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 objects to claims by Citi Financial, Snow Christensen and Mark J. Lange
Monday, July 20 2009 @ 01:01 PM EDT

SCO objects to several more claims, including Snow Christensen & Martineau's. If you are getting that deja vu feeling, you'd be right. SCO got their $100,000 claim tossed once, and the firm, SCO says, filed again, and it asks [PDF] that this claim also be tossed. Snow Christensen would prefer not to have its claim disallowed, I gather.

This is the law firm that helped Caldera beat Microsoft into a settlement in Caldera v. Microsoft. SCO general counsel Ryan Tibbitts was with the firm back then. The firm accepted shares in SCO as part payment. Big mistake.

Here are the filings:

844 - Filed & Entered: 07/16/2009
Objection to Claim
Docket Text: Objection to Claim Number by Claimant(s) Citi Financial, Inc.. /Debtor SCO Group, Inc.'s Objection to Claim of Citi Financial, Inc.. Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A # (2) Certificate of Service and Service Lists) (Makowski, Kathleen)

845 - Filed & Entered: 07/16/2009
Objection to Claim
Docket Text: Objection to Claim Number by Claimant(s) Snow, Christensen & Martineau. /Debtors' Objection to Claim of Snow, Christensen & Martineau. Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A # (2) Certificate of Service and Service Lists) (Makowski, Kathleen)

846 - Filed & Entered: 07/16/2009
Objection to Claim
Docket Text: Objection to Claim Number by Claimant(s) Mark J. Lange. /Debtors' Objection to Claim of Mark J. Lange. Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit A # (2) Certificate of Service and Service Lists) (Makowski, Kathleen)

What makes the one against Citi Financial interesting is that there is a 2003 update license for UnixWare attached as an exhibit [PDF]. On page 4, we learn that Citi Financial "bought a license to use an operating system called the 2661 SCO UnixWare 7.1.3 in November of 2003", specifically SCO Update Add-On for UnixWare 7.1.3, departmental edition NCB/NCP. It filed a contingent Proof of Claim, saying that is SCO no longer supported the software or rejected the license agreement, Citi's damages would be "in excess of $3 million". As of the date of the filing, back in April, SCO was still supporting the software. That's the contingent part, with Citi just putting its foot in the door, so as to assert its claims if ever SCO left it in the lurch.

That was April. It's now July. And SCO now objects to this claim, on the grounds that it is based on a contingency that has not happened to date. It asks the court to disallow the claim, saying only if and when the contingency happens should the claim be considered.

Page 8 is the Certificate of Right to Install and page 10 is the Certificate of License and Authenticity. The software license agreement begins on page 12.


  


SCO objects to claims by Citi Financial, Snow Christensen and Mark J. Lange | 16 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
SCO objects to claims by Citi Financial, Snow Christensen and Mark J. Lange
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 20 2009 @ 01:15 PM EDT
Is Citi trying to get SCO to say its purchaser will honor these contracts?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections thread
Authored by: Arthur Marsh on Monday, July 20 2009 @ 01:19 PM EDT
Please post corrections to this article below this message, including a sample
of the text in error and any suggestions or proof of what the corrected text
should be.

---
http://www.unix.org/what_is_unix.html

[ Reply to This | # ]

Newspicks thread
Authored by: Arthur Marsh on Monday, July 20 2009 @ 01:22 PM EDT
Please post any messages about Newspicks below this message, using the title of
the Newspick as the subject.

---
http://www.unix.org/what_is_unix.html

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off-Topic Thread
Authored by: Arthur Marsh on Monday, July 20 2009 @ 01:26 PM EDT

Please post messages to do with subjects other than this Groklaw article or Newspicks below this message, using HTML mode if possible when including links to other web sites like this: http://www.example.com.

---
http://ww w.unix.org/what_is_unix.html

[ Reply to This | # ]

Citi Financial's License
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 20 2009 @ 01:35 PM EDT
One of the Exhibits to Citi's claim is a copy of their license. It is very
similar to the earlier SCO Licenses.

It says in part:

"You may load, copy or transmit ths Software in whole or in part only as
necessary to enable the Software to be used up to the permitted number of Users
on the permited number of computer systems and CPUs."

It is only slightly different from the original SCO version.

The Document is dated 1/10/2008.

This rest of it is also almost identical the old SCO licenses. The only
significant change I see is that the prohibition against reversle compling is
strengthen from the original SCO wording;

"You may not reverse compile the Software for any purpose."

To the more expansive;

"You shall not modify, decompile, disassemble, decrypt, extract or reverse
engineer the Software for any purpose.

I wonder which version AutoZone has.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Citi Financial Contingency
Authored by: mattflaschen on Monday, July 20 2009 @ 06:22 PM EDT
IANAL, but the way I read it, the authority (law) SCO cites for Citi Financial states exactly the opposite of what they need it to say. The text (Code Section 502(b)) is (emphasis added):
"The court, after notice and a hearing, shall determine the amount of (a J claim in lawful currency of the United States as of the date of the filing of the petition, and shall allow such claim in such amount, except to the extent that ... such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor, under any agreement or applicable law for a reason other than because such claim is contingent or unmatured."
So the court can not disallow a claim solely because it is contingent. Contingent claims are par for the course, and are specifically mentioned among other places § 101 5 of the Bankruptcy Code (emphasis added):
"The term “claim” means— (A) right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured; or (B) right to an equitable remedy for breach of performance if such breach gives rise to a right to payment, whether or not such right to an equitable remedy is reduced to judgment, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, secured, or unsecured."

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO objects to claims by Citi Financial, Snow Christensen and Mark J. Lange
Authored by: jheisey on Monday, July 20 2009 @ 10:55 PM EDT
Citi Financial's claim looks to be bogus. I do not see anything in the contract
exhibits that stated that Citi Financial was entitled to perpetual product
support. Indeed, it provided only a ninety day warranty and stated that Caldera
might optionally provide updates. These were not required by the contract.

[ 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 )