|
|
| SCO Gets 3 New IP Lawyers -- They're Not From Boies, Schiller |
 |
|
Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 01:11 AM EDT
|
I think we may discern some panic, or at least a shift in strategy, by the fact that SCO has added three new lawyers to the team, and they are not from the firm of Boies, Schiller. Here is the court application. The three new attorneys are with Andrews, Kurth, a Texas firm, but they are from its Washington, DC office. The three list on their applications the courts they've appeared before, and you find appeals courts, and tax and antitrust law represented in the list, but they are IP lawyers, specializing in patent law. Their names are Frederick S. Frei, John K. Harrop, and Aldo Noto.
Here is what this firm does. Lots of talk about mergers, corporate securities transactions, asset securitization, financial transactions. But when you visit their history of the firm page you find out they began as a Houston, Texas firm just over 100 years ago and now they are an international firm with 400 lawyers and 8 offices, and that in 2003, they added a group of technology lawyers when the firm "acquired a large group of technology lawyers from the failed Brobeck’s Austin office. We also added a large group from Arter & Hadden in Dallas and a key IP group in Washington, DC from Dorsey & Whitney." The three just added to the SCO team joined this firm during one of the acquisitions and are patent specialists: "Andrews Kurth's new D.C. Patent Group includes Aldo Noto, Frederick Frei, and John Harrop, joining the firm as partners, and associates Sean Wooden, Kelly Lee and patent agent Dr. Michael Ye. The new group focuses on patent procurement, acquisition, and exploitation including licensing and other technology transactions and infringement litigation before Federal Courts and the U.S. International Trade Commission. Their practice includes high tech work in the areas of computer hardware and software, semiconductors, electrical devices, multimedia, defense, communications, bioinformatics, biotechnology, nanotechnology, and medical devices. "'Adding a patent group in our Washington, D.C. office was a strategic priority to round-out our national technology practice group,' says Howard Ayers managing partner of the firm. The acquisition brings the number of Andrews Kurth attorneys to over 400." So maybe they've noticed that it might come in handy to have some tech lawyers who might know what binutils is, or more accurately, what it isn't? Hint: It isn't in the Linux kernel. Here is how the firm thinks, from its IP practice page: "Competitive advantage from intellectual assets
"Intellectual property is one of the most valuable assets any company has. When fully leveraged it can be a major source of profitability; when underused and improperly protected, it becomes a liability. Andrews Kurth IP lawyers know patent, trademark, trade secret and copyright law, and we also know the business sense behind it. We give our clients full-service IP counsel, across a wide range of technologies and industries, in every part of the world, without getting lost in the detail. Our strength is straight talk and clear advice that turns a client’s intellectual property into a measurable competitive advantage." Oh, brother, please don't let them find any patents they can help SCO "fully leverage" to become "a major source of profitability". Thank you, Novell, for thinking ahead and not putting all of UNIX's eggs in one basket. Actually, this is most likely about the patent counterclaims.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: bonzai on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 02:26 AM EDT |
| so PJ can easily find them. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 02:31 AM EDT |
we have new councel, and councel needs time to go over our
ip that ibm contributed illegally to linux. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 02:32 AM EDT |
The question now is, what do these new lawers do when they realize that SCO
doesn't have have any "assests" to leverage?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ujay on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 02:34 AM EDT |
Do I smell Baystar behind this?
---
Programmer: A biological system designed to convert coffee and cheesies into
code[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 02:37 AM EDT |
I suspect that these guys are to defend SCO aginst IBM's patent
suit. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: cheros on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 02:42 AM EDT |
I just wonder who sold to who here. Darl doesn't exactly have a large war chest
left (but OK, there's plenty more where the original funds came from).
Or maybe the new guys know a few new tricks - if they've been doing it for years
they must know that it's not exactly reputation enhancing what they've picked up
here otherwise..
Then again, fees are fees. I presume they were wise enough not to operate on a
'no win no fee' basis ;-).[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 02:55 AM EDT |
... these new lawyers, and point them at Groklaw.
It's possible that SCO may have just found some ppl who are ignorant of this
mess.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 03:01 AM EDT |
| Or his firm? Besides seeing their name on documents have we seen them at all in
court? There is an interview with David here from October
2000 on Wired. Clearly he has been able to comment about other actions he has
undertaken, but so far we have heard nothing directly from his firm. Perhaps he
thought Darl was doing enough damage just by himself? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 03:10 AM EDT |
Buying time to stall - IBM is an 800 pound gorilla even next to Microsoft. SCO
is buying time to hope for a miracle because they have no case and they know it.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 03:29 AM EDT |
The new counsel needs time to catch up.
Can such strategy be leveraged to prolong the trial indefinately ?
-Hire new counsel
-Ask for more time
-Repeat[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Marc Duflot on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 03:54 AM EDT |
| link
SCO is excited to
announce that Rob Enderle, principal
analyst for the Enderle Group, a company
specializing in
emerging personal technology, will be presenting a keynote
at
SCO Forum 2004 regarding SCOsource. This is a great
opportunity for SCO
partners to hear from someone on the
outside about SCO and the reasons we have
a valid and
viable case. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: kawabago on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 04:15 AM EDT |
That's still the only case they have. I suppose they will try to argue the APA
transferred the copyrights, all software is a derivative of UNIX and unfair
competition from Santa Clause is crushing the toy industry!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 07:20 AM EDT |
I think that this quote says it all...
"The new group focuses on patent procurement, acquisition, and
exploitation"
It's interesting to see that they believe it is legal and fair to 'exploit'
customers/anyone in the search for profit.
EXPLOIT (noun): To make use of selfishly or unethically[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 08:01 AM EDT |
For some reason this reminds me of the "attack of the many Smiths"
scene from the second Matrix movie... "we need *more* lawyers!!!"
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 08:05 AM EDT |
Ah, no worries. We need the new team as much as SCO does. Gives us a new bird to
pick apart. It was getting quite boring there for a bit. Super.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: a1pha on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 08:28 AM EDT |
I think that this is an admission by SCO that they're firmly in the endgame
now.
I think they're realising that their linux licensing is a non starter, their
code copying charges are non starters and the new lawyers are an attempt to stop
IBM ripping them into pieces (remember IBM has sued them over Patent
violations)
Given IBM.s patent portfolio - this is one match they don't want to get into.
IBM could probably find a patent they owned which affects SCo staff going to the
restroom......
---
--
Trech Gwlad, nac Arglwydd[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 08:49 AM EDT |
"Andrews Kurth's new D.C. Patent Group includes Aldo Noto,...
And now the latest song from an artist called Aldo Noto
SCOs lawsuit is just a fantasy, can you live this fantasy..
Hint: Kids, search for Aldo Nova[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: MyPersonalOpinio on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 08:52 AM EDT |
SCO are defendants for IBM's patent counterclaims. Going against IBM on these
items without patent specialists seemed extremely foolish [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Foolish? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 10:21 AM EDT
- Expected? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 01:46 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 08:54 AM EDT |
How many more lawyers can they pack on this bus? Never mind. The more, the
better when it finally goes over the cliff. Wouldn't want to leave any vacant
seats. (This job won't be going on their resumes I suspect.)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 08:57 AM EDT |
More Lawyers = Less time till they run out of cash. Here's a recipe for
disaster, stall for all you're worth in court, while hiring more lawyers...
The Boise team got 9 Million plus profit-sharing, I wonder what these guys got.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: dmscvc123 on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 10:13 AM EDT |
| ...And SCO still says they can't attend a deposition. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: dmscvc123 on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 10:32 AM EDT |
Andrews Kurth hid billions of dollars for Enron:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/business/2283601
Interestingly, RBC was involved in Enron and A&K are mentioned in the same
article as RBC:
http://www.ascribe.org/cgi-bin/spew4th.pl?ascribeid=20040109.100325&time=10[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: RyanEpps on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 01:26 PM EDT |
We all want SCO to be squashed but have we really looked at the Patent claims?
I know IBM is the good guy in this but what do we really know about the patents.
Do we really agree with them or are we just going along because it suits our
purpose at this time.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: one_penguin on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 02:09 PM EDT |
PJ - in the early days I used to use Google News search as my
information source. I rarely bother any more, because all I want to
know about the SCO scam I find at Groklaw.
Thanks!
What really amazes me is that you can research, write, edit and
publish at about the same speed I can read. Frankly, I don't know how
you do it.
You are the most productive person I know.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- PJ Theory- - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 07:35 PM EDT
- PJ Theory- - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 09 2004 @ 05:36 AM EDT
| |
| Authored by: eddsouza on Tuesday, June 08 2004 @ 11:07 PM EDT |
Possibly SCOG's puppeteers' plan is to avoid a legal resolution of the case by
all means possible... if SCOG folds without the trial having ended (I dunno what
US law says on this point, but can't imagine a bankrupt company is made to go on
fighting its battles in court), then the proprietary faction has a good chance
of pumping up many more Browns and Enderles to hoodwink the public.
OTOH, if SCOG survives till their chops are busted by Judge Kimball/IBM and in
other cases they have filed, that will probably make headlines even in media
where the reporters don't know what "IT" stands for. And this would
make the whole deception effort pointless, seeing that a large portion of the
public would know they had been beaten with a very large, very hard and knobbly
club.
Perhaps the (current, revamped) corporate strategy at SCOG is to increase the
burn rate based on semi-plausible reasons, AND stretch out the time till the
case comes to trial, until the company runs out of cash.. THEN, they will have
achieved the above, as well as the excret^W corporate management floating at the
top of SCOG will be able to shrug with a semblance of innocence "Hey, we
did, and still DO believe we had a valid case, but nasty ol' IBM ran us into the
ground till we had to file for bankruptcy! That isn't OUR fault!"
<whine, whine, whimper, whimper>.
Congress should bring in the life imprisonment penalty for scamsters fiddling
around on these levels (say, >1 million US$).. would lead to an enormous
amount of honesty - provided they also revamped some of the crap laws bedeviling
this country at the same time. Starting with patents for software.
Eddie.
---
Well, I'm disenchanted too. We're all disenchanted.
-- James Thurber
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- I think the plan - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 09 2004 @ 12:33 AM EDT
|
|
|
|
