SCO's claims Against Daimler-Chrysler Thrown Out 483
Zak3056 writes "According to eyewittness reports published on Groklaw, SCO has been all but thrown out of court in their suit against Daimler-Chrysler.
In a hearing that lasted 18 minutes with the judge ruling from the bench, all of SCO's claims, save that DCC failed to file their required certification with 30 days, were dismissed."
Good Precedent (Score:2, Interesting)
Stock price already in a nosedive (Score:5, Interesting)
Its been quiet for a while.. (Score:3, Interesting)
One question... (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess ultimately my question is, does SCO going belly up mean the end of these lawsuits?
Re:Money? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Money? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's all pump-n-dump as far as I can tell. If you look at their 1 and 2 yr stock charts, you'll see that they were doing better. I think it was due to investors thinking one company had a shot and legally licencing all the linux boxes in the world. Of course, that's ridiculous. So now their company is in the toilet.
And a it's about damn time.
Re:One down (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:One down (Score:3, Interesting)
eyewitness account #1 without the commentary (Score:4, Interesting)
SCO v DC was 18th of 22 cases on the motion callsheet for the morning. At 0841, the clerk called the SCO v DC attorneys up for a brief discussion, during which I was able to overhear the clerk tell them that he would "like to get [them] in and out."
At 0850, the clerk came over to the SCO side of the bench and spoke briefly with them, telling them "five minutes", I think stating the amount of time that each side would be granted for arguments. DC's attorneys came over and confirmed with the SCO attorneys what the clerk had to say.
SCO v DC was called at 0942. Barry Rosenbaum arguing for SCO and James Feeny arguing for Daimler, and motions were heard to admit Heise and Steven Prout?? pro hac vice for SCO, and also to admit Mark Masuchak from Massachussetts pro hac vice for Daimler, which the Judge granted.
Mr. Rosenbaum argued Daimler's summary dispo motion, noting from the outset that this was a more technical case, dealing with software and licensing agreements, and that he would frame the case briefly, in about 30 seconds. Chrysler says that the case is about whether or not section 2.05 of the SA requires a certification of compliance with detailed enumeration of extraneous facts outside the agreeement, or whether it simply requires a brief certification that licensee has complied with the terms of the license agreement.
Mr. Rosenbaum then went on to recite the language of Section 2.05. He stated that the letter requesting the certification from SCO went quite far outside the unambiguous language in section 2.05 when it asked to enumerate information regarding DC's use of Linux. Daimler didn't file the certification until after SCO filed it's lawsuit, which on its face appeared to be about the contract provisions being breached due to DC not giving SCO their compliance certification in a timely fashion.
Mr. Rosenbaum then went on to recite paragraphs 2 & 3 of DC's response letter, stating that there were no cpu's running SCO's software, that not providing a list of cpu's that weren't in existence and hadn't been used in more than 7 years was more than sufficient to comply with the language of 2.05. Since the language of 2.05 is unambiguous, there is sufficient grounds to grant summary judgement on all assertions in SCO's complaint.
Mr. Rosenbaum finished by stating that the original letter didn't request a list of CPU's running SCO's software. Since there were no CPU's running SCO's products, DC felt it was immaterial as to whether or not they responded within 30 days.
At 0951, Mark Heise then argued the SCO side of the case. He felt that DC's SA gave them full access to the source code and that DC had been given the right to use, modify and create derivatives for their own internal use, and that the SA required that they keep the software confidential, that it should not be exported outside the US -- which in this case seems to be a concern since Chrysler's recent merger with Daimler Benz of Germany.
Heise went on to argue the point that DC's answer to the request for certification was not timely nor was it adequate in that SCO has fears that the source code still lives on disk on some computer somewhere at DC and they are entitled to know where it's stored. He also stated that DC is not alleviated from the terms of the SA once they have decided to take the CD's or tapes or whatever of the source code and toss them in a closet somewhere, and that they needed full certification that the software had been held in confidence by DC.
He went on to recite the terms of section 6.02 of the SA, stating that Chrysler, upon ceasing use of the software, was bound to either destroy all copies or return the software and to notify SCO that they did same. Again, he expressed his concern that in DC's use of the Linux software they were worried that they may b
It gets worse, and soon... (Score:3, Interesting)
If the judge grants that (and it looks 50/50).. it's game, set and match.
Re:Stock price already in a nosedive (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:One down (Score:2, Interesting)
I think maybe that's why it's their 2nd biggest mistake.
First victory (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:eyewitness account #1 without the commentary (Score:3, Interesting)
OUCH! Stock price plunges.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:One down (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:OUCH! Stock price plunges.... (Score:3, Interesting)
You think it started when the judge walked out of the room? I'd say that some quick-thinkers decided to sell when the judge walked INTO the room, seeing as how SCO would actually have to prove a point.
Re:One down (Score:2, Interesting)
SCO gets +$30M (BS) +$20M (RBC)
BS buys out RBC's share
SCO loses -$13M
SCO issues 2.1M shares of C.S.
=SCO has an extra $37M in cash with an extra 2.1 M C.S. shares outstanding.
BS no longer has preferred stock, so when SCO goes belly-up, they will have no rights to any remaining assets beyond what their percentage stake in the company is based on C.S. holdings.
Re:SCO winning in mainstream press (Score:2, Interesting)
The part about warranties bugs me, though, since I'm 99% sure that the last Windows EULA I read also offered no warranties. They're still pretty on the mark with the possible concerns there, though.
At any rate, it looks like an interesting article to send to less-savvy friends and relatives who wonder about this open-source stuff you're always on about...
Oddly Enough (Score:3, Interesting)
Its now 4PM EST so they have had a few hours to come up with SOMETHING, but their website [sco.com] only has two PRs so far today... one about a new release, and another about a partnership with Ericom.
Maybe even they dont know how to spin this one...
Has anyone noticed how each day ... (Score:2, Interesting)
This has not yet reversed the general trend downward. Moreover, the average trading volume also has been declining nearly steadily, hence, a realitively small trade can reverse the day's trend.
Re:OUCH! Stock price plunges.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:One down (Score:3, Interesting)
Damn! (Score:2, Interesting)
Now BayStar is dealing with the SEC investigation related to the PIPE deal and it's bid to get out as clean as possible. Seems TSG is holding it's own corporate investors hostage as well. What needs to seriously happen in the rest of the cases is for courts to get SCO to finally decide what their case is about. I mean let's be realistic here, SCO has been on a "fishing" expedition essentially from day one. The lawyer that introduced himself to the DCC team is most likely from one of the three (IBM, Novell, Rhat) but regardless you can bet they're taking notes.
As this case is all but concluded (save for the 30 response time - which means what, a small and meager fine at worst?) I am hoping that it will at least hopefully set a trend. A trend wherein the judges in the other cases see SCO for what is really going on. The fishing expedition is mostly secondary to the primary goal of Darl and company - that is to pump and dump and then do it again. Speedy resolution to SCO's contention is counter to this since it lays to rest the controversy and leaves SCO with no "time" to play the market. Chances are fair that the judge has some inkling of this and didn't appreciate SCO's attempt to manipulate the courts for it's own gains, based on a case that has little if any merit.
The longer this crap floats around on court dockets the more SCO can play the stocks. The quicker the "SCO Question" is answered and layed to rest the quicker SCO's stock will tank and we can all go about get on with making a competitive OS that is stable, robust, and feature ladden, which is exactly what SCO is trying to kill.
Good Luck Darl, you'll need it. Not that it is likely to do you any great benefit. Just a clue Mr. McBride. You might have at least had something (no matter how small) tangible to pull out of your hat if things get sticky. The time to claim that revealing the code would destroy your case is gone. Your case is going down the tubes and waiting of the other foot to drop is most likely a waste of time. There ain't gonna be any other surprises - your case is vaporware. You know it, we know, and soon the judges will know it. Better hope that that sleeping dragon called the SEC doesn't wake - if it does you're most likely going to find yourself up shit creek, and not only without a paddle, but in a very leaky boat.
The question I have is this. When SCO finally tanks, and there investors find out that it was essentially a scam, how is Darl and company going to pay for a legal team? I mean all those investors filing torts and class action torts against SCO, Darl and the rest of the TSG clan, the legal fees are going to seriously start getting very expensive. Then there's the counter suits filed by.... hmmmm, let me think..... IBM, RedHat, Novell, and likely a few other corporations. All that money that Darl and his cavalcade of investors have made is essentially already spent - So what was the point again?
More about an unreasonable request (Score:4, Interesting)
What would you do if you had a contract to provide a bushell of corn to your neighbor at most once a year. Then a guy that lives a mile down the road sends you a letter saying he bought the contract from your neighbor and that you have to get him a bushell of apples and wants you to certify that you are not growing peaches. How would you respond if you were growing peaches? Would you go ahead and send him a bushell of oranges assuming that his claim to have taken over the contract is valid and that is what he is entitled to?
I think this should have been thrown out as well. They didn't even request what they were entitled to. I don't think ignoring a request for something they aren't entitled to is out of line. At the very least, SCOX should have made a good faith effort to contact them again. All they did was send a letter in December and then file suit in March. Come on, not even a second letter, a phone call, or a fax to see why they haven't responded yet? Who does business like that?
Re:Pronunciation Guide (Score:2, Interesting)
I worked on a project for DCX in the US and Germany for a short while. Daimler is definitely the "mother ship."
Re:One down (Score:2, Interesting)
The timing is more a result of two factors. First there is a healthy chance that Kerry will win the election and pull the dividend tax cut. Getting the deal done now means that something like 8 billion of the 30 doesn't go to Washington. Also interest rates are at 40 year lows and very likely to head higher in the next year. MS cash is mostly in short and long term bonds which have gone way up in value as interest rates declined and would go way down in value if interest rates rose. So they decided the timing was right and got the cash out to owners while bond values would still be high and taxes wouldn't get charged.
MS may be big on the stock market, but the IBMs and HPs of the tech world have a much bigger effect on the economy since they employ so many more people.
Re:SCO winning in mainstream press (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:OUCH! Stock price plunges.... (Score:2, Interesting)