On TV.com: Jennifer Hudson's Chicago Christmas
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 11 of 29:
Next »
« Previous
Maybe, and maybe not.
The fact that IBM didn't stop the filing means very little really. If they did block it, SCO would simply file another law suit and the entire thing starts from square one again.
Posted by: No_Ax_to_Grind   Posted on: 02/28/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

(NT) Whatever happened to the "Put Up, or Shut Up" order from January?  Plain Logic | 02/27/04
SCO droped the part of the suit...........  nite_w0lf | 02/27/04
An effective way of dragging it out  IT_User | 02/27/04
You have it backward.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/28/04
Very true  NemesisNL | 02/28/04
bitty changes like the wind  NoB$ | 02/28/04
Hmmm... seems to be working  IT_User | 02/28/04
Must Be an Odd Monday...  BanjoPaterson | 03/01/04
"Certainly SCO must have a case"  IT_User | 02/27/04
subject to IBM's right to move against the amended pleadings.  nite_w0lf | 02/27/04
Maybe, and maybe not.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/28/04
An interesting sidenote  nite_w0lf | 02/27/04
Never ending story  OhMyGosh | 02/28/04
I don't agree with this  NoB$ | 02/28/04
IBM's code doesn't belong to SCO  dwjohnso | 02/28/04
in case you didn't know ... link  dwjohnso | 02/28/04
Three lawsuits?  k4_pacific | 02/28/04
As One Groklaw'er writes...  BanjoPaterson | 03/01/04
IBM - Classic Response  Chad_z | 02/29/04
DON'T COUNT SCO  V Sanders | 02/29/04
Baloney  Chad_z | 02/29/04
Of course that's literally true  IT_User | 02/29/04
Perhaps sooner  IT_User | 03/01/04
Must Be an Odd Monday...  BanjoPaterson | 03/01/04
(NT) This was a response to earlier thread...  BanjoPaterson | 03/01/04
testing 123  ScarryJerry | 03/01/04
SCO vs. IBM  rdwhitti | 03/01/04
SCO vs. IBM...rdwhitti  dbradt@... | 03/02/04
SCO  krolsen | 03/05/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement