I have only had a moment to read it quickly, but I confess that I'm a little disappointed. I thought it would be better than this. I doubt any old timers will be surprised. In a sentence, SCO argues that if SCO had no right to enter into the SCOsource license agreements, and if Novell didn't approve SCOsource licensing, then Novell has no right to the money SCO got from SCOsource.

Uh huh. SCO logic, whereby all brain synapses fire in only one direction all the time -- in service of the noble goal of making sure SCO keeps Novell from getting its money, while forcing Novell to spend buckets more on lawyers. So, who gets the money in SCOland? Guess. Microsoft and Sun, you silly wabbits. Who'd ya think?

At least that's what I get from the implications of footnote 3 on page 13.

Why shouldn't those two enablers be rewarded for their lack of due diligence and for helping SCO hold up the marketplace in what Novell has called a scam? Bonus points for trying to destroy Linux. Certainly they deserve every penny back.

Oh wait. SCO already told the court, it's pretty much all gone. All the dollars they have left are different dollars. Hmm. What a dilemma. I know. How's this? The new moneybags partners offering to save SCO could pay all the perps? Why wouldn't that be a SCO dream come true?

Here's the docket:

507 - Filed & Entered: 03/12/2008
Redacted Document
Docket Text: REDACTION to [506] Sealed Document, SCO's Memorandum in Support of its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings on Novell's Claims for Money or Claim for Declaratory Relief by Counter Defendant SCO Group. (Normand, Edward)