This was expected. IBM has the right to know *which* lines of code are alledged violations of contracts and copyright. SCO puts up or shuts up next, but this thing ain't near over kid.
Posted on 12/05/2003 12:29:20 PM PST by Salo
First Report from Grokker Inside Hearing: IBM Wins Both Motions to Compel
Friday, December 05 2003 @ 02:30 PM EST
Our first report from a Groklaw volunteer, sam, who attended the court hearing is that IBM won both of its motions to compel and SCO's motion was set for a later date. Here is what sam is telling us, and it's subject to further information and confirmation as more news arrives. We have several attending and I'll do a followup, but this is the first word. Here is what sam is telling us:
"Just returned from the hearing.
"Needless to say there was blood all over the floor on the SCO side of the aisle none on the 'left' side.
"Judge granted both IBM motions to compel, gave SCO thirty days to comply 'with specificity' and suspended further discovery. Did not rule on the SCO motion until next hearing scheduled for Friday, Jan 23 and 10:00 am.
"SCO did say that they will be filing a complaint within days on copyright violations.
"More to come" So it looks like they have 30 days to finally tell us what code they are talking about "with specificity". Finally.
This was expected. IBM has the right to know *which* lines of code are alledged violations of contracts and copyright. SCO puts up or shuts up next, but this thing ain't near over kid.
SCO puts up or shuts up next, but this thing ain't near over kid.
I'm not sure, do you think I need to reset my cynicism meter or my disbelief quotient?
SCO is a lot better at leveling charges in the press than they are at making the same charges under oath... with evidence. Faced with possible perjury convictions if they are caught lying, they are suddenly unwilling to say what they say every day to the news media, or to show any of this so-called "evidence" that they wave around in front of financial analysts. What is the deal here? They said they were saving it for the courtroom. Well, here's the courtroom. Why does the judge have to literally order them to produce stuff they claim to have had for months? In order to issue this ruling, the judge has to have already concluded that SCO is jerking the court and IBM around. This means that Mr. Boies has managed to get himself on the windy side of this judge by screwing around and playing games instead of proceeding with his so-called "case." |
SCO has put off publishing their numbers for the last quarter -- because their normal business has plunged. Watch for the insiders to start dumping SCOX like crazy now...
That isn't to say I don't and won't use Microsoft in the future. But if you want to run a stable, nuts and bolts business application that will be still running in 2050, the cost and headaches have just gotten out of hand.
Die! SCO Die!
If they have no more difficulty in printing out the lines of Dynix in Linux than they did naming the files in the first place, then this is really only further stalling the whole process, which you claim is their goal in the first place. Do you think they weren't expecting to have to enumerate this over at some point anyway? This is mere formality, IBM better be careful not to overplay it's hand.
From the article:First IANAL, so I could be wrong on this, but I think that last part about "suspended further discovery" means that everything is on hold until SCO answers specifically what they are complaining about. It is kind of like a "time out" during a sporting event. The deadlines for IBM's answers and everything else on the calendar will be pushed back while SCO works on producing the alleged evidence.
Judge granted both IBM motions to compel, gave SCO thirty days to comply 'with specificity' and suspended further discovery.
I think it's pretty rare for a judge to suspend discovery in an action like this. This is only one step short of dismissing the case outright.
Lets not kid ourselves, SCO has no "normal business."
The real SCO changed its name and is still operating in Santa Cruz. This SCO is a shell company. It owns some rights to some things, and it is currently pursuing its perceived rights aggressively.
But this isn't about some pump-n-dump stock scam. IBM, MicroSoft, Oracle, Novell, and Red Hat wouldn't be playing at this level of the game if it was only about fleecing some over-eager, highly gullible SCOX investors ala the 1996-1999 Internet bubble operation.
It's about intellectual property. This SCO claims to own certain rights to Unix. It further claims that some of its proprietary Unix code is in Linux, among other places, in violation of either copyright, contracts, or both.
IBM's point is that SCO has to tell it precisely *which* lines of proprietary code are included in Linux (and other places) without legal permission. IBM absolutely has this right to know. After all, IBM is being sued by SCO.
So the judge could rule no other way.
Prior to this ruling, there was much gamesmanship in play. Now we are to the pivot point.
Can SCO show that proprietary Unix code to which it owns rights are included somewhere in Linux without legal permission?
We'll see SCO's efforts to that extent in 30 days.
If SCO manages to make a decent case in the next 30 days, then we'll have to wait to see how IBM defends itself as well as attacks the SCO arguments/facts.
That's where we stand today.
Now, as for speculation, I'd guess that Unix code *IS* included somewhere in Linux. Some of that Unix code might even be proprietary, copyrighted, and covered by contracts, but can SCO proves that it owns it? Doubtful.
On the other hand, I don't rule it out.
In the meantime, Oracle and MicroSoft will no doubt continue to pay Unix and Linux licensing fees to SCO for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is to insure that SCO has the resources required to give their case a decent shot in the courts.
Should SCO either win or succeed in delaying the outcome of this case for some great length of time, then the software market will see some profound shifts. Should SCO lose, then the continued advance of Linux in the marketplace will no doubt proceed at an increased pace, albeit still as a minor player overall.
Needless to say, lots of fortunes on both sides of the aisle will be impacted no matter how this case ends.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
I hope that this ruling gives some of our illustrious trade journalists a clue that things in the courtroom are not as SCO would have us believe.