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
The Zombie company | 244 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Believe it or not, SCO pops its head up again ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 26 2013 @ 04:41 PM EDT
Shouldn't this just get dismissed since they asked for and
got permission to destroy their documentation in bankruptcy
court?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

I have seen the film...
Authored by: Nick_UK on Tuesday, March 26 2013 @ 05:59 PM EDT
...groundsco day.

Nick

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

They are just a few days early ...
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 26 2013 @ 07:45 PM EDT
should have been published first of april.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Well, duh...
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 26 2013 @ 08:06 PM EDT
Now that the court has authorized them to destroy the records, it makes sense to
go forward. Couldn't do that before, because the prison terms were unattractive
to certain parties.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

This will never be over
Authored by: symbolset on Tuesday, March 26 2013 @ 09:52 PM EDT
After the administrator files the final papers dissolving the entity, a long
lost
heir claiming rights to these untold potential billions will ride in from
the
East. Debunked one by one, each rejected pretender will multiply until
they
turn into a horde of dubious claimants.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Believe it or not, SCO pops its head up again ~pj
Authored by: Tinstaafl on Wednesday, March 27 2013 @ 12:25 AM EDT
Scombie

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Maybe they accidentally dropped...
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 27 2013 @ 12:46 AM EDT
Maybe they accidentally dropped a stack of paper in the Outbox instead of the
shredder.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Believe it or not, SCO pops its head up again ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 27 2013 @ 02:02 AM EDT
The Night of the Living Dead. I just KNEW we had not
heard the last of SCO. Its time to release the IBM
Nazguls!!! Now if *I* were the judge, I'd ask SCO what
IBM could recover from SCO should they lose?!? Will
SCO lose?!? Of course they will lose -- they haven't won
a single round, yet they hope to beat IBM?!? SCO is
filing a "Nuisance Lawsuit", as such on that grounds
SCO's request should hereby be DENIED!! IF it were
allowed to go forward I would force SCO to put into
escrow the sum of 20 Million dollars or more in the
-- likely -- event SCO were to lose. If SCO can't come up
with the money to put into escrow, the "request" would
be DENIED!!! When is some judge somewhere going to
stand up and shout, "SCO has no clothes"... or even a
legal leg, to stand upon. I am sick and tired of greedy
con men using our legal system to try and extort
gazillions of dollars from companies. SCO has had its
day in court -- more than its day -- and it has LOST
EVERY SINGLE TIME on every single issue, in front
of several different judges and even a jury, and here
they are back again?!? No, ANY SANE Judge should
simply DENY the request, and if they want to fight
about then they need forced to put into Escrow all the
money needed to pay the IBM Nazguls, plus damages
to pay to IBM when SCO loses -- and they will lose --
since SCO is BANKRUPT and has NO MONEY. You
don't get to play the "Litigation Lottery" forever.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Believe it or not, SCO pops its head up again ~pj
Authored by: fxbushman on Wednesday, March 27 2013 @ 11:22 AM EDT
It looks like April 1st comes a few days early for SCO.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The Zombie company
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 27 2013 @ 05:20 PM EDT


Maybe they've been hanging around my buddy Zombie Zak, and picked up some of his tricks...

Wayne
http://madhatter.ca

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Believe it or not, SCO pops its head up again ~pj
Authored by: mtew on Thursday, March 28 2013 @ 08:06 PM EDT
Is the 'Principal' (Cahn) libel for any sanctions or
penalties? If not, why not?

---
MTEW

[ 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 )