|
|
| Dear BS&F... I think you misfiled... |
 |
|
Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:36 AM EDT
|
Just a quick shout out to BS&F: I think you filed a document in the SCO v. IBM category that actually belongs in the SCO v. Novell category: 998 - Filed: 03/16/2007
Entered: 03/20/2007
Sealed Document
Docket Text: **SEALED DOCUMENT** REPLY MEMORANDUM in Support of Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Novell's Fourth Counterclaim filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (blk) Well, who can keep track of all this paperwork? It could be a clerk's error, but if not, you probably need to fix this. You're welcome.
Update: It turns out they didn't need my help. From Pacer: 1008 -
Filed & Entered:
03/21/2007
Modification of Docket
Docket Text: Modification of Docket: Docket entry #998, SCO's Sealed Reply Memorandum was entered by the clerk in the wrong case. Correction: Clerk has modified the docket text and entered this filing in SCO v. Novell, 2:04cv139, as docket #251, re [998] Sealed Document. (blk)
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:46 AM EDT |
BF&S = BS&F (Boise, Shiller, & Flexner)
RAS[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Still Tired P.J.? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:53 AM EDT
- Still Tired P.J.? - Authored by: Peter H. Salus on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:54 AM EDT
- Still Tired P.J.? - Authored by: Liquor A. on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 10:36 AM EDT
- Still Sick, actually as you see... - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 10:48 AM EDT
- Please get better PJ - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 11:12 AM EDT
- Still Sick, actually as you see... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 11:13 AM EDT
- Still Sick, actually as you see... - Authored by: fuego451 on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 11:27 AM EDT
- then why did you come back? - Authored by: Illiander on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 12:13 PM EDT
- Still Sick, actually as you see... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 01:04 PM EDT
- My appologies if it came off as snarky.... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 01:07 PM EDT
- snarky monster - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 02:03 PM EDT
- Red nose, red dress ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 04:46 PM EDT
- Take it easy, PJ - Authored by: tiger99 on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 05:24 PM EDT
- Still Sick, actually as you see... - Authored by: bigbert on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:11 PM EDT
- Still Tired P.J.? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 10:52 AM EDT
- Still Tired P.J.? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 11:21 AM EDT
- Correction to correction - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 03:56 PM EDT
- Isn't addition supposed to be commutative? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 07:16 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: MathFox on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:50 AM EDT |
We all make mistakes
---
If an axiomatic system can be proven to be consistent and complete from within
itself, then it is inconsistent.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: MathFox on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:54 AM EDT |
For your collection of Open Source and/or law related issues
---
If an axiomatic system can be proven to be consistent and complete from within
itself, then it is inconsistent.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Off topic thread - Authored by: fishyfool on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:57 AM EDT
- $240 million that Microsoft committed to Linux ?? Or to Novell greed not linux LOL - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 11:17 AM EDT
- Some new distortion FUD by Reuters - Authored by: Brian S. on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 11:33 AM EDT
- How credit card companies make money from computer errors. - Authored by: Brian S. on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 12:07 PM EDT
- Linus speaks about the GPL. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 12:09 PM EDT
- EU's Kroes says Microsoft continues "abuse" - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 01:58 PM EDT
- Lawyer sanctioned for filing allegations without supporting evidence - Authored by: Bill.S on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 02:13 PM EDT
- OT: SCOX - Authored by: Peter H. Salus on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 03:17 PM EDT
- OT: SCOX - Authored by: markpmc on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 04:22 PM EDT
- OT: SCOX - Authored by: PJ on Friday, March 23 2007 @ 05:00 AM EDT
- This is the first week below $1.00 - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 05:34 PM EDT
- OT: SCOX - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 07:27 PM EDT
- OT: SCOX - Authored by: rc on Friday, March 23 2007 @ 12:51 PM EDT
- More happy happy joy joy dancing - Authored by: MDT on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 04:00 PM EDT
- Microsoft's John Caroll on ZDNet: Perspective on "Blocking the Microsoft / Novell deal" and GPL3 - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 04:37 PM EDT
- Patent Office slings some BS - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 04:45 PM EDT
- Judge to RIAA: Put up or shut up - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 04:48 PM EDT
- The Media and lack of investigative reporting - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 06:53 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 10:03 AM EDT |
You see, SCO finally figured it out. Novell are working for IBM !
Well it is obvious of course: Novell is in the computer business and so is IBM.
Novell's headquarters are in the same country as IBM's. IBM has paid money to
Novell under the auspices of "buying SuSE" - and we all know that
Linux is free. Novell is countersuing SCO, and so they *must* be working under
IBM's direction. So therefore, according to SCOlogic, there is really only one
case instead of two !
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 10:04 AM EDT |
Could this have been an error by the clerk of the court (or whoever does the
data entry in these dockets)? There does seem to have been something expected
in the Novell docket on the date this was filed (see Novell 246). If it was
BS&F who misfiled, does this mean that the material did not meet the
deadline?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: sschlimgen on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 11:13 AM EDT |
<Humor>
<SCO Logic>
By politely informing BS&F of the filing mistake, PJ has revealed herself to
be a front for IBM.
After all, everyone knows the Nazgul are sneaky. Helping SCO out and appearing
to be fair is exactly the opposite of what they'd want, so they did it to
confuse everyone.
</SCO Logic>
Y'know, this "thinking like SCO" is kinda fun, though it makes my
brain feel like Moebius, Dali, Escher & Picasso are having a PaJama party
inside my head.
</Humor>
Steve Schlimgen
---
Meandering through life like a drunk on a unicycle.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 11:44 AM EDT |
We can't tell whether it's BSF's error or the courts, because the filing is
sealed.
OK, maybe it's not the "best" part. I, at least, found it amusing...
MSS2[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 12:22 PM EDT |
The current docket number is something like 1,010 according to Tuxrocks, and the
filing mistake was already corrected long ago (measured in Internet time:-),
more than twelve hours ago.
You're far behind. BSF figured out their mistake already, just for once. :-)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 03:39 PM EDT |
Hmmm. BS&F Bill - $50 million and counting
Groklaw Bill - $0
BS&F Lunacy and Demonstrated Incompetence - Priceless
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 06:51 PM EDT |
Consider the following...
Groklaw is providing SCO with amazingly cogent legal advice, even though SCO
fails to take it.
BS&F is providing SCO with amazingly.. er.. expensive legal advice.
What if a complete review of the Groklaw archives compared to BS&F's filings
in the SCO cases using the Rochkind-Blepp-Balmer filtering system reveals over a
90% match between the content of Groklaw and the BS&F filings in the cases.
Based on this non-literate system of evaluation what if BS&F concludes that
Groklaw has been dumping BS&F IP onto the internet and files suit accusing
Groklaw of unfair trade practices and claiming that the Free Open legal advice
is not only unconstitutional but just plain unnatural.
BS&F might end up asking the RIIA to help them track down all the Groklaw
posters based on their IP addresses,
and file john-doe-re-me-fa-so-la-ti-doe lawsuits seeking to properly identify
all of the potential infringing Groklaw posters, thus ensnaring little old
ladies who have never used a pocket calculator let alone a computer, and dead
people in expensive and highly entertaining legal disputes.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
