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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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
Does this mean SCO is really over? or is there a conflict of interest? | 234 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
That is puzzling... - n/t
Authored by: Gringo_ on Sunday, November 11 2012 @ 11:31 PM EST

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Does this mean SCO is really over? or is there a conflict of interest?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 12 2012 @ 02:43 AM EST
Do you know the terms of the agreement? The recent Chapter 7 might have
released him.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Does this mean SCO is really over? or is there a conflict of interest?
Authored by: Steve Martin on Monday, November 12 2012 @ 06:57 AM EST

Since the deal in the SCO case was for a one-time fee covering all appeals, it seems like that case is not over for his law firm unless appeals are dropped.

Boies Schiller is no longer representing TSG Group against Novell, because the Novell litigation is over, as acknowledged by The TSG Group themselves:

The Project Monterey Claim and the Tortious Interference Claims are unaffected by the final judgment entered in SCO v. Novell, Civil No. 2:04CV139 (the "Novell Litigation"), which the Tenth Circuit has now affirmed. This Court need not await the resolution of that litigation, because it has ended.

(emphasis added by me)

Further, even if (insanely) The TSG Group had wished to carry this on to apply for certiorari to the Supreme Court, per U. S.C. &sect 2101(c), they only had 90 days from entry of final judgment in the Tenth Circuit in which to do so, and that time has passed. So I think we can safely say that the case of SCO v Novell has finally had a stake driven through its heart.

---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffe, "Sports Night"

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

No. But the Wikipedia article needs updating
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 12 2012 @ 12:21 PM EST

I'd do it, but I'm too busy right now.

Volunteers wanted!

Wayne
http://madhatter.ca

PS: Check the Groklaw and PJ pages too. I haven't checked them recently.
The number of negative changes dropped dramatically after Darl was
forced out.

[ 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 )