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
SCO Layoffs - Maciaszek Out
Saturday, February 09 2008 @ 01:52 PM EST

SCO yesterday filed an 8K with the SEC, stating that it will be laying off about 30 more people, beginning on January 31.

Here are five of them [PDF] already, as filed with the bankruptcy court, folks who survived the initial bankruptcy cut but are now out the door. One of them is John Maciaszek, a director "who has worked for USL, Novell, Santa Cruz and SCO as a Contract Manager in the UNIX licensing groups". He was director of operating system product management at SCO . Evidently there is no current need for that position.

Maciaszek first came to our attention in May of 2003, when he signed the Dear SCO Partners letter, telling about purging materials involving LKP due to SCO's purported intellectual property concerns about Linux.

Next, in February of 2004, his name came up when IBM complained to the court in SCO v. IBM that SCO had failed to include discovery from his files. SCO claimed it was an oversight and later said they'd produced the materials. If you recall the context, even when SCO provided emails, it had not produced the attachments. So IBM scheduled a deposition of Mr. Maciaszek for December of 2005. It was filed under seal. He provided SCO a Declaration also. And in the SCO v. Novell case, he testified -- (Novell filed evidentiary objections to his testimony and asked it be thrown out) -- in support of SCO's failed effort to convince the court that Novell had no right to tell SCO to waive, etc. His testimony, as described by SCO in its motion for reconsideration of the Utah court's August 10th order, involved this aspect of the contract dispute:

Second, the uncontroverted testimony demonstrates that the parties always treated revenues from UnixWare Licenses that included incidental licenses to SVRX as UnixWare revenues under Schedule 1.2(b) of the APA, not as SVRX Royalties....

John Maciaszek has been involved in the UNIX business for almost two decades. (Maciaszek Decl. (12/11/06) 2.) He testified that Novell's interest in UnixWare Licenses that included an incidental license for prior SVRX products was always treated under the UnixWare Royalty provisions of Schedule 1.2(b), and that interest "expired in 2002." (Id 27.)

Next, when SCO filed for bankruptcy, he showed up on the list of creditors. He was apparently also deposed in the Novell case, because portions of his deposition transcript are listed as an exhibit attached to the recent Brent Hatch Declaration. Now, he's gone. He gets severance of $486.91 for 10 years service at SCO.

Bruce Grant, who was with Vultus originally, is also cut. He gets $2,118 severance pay for 4 years and 8 months' service. Go figure. Mike Almond, who was OpenServer Product Team Manager for SCO according to Bela Lubkin's resume but is listed by SCO as "Vendor Relations Manager", is out too. He gets $2,179.03 for 16 years 7 months' service. Krishna Aluri, who was with Santa Cruz back in 1996 with Worldwide Services And Technologies, is on the list too, with $693.07 severance for 11 years' service. The tech talent is being weeded out.

The 30 positions represent 26% of the total workforce, SCO says. I'm sure you can do the math. SCO is shrinking. Do not let that fool you, however, as to their ultimate hopes and dreams. I continue to believe that they intend to try to do the York deal before this is over.

Here's how the 8K reads:

********************************

Item 8.01 Other Events.

On January 31, 2008, The SCO Group, Inc. (the “Company”), in an effort to reduce ongoing operating expenses and to conform the Company’s business to its current objectives and opportunities, began implementation of a reduction in force. The Company currently anticipates that it will reduce its workforce by approximately 30 positions, a reduction of approximately 26% of its total workforce. The Company instituted this reduction in force to continue to focus on and serve its UNIX customer base and to deliver on key opportunities with its mobile products and services.

Forward Looking Statements

The statements contained in this Form 8-K regarding (1) the Company’s intention to reduce the number of its employees, and (2) the Company’s efforts to continue to focus on and serve its UNIX customer base and to deliver on key opportunities with its mobile products and services are forward-looking statements and are made under the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are based on management’s current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties. We wish to advise readers that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from historical results or those anticipated in such forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to, outcomes and developments of our Chapter 11 case, court rulings in our bankruptcy proceedings, the impact of the bankruptcy proceedings on our other pending litigation, and our cash balances and available cash. These and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated are discussed in more detail in the Company’s periodic and current filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the Company’s Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, and future filings with the SEC. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which such statements are made, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update such statements to reflect events or circumstances arising after such date.


  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 )