On GameSpot: We try out down the PSP Go
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 41 of 54:
Next »
« Previous
SCO=Grease Spot
Well the chickens do finally come home to roost. In this case not just the flock, but the whole damn farm. SCO loves to litigate others, but does not like it when the shoe is on the other foot. To bad.

If SCO drops any of the suits they have filed they will have to pay court costs and legal costs for the other side. This would also occur if the judge in any of the cases SCO filed dismissed the cases. Potentially, the defendants (meaning folks like IBM, Novell, etc.) could then file against not just SCO, as a company, but potentially the officers of SCO for damages, in their personal capacity, to their fine reputation, caused by SCO's claims. While corporate law provides for limited liability, it does not protect people who as officers, become reckless and demonstrate things like the proceeding, knowing their attacks and claims were without a valid basis or with merit.

As director of Research & Technology at a law firm I have been continually amazed the judge in the SCO v. IBM case has not stopped SCO's games and dismissed the case. I suspect she was trying to prevent needless appeals by SCO. She may well have the chance now. If SCO has no new money they could not go to the higher courts. Story over.

I saw this in a previous comment, and I agree, is SCO going to put a button on their website for a Paypal donation? The allegations, from the beginning,were and are over the top, to a nonsense level.

Those of you outside of the U.S. have seen the U.S. Federal Courts be very good in the handling of the SCO cases, so far. However, cases like this are also VERY expensive and the rules of court are very clear. SCO has been testing the limits of those since day one. Now SCO may be at the end of their finacial rope. That alone will end the SCO madness. The other thing is that even if on some fluke SCO won, the courts could have awarded as little as $1, or less, in damages. SCO at no point described how they were harmed, in a manner that the amount damages were clear. SCO has always assumed the court would accept they were a viable company and violations of these alleged lines of code, damaged them.

Further, since SCO at one time sold Linux, the court could have considered that SCO was fighting the very thing, they themselves had used to enrich themselves. SCO was pretty much screwed no matter what.

On a quick side note, we have a new lawyer coming into the firm I work for, who wants to start litigating certain software companies for delivering defective software, in violation of the Tennessee Lemon Law. He may have a point. He asked me to explain to him, from my professional standpoint, the purpose of patches, updates, and service packs. As we know, they are most often to repair "flaws" in the software. He may have a point.

He is working on writing a small case, right now, against SCO!!! He also has M$ and WindowsXP, Win2000, etc. on his radar. The partners told him that he needs to go slow. I think they saw me having a stroke trying to explain to this new, freshly minted lawyer the joys(?) of dealing with M$. M$ needs to be very cautious, this young man is watching. Under the Tennessee Lemon Laws he may well have a valid point.
Posted by: drichards1953   Posted on: 04/17/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

blub blub blub  Arrg | 04/16/04
Of course not....  James T. Kirk | 04/16/04
i do smell something....  Monkey_MCSE | 04/16/04
Microsoft's getting worried  OhMyGosh | 04/16/04
Sewage, eh...  jcrit | 04/16/04
Breaking news....!!  PaulWallen | 04/16/04
Royal Bank of Canada  nograin | 04/18/04
what will rbc do  lotta_anger | 04/19/04
investors  Arm A. Geddon | 04/16/04
Baystar is going to regret this...  Mike Cox | 04/16/04
Mikie - Baystar ALREADY regrets it  IT_User | 04/16/04
love it...  Breakthrough Bruce | 04/16/04
. . . . . 7.4 . . . . . .  Plain Logic | 04/16/04
No, they won't.  linuxadmin2 | 04/16/04
Once again 200% on the money  Joe Frisco | 04/17/04
"Cold Feet"? Not BayStar!  kd5auq | 04/16/04
Perversely sorry if SCO bows out  Blair_z | 04/16/04
I believe you're wrong  Robert Carnegie | 04/19/04
I wonder...  Rick_K | 04/16/04
What I don't get  Fred Fredrickson | 04/16/04
if ms bought sco  V Sanders | 04/17/04
In need of a moral Victory  Joe Frisco | 04/17/04
I really hope....  Rick_K | 04/18/04
I really hope.... jafrisco gets back on his meds. (NT)  Plain Logic | 04/18/04
MS won't dare touch SCO - It would be death for them!  George Mitchell | 04/18/04
NEWS FLASH! MS Discovers A Need for $20M More Unix Licenses  km4hr@... | 04/18/04
Suckers Poor Bay Street and Royal Canada Bank - Just trrew away $50,000,000  Plain Logic | 04/16/04
Hey bitty, come eat your crow  Spam-ZD | 04/16/04
ms wants nothing to do with sco  V Sanders | 04/17/04
ZD/CNET CARROL AX_, Your crow is served!  Spin_Masterz | 04/16/04
Uh no...  John Le'Brecage | 04/17/04
Testing the GPL  IT_User | 04/17/04
It's a start. (More of a pop quiz than a test)  John Le'Brecage | 04/17/04
NBMers crap pants?  richhayes | 04/17/04
I'll tell you why....  Spin_Masterz | 04/17/04
Tell me why  richhayes | 04/18/04
Maybe he meant to say..  NemesisNL | 04/18/04
maybe  richhayes | 04/18/04
Chill out  Spin_Masterz | 04/18/04
not exactly  NemesisNL | 04/19/04
SCO=Grease Spot  drichards1953 | 04/17/04
I'd be interested to know...  John Le'Brecage | 04/17/04
um.. the EULA is no different  Romanval | 04/18/04
No, you miss my point...  John Le'Brecage | 04/18/04
Oh, great.  gordon@... | 04/17/04
No it's not!  NemesisNL | 04/18/04
omg...  userini | 04/17/04
SCO is money down the drain  Uncoveror | 04/18/04
I don't think it will take that long happy (nt)  NemesisNL | 04/18/04
People always want their $$ back for broken stuff  Xunil_Sierutuf | 04/18/04
BayStar and Royal Canada Bank both proved that PT Barnum was right . . .  Plain Logic | 04/18/04
I smell investor lawsuits just around the corner!  George Mitchell | 04/18/04
royal bank of canada  lotta_anger | 04/19/04
RE: royal bank of canada  support@... | 04/19/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here