If I understand this correctly, SCO is claiming their case is based on evidence they've never seen? Or do they mean they've actually seen it, but then it got destroyed so they can't present it as a part of the case?
Oh wait.. wasn't this code neatly tucked on IBM developer workstations when all this began? So if SCO's case is based on it then they must've had access to it then!
How is that possible? I'm too scared to even think about it.. Let alone mention it out loud when Darl might be around the corner ready to fire a subpoena at me!
Slashdot Mirror
If I understand this correctly, SCO is claiming their case is based on evidence they've never seen? Or do they mean they've actually seen it, but then it got destroyed so they can't present it as a part of the case? Oh wait.. wasn't this code neatly tucked on IBM developer workstations when all this began? So if SCO's case is based on it then they must've had access to it then! How is that possible? I'm too scared to even think about it.. Let alone mention it out loud when Darl might be around the corner ready to fire a subpoena at me!