We have obtained the transcript [PDF]for the December 13, 2005 hearing, in which SCO and IBM lawyers argued SCO's motion, trying, in effect, to get Judge Kimball to overrule Judge Wells. The subtext is they wouldn't mind some more delay, I gather.
You'll remember the issue was Linux developers' notes and papers. SCO wanted more, more, more, and Wells wouldn't give it to them. So SCO asked her to reconsider and simultaneously went to Kimball with the thought that he might change her mind. Ted Normand, the SCO attorney arguing this motion, admits as much.
As for David Marriott's arguments, they stand as a template for how to tell the court that the other side is telling stories instead of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, without being in any way impolite about it. It's really an enjoyable read, particularly if you read it after reading Normand's opening remarks, by which time your blood will be boiling as you note time after time where you see him fudge the way it really was, according to your memory. At least, that is what happened to me. I don't need to make a list for you, though, this time, because Marriott does it. Just read it and enjoy the knowledge that we know how this one turned out. IBM prevailed.
For those of you on dialup, we've divided the transcript into three sections:
Part 1, Normand opens
Part 2, Marriott responds
Part 3, Normand replies
Enjoy! If anyone could do a text or HTML of this PDF, I'd appreciate it very much. If you can, leave a comment here please, so we don't duplicate effort. And when you send me your work, in the email can you please tell me if you wish credit and if so, by name or handle? Thank you.