|Authored by: dobbo on Friday, October 05 2012 @ 07:52 AM EDT|
|Realistically how can any big law firm walk way from a |
hopeless case without sending the "I give up when things get
difficult" message to your future clients?
Lawyers are not their clients, they only represent them.
That's a very big difference in my book. If you don't like
BS&F is it because of the way they when about trying to win
the case for their clients, SCO. Or is it because of SCO's
allegations against Linux, an OS you love?
I remember the start of the Caldera v. IBM case. We didn't
know back then if there was a real case or not. We got a
very good idea when some of SCO's evidence started to leek
out (like the obfuscated slides - that did make me laugh)
but even then we could not be sure that all their evidence
was so poor.
I think it bad form to judge anyone based on hindsight, BS&F
would have had to know that it was wrong at the start and
I'm not at all sure that they did. I presume they are
better now. What is the betting that BS&F now have a
checklist of things to be sure of before taking on a case:
like does the client own the copyrights before we file suit.
How many SCO like companies have come to them since those
times and be turned away?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]