|
Authored by cpeterson on Feb 10, 2014 19:49:55 GMT
Nothing new to report.
Stopped by the Federal Courthouse; #1131 is still the most recent item on the docket.
The bright-shiny New Federal Courthouse will be ready for occupancy by the end of March, so we've probably had our last of the old historical grey stone courthouse.
But we'll have more courtrooms than judges (we'll almost have as many *floors* as judges!) so maybe we can hope for some judgeships to be filled... Then we can hope for the criminal docket to get worked down to the point that the civil docket can get some attention.
|
|
|
Authored by wayneborean on Feb 13, 2014 1:38:11 GMT
Nothing new to report. Stopped by the Federal Courthouse; #1131 is still the most recent item on the docket. The bright-shiny New Federal Courthouse will be ready for occupancy by the end of March, so we've probably had our last of the old historical grey stone courthouse. But we'll have more courtrooms than judges (we'll almost have as many *floors* as judges!) so maybe we can hope for some judgeships to be filled... Then we can hope for the criminal docket to get worked down to the point that the civil docket can get some attention. Thanks for checking! Wayne madhatter.ca
|
|
|
Authored by sk43999 on Dec 16, 2014 21:10:09 GMT
SCO/IBM Docket #1132 has just been posted on Groklaw. Basically IBM got most everything that it asked for in its Proposed Order (#1131-1).
|
|
|
Authored by arthur on Dec 16, 2014 21:10:37 GMT
Linux wins!!!! (repost of my post on IV) Yesterday's ruling, groklaw.net/pdf4/IBM-1132.pdfwas the judge decision on IBM's motion 1126, groklaw.net/pdf4/IBM-1126.pdffiled 22-Jul-2013. In that motion, IBM recapitulates SCO's remaining Claims / Causes of Action: Counts VII and IX: Tortious Interference Won by IBM. SCO does not own the pre-1996 UNIX Copyrights, and furthermore Novell's Waiver is contractually binding for Santa Cruz successors. Count VI: Unfair Competition Won by IBM. Was predicated on UNIX Copyright ownership, and was also waived. Counterclaims IX and X: Declaration of Non-Infringement of Copyrights A win !!! By the judge Order, IBM has not infringed on any SCO owned Copyrights relative to Linux code, in any way whatsoever !!! Champagne for Br3N, red dress for PJ and brandy for me !!!!! Counterclaims II, IV, and V: Lanham Act, Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Relations, and Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices The judge cannot rule a Summary Judgement over that IBM counterclaim. It'll have to be decided at trial, with the damages that SCO must pay for denigrating Linux and IBM. Very unlikely that this ever go to trial.
|
|
|
Authored by wayneborean on Dec 17, 2014 11:29:03 GMT
See I've got some reading, as soon as I finish waking up Wayne madhatter.ca
|
|
nsomos
Veteran Member
Posts: 140
|
Authored by nsomos on Dec 17, 2014 20:51:58 GMT
Excellent news.
To the extent that what little was left in the dead husk of SCO had been totally milked dry by the bankruptcy process, there would be nothing for IBM to collect in damages that they might win.
Perhaps Darl might be ordered to spend some time standing in public with a sign hung from his neck, saying that he lied over and over again about these things. (Either that, or he is/was a complete idiot)
But that is about the most that IBM could ever hope for.
Thanks to those who continue to monitor such things and report back to us.
|
|
|
Authored by cpeterson on Dec 17, 2014 22:08:55 GMT
Slow day at the Federal Court?
Dig up SCO. Deepen the hole a little. Dump it back in & re-bury.
Next time it comes up, it might be for archaeology rather than litigation.
|
|
|
Authored by wayneborean on Dec 18, 2014 14:59:43 GMT
Excellent news. To the extent that what little was left in the dead husk of SCO had been totally milked dry by the bankruptcy process, there would be nothing for IBM to collect in damages that they might win. Perhaps Darl might be ordered to spend some time standing in public with a sign hung from his neck, saying that he lied over and over again about these things. (Either that, or he is/was a complete idiot) But that is about the most that IBM could ever hope for. Thanks to those who continue to monitor such things and report back to us. If you define 'Idiot' as someone who doesn't have the technical skills to understand the situation, then yes, he's an idiot. a long time ago I looked at the backgrounds of Yarrow and McBride, and neither appears to be capable of making a solid evaluation, just like almost none of the reporters. I suspect they sold themselves on an idea, and were horribly shocked when it turned out that they were wrong. But that's a guess. I've never talked to Yarrow or McBride, so I don't know for certain. I have talked to several of the reporters who got things so badly wrong. The ones I talked to all admitted that they didn't have the technical background to understand what was happening. So in my opinion it was the blind leading the blind, not a deliberate plot. Wayne madhatter.ca
|
|
|
Authored by arthur on Dec 18, 2014 18:49:41 GMT
Reposting my own post from IV:
Q:What's left to fight over?
Post-1996 UNIX code. Code that would have been added by Santa Cruz or Caldera people, and then lifted by IBM to be included wholesale into Linux. Even then the Novell waiver would still carry, because Novell can enjoin by waiver Santa Cruz, Caldera and their successors to leave Novell's customers alone over any copyright dispute. Such code does not exists. Discovery is long over. Any code at isssue would have to have been properly identified and disclosed by SCO, with the proper ownership claim. There were very very very few lines of code still in play after discovery, from the top of my mind, about 22 lines remaining, most of those "lines" being freaking function calls prototypes. Even then, from the filings, SCO utterly failed to track the origin of those lines, so there absolutely no data about pre-1996 UNIX code and post-1996 UNIX code in the Discovery answers, and no proper analysis in the Expert reports, most of which reports have already been voided by the judge for Lack of the Required Specificity, if memory serves. In any case, the whole of SCO case is utterly tainted by SCO claiming code that was never theirs in the first place, no matter their claimed excuse that they were acting in good faith. SCO might attempt to rekindle their Monterey JDM beef, but it's awful thin soup, and SCO failed to add proper Monterey claims in their complaints, and IBM has proof that Caldera was never partner in the Monterey JDM anyways. So, unless Boies & Co has still $5 millions to lose extending this train wreck, the case ought to be over. But then, I'm not a lawyer, and not paided by Microsoft.
|
|
nsomos
Veteran Member
Posts: 140
|
Authored by nsomos on Dec 18, 2014 19:27:52 GMT
|
|
swmech
Veteran Member
Posts: 152
|
Authored by swmech on Dec 18, 2014 19:54:23 GMT
A lot of us did. That's probably why we've been so hooked into it from the beginning. I'm just glad it's finally coming to a legal conclusion.
|
|
|
Authored by wayneborean on Dec 19, 2014 15:05:26 GMT
A lot of us did. That's probably why we've been so hooked into it from the beginning. I'm just glad it's finally coming to a legal conclusion. Yeah. My point was that most of the reporters couldn't make these comparisons. Nor could McBride or Yarrow. Of course this still allows them to be thieves. Once they knew there was no basis for the suit, they should have dropped it. Wayne madhatter.ca
|
|
|
Authored by entre on Jan 13, 2015 8:51:47 GMT
Is there even a remote possibility of official documents after #1132 or is this the final whimper of all on 12-15-2014? groklaw.net/pdf4/IBM-1132.pdf
|
|
|
Authored by sk43999 on Mar 3, 2015 23:58:00 GMT
Is there even a remote possibility of official documents after #1132 or is this the final whimper of all on 12-15-2014? groklaw.net/pdf4/IBM-1132.pdfIt's more than a remote possibility. Judge Nuffer is demanding action: [1133] 02-Mar-2015 "DOCKET TEXT ORDER No attached document. Court orders the parties file a joint status report by Noon, Friday, March 13, 2015. Signed by Judge David Nuffer on 3/2/2015. (asb)" My prediction - SCO and IBM will request an extension of time.
|
|
|
Authored by wayneborean on Mar 4, 2015 13:58:39 GMT
Is there even a remote possibility of official documents after #1132 or is this the final whimper of all on 12-15-2014? groklaw.net/pdf4/IBM-1132.pdfIt's more than a remote possibility. Judge Nuffer is demanding action: [1133] 02-Mar-2015 "DOCKET TEXT ORDER No attached document. Court orders the parties file a joint status report by Noon, Friday, March 13, 2015. Signed by Judge David Nuffer on 3/2/2015. (asb)" My prediction - SCO and IBM will request an extension of time. <INSERT ZOMBIE JOKE HERE>
|
|