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.


To read comments to this article, go here
IBM's Reply Memo Supporting Non-Infringement Declaratory Judgment
Wednesday, August 25 2004 @ 01:52 PM EDT

Here is IBM's Redacted Reply Memorandum In Further Support of its Cross Motion For Partial Summary Judgment on its Claim for Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement. I think you will find it the best of the best. Unless you are Sandeep Gupta, of course. IBM cites so many cases and statutes, it isn't until page 11 that the text begins.

"To avoid summary judgment, SCO was required either to adduce evidence demonstrating that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to IBM's alleged infringement of SCO's purported UNIX copyrights or to demonstrate precisely how additional discovery would lead to a genuine issue of material fact. Notwithstanding SCO's opposition papers of more than 200 pages, SCO fails to establish that any material facts are in dispute or to justify SCO's inability to support its allegations on the current record. Partial summary judgment should therefore be entered in favor of IBM and against SCO."

That says it all right there. You said you had mountains of evidence, IBM is saying to SCO. So, where is it? Where's the beef?

On all the cases, there are too many for me to find them all myself. If anyone feels inspired, please can you see how many we can find? There is no way to properly analyze this document and the SCO document it is responding to without finding the cases referred to. If you find them, I'll explain them.


  View Printable Version


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 )