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!

Judge Calls SCO On Lack of Evidence

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the like-it-is-judge-like-it-is dept.

187

Rob writes to mention a CBR article on Judge Wells' assessment that SCO just hasn't made its case against IBM in the well-known and long-lasting legal battle. The magistrate called the lack of evidence inexcusable. She further likened their claims to a shoplifter being handed a catalog for a store after being stopped, and being told 'what you took is in there somewhere, figure it out.' From the article: "In the view of the court it is almost like SCO sought to hide its case until the ninth inning in hopes of gaining an unfair advantage despite being repeatedly told to put 'all the evidence... on the table' ... given SCO's own public statements... it would appear that SCO had more than enough evidence to comply with the court's orders." Groklaw has coverage of the decision, and the complete text from the judge. Update: 06/30 15:14 GMT by Z : This story bears more than a passing resemblance to this one from Wednesday. Sorry about that.

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

This is still going on? (3, Insightful)

a_karbon_devel_005 (733886) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636333)

This case was lost in the public court of opinion long ago, I'm kind of surprised it's even still going on. Apparently the judge is of the same mind.

Re:This is still going on? (5, Funny)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636485)

Ah, yes, the court of public opinion. I'm shocked the judge hasn't just deferred to that and sentenced Darl to be hanged by the neck til he be dead, dead, dead. Stupid rule of law.

Re:This is still going on? (5, Interesting)

LoyalOpposition (168041) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637113)

Normally you'd be right. However, I still think the parent has a point. Several things SCO has done make it appear that the whole purpose of the lawsuit was to slow the uptake of Linux. In other words, a trial in the court of public opinion. It's a though there's someone pulling SCO's strings. Someone with deep pockets; someone who would greatly benefit by Linux's demise. However, I can't imagine who that might be.

-Loyal

Re:This is still going on? (4, Funny)

imaginaryelf (862886) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637442)

Hey. Whatchout for that flying chair....

Re:This is still going on? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15637420)

I'm shocked the judge hasn't just deferred to that and sentenced Darl to be hanged by the neck til he be dead, dead, dead. Stupid rule of law.

I think hanging Darl might be a bit extreme. But a good old fashioned tar and feathering and forced to write I am a scumbag 100,000 times on a white board might be a fitting punishment for his fraud.

Re:This is still going on? (5, Funny)

IAmTheDave (746256) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636524)

I wonder what the board room meetings of SCO are like with the lawyers that have undoubtedly drained SCO's coffers of every red cent...

"Na guys, we're feelin good about this thing. The judge keeps giving me a vibe - I'm so gonna hit that. But back to the case, na, we're doing well. I'm feeling judgement for us, no problem. IMB is (what's that? oh, IBM) IBM is SO gonna pay through the teeth. Leanux is going down!

"Oh, um, here's your bill. Pay that whenever. No rush."

Re:This is still going on? (2, Informative)

shotfeel (235240) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637458)

Just one problem -SCO and its law firm entered an agreement about a year ago. SCO paid them a lump sum to cover the entire trial (minus expenses). SCO got a good deal, and the law firm got its money while SCO still has some.

So at this point, there's no more monetary motive for the law firm to drag the case out.

Re:This is still going on? (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637483)

Obviously you've never dealt with lawyers. They always take care of the payment issue first. :)

In the case of SCO, they have a whole trust fund set aside to pay themselves out of, in case the company goes bankrupt in a hurry. The employees may not get their retirement benefits, but by god the lawyers are going to get paid! (This is fairly standard practice, I should note.)

Re:This is still going on? (4, Insightful)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636564)

It depends on your perspective.

This case dealt a near fatal blow to end-user linux in business. Over the last two years Microsoft made previoulsy unimaginable gains in server market share, and they are using it to increase their desktop lock. The vast majority of IT managers, CIOs, CFOs, and corporate legal departments are scared to death of the GPL. The FUD is made even worse by lawyers cashing in on those fears by telling people they need to pay for costly audits and license reviews.

So who lost again?

Re:This is still going on? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636695)

"So who lost again?"

The suckers locked in?

Re:This is still going on? (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636696)

The foolish companies that are paying thru the nose for MS tech...

Jaysyn

Re:This is still going on? (1)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636709)

You're right, but I would word that as "Everybody but Microsoft".

Re:This is still going on? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636723)

There's no evidence that Microsoft has grown their server marketshare at Linux's expense, because Linux has also shown large marketshare growth.

Re:This is still going on? (2, Interesting)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637456)

On the contrary one of the companies I used to work for is analizing the benefits and potential liabilities of using Linux. In the meantime its Windows everywhere and a hold on Linux.

Yes, this has damaged Linux in the office and Microsoft is gleaming as they charge us throught he roof.

FYI, the cost of the audit in the accounting spreadsheets is added to teh TCO of using Linux which makes MS look cheaper. After all we will have lower legal bills if we use Windows right?

Sigh

I want to deck these guys.

Re:This is still going on? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15637200)

Hey, Mr. Glass-half-empty dude,

You're forgetting that linux came from literally nothing, and has managed to gain the respect and share it has based on it's merits as an OS, and to a lesser degree on the free beer/speech stuff. Even in the astronomically unlikely event that SCO wins, and Microsoft goes on to world domination, linux will still be there, and will be active. Why? Because Microsoft is evil - it's their nature. That paradigm will live on as long as we have SCO & MS.

Remember the AT&T/BSD smackdown? What happened after that? They removed the offending code, and BSD lives on to this day.

So go have a beer, relax, and know it's all going to be ok.

Re:This is still going on? (1)

BootNinja (743040) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637490)

and BSD lives on to this day.
Have you doublechecked that with netcraft?

Re:This is still going on? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637498)

Whats the point of boasting about Linux pride if only a few hobbiests and Computer science students use it?

Shouldn't the growth continue to change the world and help everyone use IT to benefit everyone instead of MS?

I just mentioned in this thread about a previous employer who has now grown skeptical of linux as a result of SCO. We did use SCO man moons ago and found out we used Linux and tried to send us threatening letters and invoices which we paid. Its cheaper to pay than fight in court.

We had to audit and pay someone even more money for an audit and a price of legality analysis. This then was added to teh TCO of using linux vs using Windows. So now the MS salesmen has proof that Windows is cheaper. After all we dont have to look for legalities everytime we download debian!

They still use Linux for some limited applications but its expensive now according to the bean counters unless a Windows solution can be used.

Re:This is still going on? (2, Insightful)

X43B (577258) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636599)

Huh? From what I heard/read about 90% of people thought RIM was a group of hard working, entreprenurial Canadians who came up with and sold a wonderful product that enriched the lives of thousands of people. NTP was a evil leach on society taking advantage of the sytem and should be shot. RIM still paid huge, I guess public opinion isn't the deciding factor.

frist post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636336)

frist post

I tossed this out long ago (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636341)

just like a tossed a deuce out of my caboose moments ago

and then I printed the comment pages from several slashdot threads this a.m., and used that to wipe

slashdot and pinching a loaf: two things that go great together

So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (3, Funny)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636344)

bah, one could only hope, but damn this is nice to hear.

Too bad Darl and friends have already made their millions from SCO's little stock kiting scheme, but it'll at least be a small comfort to see SCO finally begin to implode. I think I'll be checking the Salt Lake Tribune (I live here) for the eventual bankruptcy sale... maybe buy one of their logoed signs and mount it on a trophy plaque. (well, a man can dream, can't he?)

/P

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (2, Funny)

Trigun (685027) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636373)

(well, a man can dream, can't he?)

While you're dreaming, why don't you go for Darl's head on a trophy plaque?

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (4, Funny)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636538)

> > I think I'll be checking the Salt Lake Tribune (I live here) for the eventual bankruptcy sale... maybe buy one of their logoed signs and mount it on a trophy plaque. (well, a man can dream, can't he?)
>
> While you're dreaming, why don't you go for Darl's head on a trophy plaque?

Except that you misspelled "pike".

I want to live just long enough to see them cut off Darl's head and stick it on a pike as a reminder to the next ten generations that some things come at too high a price. I would look up into his beady eyes and wave, like this... (*wave*!). Can your associates arrange that for me, Mr. McBride?
- Vir "Flounder" Kotto, Sr. VP, IBM Empire.

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (4, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636640)

I want to live just long enough to see them cut off Darl's head and stick it on a pike...

Why would you put Darl's head on a fish?

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (2, Funny)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636707)

Because it hurts more, you twit.

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (1)

schon (31600) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636889)

No, no, no.

He's talking about this guy. [google.com]

Or possibly this [ida.liu.se] , but I don't imagine Darl's head would go very well on it.

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15637736)

Why would you put Darl's head on a fish?

Because he can't afford a frickin' shark.

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636761)

beady eyes? oh, you're talking about cutting off *that* head....

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (1)

Skjellifetti (561341) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637031)

I want to live just long enough to see them cut off Darl's head and stick it on a pike as a reminder to the next ten generations that some things come at too high a price.

Thus giving rise, five hundred years from now, to the legend of Sam [wikipedia.org] the Impaler [wikipedia.org]

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (1)

smellsofbikes (890263) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637752)

I very much enjoy your apt reference.

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (1)

nuzak (959558) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637069)

I much prefer "to the pain" myself

(JFGI, I don't think I need to paste the quote from IMDB to here)

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (2)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636390)

Whats funny is SCO is up about 3 cents from this news so far. HU..

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (1)

Teancum (67324) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636953)

Just speculating here, but SCO for the longest time has been one of the most shorted stocks on the market. Perhaps somebody is trying to cover their short, realizing that this is the beginning of the very end for this company?

Very Very Small Comfort (2, Interesting)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636500)

Seeing SCO capsize, dozens (hundreds?) of competent if obsolete UNIX hackers thrown out of work, with yummy parachutes for all the top-level blokes who dreamed up the Awesome strategy of trying to sue Linux out of existence, or at least make it look like a platform with hairy legal issues attaching to it. I hyperbolize only a little bit when I say this is almost an Enron-type scam.

Re:Very Very Small Comfort (1)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636844)

You hyperbolize by quite a lot. This is more a really bad 'bet the company' mistake. You just feel a lot of sympathy because it's technology.

The class warfare perpetuated around here is amusing on so many levels, but this fake 'fight the power' horeshit aspect of it is by far the funniest.

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (5, Interesting)

yo_tuco (795102) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636616)

"maybe buy one of their logoed signs and mount it on a trophy plaque. (well, a man can dream, can't he?)"

Better yet, How about we get in line and call in McBrige's offer to take our best shot! You do remember is famous words: [crn.com]

"We're either right or we're not. If we're wrong, we deserve people throwing rocks at us."

Okay big-mouth Darl McBride. I'm ready! I'm waiting! It's time!

Re:So FINALLY we'll see an end to it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636864)

Time to buy a rock mine.

And for those of you just tuning in (3, Informative)

schon (31600) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636359)

You can see lots of insightful comments in the other [slashdot.org] story about this.

Re:And for those of you just tuning in (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636602)

This story bears more than a passing resemblance to this one from Wednesday. Sorry about that.

Every story on SCO bears more than a passing resemblance to all the others!

Re:And for those of you just tuning in (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637686)

I just gotta say . . .

I usually try to be the loudest voice in the "Dupe Chorus", but the fact that Zonk admitted to his mistake and apologized for it impresses me. It would make my Republican heart go all fluttery if we Republicans had hearts. Zonk, you're OK in my book. (I'll still rag on you for dupes, though!) =)

Re:And for those of you just tuning in (1)

schon (31600) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637704)

I wonder if he read my comment, or if someone emailed him about it?

Waste of time and effort (2, Insightful)

gasmonso (929871) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636363)

This case was a complete waste of time and effort. Hopefully they will disappear into the woodwork never to be seen or heard from again. Quite pathetic that it went on this long.

http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]

Re:Waste of time and effort (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636652)

NO, we DON'T want it to just go away. We want IBM to kick the Ever Loving Shit (tm) out of SCO to discourage this sort of thing from happening again. We want this to be loud, public, messy and embarassing for SCO, even much worse than it is now...much worse. I want the judge to come off the bench and bitch clap every SCO lawyer and exec, one at a time, on live TV, at the SuperBowl halftime with Janet Jackson's tits hanging out in the background. THATS what we want, thats what we need.

How did SCO get to sue IBM in the first place? (5, Interesting)

DRM_is_Stupid (954094) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636378)

I thought that US law requires the defendant to provide reasonable amount of evidence in order to get a court case started in the first place.

Re:How did SCO get to sue IBM in the first place? (3, Informative)

B'Trey (111263) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636435)

Depends on what you mean by "getting started." This case is still in the "getting started" phase - discovery and pre-trial motions. Essentially, other than confusing the terms "defendent" and "plaintif," you're correct. The plaintif does have to provide some evidence, and the fact that SCO didn't is exactly what led to this decision.

Not at the evidence part yet. (5, Interesting)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636547)

Merits are not under consideration yet. This ruling is strictly on the fact that SCO did not specify what exactly they are claiming IBM did wrong. IBM has spent three years saying "What did we steal/contribute unlawfully? What code? What 'methods and concepts'?" It'll be later this year that they say "No, we didn't do that stuff."

And I agree it's sad that a co. can game the system this much for this long, without providing detail about the alleged wrongdoing. It's basically a Gitmo approach to suing.

Re:How did SCO get to sue IBM in the first place? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636631)

Either that or enough money.

Wait a minute (2, Funny)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636428)

This case is still going on?

I thought SCO lost a long time ago.

Re:Wait a minute (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636985)

I thought SCO lost a long time ago.

they did, it is just that the lawyers employment union makes sure it takes a looooooooong time before the loss becomes *official*.

SCO's mistake (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636432)

SCO made a terrible mistake by taking on IBM over the Monterey issue. They should have pursued the Linux kernel developers - THAT is where code was being stolen wholesale. Code, that by any interpretation of Novell / SCO deal (BS fanboy sites like groklaw aside), was owned by SCO. I have seen the code that SCO is referring to - same comments, same code, same EVERYTHING. Header files copied in their entirety.

They blew it with the IBM case. Had they played their cards right, TiVo owners, Linux router owners, Linux desktop users - EVERYONE would be paying licensing fees to SCO.

Re:SCO's mistake (1, Redundant)

colinrichardday (768814) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636481)

Name the source/header files involved.

Re:SCO's mistake (3, Insightful)

paladinwannabe2 (889776) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636512)

What you may have missed is that SCO's parent company released a lot of source code under the GPL- and once released they can't 'unrelease it' later. As a result it was perfectly legal to use a lot of those files in Linux. Besides, don't you think that SCO would have shown this source code to the Judge if they had a case at all?

And another thing (0)

colinrichardday (768814) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636544)

People would switch to BSD before submitting to SCO.

Re:SCO's mistake (1)

HardCase (14757) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636549)

(snicker) YHBT!

Re:SCO's mistake (5, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636557)

Fuck off, troll.

Since nobody outside SCO except perhaps the MoGTroll [slashdot.org] , Didiot, and a few people who were paid to look at it, have seen it, I call bullshit - or should I say backinfullforce-shit.

  1. Both SCO and Linux can legally take anything they want from the BSD code base - so they would have the exact same comments, etc.
  2. The LKP module that SCO had to yank is a good indication that copying went from Linux to SCO Unix, and not vice versa;
  3. Header files? Sure, for things like POSIX, they WOULD be the exact same. No copyright infringement.
  4. Those "millions of lines of code" in Blepp's suitcase seem to have disappeared.
Stock scam. That's all it ever was, after the extortion attempt failed.

Re:SCO's mistake (1)

One Louder (595430) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636862)

So, um, why was SCO unable to produce *any* of this alleged identical source code in discovery?

I guess I don't understand the strategy of not actually using the "mountains of evidence" in the *only* circumstance that would matter, as opposed to disclosing it to random clueless Anonymous Cowards.

Re:SCO's mistake (2, Informative)

shotfeel (235240) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637681)

They may have. There were many items in the "Final Disclosure" that IBM did not challenge as being insufficiently described. Meaning they probably did have line numbers, file and version listed. Since the actual list is under seal, none of us know for sure. This was just the first stroke of the axe, cutting out all alleged instances of misuse that have not been sufficiently specified.

In the next stage, the summary judgement phase, IBM may ask the judge to toss out more. However the bar for summary judgment is pretty high (the "facts" are not in dispute), but that doesn't mean we can't expect more of the instances of alleged misuse to be axed at this step too.

Anything remaining would then be left for a jury to decide.

At least that's how I understand the process.

Well, that's not entirely true. (2, Insightful)

kahei (466208) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636440)


SCO _have_ made their case. Specifically, they've effectively gone "our case is extremely weak and you should throw it out."

They can do this because their aim was to encourage investment in SCO (both via share buying and directly from coMpanieS willing to support anything that might weaken IBM), not to win a case.

If only all litigants were so forthright. Three cheers for these latter-day Washingtons!

Re:Well, that's not entirely true. (2, Interesting)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636581)

SCO _have_ made their case. Specifically, they've effectively gone "our case is extremely weak and you should throw it out."

Except I don't think it was quite that simple. While their case is extremely weak, they believed it was very strong. They've spent years now firing off one motion after another, trying to obfuscate, decalrify,and otherwise muddy a perfectly straightforward situation -- that they have no leg to stand on. They got some companies to settle with them, if nothing else to avoid the hassle of being dragged into this farce. While their attack may be driving investiment, it was not their primary goal, but now the case has been revealed for what it is: a tottering house of cards.

Re:Well, that's not entirely true. (1)

Urusai (865560) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636685)

If so, the SEC might be interested in administering the coup de grace.

Re:Well, that's not entirely true. (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636712)

if you've noticed, the SEC is much like the auditor's mindset, going in after a battle and bayonetting the dead. If the courts find SCO's claims to be bogus, and then Novell and IBM destroy what's left with their countersuits, and then the stockholders get pissed and sue, then the SEC will wake up and start doing something.

I've had it with SCO and Microsoft ! (0, Redundant)

Chemkook (915402) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636449)

These two companies are so irritating that it's not even funny anymore.

Re:I've had it with SCO and Microsoft ! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636860)

Whats wrong with Microsoft? I mean, honestly. The irritation isn't coming from Micrsoft, but the constant baseless accusations against them, and the onslaught of negative feedback against them for everything they do.

I am tired of the constant complaints against Microsoft, to a point where I don't read anything involvoing Microsoft in the title, at least on Slashdot. The fact I am reading an article about a completely different company and someone throws Microsoft's name into it just suggests that there is a culture of unfounded hatred to a company that had done nothing worse the live the American Dream to its ultimate conclusion, world wide domination!

Re:I've had it with SCO and Microsoft ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15637073)

a company that had done nothing worse the live the American Dream to its ultimate conclusion, world wide domination!


You sounded like you had a reasonable point until then.

Re:I've had it with SCO and Microsoft ! (3, Funny)

Shohat (959481) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636914)

Only Microsoft's contribution had positive impact on 95% of the world's PC users ....

One Word... (1)

TheDreadSlashdotterD (966361) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637640)

Debian

The judge's analogy isn't quite right... (5, Interesting)

brother_b (16716) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636456)

She further likened their claims to a shoplifter being handed a catalog for a store after being stopped, and being told 'what you took is in there somewhere, figure it out.'

No, it's more like a store manager stopping someone who owns a competing business leaving the store, accusing them of shoplifting with no proof of anything being stolen, and then giving them the catalog to sort it out simply to harass them and take up their time.

Re:The judge's analogy isn't quite right... (1, Insightful)

PinkyDead (862370) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636834)

The quote isn't quite right either. She said someone 'accused of shoplifting'...

I thought it a bit odd that a judge would leave something hanging like that - i.e that IBM were guilty, but that SCO couldn't prove it.

Re:The judge's analogy isn't quite right... (4, Informative)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637472)

I thought it a bit odd that a judge would leave something hanging like that - i.e that IBM were guilty, but that SCO couldn't prove it.

No, the judge is spot on.

SCO has accused IBM of shoplifting a good many different items, so to speak.

The judge has not yet ruled on whether or not IBM shopifted anything. What she has said is that SCO has failed to provide evidence even to warrant such a ruling regarding the alleged shoplifting of most of the items, and dropped those counts.

However, there are a few items left of which IBM remains accused of taking (to continue with the "shoplifting" analogy).

For the judge to appear to have decided on IBM's "guilt" or "innocence" with regard to any of the remaining items at this point in time would be improper because that evidence has not yet been given a full hearing. IBM does in fact remain accused by SCO - nothing more, nothing less - and that's what she must say if she is to appear impartial.

The next step is for the remaining counts to be presented, along with evidence, in court. Only after that happens will IBM's "guilt" or "innocence" of the (remaining) charges brought by SCO be determined.

Re:The judge's analogy isn't quite right... (1)

WWWWolf (2428) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636998)

No, it's more like a store manager stopping someone who owns a competing business leaving the store, accusing them of shoplifting with no proof of anything being stolen, and then giving them the catalog to sort it out simply to harass them and take up their time.

...all this while the manager entered during the "Come-Right-In-And-Grab-Whatever-You-Want-For-Free " 15 minutes special sale.

128 foot notes? (2, Funny)

ajedgar (67399) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636582)

128 foot notes? Curious.

Coincidence? I think not...

aj.

It's like dealing with women.. (4, Insightful)

HockeyPuck (141947) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636591)

"It would be absurd for an officer to tell the accused that 'you know what you stole I'm not telling'.


Anybody here think that this resembles some guy dealing with his girlfriend/wife who is mad at him..

Him: What did I do?
Her: You know what you did, and if you don't know, I'm not telling you.

Re:It's like dealing with women.. (0, Troll)

tommyatomic (924744) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637106)

That was an uncanny impression of my GF. Oh God I hope she not reading this. I could be in the doghouse another six months without knowing what I did or didnt do wrong. That happened too. I got in trouble for not doing anything wrong.

Can you imagine being in a lesbian relationship? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15637282)

Jeeesuuss? the sheer amount of "mind reading" that you'd have to do to keep *that* sucker stable!!!

Re:It's like dealing with women.. (1)

LoveGoblin (972821) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637329)

She's probably mad 'cause he keeps referring to her as his "girlfriend/wife".

Re:It's like dealing with women.. (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637575)

Maybe "girlfriend" and "wife" aren't the same person -- that would explain a lot of his problems.

penalties? fines? anything? (4, Interesting)

Tom (822) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636609)

So if even the court believes that SCO has abused the legal system for unfair gains - will there be any punishment for that? Can the judge declare such punishment or does it have to go through a seperate case? Does the court system even have a way to send the message that it doesn't like being abused?

Re:penalties? fines? anything? (4, Interesting)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636678)

IBM and Novell have already filed countersuits, and those are for amounts that will more than destory anything that's left of SCO. Then there will be fun of all the shareholders realizing that Darl and other executives lied about what SCO owned. This will go on for years and get very ugly, I can't wait 8D

Re:penalties? fines? anything? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637384)

oh yeah, forget about the wee little bit about SCO not sending 100% of the $24M it collected from Microsoft and Sun to Novell so Novell could then do their usual thing of sending 5% back to SCO (since SCO obviously doesn't own Unix with this arrangement). So that brings up the criminal matter of embezzlement on the part of SCO's executives. They should begin gastrointestinal egress dilation excercises for when they get an all expense paid vacation in the steel and concrete suite with no view and a randy roomate.

Re:penalties? fines? anything? (1)

LoyalOpposition (168041) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637191)

So if even the court believes that SCO has abused the legal system for unfair gains - will there be any punishment for that? Can the judge declare such punishment or does it have to go through a seperate case? Does the court system even have a way to send the message that it doesn't like being abused?

Yes. Yes, no. Yes.

-Loyal

Re:penalties? fines? anything? (1)

popsicle67 (929681) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637757)

The judge can punish SCO for wasting the courts time but that would have nothing to do with the problems they caused for IBM. It would be something like sanctioning the lawyers and plaintiffs with fines or jail time and the lawyers would have problems with the Bar in their state if they were found culpable for frivolous litigation(meaning they knew their clients were full of dookey). IBM and other defendants would have to go to court though but it begs the question, Will they decide to pay to flog a dead horse? I say that after SCO gets done being whipped in court there won't be enough of it left to bother with,cetainly not worth handing out more money to lawyers. The one sad thought I had was that with the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment the real evil in this saga will never get the appropriate punishment that he so richly deserves. Imagine Darl McBride shuffling down the street in a headstock, naked as a jaybird, with the American Flag shaped like an arrow on his back pointed to his ass, on the Tenderloin, Tuesday night.

Summation of the PDF (5, Interesting)

a_karbon_devel_005 (733886) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636651)

In quick summary, SCO did not provide line number, VERSION and FILE information for many of it's claims. Some of their claims they did not even find source code for (roughly 2/3rds of claims). IBM warned them very early on that if they didn't receive these specifics, they would seek court intervention.

SCO also claimed that "methods and concepts" do not need source code to back them up. However, the Judge decided that this was incorrect and that methods and concepts could, in the most basic of terms, be boiled down to source code. Even the SCO technical witnesses attested to this, and furthermore SCO repeatedly requested the SAME LEVEL of specificity from IBM when requestiong source codef regarding AIX, LINUX and other products throughout the trial.

Basically the Judge finds it unacceptable that even though SCO has had since 2003 to substantiate it's claim with LINE, FILE and VERSION numbers for each claim, it has failed to do so.

Re:Summation of the PDF (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636922)

In other news, "it's" is not a possessive.

Re:Summation of the PDF (1)

just_forget_it (947275) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637001)

Right. Basically, SCO is submitting source code with no reference to anything. Heck, they probably are taking random lines of code in LINUX and CLAIMING that they are also in Unix. What a feeble attempt at defrauding the court. If this were a legitimate case, all the evidence would be available now. At this point, SCO is getting closer and closer to the borderline of being nothing more than a patent troll.

Re:Summation of the PDF (2, Insightful)

LoyalOpposition (168041) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637280)

Right. Basically, SCO is submitting source code with no reference to anything. Heck, they probably are taking random lines of code in LINUX and CLAIMING that they are also in Unix.

No, mostly what they've done is to highlight emails from IBM employees to the linux kernel mailing list, among others, telling them to use certain techniques or not to use certain techniques to accomplish certain goals.

What a feeble attempt at defrauding the court. If this were a legitimate case, all the evidence would be available now. At this point, SCO is getting closer and closer to the borderline of being nothing more than a patent troll.

Yes, but that's not the correct term as SCO have no patents. Vexatious Litigant? Frivolous lawsuit?

-Loyal

Re:Summation of the PDF (2, Interesting)

mabhatter654 (561290) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637319)

Back to the shoplifting analogy... The judge has made IBM "strip search" for the court and SCO is still saying they took "something precious" without actually pointing to something that came from IBM's "pockets". Remember, SCO's had 2 years with IBM's source code opened to their lawyers to find something that IBM "stole". By this point the judge is expecting SCO to have "pages" in hand that they accuse IBM of stealing... they still REFUSE to pick something out that the judge can rule on.

mod do3n (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636718)

Time Paradox! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15636721)

Welcome to TWO YEARS AGO!!! ... ... ...
No wait... they really did wait that long to state the obvious!

Similarity to the War in Iraq (-1, Flamebait)

hypersql (954649) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636809)

I know it's completely off-topic but... 'what you took is in there somewhere, figure it out.' (SCO) 'We know they (WMD) are in that area' (Rumsfeld) SCO just hasn't made its case against IBM (Judge) Bush hasn't made it's case (public opinion in Europe)

Hold The Board Accountable (3, Insightful)

Rhett's Dad (870139) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636882)

I would now like to see the SEC and/or the major SCO stockholders (non-MS obviously) hold the executive team accountable for this major company loss of money, business, and most of all CREDIBILITY in the technology market. Those Linux-using companies that SCO intimidated into buying indemnity licenses should further pursue legal action to get their costs back, with punitive damages to boot.
In my mind, this strategy of theirs fits right in line with the same kind of covert accounting strategies that Enron/Worldcom/etc were investigated for, where the EXECUTIVES themselves were held accountable to the tune of big $$$ and jail time.

Die SCO DIE!!! (2, Informative)

obnoxiousbastard (239578) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636893)

Don't go away mad. Just go away.

Do the math:

SCO = (SUCK)!

Shoplifting (5, Insightful)

corby (56462) | more than 8 years ago | (#15636925)

The shoplifting analogy isn't quite there.

Actually, it's as if you walked out of Neiman Marcus, a security guard accused you of shoplifting, and then refused to tell you what you shoplifted.

Then, the guard pulls over his buddy, respected Yankee Group Laura Didio. She looks in your bag, then looks at the Neiman Marcus catalog, and announces on national media that you have stolen something from Neimann Marcus but she won't say what it is [computerworld.com] .

Three years later, during trial, the guard is still unable to explain what you stole from the store.

So when will SCO get sued? (1)

enosys (705759) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637046)

So when will SCO get sued for what it's done? It wasted others' time and money with frivolous lawsuits. It lied. It got some fools to pay for their Linux licenses, which might be fraudulent. SCO needs to be buried for all this sometime soon.

Re:So when will SCO get sued? (2, Interesting)

LoyalOpposition (168041) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637406)

So when will SCO get sued for what it's done?

That's already happened.IBM counter-sued them to get them to say that IBM doesn't infringe. Red Hat sued to get them to say that Red Hat's customers don't have to pay SCO's licensing fees. And Novell sued them for 95% of their revenue. Amongst other things.

It lied. It got some fools to pay for their Linux licenses, which might be fraudulent.

It tried. SCO refused to sell the licenses once people stepped forward to buy one. Well, except for Microsoft and Sun, but SCO won't show the contracts that went with those sales.

SCO needs to be buried for all this sometime soon.

It'll happen. The Novell lawsuit is going to gut SCO. The IBM countersuit is going to render the fat into soap. And then the Red Hat lawsuit is going to clean up the blood stains.

-Loyal

Mmm... I smell bacon.. (1)

bl8n8r (649187) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637068)

sco, eggs and toast.

Re:Mmm... I smell bacon.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15637691)

... and spam

The Real Tragedy (2, Insightful)

PingXao (153057) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637204)

The real tragedy here is that a gang of crooks are able to game the legal system and drag on a bogus lawsuit for years and years. How many small business owners or private individuals could afford to defend against a legal claim - any legal claim - where the opponene, even though his case had no basis in fact, was ready to litigate for YEARS.

So I applaud the Judge in this case (I think) and IBM for having the backbone to stand up to the SCO thugs. But we're all losers here.

SCO executives and possibly even the goddamned shareholders should do jail time for fraudulent use of the courts.

Re:The Real Tragedy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15637441)

SCO executives and possibly even the goddamned shareholders should do jail time for fraudulent use of the courts.

Along with a number of MS execs. Darl is a bit like an NFL player. Team Redmond hired him for X million per season knowing that his career was likely to be very short. The plan is and was stock kiting scheme to conceal anti-competitive behaviour. Fortunately for them, they live in Bush's America where it is ok to rape children [breakingnews.iol.ie] so long as you don't copy music.

See I told you so... (4, Insightful)

Laura_DilDio (874259) | more than 8 years ago | (#15637348)

Laura DiDio, a senior industry analyst of the Yankee Group who tracks SCO, says Wells's latest ruling isn't a surprise.

Laura is such a two-faced windbag! She spends months berating Linux and IBM -- hell, she's seen the supposed evidence, and now she's doing an about-face so she can proclaim that as an industry analyst, her forcasts are "spot on".

The Yankee Group (and especially Laura) wouldn't know their own asses from a hole in the ground.

Is she married? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15637457)

A girl judge just told SCO where they could stick their source code, and she did it with a sports metaphor!

Yay! And... Huzzah!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?