[plug] Novell kicks TSG in head, groin

[Shayne O'Neill]

I wonder if this means that IBM can then say "Well, another case has just
found that SCO isnt a party to this IP. Can we throw that out this arvo
and move on to the counterclaim?"

And far out, without UNIX copyrights, I wonder if SCO has any assets worth
speaking of, other than the office chairs.

Oh how the wicked fall.

--
"Well, I think if you say you're going to do something and don't do
it, that's trustworthiness."
-- George Bush on CNN online chat, Aug.30, 2000
RIAA Copyright notice trap: http://guild.murdoch.edu.au/~shayne/

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Leon Brooks wrote:

>
>     http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20041110033306403
>
>     Something extraordinary has happened. Novell has filed its
>     Reply in Support of Novell's Motion to Dismiss Amended
>     Complaint, and in the document it reveals that it has filed
>     an exhibit, the 1995 minutes from the corporate kit of a
>     meeting of the Board of Directors, which clearly and
>     unequivocably say that Novell was to retain the UNIX
>     copyrights in the sale to Santa Cruz that year: [...]
>
>     And there is another bombshell. Novell says that by
>     introducing evidence outside the complaint, such as the Ed
>     Chatlos declaration, SCO is inviting the Court to convert
>     the motion to dismiss into a summary judgment, which they
>     say means the Court now has the option to decide the
>     matter once and for all and with finality right now.
>
> Cheers; Leon
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG discussion list: plug at plug.linux.org.au
> http://mail.plug.linux.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/plug
> Committee e-mail: committee at plug.linux.org.au
>