Sure it can, if one of these current or surely upcoming Federal trials can nail linux for bootlegging. And there's no reason they shouldn't, legal experts within the Free Software Foundation itself are the ones that have admitted the likely patent violations they know of, 300 or so in the kernel alone.
It's so obvious what's going on, the linux crowd's best answer is to revoke the entire US patent system, you see it on here and elsewhere all the time. LOL, good luck with that guys. Actually they're working to rewrite the kernel right now (don't believe the denials, it's their only chance), but they'll never be able to get them all out. IBM is trying to setup some sort of patent welfare system, but it's going to be limited in what it can protect because not many others that have actually earned patents are ready to throw them to the wind.
In the meantime, linux is just a rip off of US intellectual property, run by a bunch of guys who know it but make it their full time job to run around denying it, and pushing for our laws to be changed. I'll get ripped like usual for pointing it out, but hey, it's actually their problem, not mine.
There are two in this issue, one is IBM. The other is Red Hat, which sued SCO for false advertising, deceptive trade practices, tortious interference and other things because of SCO stating publicly that Linux is tainted without showing any evidence to prove that assertion. This is the trial that would free Linux, but SCO got it stayed until IBM is decided.
Daimler Chrysler was about DC not responding to SCO's request for status of licensing, including a demand to know in which ways DC is using Linux. That one was dying, then SCO tried to get it stayed, then it died, SCO lost, and just lost their appeal. It'll cost them if they want to bring that bit of an action still allowed again.
Autozone is about SCO alleging that Autozone used SCO libraries during its transition from SCO's UNIX to Linux. The man in charge of the migration says no, and I think SCO's just pissed about losing a major customer. Autozone got this one stayed until IBM is decided. Interestingly, SCO is lying either to the judge in Red Hat or the one in Autozone, because they contradicted their Red Hat and DC opinions trying to avoid a stay.
Novell is about SCO alleging that Novell committed slander of title when Novell contested SCO's statement of ownership of the UNIX copyrights. So far, Novell board minutes seem to show that Novell sincerely believed it didn't transfer ownership, therefore I expect SCO to lose this one.