Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Caldera IBM Government Software The Courts Linux News

SCO Asks Court To Reconsider IBM's Dismissal 139

Posted by CowboyNeal
from the not-so-fast dept.
VE3OGG writes "The SCO Group — the litigation firm currently in dispute with, among many, IBM, over supposed copyright infringing code in Unix — has quietly asked the courts to reconsider IBM's request to toss the case out. SCO argued that the court's November decision was procedurally and substantially flawed and they say 'the rules of procedure do not support such a result under the circumstances of this case.' If allowed to reopen the case, the SCO Group argues, that new evidence would present itself through the deposition of several IBM programmers who had previously been interviewed."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SCO Asks Court To Reconsider IBM's Dismissal

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Errr... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by twiddlingbits (707452) on Saturday December 23, 2006 @12:26PM (#17348356)
    New evidence can be entered after discovery is closed but it's got to be something that would cause a great injustice if not considered. The ruling SCO is protesting was Judge Wells ruling that SCO did NOT comply with Kimball's earlier ruling that the parts of Linux that infringe be defined in DETAIL, with filename, line #, actual code, relation to code SCO "owns" must also be shown. IIRC, SCO tried to skate around this requirement for about a year with various motions and delays. When discovery closed after SCO being allowed a look at the IBM code archives for Dynix, AIX and IBM's Linux contibutions (such as JFS) and taking dozens of depositions from IBM the BEST SCO could come up with was about 25-30 items that meet the burden of proof. Of those 25-30 most were things like .h files, the ELF binary format (which is public), and some Error Codes.

    Critical to the case, even more so than showing infringement, is the issue of IF SCO even OWNS the copyrights on said System V UNIX code found in Linux, and IF they did (big IF) IBM has a contract with Novell (orginal owner or current owner depending on if you are SCO or IBM) that allows IBM an irrevokable right to use the System V UNIX code as they pleased since they paid for that sort of license. SCO is cooked about six different ways but whether they are roasted, boiled, BarBQ'd, broiled, fried, etc. will have to wait until after the close of discovery in the SCO vs Novell case. If the court (same judge by the way) decides in that instance SCO does NOT own the copyrights on UNIX code the case against IBM is over and IBM wins. The only issue to settle would be IBM's counterclaims, which wouldn't be worth much as SCO would be bankrupt without a win (or another infusion of cash in exchange for "IP" from the Microsoft fairy).
  • by cwsulliv (522390) * <cwsulliv@triad.rr.com> on Saturday December 23, 2006 @01:45PM (#17348668)
    that SCO _ever_ thought they had a chance of winning this case; that their intention from the very beginning was just to draw it out as long as possible.

    As long as they do, the 800-pound puppetmaster behind the curtain can continue to get mileage out of charges that Linux is tainted by IP infringement and that Linux users may be liable for stiff damages.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 23, 2006 @06:21PM (#17350022)
    Apparently you don't either, or you would spend that entire useless post actually explaining it. He asked a legitimate question. You had no answer.

  • by Shadow-isoHunt (1014539) on Saturday December 23, 2006 @07:02PM (#17350178) Homepage
    Hey, SCO! You're supposed to submit your evidence during discovery, not several years into the case! Stop wasting our time and give up already.

Organic chemistry is the chemistry of carbon compounds. Biochemistry is the study of carbon compounds that crawl. -- Mike Adams

Working...