Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


What happens next in SCO vs. Novell

Earlier this week, a Federal Appeals Court ruled that the U.S. District Court had overstepped its grounds in ruling that SCO had never bought Novell's Unix IP (intellectual property) rights. Without those IP rights, SCO didn't have a leg to stand on in all its other anti-Linux lawsuits against IBM, Novell, Red Hat, et. al. So, now SCO can start again right? Ah wrong. It's much more complicated than that. Here's what really going to happen next.

First, SCO doesn't own Unix's IP. The court ruled that Judge Dale Kimball overstepped his authority to make that decision, and that the question of who owns Unix should be decided by a jury. That's not the same thing as deciding who owns Unix's IP; that question is still up in the air.

According to SCO CEO Darl McBride, this decision enables the company to continue its Novell and IBM lawsuits. Not really, as McBride no longer has any control of SCO. The day after the Federal Appeals Court made its decision, the Bankruptcy Court put SCO under the control of a Chapter 11 Trustee, Edward N. Cahn. Cahn, a former judge who has no connection with SCO's management, is now the man in charge, and his priorities have nothing to do with SCO's manic self-destructive drive to spend every dollar it can beg, borrow and steal on anti-Linux lawsuits.

The real question isn't what McBride wants to do; that doesn't matter any more. Novell intends to fight it out... if there's anyone left to fight. As Ian Bruce, Novell's PR director, explained in a Novell blog: "On other issues such as ownership of the UNIX copyrights, on which SCO's claims against Novell, IBM, and Linux users depend, the Court remanded the case for trial. Precisely what will happen next in the lawsuit remains to be seen, especially in light of the pending SCO bankruptcy and the recent court decision to appoint a Chapter 11 Trustee to take over the business affairs of the company."

Would a Chapter 11 Trustee want to continue the fight? Probably not, according to Andrew Updegrove, a well-known technology and open-source attorney and a partner at the law firm Gesmer Updegrove LLP. Updegrove told me, "Ordinarily, in a situation where this amount of money (relative to legal costs) is at stake, pragmatism would lead to a settlement. Until now, of course, this has always been a war of attrition, with each side willing to fight to the bitter end. A bankruptcy trustee, however, has a different duty, which is to maximize the return to creditors. In my view the trustee should take the greater resources and determination of IBM and Novell into account, and see if he can come to a settlement that achieves their business goals, while preserving as many of SCO's dwindling assets as possible for the benefit of those to whom they are owed."

Tom Carey, a partner at Sunstein, a Boston intellectual property law firm, agrees: "So now SCO is in the hands of a trustee who has been around the block, and whose career is not tied to the decision to sue IBM. My guess is that under his leadership SCO will pursue its fight with Novell if need be, but will give up fighting Big Blue because its case against IBM is a loser. SCO may be able to cut is expenses by settling with Novell if it settles with IBM. But then the question is, what does SCO have? Is there a business left to maintain? I rather doubt it, but I have not been following it since it became clear that SCO poses no threat to Linux. And with every passing day of SCO's bankruptcy, that point becomes clearer and clearer."

Though SCO may slowly go under, there remains the question: Who owns Unix?

Carey thinks "the Novell claim to ownership was all that strong. If the contract between Novell and SCO was not a sale of Unix, then what was it? Either the contract was a hash of words that failed to properly articulate the intent of the parties or, more likely, the parties thought that they had papered over their differences by signing an ambiguous, unclear contract. Nonetheless, someone has to own Unix, and the contract, as a whole, appears to be one in which Novell was the seller and SCO was the buyer."

That, however, is a matter that will have to be decided, if SCO's Trustee thinks it's worth pursuing, by a jury trial. In any case, as Carey notes, "The contract between Novell and IBM, as it was modified when IBM made a lump sum payment in order to stop having to pay ongoing royalties, makes it clear that IBM was free to create derivative works without any accounting to Novell."

Even if IBM had made contributions to Linux from Unix — which, after years of trying, SCO was never able to show one bit of proof for — IBM's "contributions to Linux were entirely proper, involving no violation of Novell's or SCO's rights. Unix has long been in a netherworld between proprietary and open source, and this arrangement was another nail in the coffin as far as there being a single owner of Unix," said Carey.

With that being the case, and there being no chance whatsoever of SCO successfully pursuing a Linux lawsuit, I strongly suspect that the Trustee will drop all of SCO's lawsuits and spend his time on rendering down SCO's remains into pennies on dollars. Rationally, there's nothing left to do, and with a reasonable person now in charge of SCO's remains, that's what I expect to happen.

What People Are Saying

Buried again I see

Lets see, if I remember correctly you were sooooooo upset that the Wintrols kept burying your comments on Digg. I see the bury votes just keep coming and even the Lintards won't help you.

Maybe if you wrote something useful with just a bit of accuracy and inside the ballpark of your limited knowledge you might not get buried so often.

Just a hint, leave the legal stuff to the lawyers, 'cause a lawyer you aren't. Clueless yes, lawyer no.

papering over differences

"the parties thought that they had papered over their differences by signing an ambiguous, unclear contract"

This sounds to me like a description of a situation in which there was no meeting of the minds, in which case the common law is that no contract was formed. That would mean that the copyrights remained with Novell.

You can argue either side of this

I think, if you read the APA and its ammendment strictly, there's no question that Novell keeps the IP. If you read it in context, Novell keeps the IP. But, there's enough wiggle room that the Appeals said a jury should decide what the deal really meant. And, then, that, of course, could be appealed and so on and so on.

To me the real question is will the Trustee feel that spending resources that SCO doesn't have in the first place be worth a few more years of litigation. I don't think so.

Steven

Chapter 11 Trustee Handbook

Do you have questions on the trustee duties?

Go to the source:

http://www.anonymous-insider.net/sco-v-ibm-et-al/Ch11Trustee.pdf

But most importantly, check Chapter 5: Termination and Removal.

And Linux techno-troopers think the trustee will lead them to the holy grail!

Linux

There is a lot of "Linux" among the comments.
But as far as I remember the claims of Unic copying bye Linux where dropped years ago.
I think there was this guy who lost his briefcase (with one million lines of copied Linux code) on a flight to Iceland.
Any way it is incredible that this case has gone on this long.
However, with a possible jury and the fifty/fifty chance of "success" that SCO has so much wanted would that actually matter at all concerning Linux.
Sometimes I think people forget that Unix is a POSIX standard.

And to destroy a company the way SCO has been destroyed beets me. I must have had at least 50 fairly happy SCO users years ago. In fact SCO Unix had in my experience less problems than HP-UX.

I did like "The Jury" the film, but a jury for a case like this gives me the creeps.

a looong time ago

"And to destroy a company the way SCO has been destroyed beets me. I must have had at least 50 fairly happy SCO users years ago. In fact SCO Unix had in my experience less problems than HP-UX."

A long time ago, in SCO corporate terms that means in a previous incarnation, the old SCO was a rather good unix vendor. Back in the early 90s I worked at a place that automated manufacturing lines. We had real-time control of material, lot, and labeling in football field sized factory using a few 386 systems running SCO unix. Those were the days.

Eventually the ownership and the organization of SCO changed and instead of making products SCO made lawsuits. I saw another post about how the money they wasted on the court debacle would have improved the company if it were spent on R&D. So true.

Oh, well, things change, and Linux works better now and has more users and support than SCO unix ever did.

What happens to "UNIX IP"

What happens to "UNIX IP" when a company which owns it (whatever 'unix ip' is) ceases to exist? Well, that company can assign its rights to any other company or individual, otherwise when the company folds any information that is already known to others essentially becomes Public Domain. What complicates things is that the matter of ownership has not been resolved and Novell may want to negotiate that. Can SCO really pay what it owes Novell? If Novell doesn't think so it may offer to reduce or drop claims on what it is owed if SCO will file a document with the courts pleading "no contest" on the ownership claims of Novell.

The ownership claims are a toxic issue - SCO cannot assign the eye-pee because it has not proven that they are the owner. This works out great for the community because even if Novell doesn't get a letter confirming ownership, it all goes to the public - unless someone is stupid enough to pick up a toxic dump *and* SCO can legally sell what it hasn't established it owns. Hey Ballmer, want to give it a whirl?

True! Especially a Jury in Utah

...Where you're on the home court of a $6B+ a year religion founded on feelings and a "burning in the bossom" and not facts.

Anonymous Insider.. who owns BSD and have you read the USL at groklaw?

I hope the new trustee can bring an end to this 7 year reign of prosecutorial persecution.

So, how does religous bigitry help this?

It looks like you are a bigot. Tell me how does the religion impact the 10th Circuit?

Perhaps this level of bigotry indicates why Linux and the Open Source movement are so limited in their successes. People get tired of the lunacy and inability of the small minded people that are always right to express their opinions other than open bigotry.

No wonder the country can't move past civil rights laws and still sees EEO as necessary. Without these laws we'd drift back to the segregation of the 50's in a heart beat with clowns like this.