decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
SCO's Exhibits to unXis APA Motion
Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 11:58 AM EDT

Here are the exhibits, or some of them, attached to SCO's Motion regarding its proposed sale to unXis, with some of them not only sealed but not even listed or designated:

06/23/2009 - 818 - Certificate of Service Regarding Debtors' Motion for Authority to Sell Property Outside the Ordinary Course of Business Free and Clear of Interests and for Approval of Assumption and Assignment of Executory Contracts and Unexpired Leases in Conjunction With Sale (related document(s) 815 ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Billion, Mark) (Entered: 06/23/2009)

06/23/2009 - 819 - Exhibit /Exhibits to Purchase and Sale Agreement Regarding Debtors' Motion for Authority to Sell Property Outside the Ordinary Course of Business Free and Clear of Interests and for Approval of Assumption and Assignment of Executory Contracts and Unexpired Leases in Conjunction with Sale (related document(s) 815 ) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Makowski, Kathleen) (Entered: 06/23/2009)




  


SCO's Exhibits to unXis APA Motion | 173 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
SCO is a bankrupt company
Authored by: emacsuser on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 12:04 PM EDT
How can a bankrupt company sell anything?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections thread
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 12:40 PM EDT
Please correct errors in the story here.

---
"Then you admit confirming not denying you ever said that?"
"NO! ... I mean Yes! WHAT?"
"I'll put `maybe.'"
--Bloom County

[ Reply to This | # ]

[NP] News Picks discussion
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 12:41 PM EDT
Discuss Groklaw News Picks here.

---
"Then you admit confirming not denying you ever said that?"
"NO! ... I mean Yes! WHAT?"
"I'll put `maybe.'"
--Bloom County

[ Reply to This | # ]

APA's, done the SCO way
Authored by: chris hill on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 12:43 PM EDT
Combine this with the way the papers for the SEC are filed, and what they want
gone from other sources, SCO will probably word their APA and 'Assorted
documents' so that it will seem as though the copyrights have transfered
properly, then the new company registers with the papers, then the copyrights
are transferred back, giving SCO a supposed legal right to the copyrights before
the appeal which they can present in court.

Another SCO endrun around the
system, I believe. I can't see anything else from this company.

[ Reply to This | # ]

[OT] Off Topic discussions
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 12:43 PM EDT
Discuss off topically here.

It's good to have the canonical threads at the top, don't you agree?

---
"Then you admit confirming not denying you ever said that?"
"NO! ... I mean Yes! WHAT?"
"I'll put `maybe.'"
--Bloom County

[ Reply to This | # ]

I'm confused...
Authored by: Lazarus on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 12:55 PM EDT
Which is not unusual, when dealing with / reading about SCO.


In an earlier article, Red Hat is objecting to things SCO is doing, because SCO
wants to try to slip in that the SCO vs Red Hat issues would be adjudicated in
front of the bankruptcy judge. Presumablly as part of the larger sale process
to UniXis(SCO) [treat that SCO as a fnord, and it all makes sense].


I understand RH's objection.


What I don't get is that if the sale goes through, won't SCO be out of
bankruptcy, and therefore the RH case wouldn't be properly heard in front of a
bankruptcy judge?

[ Reply to This | # ]

assets listed in 819?
Authored by: designerfx on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 01:05 PM EDT
disclaimer: someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but:

among the things listed (typed by hand)

- SCO Unixware (versions 2.1.0 to -> 7.1.4).
- Unix System V Release 3.0->4.2 (386/international/MP)
- all prior versions of System V.

Wasn't this the stuff determined that they never owned due to the whole original
APA?

Also a whole lot of stuff listed doesn't have an acquisition date on it. Is that
normal for accounting/normal at all?

Lastly, did they miss anything under schedule 5.17? I'm asking someone in the
know, as I am not.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Sun paid 10 mil for licesenses, now could buy the whole company for 2.5 mil /nt
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 02:33 PM EDT
Sun paid 10 mil for licesenses, now could buy the whole
company for 2.5 mil

Dennis H

[ Reply to This | # ]

White Knights?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 02:55 PM EDT
I wonder if there are any potential White Knights out the who might be willing
to buy SCO lock stock and litigation in order to put this to rest.

IBM and RedHat are pretty much ruled out, Sun has been purchased by Oracle and
I'm not sure where Oracle stands. Who else is there with the resources and
inclination?

The risk of course is that there will be a bidding war and Darl's compadre will
match any offer which will only serve to replenish the litigation fund.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Exhibit H: Post-closing Escrow Agreement
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 03:10 PM EDT
... which is supposed to control how Novell get its money:
2. The escrow agent shall hold the escrow document and shall not deliver the escrow document to any party other than... b) pursuant to written instructions executed and delivered to the escrow agent by seller and purchaser, ...
The way I read it is: once we've closed the deal, we can make up our mind about that Novell money and as long as we both agree on it, we can do with it anything we like. How convenient for SCO. /Andreas

[ Reply to This | # ]

APA converted to html
Authored by: sk43 on Wednesday, June 24 2009 @ 08:05 PM EDT
Courtesy of The SCO Group, no less.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1102542/000095012309016819/v528 34exv2w1.htm

[ Reply to This | # ]

I've had quite a few thoughts.
Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, June 25 2009 @ 04:52 AM EDT
But, I cannot express them without violating Groklaw policy. So, how about you
legally astute folk looking at The Real Questions in the (large) child post for
me?


---
Regards
Ian Al

Linux: Viri can't hear you in free space.

[ 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 )