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
Corrections | 111 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections
Authored by: Kilz on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 01:30 PM EDT
please mention the mistake in the title of your post.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic
Authored by: Kilz on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 01:31 PM EDT
For all posts that are not on topic.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Newspicks
Authored by: Kilz on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 01:33 PM EDT
Please mention the new story's name in the title of the top
post. A link back to the news story in the top post is
helpful as they do fall off the Home page.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Comes
Authored by: Kilz on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 01:35 PM EDT
Please post all transcriptions of Comes exhibits here for PJ.
Please post the html in Plain Text mode so that she can
easily copy it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Novell hires David Boies and Stuart Singer in Appeal of Wordperfect Case v. Microsoft ~pj
Authored by: Kilz on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 01:37 PM EDT
It should be interesting to see Boies do more than dance, at
least I hope he can.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I think they did an amazing job
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 01:37 PM EDT
PJ, I think you are conflating SCO with its lawyers. SCO *had
no case*, and yet BSF was able to drag it out for 10 years.
In the process, SCO got at least 25M in "investments", all of
which has now been "spent". That's an amazing performance.

Sure, SCO didn't get billions and billions it was dreaming
about, but that was just not realistic (unless IBM or Novell
caved). BSF performed very well, considering what it had to
work with.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Novell hires David Boies and Stuart Singer in Appeal of Wordperfect Case v. Microsoft ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 02:07 PM EDT

I suspect Novell picked up Boies for this role now specifically because of the history with the DoJ antitrust suit against Microsoft. Not only did BS&F put on an outstanding show at trial, they have an intimate knowledge of what worked then, what antitrust claims are likely already exhausted, and how that history can be leveraged in the instant action.

As far as this change in gears from the BS&F role in the SCO saga...well, haven't we seen this before? MoFo has worked both sides as well, if I recall. I'm reminded of a line from the bumbling idiot lawyer representing Mr. "Not Sure" in Idiocracy: "I like money..."

[ Reply to This | # ]

Novell hires David Boies and Stuart Singer in Appeal of Wordperfect Case v. Microsoft ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 05:03 PM EDT
Since, from what I've read, and at least in theory, the SCO suits are still in
play, isn't this a conflict of interest for Boies? Or did the husk of SCO
finally drop any further appeals of it's action against Novell?

--W. H. Heydt

[ Reply to This | # ]

Strategy
Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 05:55 PM EDT
Prevent Microsoft from hiring them?


---

You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Look on the bright side...
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 10:51 PM EDT
...either Boies Schiller loses or Microsoft loses. Either way, it's a win :-)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Novell hires David Boies and Stuart Singer in Appeal of Wordperfect Case v. Microsoft ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 04 2012 @ 11:13 PM EDT
Of course we know irony hoes here

[ Reply to This | # ]

Playing dirty?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 05 2012 @ 03:36 AM EDT
Perhaps for Novell playing dirty is the only option left in this court, and they
want the best lawyers for that.

[ Reply to This | # ]

David Boies
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 05 2012 @ 06:57 PM EDT
David Boies has lost every big case he's ever litigated. I have no ideas why
companies continue to pay thousands of dollars to have a proven loser cost them
money, I know plenty of lawyers who will do that for free.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • David Boies - Authored by: PJ on Friday, October 05 2012 @ 07:02 PM EDT
Planning to pin a potential loss on BSF?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 05 2012 @ 08:43 PM EDT
I assume you can imagine my reaction when I got the news. But, as Dylan sings, people are crazy and times are strange ... I used to care, but things have changed. When Novell did that toxic patent deal with Microsoft, it was a sea change. I hope my inner thoughts prove unfounded. But to tell you the truth, they usually are on the money. It will not amaze me if Novell loses now, but it's fine if I am proven wrong.
No doubt you were surprised, but beyond that, I have no idea how you reacted.

Novell's case is so weak it barely squeaked by in its last appeal. Surviving this one will be even more difficult. Despite that, you've created expectations that Novell would win. So are expectations being lowered to more realistic levels now, with the blame being hung on BSF?

Last time one judge (on the three judge panel) thought that it would be impossible for Novell to win, but the other two thought that Novell might have a chance of proving enough to win on one claim. That was before the trial, so they couldn't see what evidence Microsoft and Novell had, nor how the witnesses would testify. They had to assume that all of the evidence would show what Novell said it would show. (All assumptions were made in Novell's favor.)

This appeal is different from the first because it is occurring after the trial. Any weaknesses in Novell's evidence and any strengths of Microsoft's evidence are known now. There are fewer things that can be assumed in Novell's favor. Unless everything went perfectly for Novell, its position is necessarily going to be weaker. If Novell couldn't convince all three judges last time, would it be surprising if it couldn't convince at least two of them this time?

I think not and I don't think it has anything to do with BSF.

[ Reply to This | # ]

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 )