BD of Directors Says Novell Would Retain UNIX Copyrights

Groklaw ^ | 10 November 2004 | Pamela Jones

[ShadowAce]

I did not include the actual Reply as it is quite long. It is posted, however, at the above site.

[ShadowAce]

SCO News ping

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Game, set, match.

Sell SCO short.

[ubu]

Not a total geek, so I haven't followed the hardcore legal fights going on, but I do find someone asserting a UNIX copyright interesting. Can you briefly fill in the background & implications for those of us not in the loop?

[ShadowAce]

SCO's Unix product started failing, and then they sued IBM for copyright infringement for their contributions to Linux.

IBM countersued.

Novell claimed that SCO doesn't own any copyrights--merely the Unix business. SCO sued Novell for slander of title.

SCO also sued Daimler-Chrysler and Red Hat (Linux distributor).

The SCO-DCC suit was thrown out, and the other suits are being delayed by SCO as they have yet to show any proof whatsoever for any of their claims.

[Boundless]

> SCO also sued Daimler-Chrysler and Red Hat ...

DC and AutoZone.

RH sued SCO.

[ShadowAce]

You're right. I had forgotten that.

[talosiv]

You missed the most important event in your chronology:

The $50 million dollar "investment" by Microsoft to SCO.

They may have pumped up to $86 million into failing SCO - all just prior to SCO filing the Linux lawsuits.

-R

[talosiv]

Forgot the link:

http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/linux/story/0%2C10801%2C91145%2C00.html?f=x10

[Boundless]

And because RedHat sued SCO, SCO can't just drop
that suit. Nor can SCO drop the IBM countersuit.

Not only is SCO going to lose all their cases,
there's a strong chance that some people face
criminal charges here.

[Salo]

Well, that *is* news. Looks like the Kneepad Mircoserf's game is up, and they'll just have to win on technical merits now.

[ShadowAce]

and they'll just have to win on technical merits now.

LOL!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Thanks for the ping!

Surely , this must nuke SCO's claims!

[Only1choice____Freedom]

For a simpler explanation, see:

http://www.arie.org/doh/

The Dukes of Hazard analogy.

[Bush2000]

"Something extraordinary has happened. Clueless, ideologically-driven bigots are posting articles about Novell again..."

[Salo]

When are you going to upgrade your name? Bush2000 is so pre-mandate. ;-)

[ubu]

Thanks ShadowAce! And to whomever posted the Dukes of Hazard link... not that I ever watched that show. :-)

Of course, my first question is, "Can the minutes from the 1995 corporate kit be duplicated on a typewriter from that era?"

Thank you, I'll be here 'til Thursday!

[TechJunkYard]

This still doesn't resolve the copyright question.

But it does expose why Caldera had to repeatedly ask Novell to transfer the copyrights, when Caldera supposedly already had 'em.

[ShadowAce]

This still doesn't resolve the copyright question.

How so? It looks to me like Novell has written proof they own the copyrights to Unix, thus blowing SCO's case out of the water.

Of course, IANAL, so I may not be seeing this in the correct light.

[TechJunkYard]

They're not explicitly asking the judge to decide the copyright question, only the Slander of Title question. That gets this case outta there so Kimball can get back to the IBM case.

I think (IANAL either) Kimball would love to decide the copyright, and no doubt AZ and IBM would like that too. But I also think Novell just wants to get this thing over with.

If SCO gets to do any discovery in this matter, they'll tie this one up for as long as they can, then they'll be back to playing the courts against each other, and some MicroIdiot might give 'em some more money to play with.