|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 01:08 PM EDT |
unfair competition and tortious interference
claims
There would have been no "unfair competition" or "tortious
interference" if SCOG had not initiated an improper Lawsuit to begin with not to
mention launching such a public campaign.
If anyone should be charged
with tortious interference of SCOGs business it should be:
Their decision to
sue customers on improper grounds.
The decision to launch such a public
campaign to decrying Linux users as thieves.
Ah well... perhaps Cahn isn't
quite yet totally up to speed on everything that really has happened - sure, it
could happen....
Note: I put "unfair competition" and "tortious
interference" in quotes because I believe SCOG is as mistaken on those claims as
all the rest of their claims in all their "vs Linux + dog" battles.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Kilz on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 01:24 PM EDT |
Someone please remind me why they still enjoy
Chapter 11 protection
from their creditors.
Because the the Bankruptcy judge does what
he wants to do,
he
has said in open
court.
"Do
they take me out behind the building and shoot me?"
Showing to me
at least that he has no one to correct
him and no fear of anyone doing it.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 05:32 PM EDT |
As TSG admits, there are no assets left to squander. All they have are
these claims. And they already pre-paid Boies Schiller, so it doesn't cost
the estate anything to litigate.
TSG's remaining assets are the equivalent of a $1 scratch-off lottery ticket.
There's a very slim chance they'll win. But there's nothing to lose by
scratching. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 16 2012 @ 12:44 AM EDT |
Don't the creditors have any say in what's left?
Could they ask the court for lottery ticket rather than wait for outcome, either
way they get nothing but at least they can close the books.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 19 2012 @ 03:08 PM EDT |
Here's the thing that bugs me, we always joked around saying that we should
search down the back of the couch to find some spare change, buy SCO and get rid
of them.
The rest of the assets are gone, this is costing Boies Schiller & Flexner
money to keep this thing going (Even if they are only paying an intern for
filings) why can't they just buy SCO and as successor in interest get rid of the
case?
This isn't helping them in any way.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
