Here is the Declaration of David Bradford [PDF], as text, thanks to Groklaw's caecer. Bradford is an attorney and at the time of the asset purchase agreement with Santa Cruz, he was the Novell executive in charge of the deal, the guy who hired Tor Braham, whose extraordinary declaration you have already read and which mentioned Bradford. Bradford confirms everything Braham told the court, and more. In a nutshell: From 1987 to 2000, I was Senior Vice-president, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary....12. The Asset Purchase Agreement means what it says: copyrights were
not included
as an asset; copyrights were specifically excluded from the asset
transfer. The exclusion was
intentional. Should any persons suggest otherwise, they are mistaken. I think he's being polite. This is yet another killer declaration from Novell in support of its Motion for Summary Judgment on SCO's 1st Claim for Slander of Title and 3rd Claim for Specific Performance, one of the four new summary judgment motions Novell has just filed. Friday was the deadline for filing such motions in SCO v. Novell, and I checked just now to see if SCO had added any new ones, and there is nothing on Pacer showing any further summary judgment motions from SCO. So this is it. Maybe in more ways than one.
Bradford was at the board meeting the day before the APA was signed, the meeting that resolved that Novell would retain the copyrights:
13. I attended the Novell Board of Directors meeting held on
September 18, 1995, or
the day immediately prior to the execution of the Asset Purchase
Agreement. The Novell-Santa
Cruz transaction was the subject of that Board meeting. As Senior
Vice-president and General
Counsel of Novell and as the Novell executive responsible for
implementing the Novell-Santa
Cruz transaction into a binding, legal contract, I participated in the
discussion. I even reviewed
the terms of the Asset Purchase Agreement with the Board. As Secretary
to the Board of
Directors, I memorialized the meeting in Board Minutes, a true and
correct copy of which I
attach to this Declaration as Exhibit 1. As I recorded in those Minutes
that I sent to the Board of
Directors, in the meeting the Board:
RESOLVED:
...
Novell will retain all of its patents, copyrights and trademarks
(except for the trademarks UNIX and UnixWare) ...
Like Braham, he not only remembers, he kept some paperwork, specifically a memo he send to the board confirming that Novell would be retaining the licensing revenue from SVRX licenses, and he states plainly that it did not mean binary licenses only. And Novell retained control rights, specifically because of a deal in the works regarding HP, which is also mentioned in the board minutes. Not only that, but he tells the court that Novell has done other deals where it sold assets but retained the copyrights. Novell sold TUXEDO to BEA in 1996, the same time frame as the Santa Cruz deal, and Novell did not transfer copyrights to BEA. So much for SCO's assertion that it never happens that way.
*******************************
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
Michael A. Jacobs (pro hac vice)
Kenneth W. Brakebill (pro hac vice)
[address]
[phone]
[fax]
ANDERSON & KARRENBERG
Thomas R. Karrenberg, #3726
John P. Mullen, #4097
Heather M. Sneddon, #9520
[address]
[phone]
[fax]
Attorneys for Defendant Counterclaim-Plaintiff Novell, Inc.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION |
THE SCO GROUP, INC., a Delaware
corporation,
Plaintiff,
vs.
NOVELL, INC., a Delaware corporation,
Defendant. |
DECLARATION OF DAVID
BRADFORD
Case No. 2:04CV00139
Judge Dale A. Kimball
|
I, David Bradford, declare as follows:
1. The statements made in this Declaration are based on my personal
knowledge. In
connection with this Declaration, I have also reviewed documents I
authored or received
contemporaneous to the transaction discussed herein. I have attached
several of these documents
as Exhibits to this Declaration.
2. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the state of
California. I have an
undergraduate degree and JD degree from Brigham Young University. I also
have an MBA from
Pepperdine University.
3. I was employed by Novell, Inc. from 1985 to 2000 in various legal
and business
capacities. From 1987 to 2000, I was Senior Vice-president, General
Counsel and Corporate
Secretary. My responsibilities included overseeing legal, security,
government relations and,
from time to time, corporate development functions at Novell. During
this period of time, I also
was part of a group of executives that comprised the Executive Staff,
which advised Novell's
President and Chief Executive Officer regarding business decisions for
the company. In
addition, I was a Secretary to the Novell Board of Directors. I
participated in strategic
management decisions. I led Novell through a number of complex
transactions, including
acquisitions, asset sales and public offerings.
4. In 1995, Novell decided to sell certain UNIX-related assets that
it had acquired in
1993 from AT&T's UNIX System Laboratories subsidiary. A company called
Santa Cruz
Operation, Inc. ("Santa Cruz") surfaced as a prospective buyer. After a
series of executive-level
discussions during the summer of 1995, I was tasked, in my role as
Senior Vice-president and
General Counsel, with overseeing the negotiation and drafting of a
contract between Novell and
Santa Cruz that would protect Novell's interests.
5. I retained the law firm of Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati,
then Novell's regular
outside counsel, to negotiate and draft the agreement between Novell and
Santa Cruz. The
Wilson team was led by Tor Braham, an experienced partner in that firm
who was already
1
familiar with Novell's business. In fact, Tor had negotiated Novell's
purchase of UNIX assets
from USL in 1993.
6. I charged Tor Braham with the responsibility of putting together
the necessary
agreements to protect Novell's interests. He was the principal drafter
of what became the Asset
Purchase Agreement executed on September 19,1995. Tor Braham
communicated directly with
me during the drafting and negotiation process, including sending me
drafts of the Asset
Purchase Agreement.
7. The Novell-Santa Cruz transaction took on a more complex form due
to various
concerns that arose during the course of the negotiations. For example,
at the outset, Novell had
been hopeful that the transaction would be a cash deal. It became
apparent, however, that Santa
Cruz would not be able to come up with the requisite cash to buy all of
the UNIX assets that
Novell had purchased from USL in 1993, as well as Novell's UnixWare
business. Among other
things, this resulted in an agency relationship, under which Santa Cruz
would collect and pass
through a revenue stream for SVRX contracts and Novell would retain
control over the SVRX
licensing arrangements.
8. There also arose serious concerns about Santa Cruz's viability as
a company. Santa
Cruz was not the most financially stable company. We thus became focused
on building in
protections for Novell in the event that Santa Cruz went bankrupt.
9. Because of these concerns, during the negotiations I discussed
with Tor Braham the
need to increase Novell's protections in the transaction, including but
not limited to the need to
retain Novell's intellectua1 property rights in UNIX and UnixWare. This
retention of intellectual
property rights was implemented with an eye to protecting Novell's
interest in the significant
revenue stream that Novell would be retaining from SVRX source code.
Novell's copyright
ownership would permit Novell to continue to have rights to this
revenue, should Santa Cruz go
bankrupt.
2
10. The Wilson team drafted a schedule of assets to be included in
the asset transfer
and a schedule of assets to be excluded from the transfer. These
schedules specifically addressed
how intellectual property rights in UNIX and UnixWare would be treated
in the deal. Copyrights
were not included as an asset; instead copyrights were specifically
excluded. It is my
understanding that the Wilson team exchanged these schedules with
representatives of Santa
Cruz prior to the execution of the Asset Purchase Agreement.
11. In its final form, the Asset Purchase Agreement executed on
September 19, 1995
included a Schedule 1.1(a). Schedule 1.1(a) specifically identified the
"Intellectual Property"
included in the assets to be transferred; it only identified certain
UNIX and UnixWare
trademarks. The Asset Purchase Agreement also contained an "Excluded
Assets" list in
Schedule 1.1(b); this list provided that certain "Intellectual Property"
was excluded from the
asset transfer, including "[a]ll copyrights and trademarks, except for
the trademarks UNIX and
UnixWare." It also excluded "[a]ll patents."
12. The Asset Purchase Agreement means what it says: copyrights were
not included
as an asset; copyrights were specifically excluded from the asset
transfer. The exclusion was
intentional. Should any persons suggest otherwise, they are mistaken.
13. I attended the Novell Board of Directors meeting held on
September 18,1995, or
the day immediately prior to the execution of the Asset Purchase
Agreement. The Novell-Santa
Cruz transaction was the subject of that Board meeting. As Senior
Vice-president and General
Counsel of Novell and as the Novell executive responsible for
implementing the Novell-Santa
Cruz transaction into a binding, legal contract, I participated in the
discussion. I even reviewed
the terms of the Asset Purchase Agreement with the Board. As Secretary
to the Board of
Directors, I memorialized the meeting in Board Minutes, a true and
correct copy of which I
attach to this Declaration as Exhibit 1. As I recorded in those Minutes
that I sent to the Board of
Directors, in the meeting the Board:
RESOLVED:
3
...
Novell will retain all of its patents, copyrights and trademarks
(except for the trademarks UNIX and UnixWare) ...
(See Exhibit 1 at 2.)
14. The Board meeting minutes are accurate in their description of
the intellectual
property assets Novell retained.
15. Under the Asset Purchase Agreement, Novell retained the right to
receive 95% of
the revenue from licenses of SVRX software. I confirmed our retention of
SVRX licensing
revenue to the Board of Directors in a memorandum on September 15,1995,
a true and correct
copy of which I attach as Exhibit 2. I told the Board: "For example, we
will be retaining our
traditional royalty stream from UNIX SVRX source code which was
approximately $50 million
for FY 1995." (Exhibit 2 at 1. I underscored "retaining" in my original
memo.) Again, at the
September 18, 1995 Board of Directors meeting, I informed the Board of
this retained revenue
stream, which was referred to as SVRX Royalties in the contract.
(Exhibit 1 at 2.) The term
SVRX Royalties was drafted so as to be broadly applicable to "all
royalties, fees and other
amounts" from SVRX agreements, and was not limited to monies paid under
binary licenses;
Novell retained 95% of all monies from SVRX agreements, source and
binary included.
16. Under the Asset Purchase Agreement, Novell also retained control
over the
licensing arrangements with SVRX customers. As indicated in the Asset
Purchase Agreement,
this right applies to all SVRX Licenses; it was not restricted to binary
licenses of SVRX. In
particular, Novell intended to use its control over the SVRX license
agreements to do "buyouts"
of SVRX agreements or, if necessary, to provide source rights to Hewlett
Packard in its
development of a 64-bit UNIX technology -- a development effort that I
memorialized in the
September 18, 1995 Board Minutes. (Exhibit 1 at 1, 3.)
17. I was presented the final Asset Purchase Agreement between Novell
and Santa
Cruz on the day it was to be executed. I was to review it and approve it
for final signature by
Bob Frankenberg, Novell's CEO at the time. I reviewed the contract and
considered it to reflect
4
the intent that I have described above in this Declaration. Indeed, I
wrote a memorandum (a true
and correct copy of which I have attached as Exhibit 3), reflecting my
approval of the Asset
Purchase Agreement for signature by Mr. Frankenberg. I still agree with
what 1 said nearly
twelve years ago:
The purpose of this memorandum is to let you know that I have
reviewed the final document and find the same to be an accurate
reflection of the business and legal terms and conditions negotiated
between the parties ...
18. Novel has retained intellectual property rights in other
transactions involving the
sale of part of its business. In late 1995 and early 1996 I was part of
a Novell business team
evaluating the future ownership direction of Novell's TUXEDO software
business, which we
also had acquired from AT&T. On January 24, 1996, Novell entered into
an agreement with
BEA Systems, Inc., in which Novell transferred certain assets relating
to its TUXEDO software
product. In that transaction, Novell specifically retained the
copyrights in the TUXEDO
software.
I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States
that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Executed on this 19th day of April, 2007 in Newport Beach
California
[signed]
David Bradford
5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 20th day of April, 2007, I caused a
true and correct
copy of the foregoing DECLARATION OF DAVID BRADFORD to be served to the
following:
Via CM/ECF:
Brent O. Hatch
Mark F. James
HATCH JAMES & DODGE, P.C.
[address]
Stuart H. Singer
William T. Dzurilla
Sashi Bach Boruchow
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
[address]
David Boies
Edward J. Normand
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
[address]
Devan V. Padmanabhan
John J. Brogan
DORSEY & WHITNEY, LLP
[address]
Via U.S. Mail, postage prepaid:
Stephen Neal Zack
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
[address]
/s/ Heather M. Sneddon
6
|