SCO bankruptcy called imminent

SCO bankruptcy called imminent

Summary: Groklaw reports, quoting documents filed by Novell, that SCO's bankruptcy is "inevitable" and "imminent."

SHARE:
56

Groklaw reports, quoting documents filed by Novell, that SCO's bankruptcy is "inevitable" and "imminent."

Novell was replying (PDF) to SCO's opposition to its motion for summary judgement, which could end the case. Pamela Jones of Groklaw also says the documents hint Microsoft and Sun were actually buying SCOSource licenses, and that revenue helped fund its legal campaign. As a final fillip, SCO asks for more discovery. (Bela Lugosi will always be the ultimate Dracula. Here he prepares to frighten Abbott & Costello.)

I have been predicting the end of this case for some time, but these sound a lot like final chords. Both sides have now been heard on Novell's motion for summary judgement, following the completion of all the discovery courts had allowed in the case.

If this is the end it seems to leave Novell in a curious position. In its deal with Microsoft, Novell appears to have granted Microsoft the power to claim that Microsoft holds the same kinds of rights to Linux that SCO claimed, and fourth quarter downloads indicate that many customers are taking those claims seriously.

So I don't care what the court says at this point. If the smart boys are stocking up on garlic, I'm picking up a stake. You bring the silver knife.  

 

Topic: Enterprise Software

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

56 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • So who is represented by Dracula?

    Is it Microsoft? Or is Abbott & Costello representing Microsoft and Novell, and Linux is Dracula, chasing the bumbling incompetents?

    Man, you Linux guys are cloudy with your analogies. ;)

    As far as SCO - good riddance. SCO and its vile leader can slink off into the sunset. (Or was Dracula supposed to represent McBride?)
    ejhonda
    • Dracula?

      Who is represented by Dracula?

      Easy answer - the blood sucking lawyers of course!
      bportlock
    • Oh, indeed!

      As far as SCO is concerned, good ridance to the lot of them.
      999ad@...
      • RE: SCO bankruptcy called imminent

        IBM requested numerous disclosures which indicated that Microsoft had coordinated, organized, and helped to get funding for a lawsuit which it knew was fraudulent.<a href="http://tnxinvitationcode.wordpress.com/"><font color="LightGrey">tnx invitation code</font></a>
        zakkiromi
    • My guess is that the case itself is Dracula

      The case itself has a certain "unlife" because it persists without a single shred of evidence that can withstand the harsh light of day. However, while it exists, it seeks to suck life from Linux-using companies by sowing fear.
      Zogg
    • Dracula doesn't represent ANYONE . . .

      The Count is WAY too cool to involve himself in petty tech affairs when he could be sinking his teeth into the neck of a Hot redhead . . .
      jlhenry62
      • Or perhaps he CAN'T represent anyone...

        because he never went to Law School ;-) ? Remember: just because lawyers are vampires does not mean that all vampires are lawyers!

        Anyway, I disagree that the Count is cool - he is actually room temperature, unless he has fed recently :-) .
        Zogg
  • SCO never proved *any* infringment.

    SCO has never shown so much as a single line of infringing code, even after repeated orders by the court to do so. If they had been able to make a case, they would have done so long ago. The truth is clear: the function of SCO's lawsuit was to bully the weak and to scare those who were considering Linux back into the MS sweatshop.

    The SCO executives and board should be considered persona-non-grata throughout the computing world. They have amply demonstrated their lack of ethics, their bullying behavior, and their flagrant abuse of the legal system. They are the worst kind of criminals; the kind who parasites who destroy what others have created in order to line their own pockets. None of us should ever allow them any possible position of power ever again.

    Personally, I think that they should be tried for this frivilous lawsuit and for their pump-and-dump stock deals during it.

    Of course, this is just my $0.02 USD, and your opinion of these toothless sharks may vary.

    Regards,
    Jon
    JonathonDoe
    • The trap closes

      Keep in mind that the Judge granted IBMs request to dismiss nearly all of the claims made by SCO, but IBM didn't request dismissal of all of the allegations. It appears that SCO was claiming ownership of technology which IBM had developed years ago, and shared with SCO in the 1990s, and also shared with Linux. In this case, SCO knew that the technology was IBMs, that IBM had been using it for years in CICS, MVS, and OS/400 as well as AIX. Yet code was listed in their claim, making the claim not just frivolous, but fraudulent.

      Had IBM simply requested dismissal, the Judge probably would have granted it, but SCO would not have been obligated to pay anything except legal expenses, and even those would have bankrupted the company, pretty much leaving IBM with a carcass.

      It appears that IBM is going after the deeper pockets, particularly Microsoft. IBM requested numerous disclosures which indicated that Microsoft had coordinated, organized, and helped to get funding for a lawsuit which it knew was fraudulent. The more deeply they can implicate Microsoft, the more likely the Judge is to rule that ALL of the parties to the lawsuit, direct and indirect, are liable to IBM.

      It's highly unlikely that Microsoft will let these facts come out in open court, and will likely push SCO into a settlement. Maybe they will even throw in a few bucks of their own. The bigger problem is that the Judge may issue preliminary rulings which allow IBM to go after Microsoft as a co-conspirator, at which point, Microsoft will also have to settle, and this could be a problem for Microsoft.

      Remember, IBM doesn't have a "PC" division anymore. They still sell the Intellistation, and even this is sold with the option of installing Linux. Since IBM sold their PC division to Lennovo, they don't need millions of OEM licenses from Microsoft. This might mean that IBM will want something much "bigger".

      Bill Gates is retiring this year. Perhaps IBM is going to push for an audit of Microsoft's code, to find out how much GPL and IBM code has been incorporated into Windows XP and Vista.

      Lots of speculation here. I think only IBM's legal department knows the final strategy, but it's clear that they won't be satisfied with a simple "we're sorry" from SCO.

      IBM has spent something like $300 million defending itself against this lawsuit. Obviously they want more than just a simple apology and a cash settlement from SCO. It looks like they may be going after Microsoft as well.
      RexBallard
  • I wonder where No_Ax is now

    http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-11202-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=21092&messageID=402605&start=-1
    Taz_z
    • Who cares?

      He'd only spout some irrelevant blather.
      bportlock
    • Please stop

      You people need to stop asking for no_ax. He doesn't care if he is right or wrong as long as he feels important.

      Calling on him by name just inflates his ego.
      dragosani
    • Doesn't matter

      His story, like several others, is that IBM is running SCOX into bankruptcy rather than face their manifestly-valid claims in open court.

      Hey, I don't make this stuff up -- I just report it.
      Yagotta B. Kidding
    • He's not likely to respond here

      He generally doesn't comment on articles that show things not going his way, unless there's some way he can spin it (you probably wouldn't either if you were in his shoes).

      That said, comments about fellow talkbackers aren't at all relevant to the story.
      John L. Ries
      • Besides...

        ...taunting your adversaries isn't at all polite... even if that's exactly what they would do to you were the roles reversed.
        John L. Ries
    • thanks for the link.....I love it

      "if it ever does get in front of a judge/jury IBM is going to lose. What will be interesting is if SCO goes after IBM for having dragged them through the mud when IBM knew all along they were in the wrong." No_Ax_To_Grind

      I'll carry this one with me wherever I go....it's a doozy :)
      mdsmedia
  • SCO acronyms

    Shutdown Continuing Operations
    Silliness Continually Overflowing
    Suing Creates Opportunities
    Standard Criminal Operation
    ...
    Roger Ramjet
    • I have a couple...

      [B]S[/B]anity
      [B]C[/B]an't
      [B]O[/B]perate

      [B]S[/B]ituation
      [B]C[/B]ompletely
      [B]O[/B]bvious

      [B]S[/B]tupidity
      [B]C[/B]reeping
      [B]O[/B]ut

      [B]S[/B]till
      [B]C[/B]an't
      [B]O[/B]perate

      I had a really good one... but as typical, I fergitted it! (spelling incorrect intentionally.) ]:)
      Linux User 147560
    • I have a couple...

      [B]S[/B]anity
      [B]C[/B]an't
      [B]O[/B]perate

      [B]S[/B]ituation
      [B]C[/B]ompletely
      [B]O[/B]bvious

      [B]S[/B]tupidity
      [B]C[/B]reeping
      [B]O[/B]ut

      [B]S[/B]till
      [B]C[/B]an't
      [B]O[/B]perate

      I had a really good one... but as typical, I fergitted it! (spelling incorrect intentionally.) ]:)

      Ahh yes!

      [B]S[/B]tandard
      [B]C[/B]orporate
      [B]O[/B]perations
      Linux User 147560
    • Another one...

      [B]S[/B]ocially
      [B]C[/B]orrupt
      [B]O[/B]rganization ]:)
      Linux User 147560