Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


The SCO zombie wins one

Oh, the irony. Today, August 24th, a Federal Appeals Court ruled that while the walking dead SCO still owes Novell big bucks for selling Unix to Sun and Microsoft, the District Court overstepped its grounds in ruling that SCO had never bought Unix's IP (intellectual property) rights in the first place. What's funny about this is that it's only after SCO is dead, for all practical purposes, that it finally manages to win one.

This does not mean, as the few brain-dead SCO supporters would have it, that SCO owns Unix's IP. It means that SCO might own them, and they can take the matter to a jury trial. As the ruling itself states: "We recognize that Novell has powerful arguments to support its version of the transaction, and that, as the district court suggested, there may be reasons to discount the credibility, relevance, or persuasiveness of the extrinsic evidence that SCO presents." But, since "the evidence presented on a dispositive issue is subject to conflicting, reasonable interpretations, summary judgment is improper. So, "We think SCO has presented sufficient evidence to create a triable fact as to whether at least some UNIX copyrights were required for it to exercise its rights under the agreement."

Does this mean that, as CEO Darl McBride said in The Salt Lake Tribune, this is a "'huge validation for SCO' that will enable it to continue its lawsuit against IBM and a related suit against Novell."?

Uh. No, not really.

McBride still has the CEO title, but he doesn't have any power. SCO's leadership, which has been in bankruptcy for years and has failed to find any buyers, no longer controls the company. According to SCO's August 3rd SEC 8-K filing, the Bankruptcy Court has had enough of SCO's executives and is putting a yet-to-be-appointed Chapter 11 Trustee "authority over the Debtors' assets and affairs and the future course of the Debtors' litigation against Novell, IBM, et al."

Pamela Jones, editor of Groklaw, thinks that this means SCO is destined for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, "because SCO was counting on the appeal to overturn on the issue of the money that the Utah decision gave Novell from the Sun license deal, and that didn't happen. Of course, there could be new investors." In Chapter 7 bankruptcy, a company simply ceases to exist with the bits and pieces sold off to pay creditors.

There's a fool born every minute — but a fool who wants to invest still more money in legal fees in this money pit? I doubt it. I doubt even Microsoft, which has bankrolled SCO's anti-Linux lawsuits, has the stomach for it.

The SCO zombie's victory is meaningless legal trivia. The company and its anti-Linux claims are still dead. The now brainless corpse is just still twitching a little.

What People Are Saying

IF ONLY . . .

If only SCO had invested all the money they've wasted on their silly attempt at judicial extortion on R&D to improve their products. Today they might be bigger than Red Hat and Novell instead of having a penny stock worth less than toilet paper.

Business Plans

When Ransom Love was the CEO it seemed there were plans to take Caldera linux to the next level and cash in on what was turning out to be double digit revenue growth for linux vendors by utilizing the newly acquired SCO business.

Sadly it was not to be, instead Ransom was out, the new CEO was in, and not long after the bald faced lies started.

And here we are with a continuation of the lies with the, about to be booted, CEO claiming validation of their claims.

While the result of the appeal is a validation of their claims that a jury trial is more appropriate to settle the APA dispute between Novell and The SCO Group, aka Caldera, what he is alluding to for the media is that somehow it validated all the lies over the years concerning SCO unix code in linux.

Of course it wasn't long ago that the world discovered through court documents that The SCO Group never found any infringing code in linux no matter how many times they looked.

The appeal adds more delay to the inevitable, but it doesn't change the simple facts. No infringement, copyrights or not.

SVN - SCO Animus Does Not Become You

I agree with Ken Sabrorio, MOG, etc - they're good people. The simple truth here is there's a reasonable dispute, and it should never have been a summary judgment.

SVN - with all your years of covering this dispute (and it is contrary to yours' and PJ's assertions otherwise) - you've let your animus derail what little journalistic ability you possess.

Topline here - which should have been noted years ago by you - there's a question as to ownership of the IP. Thus, it's improper to proceed further without figuring that out. Summary judgment is not approrpiate for such a dispute.

SVN, I have to ask - did someone pay you to post such willful blindness over these years? Any first year J-school student would have seen this and reported it...fairly.

It was never a *reasonable* dispute

Which is why the case has featured covert funding by Microsoft, assiduous astro-turfing by known (ie. documented) shills -- at least one of whom has reappeared on this board today (Hi there!), continual weather-vaning on what the actual complaints were, baseless smear campaigns against unsympathetic reporters and commentators, and repeated, on-going failure of the plaintiff to produce actual evidence (despite public dog-and-pony shows purporting to show the public precisely that evidence).

SJVN may not be the world's greatest journalist, but his coverage of the SCO fiasco has been far more credible than your multitudinous postings across the web. He may have championed one side (as you have) but he at least showed respect for the facts, and both the ability and the willingness to distinguish between the facts and his opinions. Meanwhile, PJ (your continual aspersions and innuendos not withstanding) has actually become recognized in the wider world as an icon of professionalism in the blogosphere, precisely because of her meticulous treatment of this very issue.

So don't worry, if a judge is forced to review this in *full* depth again, the summary judgment will be upheld again; obviously this judge was snowed by the sheer volume of contradictory testimony and technical minutia of Unix
Linux history, and declared there must be an argument in there somewhere.

Admittedly, a jury trial is harder to predict, as there is an avalanche of technical details and confusing testimony to wade through; as the saying goes -- if the law is on your side, submit the case to a judge, if the law is against you, try your luck with a jury.

"I agree with Ken Sabrorio,

"I agree with Ken Sabrorio, MOG, etc - they're good people."
After a statement like that you have ZERO credibility. MOG has done things that good people do not do. If MOG has reported fairly to you I know I do not like what you call fair

What has MOG done to you?

Really, what has MOG done? Told the truth about the beard, PJ? Danny Lyons also made similar statements - did he offend you, too? With the truth?

Ouch.

I'll tell ya' what. The writer of this anti-SCO column, SVN - he's one of the few people who has "seen" PJ, and "knows" that she's "real" and not some astroturf (using a Nancy Pelosi term of late), 3rd-party, spoon-fed by lawyers in Armonk or elsewhere. I'd love for him to use his journalistic abilites (what's left, that is), and tell us that whole lugubrious story. Or, perhaps the story of the clerk who read Groklaw, and wrote a funky summary jdugment for a seemingly incompetent judge.

That would be news.

But it won't be covered here because it will lead to inconvenient truths about the writer SVN (and those that traffic in his spin).

Can't have that now, can we? Even though we can rail on about the "evils" of MOG and Danny Lyons, and Darl McBride, or the indisuputablity of Novell's case.

That's not funny!

I had a friend that died from MOG!

I also read "Chapter 11

I also read "Chapter 11 Trustee" as "Chapter 7 Liquidator". Darl just managed SCO so unbelievably bad from day 1. I'd sell off what I could; there is just no future for SCO despite what deluded/hallucinatory ramblings come from Darl.

Not all correct

Um, I think you have a few mistakes. First, the bankruptcy court had a chance to move SCO to chapter 7 a few weeks ago and decided against it. It chose instead to appoint a Trustee (with a legal background to determine validity of SCO's legal claims - which essentially got validated today), which it has has yet to do. It can't go back on its own decision and suddenly decide in favor of chapter 7. In fact, if anything, today's ruling almost forces the BK judge to now see merit in their case and approval a sale of SCO's assets to an entity that will look after shareholder interest. Current SCO management is still in charge No trustee has been appointed yet.

Answer to Darl's anonymous post

Explain how SCO management or the trustee will pursue anything further in the legal arena with no funds left to finance that, please? I'd bet that whomever is appointed as Chapter 11 Trustee takes a look at things, says, "Nope, no money left," and immediately recommends Chapter 7.