwriting is on the wall and it is easy to read. As to Boies and co. being good lawyers, well, face it, they are. They trashed M$ at the DOJ trial and, ultimately, the M$ general counsel retired b/c of the poor handling of the defense of that case. Also, the New Yorker ran a long profile of Boies in 2002 detailing his handling of the art auction house price-fixing civil case. Boies and co. took it on a contingency basis to recover damages for price fixing for buyers and sellers of art and made about $22 million for not very much work. (The owner of one of the auction houses was just sentenced to prison for price-fixing.) Boies is too good a lawyer and his firm has too much to lose to be part of a pump and dump fraud scheme. True, Linux and Linus are not formal parties yet. But there is a significant risk they will be. If not formally joined, certainly they will be subjected to the receiving end of oppressive pre-trial discovery (paper to be produced, old e-mails, a live multi-day deposition). Linux and Linus deserve protection. Someone should pay for it. Who?
IAALS (I Am A Land Shark). 1. This isn't a pump and dump scheme. It is a contingency case. The Boies firm has obviously taken this case on a contingency basis (probably 1/3 or higher of total recovery). They are the generals here looking out for what they believe to be SCOs and their own best interests (wallets). 2. These posts assume a high level of competence by IBM's lawyers. Maybe. Maybe not. In the DOJ case, everyone assumed initially that M$ would hire top flight trial lawyers to defend them. Turned out to be the opposite (and M$ general counsel later resigned). 3. IBM's interests do not equate to Linux's interests. The Linux community (and Linus) should be represented in this case. Boies and company are very good lawyers as M$ found out.