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
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



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

No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Novell v. Microsoft Oral Argument Tentatively Scheduled for Week of March 22nd
Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 12:46 AM EST

The Novell v. Microsoft appeal in the litigation regarding WordPerfect has now been tentatively scheduled, and it will be in March. If you were planning to attend, please note this change:
12/30/2010 - 41 - CASE TENTATIVELY CALENDARED for oral argument during the 3/22/11 - 3/25/11 argument session. Notify Clerk's Office of any scheduling conflict by: 01/10/2011 [10-1482] (JLC)
If either side can't make it, they'll alter it again, but it won't likely be any earlier. So stay tuned for any tweaks in the schedule. It would not surprise me, though, if the case settles before March, assuming the patent sale to the Microsoft consortium goes forward. Originally, I posted this quickly, thinking it was about SCO's second appeal of its Novell loss in Utah. Sorry for any confusion. My excuse is that it was New Year's eve.


Novell v. Microsoft Oral Argument Tentatively Scheduled for Week of March 22nd | 336 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Comes cometh here
Authored by: papafox on Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 02:36 AM EST
A placemark for your Comes Exhibit transcriptions, please.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic
Authored by: Tufty on Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 02:37 AM EST
Off tropic allowed but not on topic.

Linux powered squirrel.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: Tufty on Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 02:40 AM EST
Read all abaarrrrrt it.

Linux powered squirrel.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections please
Authored by: Tufty on Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 02:41 AM EST
Hope there aren't too many on this one. Oops this should have been the first
reply. Sorry.

Linux powered squirrel.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hopes for 2011?
Authored by: complex_number on Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 02:55 AM EST
As this is the first new post for the new year, I thought it might be pertinent
to list our hopes (releated to the things Groklaw is interested in and reports
ONLY) for this year.

I'll kick things off.

1) SCO - The saga has to come to an end sometime. Please let it be this year.
Can we have a nice Easter Pressie please? Refuse the appeal and let SCO go into
Chap 7 (rating 50%)

2) An end to this Smartphone Patent MAD(ness). This is getting beyond a joke.
Seriously, the only winners are the lawyers NOT the companies or the
consumers.(rating 10%)

3) Some form of sanction taken again Lawyers who bring silly cases that clearly
have not a hope in hell of succeeding. I know US law says that anyone can sue
anyone else for any reason but clearly things are getting out of control. Again,
the only winners are the lawyers. They get paid whatever happens. We need more
of them to tell their clients, "sorry you don't have a case. If I take this
forward you could be bankrupted"(rating 5%)

I'm sure there are many more so I'll leave the door open for others to comment

Ubuntu & 'apt-get' are not the answer to Life, The Universe & Everything which
is of course, "42" or is it 1.618?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: The Mad Hatter r on Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 04:37 AM EST

Remember folks, more is better. As PJ said, everybody see different things, and
you'll have our eternal gratitude for attending.

I'd offer to do so myself, but I'm not capable of travel anymore.


[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO v. Novell Oral Argument in the Appeal Tentatively Scheduled for Week of March 22nd
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 07:53 AM EST
Hello, and best wishes for a happy and healthy new year for all the good folk of groklaw.

Back in November 23, 2010, we had Oral Argument in SCO's Appeal Set for January 20th at 9 AM.

Here in December 23, 2011, we have SCO v. Novell Oral Argument in the Appeal Tentatively Scheduled for Week of March 22nd.

I wonder what happened, and whether there will be a scrap of significance in the apparent change of date?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The loser takes it all
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 08:07 AM EST
The story is no longer interesting. SCO is dismantling itself thoroughly enough
under the auspices of the US trustee that nothing will remain to satisfy any of
the claims it contests or even does no longer contest. Its opponents will pay
dearly for every week they continue pursuing this case, and it does not matter
one bit that they are going to win every further twist, like it did not matter
one bit that they have won every court case so far.

The loser takes it all.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO v. Corporate Death
Authored by: mexaly on Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 10:24 AM EST
When does SCO implode? Pretty soon now, isn't it? Aren't there already
services rendered that will not be paid?

When, not if, that happens, how does the trash get taken out?

IANAL, but I watch actors play lawyers on high-definition television.
My thanks go out to PJ and the legal experts that make Groklaw great.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Interesting, but for the Wrong Reasons
Authored by: sproggit on Saturday, January 01 2011 @ 06:05 PM EST
Unlikely, but depending on how this goes, we may get an inkling of the influence
and relationship that Microsoft with respect to the now-sold Novell.

In theory there is little or no relationship between Attachmate and Microsoft,
even though Microsoft - through the consortium it now shares with others - was
able to purchase a significant patent portfolio from Novell.

But what about practice?


History is replete with stories of "small" companies being swallowed
by a larger competitor even when some legal dispute exists between the two.

So, if you're a large, powerful and cash-rich company that just happens to be on
the losing end of a legal argument, what simpler solution than to buy out your

We are never going to see the full story here. These guys are smart enough to
know that discussions of tactics I'm theorizing here will never be recorded,
never minuted, never acknowledged. But we have to acknowledge the ease with
which such pressure can be brought to bear.

It would be so easy for someone senior at Microsoft to pick up the phone to an
executive at Attachmate and say, "Look, how about we help you with [ your
Windows software Licensing Program / your next product release / a few more
acquisitions we think you might be interested in / etc ] and you help us by
making this court case disappear? You can say that you evaluated all the ongoing
litigation that was in flight at the time of your acquisition of Novell and
decided this one wasn't economically viable..."

And so very hard to prove...


As PJ reminds us on a regular basis - a good lawyer can help you win in court. A
great lawyer will keep you out of court in the first place...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Didn't Novell already lose against MSFT?
Authored by: gnufreex on Sunday, January 02 2011 @ 10:39 AM EST
I thought they already lost antitrust suit against MSFT, about in the same time
when they won against SCO?

[ 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 )