SCO Admits They Might Just Not Win - Maybe

inetsee writes "According to Groklaw, SCO has admitted in a 10K filing that if the court grants any or all of IBM's six motions for summary judgement, 'We can not guarantee whether our claims against IBM or Novell will be heard by a jury.' The site goes through a statement by statement run-down of SCO's filing, noting things like the absence of employee numbers (a piece of information they told investors they would disclose). Elsewhere in the document, it is revealed that SCO's stock is in danger of being delisted from NASDAQ, they may come under further litigation from an unrelated legal matter, and SCO is now claiming that OSes like HP-UX and Solaris are derivatives of code that they 'own'. Despite the dire pronouncements throughout the filing, if everything else runs according to plan their 10K indicates they could keep fighting the good fight for another 12 months."

Re:Stock price...

[Spad]

Which is exactly what SCO want - to be bought up rather than to lose the case and end up bankrupt.

Not to mention the precedent it would set for other low-lifes to start legal action against IBM with the hope of being bought.

I thought that was standard for 10K...

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I thought 10K filings are supposed to have that type of information, on the forseeable risks. I don't care what sort of PR bravado a company has, a 10K filing is not the place to pretend you are guaranteed a win everything.

In short, nothing to see here, move along.

Hooray Pamela Jones

[Darth Cider]

SCO deserves all the bad press it can get on Slashdot, but Groklaw has led the way. What a fantastic job they've done over there! Kudos, you fine folks.

Re:I thought that was standard for 10K...

[tverbeek]

Mod parent up. These kinds of filings always contain statements of potential doom that you'll never find in any press release. If they're in a legal dispute, they have to say what the consequences will be if they lose... even if they sincerely and correctly expect to win. So it's not an admission that their case is weak, only of the fact that they are involved in litigation whose outcome is still pending.