Posted on 02/22/2006 10:03:02 AM PST by Salo
Hold on to your hats! IBM has subpoenaed Microsoft! And Sun! At last, we're getting to the core of the matter. We're going to get to find out the whole story. I'd pay for this. No kidding. Feast your eyes on these and don't skip the topics for deposition:
* Plaintiff IBM's Notice of Service of Subpoenas Duces Tecum - yes, plaintiff for the countercharge...oops, I meant counterclaims * Exhibit A - HP's (deposition set for March 15, 9 AM) * Exhibit B - Baystar's (deposition set for March 16, 9 AM) * Exhibit C - Microsoft's (deposition set for March 14, 9 AM) * Exhibit D - Sun's (deposition set for March 7, 9 AM)
If anyone has time to do a plain text of the topics, I'd appreciate the help. What a day.
I love Sun's. Among other things, IBM would like to have them testify about such matters as "restrictions or prohibitions on Sun employees having access to any UNIX product, including, but not limited to, its source code." And they'd like to hear all about all communications between Sun and SCO since June 28, 2002 (isn't that the date Darl joined SCO as CEO?), including any chats about any software licensing agreements and what Darl said to Scott McNealy in May of 2003 regarding SCO's rights to the UNIX operating system and "discussions of business opportunities between SCO and Sun." Oh, and involvement by Sun in the development of Linux.
IBM would like Baystar to hand over documents about any communication between Baystar and Microsoft regarding SCO, IBM or the SCO v IBM litigation and all documents regarding agreements between Baystar and SCO and all documents regarding Baystar's investment in SCO, and all documents concerning Baystar's knowledge of SCO's business". Say, that should be easy for a "pure financial animal".
Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft. Do tell IBM all about any agreements between Microsoft and SCO, and all communications or agreements relating to SCO or this litigation, including all communications between Microsoft and SCO since June 28, 2002, including Darl's communication in May of 2003 "with Steven Ballmer regarding SCO's rights to the UNIX operating system". Oh, and IBM would like to hear about "Microsoft's business strategy regarding Linux", and they'd like to chat about the Caldera antitrust litigation against Microsoft too. Me, too. Me, too. Now about those shredded documents... And finally, they'd like "all communications or agreements relating to SCO or this litigation, including all communications with Baystar, Royal Bank of Canada, and Everyone's Internet, Ltd."
Yoo hoo. PIPE Fairy. Hope you like sunshine.
As for HP, IBM would like to see their contract licensing them to use UNIX. They'd like to know about any restrictions on employees having access to UNIX source code and all documents concerning "any agreements relating to any Hewlett-Packard software product involving Hewlett-Packard and AT&T, USL, Novell, Santa Cruz, Tarantella, or SCO." And any documents regarding any open sourcing of any HP UNIX product and all documejnts concerning the origin of any UNIX source code "publicly disclosed or open sourced by Hewlett-Packard." And they would like to see, or hear about, any agreements between SCO and HP. They'd like to know more about the indemnification plan of HP's also. And this is interesting, number 12:
12. All documents concerning any efforts to ensure or maintain the secrecy or confidentiality of any UNIX source code, know-how, concepts, techniques, or methods, including but not limited to: (a) any rule, policy, practice or procedure relating to the confidentiality or secrecy, or lack of confidentiality or secrecy, of any UNIX source code, know-how, concepts, techniques, or methods; any breach of any such rule, policy, practice or procedure; (c) the use by any person of any UNIX source code, know-how, concepts, techniques,, or methods; and (d) the disclosure or availability of any UNIX source code, know-how, concepts, techniques, or methods to any person.
I begin to think that every question we've had, we will finally get to know the answer.
I see comments indicating that some of you thought discovery was over. Here, from Groklaw's IBM Timeline page, is the schedule:
22-Dec-05 - Final Deadline for Parties to Identify with Specificity All Allegedly Misused Material
27-Jan-06 - Close of All Fact Discovery Except As to Defenses to Claims Relating to Allegedly Misused Material
17-Mar-06 - Close of All Remaining Discovery (i.e., Fact Discovery As to Defenses to Any Claim Relating to Allegedly Misused Material)
As you can see, we're in the part that I've highlighted in red, which is over on March 17. It's all about defenses now. In other words, SCO filed it's list of ha ha allegedly misused material, and now IBM gets to do discovery to establish its defenses. Don't forget the expert witnesses also:
14-Apr-06 - Initial Expert Reports
19-May-06 - Opposing Expert Reports
16-Jun-06 - Rebuttal Expert Reports
10-July-06 - Final Deadline for Expert Discovery
And then, ta da! Dispositive motions.
Huh? I thought you said this trial was going to be over at the very first summary judgement request, but it's still going on? IBM is now the one on the fishing expedition? That sounds desperate to me, at least that's what you said about SCO's discovery. Looks like IBM is on the ropes now, doesn't it. Especially since they're on the hook already for giving Novell $50 million themselves.
See--that's what happens when you think. Things get all wrong in your head.
Yea SCO sends out discovery notices to Intel a few hours before its due and IBM is the desperate one? Thats what happens when you think, its like watching the Texans Play the Saints, its bound to be ugly but still fun to watch..
It's always best to post abusive PMs right in the thread that spawned them.
What you should have said. Much more correct to the point.
Must be, according to you guys. At least that's what you said about SCO's discovery, how is this any different?
bttt
Decorum prevented me from doing so, and some of the ones I saw which he sent to others were even worse..
So what, this is still laaaaaaaaate in the process for IBM, who supposedly had this thing wrapped up before it even began, at least according to you guys. "Fishing Expedition" I seem to recall, many many times.
Oh you poor little things, so terrible they couldn't be repeated. Sure they were. Who you whiners talking about, anyway?
I've done it, with asterisks or "font color=white" to redact parts of words. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
I think at least one warning would be fair, and only if you post your own comments as well. I might do that before I cried to the administrators, but some around here seem to do that at the drop of a hat.
Either way, they're a humorous bunch.
If I get an abusive private mail out of the blue (and not part of an ongoing PM conversation), it goes in the thread.
I don't see where a warning is necessary.
That's up to you, guess I've never gotten one I felt I couldn't handle on my own.
That's how I handle it on my own.
Like you don't know.
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.