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
New Subpoenas by IBM
Monday, January 24 2005 @ 06:59 AM EST

New Pacer entries show fascinating activity by IBM. First prize to whoever figures out what they are doing. I acknowledge I have no clue what Sherwin-Williams has to do with this, but clearly something new is up. As you can see in Pacer entries 381 and 382, IBM has sent subpoenas to Autozone, Sherwin-Williams, Intel, Target, Oracle, and Computer Associates:

1/19/05 -- 380 -- Motion by CNET Networks, Forbes for Joinder RE: [340-1] motion to intervene and to unseal court's file by G2 Computer Intel, to intervene (joined with [340-1] motion by G2 Computer Intelligence), and to unseal court files (joined with [340-1] motion by G2 Computer Intelligence) (tsh) [Entry date 01/21/05]

1/19/05 -- 381 -- Certificate of service by Intl Bus Mach Inc re: Subpoenas Duces Tecum issued to: Target Corporation; Autozone, Inc.; Sherwin-Williams Corp.; and Intel Corporation. (Note: Filing not considered a return of service executed as there was no proof of service/declaration of server included with these documents.) (tsh) [Entry date 01/21/05]

1/19/05 -- 382 -- Certificate of service by Intl Bus Mach Inc re: Subpoenas issued to Oracle Corp. and Computer Associates, Inc. (Note: Filing not considered a return of service executed as there was no proof of service/declaration of server included with these documents.) (tsh) [Entry date 01/21/05]

The reason it looks like something new is IBM subpoenaed Oracle back in April. They already asked them to turn over:

  • all documents concerning any communications with SCO and/or Canopy regarding Unix or Linux;
  • all documents concerning any meetings between SCO and/or Canopy regarding Unix or Linux;
  • all documents concerning any agreements relating to Unix or Linux, including but not limited to licenses, license agreements, software agreements and sublicensing agreements;
  • all documents concerning all efforts by Oracle to ensure or maintian the secrecy or confidentiality of any Unix source code, know-how, ideas, concepts, techniques, or methods to any person;
  • all documents concerning any agreements or understandings (written or oral) between Oracle and SCO;
  • all documents concerning any business relations (past, present or prospective) between Oracle and SCO.

What else could they possibly ask for or about? A reader found this and wonders if there is a database angle.

Wait a second. Could this be the Sherwin-Williams connection, that they switched from SCO UNIX to Linux in 2002 with the help of IBM? We know about AutoZone. Target was listed as a SCO customer in the original SCO complaint. I'm starting to see some breadcrumbs on the pathway.


  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 )