decoration decoration

When you want to know more...
For layout only
Site Map
About Groklaw
Legal Research
ApplevSamsung p.2
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Gordon v MS
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
MS Litigations
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
OOXML Appeals
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v Novell
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Unix Books


Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

You won't find me on Facebook


Donate Paypal

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

The Media on SCO Bankruptcy
Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 12:06 AM EDT

I thought it would be fun to include some of the media reaction to the news of the SCO bankruptcy filing. Some of the headlines are inspired. The winner has to be "SCO files Chapter 11 bankruptcy - Seeks court protection from its own lawsuits". My personal favorite is, "SCO files for Chapter 11, threatens business as usual." There is also a funny graphic in the collection. One of your comments is immortalized in the mainstream media as well.

We get to hear from some of the SCO rah rah fan club that was. Laura Didio however appears not to wish to be interviewed, according to Sam Varghese. Enderle presents his opinion, despite claiming the other day not to have been paying attention to SCO for years. And I think MOG, the only true believer still left, makes an appearance. At least it sounds like her writing style. She's incognito, though, posing as ".NETDJ News Desk".


  • Chapter 11 blamed on IBM suit, Tom Harvey, Salt Lake Tribune: The SCO Group's stock finished down 26 cents, closing at 38 cents a share on Friday on the Nasdaq Stock Exchange. It had traded as high as $3.11 in the past year.... Bob Enderle, principal analyst and founder of the Enderle Group of San Jose, Calif., said The SCO Group's gamble was that it didn't have the financial strength to survive losing. "To do this, SCO needed to focus 100 percent of their effort . . . and SCO simply refused to do that," he said in a telephone interview. ...

    The company's lawsuit garnered worldwide headlines in 2003 because it was seen as a Microsoft-backed attempt to derail Linux. It angered the open-source community because of its potential to reach into the pockets of users for licensing payments.

    "It damaged us and it damaged my [consulting] business at the time. It created the impression there were intellectual property claims against Linux," said Bruce Perens of Berkeley, Calif., one of the founders of the open source movement.

    Enderle said that paradoxically SCO's failure so far to win its lawsuits and now its bankruptcy will strengthen the open-source movement by making it harder to sue over the code in Linux that came from many sources. "This has actually defined an awful lot," he said.

    Perens also said the lawsuit has helped to define the relationship between open source codes and intellectual property rights.

    "I think what this means is don't tread on me," he said. "Rather than a group of people who don't understand intellectual property, we understand it thoroughly."

  • SCO, SCO, SCO your boat, gently down the bankruptcy stream, Sam Varghese, ITWire: The SCO Group has declared that it will be filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Yes, this is the same group that was so confidently asserting that it would appeal against a recent judgement that rules Novell was the owner of the Unix IP which SCO claimed to own....

    That future is not looking overly bright now, methinks. And it is fair to assume that none of the cheerleaders of the SCO Group will be coming forward to push their tortured opinions in the media.

    IBM's reaction is characteristic of its low-key approach; the company has said nothing....It looks like I won't be getting an interview with Laura DiDio even though I wrote and asked for one. She seems to have gone underground.

  • SCO Declares Bankruptcy, Robert McMillan, ABC News: The company's critics said that the bankruptcy filing was expected. "I have to say we weren't surprised," said Jim Zemlin, executive director of the Linux Foundation, in a statement e-mailed to IDG News. " Their legal strategy was ill-conceived and misguided. Companies like Red Hat, IBM and many others have proven that it's far smarter to build a business around Linux than it is to attack it in the courts."

  • SCO Bankrupt? End of Saga Can't Be Far Off, Charles Babcock, InformationWeek: The thing that bothers some of us is that a competent technology company resorted to claims in court rather than sticking to the hard work of technology generation. Anyone may assert claims of invention and ownership, but to resort to sweeping claims against such a broad set of customers suggested that all SCO's boldness had been invested in a legal strategy. And that in turn suggested a loss of nerve in its technology strategy.

    Is Chapter 11 the last chapter? It's probably only the beginning of the last chapter, but a sign that the end to this sorry saga cannot be far off.

  • SCO, a Software Maker, Is Seeking Bankruptcy, Bloomberg News, on NY Times: The SCO Group, the software maker that sued International Business Machines for copyright infringement, filed for bankruptcy yesterday, 10 days after conceding that much of the case should be dropped....

    The trial of SCO’s suit against Novell had been set to begin Monday but was postponed because of the bankruptcy filing. The case was substantially gutted last month when a judge ruled that Novell owned the copyrights for the Unix system.

  • Battered SCO Files for Bankruptcy to Stay Afloat, David Kravets, WIred: In an interview two weeks ago with Wired News, CEO Darl McBride said the company would leave no legal stone unturned in its quest to continue litigating to win the Unix copyright. A company spokeswoman declined to comment Friday on whether SCO would follow through.

    In that interview, McBride said that the company was healthy and on the right track with new mobile device products and upgraded server products....

    In 1995, SCO (then known as Santa Cruz Operation) bought the Unix operating system from Novell for $149 million, but who owned the copyrights wasn't clear, and years of litigation ensued.

  • SCO files for Chapter 11, Nate Anderson, ars technica: Is there any future for the fallen UNIX vendor? SCO CEO Darl McBride hopes to reinvent the company and focus on mobile UNIX. SCO offers a mobile systems management solution called HipCheck and a mobile server applications platform. With the relevance of proprietary UNIX technologies rapidly deflating, it's unlikely that mobile UNIX will restore SCO to its former glory. SCO also offers a subscription-based social mobile communications service that allows users to transmit electronic "shouts" to other users. SCO can certainly shout, but somehow, I don't think anybody will listen.

  • SCO files Chapter 11 bankruptcy, Grace Deleong, Daily Herald: Another Linux Foundation executive, Don Kohn, says SCO may face the possibility of being forced into an involuntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition to liquidate its assets depending on how aggressive its creditors and Novell are in their debt recovery attempts.

    Novell declined to comment on its next move.

    "We'll be evaluating our options for pursuing our interests in this matter," said Kevan Barney, spokesman for Novell.

    By filing bankruptcy, SCO may buy some time to negotiate with creditors and obtain debtor-in-possession financing for its debts.

  • SCO files for US bankruptcy protection, Gavin Clarke, The Register: SCO had dismissed as FUD claims by Novell earlier this year that it lacked the cash to pay and was staggering towards bankruptcy.

    In subsequent interviews, intended to show SCO was coming out fighting, embattled chief executive Darl McBride insisted SCO would not only appeal the judge's decision but SCO didn't owe a red cent.

    "The deals with Sun and Microsoft were about the latest and greatest of UnixWare technology, which is ours," McBride said.

    It's a bitter, but predictable, end to a case that saw McBride gamble big and in which SCO poured money into the pockets of its attorneys, Boies, Schiller & Flexner.

  • SCO files Chapter 11 bankruptcy - Seeks court protection from its own lawsuits, Egan Orion, The Inquirer: ON FRIDAY AFTERNOON, both SCO Group and its subsidiary SCO Operations, Inc. filed voluntary petitions for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in US Bankruptcy Court in Delaware.

    Trading in SCOX was halted on the NASDAQ exchange ahead of the news but resumed before closing. SCO stock lost 43% on the news, ending the day at 37 cents per share....

    Judge Kimball's August 10 rulings in effect almost totally demolished SCO's cases against both Novell and IBM.

    Novell, because ownership of the UNIX SVRX copyrights was SCO's major issue, and Novell won several rulings that in effect turned the lawsuit around into Novell v. SCO.

    [PJ: This is a very concise and clear summary of the SCO saga.]

  • Chapter 11, in Which SCO Finally Gets What It Deserves, John Paczkowski, All Things Digital: When a company begins characterizing its assets as merely “those remaining,” as the SCO Group did earlier this year, bankruptcy is an inevitability. So it comes as little surprise to learn that the company’s hard-fought, but ultimately ludicrous, four-year legal campaign against Linux has ended in a Chapter 11 filing. Seems using litigation as a profit center to compensate for market losses isn’t such a grand idea after all. [PJ: Funny graphic .]

  • Stick a fork in SCO. They're done., Steven J. Vaughan Nichols, Desktop Linux: The story of SCO and its Linux lawsuits is an IP (intellectual property) epic. It's also a horror story. It showed how even with the flimsiest of evidence, one small company could attack a multi-billion dollar software industry for years....

    Oh sure, Chapter 11 means that SCO will still hang on for at least half-a-year longer. So what? In a Chapter 11, you re-organize to continue your business. When your big-win business plan was to make billions by lawsuits and you can no longer pursue them while you're in Chapter 11, exactly what do you have left to re-organize?...If, and that one heck of an if, SCO abandons its losing Linux litigation efforts and its enemies allow it to survive, then and only then will SCO ever emerge alive out of bankruptcy. What I really expect to happen is for SCO to go out of business sometime in the next year.

  • SCO files Chapter 11, threatens business as usual, Paul McNamara, Network World:Grave dancing has commenced over at Groklaw, which has long been a go-to destination for the legal nitty-gritty on this case. From the first comment posted:

    How sad:-) ... Sad for the poor folk who used to make a decent living from a reasonable outfit until the gamblers jumped in anyway.

  • SCO Heads to Court, Sys-con, .NET Developer's Journal News Desk (but I believe it's Maureen O'Gara, judging by the style): It's supposed to be a highly overturnable decision in which Kimball usurped for himself decisions only a jury can make under the law.

    Apparently it's a familiar pattern. Kimball has a string overturned summary judgments to his name. Maybe he should get clerks with higher grades in law school if he's gonna let them write his decisions. They made some real big bloopers in the SCO case.

Some things never change.

: )


The Media on SCO Bankruptcy | 378 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections Here
Authored by: feldegast on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 12:12 AM EDT
So they can be fixed

My posts are ©2004-2007 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic
Authored by: Kilz on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 12:22 AM EDT
Please make all links the click kind :D

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Media on SCO Bankruptcy
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 12:44 AM EDT
That graphic of Darl standing in front of a chart of SCOX's stock price is so
funny it almost made me cry. Funniest thing I've seen in a long time.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I it is time for that Red Dress
Authored by: AH1 on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:07 AM EDT
PJ, I think that it is time to pull that Red Dress out of the closet, and send
it to the Dry Cleaners.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: karl on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:11 AM EDT
You got to hand it to BSF. They smother SCO and then get to feed off the

Way to go, David. I admire the way you vacuumed up their money and all the
while they were thanking you for it. So smooth.

BSF won't quit working on SCO until there's less than 1/10th of a billable hour

left. Last guy out, turn out the lights, 'k?

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Erm ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:38 AM EDT
    • Erm ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 05:27 AM EDT
      • It's a Ben Franklin quote - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 07:05 AM EDT
      • Erm ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:15 PM EDT
        • Erm ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:28 PM EDT
          • Erm ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 06:00 PM EDT
            • Erm ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 07:11 PM EDT
    • Erm ... - Authored by: bstone on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 08:20 AM EDT
Well, Darl did his job on Wired
Authored by: red floyd on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:29 AM EDT
Wired still doesn't get that SCO and Santa Cruz are not the same entity.

Congrats to Darl on confusion well spread.

I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a *CITIZEN* of the United
States of America.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The .NETDJ comment (M o'G??)
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:39 AM EDT
It's supposed to be a highly overturnable decision in which Kimball usurped for himself decisions only a jury can make under the law. Apparently it's a familiar pattern. Kimball has a string overturned summary judgments to his name....
Just curious: does Judge Kimball have an unusual history of overturned summary judgments?

To my IANAL eyes, he didn't usurp any jury work. The substance of the summary judgments seemed to be, "guys, you didn't bring it. And what you tried to bring instead wasn't admissable." But, like I say, IANAL.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Steven J. Vaughan Nichols - what??? IP (intellectual property) epic
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:47 AM EDT
When did the Keystone Kops become an epic?

I don't think Homer or Frank Miller wrote that.

No matter how good a salesman some think Darl McBride is, Gilgamesh he ain't.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO files for chapter 11
Authored by: ETian on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:50 AM EDT
"Groklaw, which has a certain interest in this story..." No,
really??? I had NO idea... ;^)

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Media on SCO Bankruptcy
Authored by: sonicfrog on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:52 AM EDT
Hey, I clicked on the "" article, and a BIG, FAT IBM add
popped up on my screen. How sweet is that!!! :-)

[ Reply to This | # ]

"SCO Heads to Court" is dated 9/11
Authored by: ankylosaurus on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 02:02 AM EDT
The date on the 'SCO Heads to Court' article is 11th September, so it pre-dates
the bankruptcy filing. As such, I'm not convinced it belongs in this collection
of "media response to SCO's chapter 11" filing - the 11 being the only
thing they have in common. As an opinion piece, it is minuscule and has
negligible content.

The Dinosaur with a Club at the End of its Tail

[ Reply to This | # ]

Darl confirms shopping for a new judge?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 02:12 AM EDT

From the Digital Daily article PJ links to above.

Darl is quoted saying:

By coming out right now and saying this is an exciting time, it’s like the boxer who has come out of the ring after getting all beaten up, and he comes over to his trainer and says, ‘The guy didn’t touch me.’ And the trainer says, ‘Then you better keep your eye on the ref, because somebody’s beating the living hell out of you.’

[ Reply to This | # ]

100 percent of their effort....
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 02:42 AM EDT
Yeah...couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the case had absolutely, 100 percent, no merit. Or maybe winning was never SCO's objective. Geez, how long are people going to quote this clueless"world class" hypocrite?

[ Reply to This | # ]

No, I don't think this is MOG
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 02:44 AM EDT

Apparently it's a familiar pattern. Kimball has a string overturned summary judgments to his name. Maybe he should get clerks with higher grades in law school if he's gonna let them write his decisions. They made some real big bloopers in the SCO case.

Whoever wrote this is referring to an earlier article by Roger Parloff. Parloff seems to be close to SCO - he certainly has good contacts there, and probably some buddies. But he is not in the Enderle/MOG/DiDio mould. I believe he is biased and wrong, but he is a former practicing lawyer and presents his material in a much more reasonable way that the E/M/D trio. (We can all be biased and wrong sometimes ...). Moreover, he's a lawyer and I'm not, so there could be some merit in his comments. I take him seriously enough to post a link to his article, which I'd never do to any E/M/D drivel.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Grave dancing
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 02:54 AM EDT
Nah. We're just standing on the shore watching it sink, telescopes to our eyes,
reporting for all. Forgive us if we crack jokes or smiles occasionally.

[ Reply to This | # ]

.NETDJ News Desk = Maureen O'Gara
Authored by: schestowitz on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 04:52 AM EDT
Yes, it's her. The opinions and the zealous anti-Linux attitude is very
consistent. .NETDJ News Desk to MOG is what Fake Steve Jobs is to Dan "SCO
will get what it wants".... *ahem* even if it's bankruptcy. :-)

Roy S. Schestowitz, Ph.D. Candidate in Medical Biophysics | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Bankruptcy - Protection from its' own lawsuits
Authored by: GriffMG on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 05:31 AM EDT
This is the crux of it really, what they are trying to do is avoid the
consequences of their own actions, not anyone elses.

I wonder if there will be a brief hearing tomorrow, Monday 17, where Judge
Kimball rules them in contempt of court - they only recently told him they had
enough to continue, someone commited perjury in my eyes!



Keep B-) ing

[ Reply to This | # ]

Oh dear
Authored by: cricketjeff on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 05:54 AM EDT
Oh dear how sad they've got not cash
From mighty wave, to tiny splash
The money spent, was not their own
And it's more polite to request a loan
With millions in hand that belonged to Novell
It seems they just thought, goodness me, what the hell!
Plundering pockets, lies to the press
All is unwinding and leaving a mess
CEO hoping the courts will not think
The Captain who steered them knew that they would sink
Now to another court charge helter skelter
Pay out yet more money for imaginary shelter
It's not their concern who they damage and how
They just want the milk from another's cash cow!

Not yet up on, will clean it up and post a link when it

There is nothing in life that doesn't look better after a good cup of tea.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sorry, we forgot
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 06:06 AM EDT
Maybe it has been said before and by others, but I seriously believe that SCO
literally forgot that the SUN and Microsoft money should be handed over to
Novell first and they would be remitted 5%.

Hey, they were looking a pile. $25,000,000.

I don't think they even thought of Novell at the time. They probably didn't even
pose the question Who's this money? Or even had the answer prepared, "Ours
of course we got the contracts with SUN and MS".

I think they were completely naively blinded by the sudden "help" from
SUN and MS against IBM so they just didn't think it would fall under the duties
to Novell.

It must have come like a surprise - "Ooops, like, I, er, we didn't kinda
think of that".

I wish I could call Noobs or Amateurs, but surely the net gain in the initial
stock values increase and various fiddlings surely made them wealthier than they
let us imagine.
- -

[ Reply to This | # ]

The MOGster in contempt?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 06:32 AM EDT
MOG is on the SCOs creditors list so it looks like she has indeed been employed
by SCO. If those are her comments and she is on the SCO payroll then she (and
those who hired her) have to be treading perilously close to a contempt of court

[ Reply to This | # ]

Did they obtain prior permission to use it?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 06:50 AM EDT
"One of your comments is immortalized in the mainstream media as

Which one and where? A link would be nice.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Ownership Calibration
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 09:19 AM EDT
I'm awaiting the article PJ has said she was considering. In the meantime I'm
still trying to figure out what special IP SCO could have sold. This might also
prove usefull to PJ as defining the question helps create the answer. ;-)

1. It looks like what AT&T/USL sold to Novell was half owned by BSD and
parts of both were probably created by third parties who may have copyright or
patent rights. (The maze of ownership.)

2. I assume Novell spruced up the interfaces and added some drivers and
functionality before they did the deal with old SCO.

3. Old SCO is pressumed to do some more drivers and bug fixes.

4. Old SCO sold it to New SCO by another name? Or was it yet another

5. New SCO is pressumed to do some more drivers and bug fixes.

6. Somebody (who?) was part of United Linux where some serious code creation
took place but much (most?) is owned by IBM but licensed to the project.

7. The current owner changed their name to SCO and started down the litigation

(We really need an ownership timeline!)

Has newSCO really done much other than bug fixes and drivers?

That should help define the amount of SRVX code in the current product.

It also shows what MS paid for when it bought it's license. How much real IP
was there?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Missing Molly Ivins
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 09:21 AM EDT

Molly Ivins was the closest thing we've had to Mencken
since Mencken. She died in January of breast cancer.

Would like to have seen her go to work on Darl and his
familiars, but, then, she had so much other material
to work with. (Is that depressing or what.)

Just one Mollyism is all you need. On one congreeman:
"If his IQ slips any lower we'll have to water him twice a day."

[ Reply to This | # ]

N.B Red Dress Brigade: Tuesday
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 09:58 AM EDT
Bring gear, including digital cameras. Meet outside after the hearing.

[ Reply to This | # ]

A rats nest versus the IT community
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 10:46 AM EDT
Such is the state of human affairs that bad people doing bad things
get away with it often enough to encourage their imitation. When
rats surface in broad daylight to harass average citizens it should
provoke authorities to action.

Remember how this started with Caldera deciding they lacked
clear copyrights, with a corporate name change to obfuscate history,
masquerading as the original SCO, with questionable dealings in Canada,
Germany, and Chicago, with leaked emails pointing straight at Microsoft,
with false and misleading statements about "millions of lines" and
suitcases of legal evidence, with mass mailings threatening legal action,
with expensive Sun and Microsoft licenses that appeared unnecessary,
with very lame early legal filings, with incredible claims to need all
AIX code going back to its beginning, with steadfastly refusing to tell the
defendants and judges what TSG case is really about, and with all that
money going into pockets.

Remember there is NO infringing code in Linux. Remember the IT
community has friends in the business community, government, and
among users.

Now, hypothetically go back and read ALL the public statements, leaked
documents, court filings, press disinformation, and Groklaw. DOES
guilty of what? What about the rest of the rats?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Bankruptcy as a legal tactic
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 11:20 AM EDT
PJ, as you have pointed out, the SCO vs IBM, Novell, and others lititation is a

superb example of lawyering at its best. It should be a great set of cases to
learn from lin law school.

SCO's bankruptcy tactic is just another great move on SCO's part to try and
delay and/or escape the inevitable.

Certainly it took a lot of the public by surprise - as evidenced by all the
written to Groklaw lamenting this act.

However, you have to leave admire SCO's lawyers for coming up with this

No doubt, IBM and Novell's own lawyers anticipated this move and have
considered their countermoves.

It is like a great chess game. It certainly has been interesting reading over
the past 4 years. Thank you P.J. for your work.

SCO is trying for a Duex Ex Machina.

However, it is not a certain road to take since Novell and IBM can challenge
this move. Also, SCO's own statements that they have enough resources to
not go into bankruptcy will come back to haunt them. Judge Kimball may
even serve as a consultant tot he bankruptcy court. Novell can show Judge
Kimball's orders to the bankruptcy court. The bankruptcy judge won't look so
kindly to SCO for trying to keep stolen property by filing for bankrupcy.

Thus Bankruptcy is NOT a certainty. It can by DENIED just SCO's other
motions have been denied.

I think, in retrospect, what allowed this move for bankruptcy was Judge
Kimball's decision to determine how much of Novell's money was stolen
during the trial. This left uncertainty of how much was stolen by SCO. SCO
used this uncertainty as an opening to file bankruptcy with the thought that
they stole none of Novell's money and can thus get away with the bankruptcy.

I wonder - since Kimball's trial was to determine how much money was stolen
by SCO - can the trial proceed even with the bankruptcy application? It is not

about how much money SCO OWES Novell. It is how much money SCO STOLE
from Novell.

Since it is stolen money that SCO has, then perhaps it cannot be discharged
throuigh bankruptcy? This will be interesting to see from the bankruptcy
court's proceedings.

One thing's for sure, this litigation is far from over. There are dramatic
everywhere. Novell's lawyers have done an amazing and aggressive job of
litigation - which eventually forced this move by SCO. We shall see how this
plays out. It certainly is a fantastic learning experience.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Understanding SCO's Moves
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 12:42 PM EDT
My theory -- SCO's latest move might be nothing more than panic, set in by
Novell publishing its Trial Brief. There wasn't a lot of comment and analysis
here on GROKLAW on that brief, due to the rapidity of successive post topics
where the bankruptcy filing 'overtook' the trial preparation.

But I encourage readers to go back to that post -- Novell's brief was
devastating, making it absolutely clear (reading between the lines) what the
trial was going to look like.

Novell would put on its expert, who would 'prove' the total amount of money
collected by SCO from the MS, SUN, and SCO Source licensing efforts. Novell
would establish, by reference to the SJ decision, that the licenses were SVRX
licenses. That entitles Novell to 95% of the money. Then Novell establishes,
again by reference to the SJ decision, that SCO committed conversion, therefore
denying SCO it's remaining 5% (because SCO was in breach) and putting the
evidentiary burden on SCO to PROVE that what Novell asserted was not the case.

SCO would then have to put on its evidence to prove that parts of each license
were attributable to non-SVRX licensing and other activities, primarily by
reference to the language of the licenses. So SCO would bring out, i.e., the MS
license and offer that the stated language in the language ascribes certain of
the $$ to non-SVRX purposes.

And then -- Novell would POUNCE in cross examination, and there the gloves would
come off. The limitations on evidence would open up, because this is now the
time to impeach SCO's evidence. The entire cooked-up deal between MS and SCO
would be exposed to the light of day. The 'real' motive for the $20M payment,
versus the 'ascribed' reason in the license agreement, would be pulled out into
the open.

SCO, but even more MS, could not stand it. I strongly suspect that SCO, backed
somehow by MS, has been trying desperately to settle so as to stave off this
"day of sunlight". And once they could not pull it off, and with
Monday looming and the prospects of an "on the courthouse steps"
settlement too unsure to count on, SCO was forced into playing this ultimate
desperation card.

But the card is not going to work -- it's a desperate gamble that will fail,
although it's bought some time to continue any negotiation efforts, if they are
in fact occurring.

[ Reply to This | # ]

If I were the press...
Authored by: vruz on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:34 PM EDT
My headline would have been:

"Swing Low, SCO Chariot"

down from your heightened sermon on the mount !
truckloads in that chariot I tell you !

--- the vruz

[ Reply to This | # ]

More news due soon?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 01:57 PM EDT

I was looking back at SCOX 10Q and 10K reports to refresh my memory of what their financial condition is. The last 10Q was dated June 14, covering the fiscal quarter ending in April. The next one should be out any day now, covering events up to July. Since this quarter ended before the August summary judgements, the financial figures should stand and it there's no real reason to delay it. The real nitty gritty should be in the report for the quarter ending in October...

Their P&L statement shows what should be done in any rational reorganization plan.

  • SCOsource is a money pit. Its cost of revenue exceeds all other product lines combined, but it generates little if any revenue. There is no reasonable hope of restoring the company to profitability until SCOsource operations are terminated.

  • SG&A (Sales, General and ASdministrative) costs are disproportionately high for a company of this size, even for a software business where cost of revenue is traditionally low. To reduce SG&A with minimum impact to customers and ongoing business, cut the officer's salaries by at least 15% and cancel all executive bonuses (this saves $267K, based on figures from the 2006 10K report). These would be replaced by stock options at not less than the NASDAQ $1 listing threshold, giving the management team incentive to make the reorganization a long-term success. Note that there's no suggestion of hiring a "turn around specialist" to take over; a business this size can't afford to hire a "top gun" executive.

  • Agree to dismiss the stayed lawsuits with prejudice, and comply with the SVRX payments and audits due to Novell. Exiting Chapter 11 will be disastrous if their present conduct continues, given the findings in the PSJs for the Novell case.

  • Recover any remaining money in the legal escrow fund, to fund and demonstrate their comittment to their core products.

  • I'm no expert, just an average investor stating my opinions on what it takes to turn SCO back into a viable business.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    What's up Wid-dis?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 03:37 PM EDT

    More headaches? I have atheros stuff and I use it too.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Well this latest by SCOG reminds me
    Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 04:42 PM EDT
    Well this latest move by SCOG certainly does remind me of the story about the
    young man who murdered both his parents and then begged the mercy of the court
    on the grounds that he was an orphan...


    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Why did Caldera/SCO let Darl McBride do this?
    Authored by: TiddlyPom on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 05:43 PM EDT
    I know it's unlikely to happen but Darl McBride should pay dearly for what he
    has done to a once trusted and respectable company.

    I think it is unlikely that SCO would have survived as it as all of the Unices
    were and are slowly heading into oblivion being replaced by open source
    operating systems such as Linux and FreeBSD but they could have diversified. If
    they had tried to produce real products based on UNIX/Linux technology (even
    perhaps their mobile technology software) instead of trying to be an
    (unsuccessful) copyright troll then they would probably have had the backing of
    the UNIX and open source communities.

    Perhaps they could even have open sourced SCO UNIX as Sun have done with
    Solaris. Now there's a thought...

    The people I feel sorry for are the software engineers and other staff at SCO
    who have genuinely tried to row their hardest whilst Captain McBride piloted the
    ship towards certain destruction.

    If there is any justice in this world then he will be punished in some way for
    the misery he has caused his own staff and hard working members of the open
    source community whilst this law suit was in progress. At this point I would
    like SCO to die quickly so that the 'real people' who worked for them can move
    on and the rest of us can draw a line under this who misguided and sorry

    Open Source Software - Unpicking the Microsoft monopoly piece-by-piece.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    MOG confirmed as author of syscon article
    Authored by: drreagan on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 06:28 PM EDT
    The Dotnet Syscon article has now been updated with a by-line confirming Maureen O'Gara was the author

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Authored by: GLJason on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 06:31 PM EDT
    SCO Heads to Court, Sys-con, .NET Developer's Journal News Desk (but I believe it's Maureen O'Gara, judging by the style): It's supposed to be a highly overturnable decision in which Kimball usurped for himself decisions only a jury can make under the law.

    Apparently it's a familiar pattern. Kimball has a string overturned summary judgments to his name. Maybe he should get clerks with higher grades in law school if he's gonna let them write his decisions. They made some real big bloopers in the SCO case.

    It amazes me that someone would write this drivel. It is Maureen by the way, it says it at the top when I click on the link. Personal attacks on the law clerks and the judge... What's the string of overturned summary judgments? What are the bloopers? I don't care how much you like SCO or hate Novell and Linux, but this goes beyond all bounds of taste and decorum. I really cannot see any reason for someone to write this unless they are being paid by SCO to write it. Even then, how would this help SCO out?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Yeah, It's O'Gara
    Authored by: mobrien_12 on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 06:33 PM EDT
    I just looked at the link,

    and her name is now on the article.

    Maybe being caught by Groklaw has forced her to do this?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Is it just me...
    Authored by: sappha58 on Sunday, September 16 2007 @ 07:53 PM EDT
    ...or does Daryl (in the "Battered SCO" article by WiReD) look like
    the kind of thug that the mob would hire as muscle?

    "Yo, toots - gimme fifty dolla and I'll guarantee your shop don' get
    torched tonight. See yas tomorraw."

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    .NETDJ == MOG, see 'latest comments'
    Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, September 17 2007 @ 07:52 AM EDT
    If you look at the 'LATEST FEEDBACK' box on the comment page (after first
    turning on your ad blockers to make sure sys-con's crimes do not pay) the true
    identity of the .NETDJ is revealed:

    SCO Heads to Court
    By Maureen O'Gara

    Seems they sorta forgot to hide those tracks there...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    The Media on SCO Bankruptcy - Novell Contacted.
    Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, September 17 2007 @ 04:30 PM EDT
    '"We'll be evaluating our options for pursuing our interests in this
    matter," said Kevan Barney, spokesman for Novell.'

    I think this comment is the only one I've seen where someone actually contacted
    Novell for a response. You have to give Grace Deleong from the Daily Herald
    credit for doing a more than cursory job.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    ITWire had one thing wrong
    Authored by: GLJason on Tuesday, September 18 2007 @ 02:42 AM EDT
    [...] And it is fair to assume that none of the cheerleaders of the SCO Group will be coming forward to push their tortured opinions in the media.

    Never underestimate Maureen O'gara:

    Apparently it's a familiar pattern. Kimball has a string overturned summary judgments to his name. Maybe he should get clerks with higher grades in law school if he's gonna let them write his decisions. They made some real big bloopers in the SCO case.

    Their only "bloopers" in the SCO cases were not demanding SCO show evidence up front, and letting this thing drag out for FOUR years.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
    Comments are owned by the individual posters.

    PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )