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.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Nah, You Misread What it Means | 155 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Nah, You Misread What it Means
Authored by: newbury on Thursday, August 09 2012 @ 01:56 AM EDT
Brings this to mind!

The Black Knight.... t'is but a scratch!
Arthur: No its not. Your arm's off.
BK: No it isn't!
Arthur: Then what's that?.....
etc.
BK..... Right, Iíll do you for that....
BK..... I'm invincible!.
Arthur You're loony!

BK Running away, eh? You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what's
coming to ya! I'll bite your legs off!

And with SCO the bark was always worse than the bite!

Returning to reality. In Chap7, doesn't the trustee HAVE to liquidate the
assets? And aren't the ONLY assets the claims in the actions? (Kinda hard to
call the status of being defendant to a counterclaim by IBM an *asset*!).
So what happens if the trustee DOES put the assets up for sale? The Novell
action is dead (another Python script jumps to mind!). The Court of Appeal will
not overturn a trial finding again. The IBM action is stayed, but since the
claim IS the asset, it would be efficient and proper to unstay the action, and
force it to trial. And if the claims are put up for sale, I don't think IBM
would buy them in. It *WANTS* a trial decision on the facts. If the claims are
not sold, Boies is still on the hook to fight! IBM would love to grind them, I'm
sure. And if the claims ARE sold (to Yarro of course!), I think that Boies would
be off the hook! Their contract is with SCO and that contract is a different
thing than the action claim. But breaching that contract would cause no damage
to SCO. If Boies repudiated, there is no damage, since SCO could no longer win
the 'fantastical pot-o-gold-at the end of the rainbow'! How fitting it would all
be. And Boies amoral heart would be exposed by the repudiation. How fitting that
Boies might be forced to fight a trial they know they will lose, because NOT
fighting it will show that *they* are the yellow bastards!

A consummation devoutly to be wished!


[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )