Comments on: September 18 roundup

By: Doug

Doug — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 05:48:12 +0000

Novell has asked for a rehearing en banc with the 10 COA. SCO has been given 14 days to respond. The clock ticks on SCO.

By: Bill Poser

Bill Poser — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:00:34 +0000

The WSJ article about SCO is overly optimistic regarding the possibility of the decision in SCO v. Novell reviving SCO’s suit against IBM. Even if SCO were to prove to own the original Unix copyrights, in spite of massive and lengthy discovery SCO has yet to show that Linux contains any infringing original Linux code, a fact on which the judge has remarked. The two putative examples that SCO has presented both ended in humiliation for SCO.

By: Underwood

Underwood — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:33:30 +0000

Where was the judge when the plaintiff’s lawyer was “Channeling”? I read the opinion. The lawyer was allowed to pretend that he was the dead plaintiff explaining how he felt when he was being autopsied. Relevant? Facts in evidence? Appeal to passion and prejudice? Anyone read Rule 3.4? Someone explain to me how this is permissible argument.

By: Troll trips up: SCO told to pay Novell $2.5 million

Troll trips up: SCO told to pay Novell $2.5 million — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 04:20:12 +0000

[…] Flexner was pursuing its anti-Linux claims on contingency. Earlier here, here, and here. [Update Sept. 18, 2009: in dramatic reversal, 10th Circuit, McConnell writing, reinstates SCO's suit; Boies firm still […]