Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Final Judgment — SCO Loses, Owes $3,506,526

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the seems-charitable-to-sco dept.

The Courts 265

Xenographic writes "SCO has finally lost to Novell, now that Judge Kimball has entered final judgment against SCO. Of course, this is SCO we're talking about. There's still the litigation in bankruptcy court, which allowed this case to resume so that they could figure out just how much SCO owes, which is $3,506,526, if I calculated the interest properly, $625,486.90 of which will go into a constructive trust. And then there's the possibility that SCO could seek to have the judgment overturned in the appeals courts, or even the Supreme Court when that fails. Of course, they need money to do that and they don't really have much of that any more. Remember how Enderle, O'Gara and company told us that SCO was sure to win? I wonder how many people have emailed them to say, 'I told you so.'"

cancel ×

265 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

You LOSE! (5, Funny)

Wandering Wombat (531833) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849215)

Good DAY, sir!

3.5M? Oh noes... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849337)

I'm sure that really stings after Microsoft's $50M cash injection. [crn.com] Really, 3.5M? That's it? They're laughing all the way to the bank.

Re:3.5M? Oh noes... (4, Insightful)

The Snowman (116231) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849537)

I'm sure that really stings after Microsoft's $50M cash injection. [crn.com] Really, 3.5M? That's it? They're laughing all the way to the bank.

I am sure it does sting, considering they have spent quite a bit of that money on lawyers, corporate executive benefits, etc.

Re:3.5M? Oh noes... (0, Redundant)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849893)

Especially seeing as how that was 4 years ago.

Re:3.5M? Oh noes... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25850135)

Especially seeing as how that was 4 years ago.

The wheels of justice grind slowly on. So, 50-3.5=46.5. 46.5/4=$11,625,000 Profit! Even if you double it to account for legal fees, that's still more than $10M a year.

Hai Microwsoff!1! Pleaz 2 pik me!!1 I will sues da Linux for 10,000,000 cheezeburgrs a yrz!

You think you're done with SCO gone? Hardly. Microsoft isn't done with you.

Re:3.5M? Oh noes... (5, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850367)

Especially seeing as how that was 4 years ago.

Back then, 50M bucks was a lot of money.

Re:3.5M? Oh noes... (4, Interesting)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850157)

McBride and his cronies my be at the moment... but SCO the organization is not. SCO has been bleeding worse than a freshly-amputated pig, with no signs of slowing down its losses. Nobody (especially in this economy) would want to buy such a toxic and radioactive property.

I also suspect that whoever is left holding the by-now worthless SCO stock would have little trouble in finding a contingency lawyer willing to sue McBride (and his buddies) personally for fiscal irresponsibility.

There is also the chance that the SEC may get in on the act as well.

/P

Re:You LOSE! (5, Funny)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849355)

Mod parent: +1, Willy Wonka

Re:You LOSE! (5, Funny)

Spatial (1235392) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849463)

I demand, demand that this replace +1 underrated.

Re:You LOSE! (5, Funny)

D. Taylor (53947) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849479)

The underrated mod is underrated.

Re:You LOSE! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25850309)

Likewise, the overrated mod is overrated.

Re:You LOSE! (5, Funny)

Zencyde (850968) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850229)

Not that it's entirely relevant; but, when I was a junior (2004-2005) my friends and I got ahold of Darl McBride's home phone number and prank called their house. His wife picked up and I went on about some investment opportunity. As soon as I mentioned Linux she started bitching me out and called me a "little shit". :) Yeah, prank calling CEOs was all the rage my junior year.

Speaking of losers... (4, Interesting)

yog (19073) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850325)

What about all those companies that paid those don't-sue-us fees to SCO back in 2002? Are they going to step forward and demand their money back, now that the entire basis for this shakedown has been invalidated? And what about companies like Chrysler [wikipedia.org] which also won against SCO? It seems to me they didn't get as much press as the IBM-SCO case did.

One might also ask, whither Microsoft, now that their $86 million investment in Baystar has turned out to be a complete waste. Shouldn't some executive's head roll for this? God, if someone can waste that much money at Microsoft and get away with it, they must be either Steve Ballmer or Bill Gates, either of whom is too powerful to reprimand.

I will say, SCO in its day was very intimidating, with Darl Bride as an eloquent and persuasive spokesman. His pronouncements sounded factual and reasonable, until people like Groklaw looked behind the curtain and showed us the truth. Well, it's just a testament to the power and resiliency of the open source community that Linux and friends will be around long after the world has forgotten what SCO was.

Re:Speaking of losers... (0, Troll)

Profane MuthaFucka (574406) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850399)

I think $699 is a small price to pay to not be a teabagging cocksucker, don't you?

Judge Kimball (1)

Ogive17 (691899) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849217)

Maybe I'm the only one, but I picture Judge Kimball reading his judgement in the governator's voice....

RIGHT :P (4, Funny)

revlayle (964221) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849219)

There is no "finally" with SCO

Re:RIGHT :P (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849767)

what happens after try and catch then?

Re:RIGHT :P (5, Funny)

GerardAtJob (1245980) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849863)

On error resume next

Re:RIGHT :P (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850329)

Undefined operation.

I for one (4, Insightful)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849231)

Can't wait to hear the last SCO story. Barring appeals, I really hope this is it.

Re:I for one (5, Informative)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849413)

This ain't it.

Novell is done (modulo appeals and the arbitration -- see below).

Still pending

* Bankruptcy
* SuSE UnitedLinux arbitration (stayed pending resolution of BK)
* IBM's counterclaims (stayed pending resolution of BK)
* RedHat (stayed pending IBM)
* AutoZone (technically still alive, don't believe anyone's ever going to finish it. Stayed pending IBM, I believe).

Chapter 7? (2, Interesting)

maz2331 (1104901) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849845)

I wonder if there will be a point that Novell can force SCO into an involuntary Chapter 7 (liquidation) bankruptcy? Especially in light of the ruling that this money isn't a "normal" debt but a "conversion" - does that take it outside of what the bankruptcy court can protect?

Re:I for one (0, Troll)

hagardtroll (562208) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849819)

Yes for want of a loss you are. But as our presence in this forum indicates we place our attention to that which makes our interest. Santa Cruz may be a distant location from where we stand, but their operation is within the context of the software we employ. Should the subject be changed to more enjoyable matters perhaps we could pontificate about that delicious beverage that the Tranya is. Whether ranting about the uniformity of goodness of our desired software framework or perpetuating the consults of the monopolistic vendor, Tranya is ever present in its ability to provide delicious refreshment.

Is this truly the end? (5, Funny)

pitchpipe (708843) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849255)

Seriously... isn't SCO just like the Energizer Bunny. I keep hearing that we've heard the last of these pukes, and then I hear it again, and again, and again...

Re:Is this truly the end? (5, Funny)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850159)

It's like "LotR: The Return of the King". Just when you thought it was over, there's 24 more endings to get through.

Bailout (5, Funny)

unlametheweak (1102159) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849261)

Of course, they need money to do that and they don't really have much of that any more.

They could always apply for a government bailout package.

Re:Bailout (1)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849301)

We are too entertaining to fail!

Re:Bailout (3, Interesting)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849419)

You meant annoying, right? Like that fly that just doesn't get out of your face with it buzzing. Well, maybe entertaining to a third party, but not anyone affected by them.

Re:Bailout (1)

Shadow Wrought (586631) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849663)

They could always apply for a government bailout package.

Without us, Linux will fail!

Re:Bailout (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849857)

That won't hold because they are harming the economy with frivolous lawsuits that they can't pay off now.

Re:Bailout (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849889)

Sadly true.

Re:Bailout (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849959)

Of course, they need money to do that and they don't really have much of that any more.

They could always apply for a government bailout package.

That is true everyone else is doing it so why not.... just don't fly to town in your luxury jet to ask for it!

Re:Bailout (2, Insightful)

b4upoo (166390) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850315)

Bush is dumb enough to grant SCO money for a bailout.

Going to court against IBM... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849273)

... which own patents on both sliced bread and wheel is great idea. Way to go fuckers!

Re:Going to court against IBM... (3, Funny)

db10 (740174) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849653)

Shampoo invented sliced bread and the wheel. Everything that Shampoo has invented is just in thought and is not produced for lack of money. These inventions are property of Shampoo and are to be patented, copyrighted and trademarked under the name: Shampoo.

This is great news (4, Funny)

Majik Sheff (930627) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849299)

Now can we dismember the corpse, seal it in a hardwood box, put the box 12 feet under ground, cover it with at least a couple of tons of concrete, and then build a parking lot over the spot?

I don't want any chance of this zombie coming back again and demanding royalties.

Zombie? More like vampire.... (4, Funny)

tnk1 (899206) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849421)

Don't forget the garlic you need to put in the coffin.

And make sure and kill any ghoul servants. They're always trying to resurrect their masters.

I suggest you start by a scheme of napalm applied liberally to the offices of their legal representation.

Re:Zombie? More like vampire.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849657)

"I suggest you start by a scheme of napalm applied liberally to the orifices of their legal representation."

Shower, rinse, repeat.

Re:Zombie? More like vampire.... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849853)

Nuke them from space... It's the only way to be sure.

Re:This is great news (1)

unlametheweak (1102159) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849449)

Many times when companies die (for legal reasons) the Management just creates a new company. I'm sure they could re-emerge as a patent Troll funded by Microsoft. BTW you can't kill the unDead.

Re:This is great news (5, Informative)

legirons (809082) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849607)

Many times when companies die (for legal reasons) the Management just creates a new company.

You mean like when SCO setup a company in the far-east and tried to transfer their assets to it?

Or like when SCO proposed splitting its company in two, with one part taking all the assets, and the other part taking the legal claims?

Re:This is great news (3, Insightful)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849833)

They're already trying. They're trying to switch to mobile phone apps, and unload the devastated and moribund server business. Darl seems to be trying to spin off the legal claims business into a separate patent troll or copyright troll company, to try and continue the FUD against Linux and open source that Microsoft kept them alive for.

Or did you think that $50 million from Microsoft that enabled them to continue the lawsuits was an investment in actual business?

Re:This is great news (4, Funny)

VEGETA_GT (255721) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849495)

And knowing my luck I would park on that lot and would have them send me a letter saying I owe them royalties for parking over there grave as its a privilege to do so.

Enderle matters? (5, Insightful)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849305)

Anyone that would write an article extolling his Ferrari branded laptop and how the prancing horse logo adds raw ultimate power should never be taken seriously.

I guess some people do listen to that hack.
Well, perhaps a few less are listening to him now.
*shrug*

Re:Enderle matters? (4, Funny)

tnk1 (899206) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849441)

Um, I beg to differ. That Ferrari logo adds at least 220hp to my internet connection.

Re:Enderle matters? (4, Funny)

Mistshadow2k4 (748958) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849543)

Your internet connection has hit points?! What does damage to it, trolls?

Re:Enderle matters? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25850039)

According to slashdot:

Moderation -1
    100% Troll

Re:Enderle matters? (2, Interesting)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849683)

I don't know this "hp" metric you are referring to. Can you explain it in Library of Congresses (LOC)?

Re:Enderle matters? (5, Funny)

SydShamino (547793) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849917)

It stands for "hit points", though in some games like World of Warcraft this statistic is also called "health".

220 doesn't seem very good, though. In 3.x WoW that's not much of an improvement at all. Heck, I think his laptop would have better stats if it dropped Ferrari and took up mining for the Toughness bonus. Or perhaps it should take up blacksmithing, so it could add some gem sockets.

Re:Enderle matters? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849713)

One of Enderle main points against the iPhone was that teens were going to "blind" text on it, causing accidents and Apple would be sued for this.

Just because Enderle talks doesn't mean anyone is actually listening.

Oh wait, technically I did... crap...

Re:Enderle matters? (3, Funny)

abigor (540274) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850041)

My favourite Enderle quote of late:

"Next Monday, the Intel Core I7 launches, and Iâ(TM)ve been using a system that Intel sent out which not only has the Core I7 and X58 chipset, but two 4870 X2 ATI graphics cards and two of the companyâ(TM)s new high-speed flash drives.

To say that this system, (which has 4 real cores, and 4 virtual cores through hyperthreading, for a total of 8) is fast would be vastly understating the experience. The word amazing comes to mind, and I can hardly wait to put Windows 7 on it (is there such a thing as blindingly fast, squared?)"

Hahahaha

Isn't this just Novell's suit against SCO? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849321)

What about SCO's suit against IBM which started this entire mess? I assume that that is still going on.

Re:Isn't this just Novell's suit against SCO? (4, Informative)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849435)

Been living under a rock for the last year?
Novell was found to own the copyrights to Unix, not SCO [wikipedia.org]
Effectively, case dismissed.

Re:Isn't this just Novell's suit against SCO? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849513)

Not quite. SCO can still claim IBM violated their copyright on the code that is in Unixware that is not in Unix. Plus IBM has all of their counter claims. However, the case can't go forward until the bankruptcy court says so.

Odds are none of the other cases will ever be decided and they will all go away when SCO finally goes Chapter 7. But that's not for a long time.

Re:Isn't this just Novell's suit against SCO? (1, Informative)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849685)

Yeah, but that's not what they were claiming in the original suite against IBM. They were citing low level code that was in UNIX since the beginning as well as parts of AIX that IBM had developed. I think there was also some issue over a specific contract related to doing unix on x86, and that issue might still be on the table. But as far as I know, IBM never had any source code from Unixware that is not in Unix. So they probably didn't copy any of it over. Even if SCO did have the copyrights to UNIX, I don't think they would have won as the code copying was never really demonstrated to be anything significant.

Re:Isn't this just Novell's suit against SCO? (1)

jfinke (68409) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849885)

Right... The rest of the lawsuits still need to play out, correct? Redhat. IBM. Autozone. Etc.

Re:Isn't this just Novell's suit against SCO? (3, Informative)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850191)

They took out many of the copyright claims and went with trade secrets in the last Amended Complaint. Of the 290 specific allegations in the Final Disclosure, the court dismissed all but 80 or so of them. Of these, the Novell decision may set this back completely for even if IBM were guilty of what SCO accused them of doing, only Novell has the right to pursue legal action. IBM's counterclaims, however, have yet to be addressed. With Court acknowledging Novell's copyright ownership this only helps IBM as IBM can show (if we didn't already know) that SCO doesn't play by the rules and sued IBM when they didn't have adequate legal standing.

Re:Isn't this just Novell's suit against SCO? (1)

Bunny Guy (1345017) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849451)

IBM is still stayed by bankruptcy court. Before it's all over, IBM's counterclaims will have to be answered.

Re:Isn't this just Novell's suit against SCO? (1)

MarkvW (1037596) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849775)

Not necessarily. IBM will only pursue its claims against SCO if there is a financial reason to go after SCO. After bankruptcy, SCO may be judgment-proof for lack of assets.

Re:Isn't this just Novell's suit against SCO? (1)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849879)

There doesn't have to be a financial gain to shooting a rabid dog. Darl needs to be completely stripped of all legal resources to continue this nonsense, and preferably suffer personally and fiscally as a warning to others not to play these games.

The odds of Judge Kimball doing so are, unfortunately, zero. It took the current pending change of administration to get Kimball to get off his ass, stop listening to the FUD, and close this part of it. Or do you think the change in Washington doesn't signal a less 'business friendly' adminstration that does not look kindly on Kimball wasting thousands of taxpayer funded man-hours dealing with this nonsense?

Christmas is early this year (5, Funny)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849333)

SCO gets a final judgement and loses $3.5m. Someone (Missouri) finally files a RICO suit against the RIAA. Our do-nothing Congress actually gets the balls enough to stand up to the automotive industry.

At this point I'm halfway expecting to see a copy of Duke Nukem Forever in my stocking.

Re:Christmas is early this year (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849527)

At this point I'm halfway expecting to see a copy of Duke Nukem Forever in my stocking.

hey you got TF2 last year, it would only be fair!

Re:Christmas is early this year (4, Interesting)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849633)

SCO gets a final judgement and loses $3.5m

meanwhile Darl McBride is still disgustingly filthty rich. Too bad instead of stealing millions of dollars from innocent rubes, he wasn't dog fighting [chicagotribune.com] instead, like Michael Vick [chicagotribune.com] .

Michael Vick lives in a prison in Kansas, making 12 cents an hour while plotting his return to the NFL. His houses and farms will soon be gone, the two yachts are history, and he's down to his last couple of Range Rovers.

A race horse he bought for $60,000 died of colic, the Atlanta Falcons are still trying to hit him up for millions they paid him, and the IRS and the state of Georgia want nearly $1 million in back taxes.

In 2006 he made nearly $15 million. Recently he reported total income of $12.89 for an entire month.

I want to see Brainwol and McBride (while we're at it, my mortgage company's President and oil company presidents as well) in a cell with Vick.

These people are the anti-Robin Hoods, stealing from the poor to give to the rich.

Re:Christmas is early this year (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849823)

Oh, that's not too far off...just wait till everyone gets tried for the pump-and-dump scam...SEC will nail them to wall.

Re:Christmas is early this year (5, Funny)

decalod85 (1214532) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849733)

And "Chinese Democracy" from GNR is due out on Sunday. It's like the final episode of a TV series where the writers are trying furiously to wrap up all the loose ends!

Re:Christmas is early this year (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849899)

And "Chinese Democracy" from GNR is due out on Sunday. It's like the final episode of a TV series where the writers are trying furiously to wrap up all the loose ends!

Haven't you heard? Obama wears a blue turban and his advisor's last name is Mabus. The end days are upon us!

Re:Christmas is early this year (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849803)

Let's not forget that Chinese Democracy is getting released on Nov 23rd.

Re:Christmas is early this year (4, Funny)

SEE (7681) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850049)

The only holdup on Duke Nukem Forever is the manual. And Harlan Ellison will get around to that just as soon as he finishes The Last Dangerous Visions.

Re:Christmas is early this year (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25850253)

I think DNF will probably be a few years behind U.S. energy independence and a cure for AIDS. But you can still put Chinese Democracy in your stocking this year, and that's almost as amazing.

No worries SCO. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849335)

Your ultimate goal is coming true anyway. The vast majority of people who used to be Linux users are now OS X users. Linux is dying on the vine, and while it is not because of your lawsuit, at least it IS happening, so that should be some consolation.

Re:No worries SCO. (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849799)

Hello? Steve? Is that you???

Will SCO do a clearance sale of Linux licenses? (5, Funny)

neonux (1000992) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849469)

I've been waiting such a long time to afford one of these to try that Linux thing legally.

Re:Will SCO do a clearance sale of Linux licenses? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25850351)

Sure, I'll sell you one, half price...

only $349.50

Get 'em while they're hot! :-)

What about the license fees? (5, Interesting)

wcrowe (94389) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849471)

I wonder about those companies who paid the SCO license fees to use Linux? Are they free now to sue SCO for the license fees they have paid?

Re:What about the license fees? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849847)

Yes. SCO committed fraud. They sold those companies something they didn't own.

Re:What about the license fees? (4, Informative)

Wilden2003 (1220744) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849909)

No. Read the actual licenses. They don't specify what was licensed. All they sell is SCO IP, which is never defined in the license.

sco who (1)

CHRONOSS2008 (1226498) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849591)

boo whoo

cry me a river , we all knew they were full of it.
Next up

wht a mess our legal system is (3, Insightful)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849605)

How much did it cost to defeat SCO and stop their nonsense? I'd be shocked if the legal bills on just the Novell/IBM side were under $10M.

The system worked once, at least in rendering the right decision. But few can afford to spend the amount of money this took.

Re:wht a mess our legal system is (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850249)

The only reason it took so much money is because there was an even larger amount to lose. Because you can't afford it pretty much guarantee's that you wont have to.

$x = "I told them so" (1)

thewiz (24994) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849615)

$x++;

gratification (5, Funny)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849675)

I thought it was extremely gratifying to look at the graph of the stock price [yahoo.com] and see that Yahoo had thoughtfully provided some space on the y axis for negative values.

How much do they have (3, Informative)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849691)

So they now owe Novell $3.5 million or so. A look at their June '08 financials ( http://finance.google.com/finance?hl=en&fkt=917&fsdt=2133&q=SCOX&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=we [google.com] ) makes it look like SCO is currently worth $8.96 million. Of course, then they have $5.85 million in current liabilities. Add in this $3.5 million and SCO's wallet runs dry (and then some). Of course, this doesn't take into account liabilities that they don't need to pay back immediately. Things like that will come up in any bankruptcy hearing.

The end result is that the amount of the award is basically meaningless. Novell may not see that entire figure (if anything) due to SCO going bankrupt. It's the ruling itself that is important. All of SCO's claims were knocked down. Novell's claims were either upheld, made moot by further developments, or voluntarily dismissed. SCO got beat down hard and I don't think they'll be getting back up anytime soon.

Re:How much do they have (3, Interesting)

mitch_feaster (1193053) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849761)

If company expansion (in terms of hiring new employees) is an indicator as to how much a company is worth then sure enough they're not doing too well: http://www.sco.com/jobs/ [sco.com]

Re: The stock price (1)

davebarnes (158106) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849901)

I still don't understand why the stock price is so high at $0.13 a share.
I would expect it to be at 1 cent.
What is keeping it up?

Re: The stock price (1)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850201)

I still don't understand why the stock price is so high ... What is keeping it up?

a) People making very long-shot bets.

b) People who didn't "do their due diligence" and are buying it without understanding the real situation.

Re:How much do they have (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850261)

You see, SCO was caught holding the bag, giving Unix internals to Sun for a small sum (hence Solaris 10/opensolaris), yet the bag was empty at the end. No useful IP (just bits and pieces of post license work), no copyrights of any real use, core code depreciated and effectively imitated by BSD branches and Linux, no Xenix, no resellers, no chance on their mobile development software, no chance of beating IBM, no chance of pursuing their other claims, no cash, no real employees (not to slime anyone), no strength of any kind in the marketplace, no chance for getting licensing from anyone with half a brain, no credibility in technical sectors, no chance of getting onto the desktop, no chance of ever working with IBM, Novell, Microsoft, or Sun again---> the total empty bag including any bag shareholders had.

Ransom Love is probably snickering at this point. So are many of us.

And Three Cheers for Pamela Jones!!!!!

Re:How much do they have (4, Informative)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850357)

Novell may not see that entire figure (if anything) due to SCO going bankrupt.

Actually, my understanding is that Novell gets paid before anyone else, since the judge ruled that SCO is actually holding Novell's money improperly (converting it?). It's not like a normal debt where the judge says "you owe them this much money", but where the judge says "that stack of money right there belongs to Novell - hand it over."

yay! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849699)

YAY! :D

Don't Forget (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849703)

Don't forget to pay your $699 licensing fee you cock-smoking teabaggers..

Re:Don't Forget (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25849829)

I understand your anger, being spit and pissed on, having to take beating after undeserved beating. Well a new future is dawning and great evil has been defeated. Rejoice my brother, now is the time for healing.

Dear SCO, (1)

sootman (158191) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849777)

Thank you for wasting five years [wikipedia.org] of the Linux community's time and casting a shadow over the legitimacy of the world's countless open-source projects. Think of all the interesting things we could have devoted our time to if we hadn't been dealing with you assholes. I hope you rot in Hell.

Re:Dear SCO, (2, Insightful)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850295)

Thank you for wasting five years of the Linux community's time and casting a shadow over the legitimacy of the world's countless open-source projects.

I think that was the point. B-(

(Or what became the point after they got caught in their own legal machine and people whose business models were threatened by Open Source saw the opportunity to hurt the competition by funding the suit to keep it alive. IMHO it started as a rent-seeking extortion scheme by people who bought into a dying company and picked the wrong victim.)

Great news on a sad end! (2, Insightful)

jav1231 (539129) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849865)

The sad part being that the old SCO and its UNIX had to be affiliated with the litigation hound that SCO is today...or was yesterday.

Market Cap... (3, Interesting)

jwiegley (520444) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849869)

The $3.5M exceeds their current market cap. which appears to be only $2.81M. (pretty far fall from the $2.54B they had in 2000.)

Don't quite know what that means but I'm hoping it means the judgment effectively wipes them off the map entirely.

It's (apparently) easy to forget facts are facts (4, Insightful)

Random BedHead Ed (602081) | more than 5 years ago | (#25849913)

Remember how Enderle, O'Gara and company told us that SCO was sure to win? I wonder how many people have emailed them to say, 'I told you so.'"

Agreed - these tech pundits were complete tools. O'Gara was shallow enough to stalk Pamela Jones of Groklaw in 2005 and publish alleged photos of her apartment. Only Daniel Lyons (he of the Fake Steve) later admitted he was wrong [slashdot.org] .

But this gets into a bigger pet peeve of mine: the tendency of people to disregard details in pursuit of what they wish were true. These pundits really wanted Linux to fail massively, either because their bread and butter was covering the developments of Microsoft and other proprietary OS vendors or because they equated Linux and free software with anti-capitalism. This led a lot of these shrills to cling to a very silly, unsubstantiated lawsuit long after it became clear that SCO had no concrete evidence to present in court and clearly hadn't thought through licensing considerations (BSD-licensed code in both Linux and System V, for example).

Many people really don't like delving into the details before forming an opinion and sticking to it. See also: religion, politics.

Look (1)

Vexorian (959249) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850067)

Cheer up, we didn't lose a SCO, we got a Novell.

YAAAAAAY! (5, Funny)

HolyCrapSCOsux (700114) | more than 5 years ago | (#25850085)

And that pretty much wraps it up. Now I need a new name...

Re:YAAAAAAY! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25850183)

And that pretty much wraps it up. Now I need a new name...

HolyCrapSCOStillSucks?

Hey, if it works for disco...

The MS kiss of death (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25850143)

This only goes to show that the old addage is true. The only companies that end up worse off than the ones that compete with Microsoft are the ones that cooperate with Microsoft.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>