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
"that would bind" - and there's the real crux | 401 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Counterclaim 10
Authored by: Zartan on Monday, May 27 2013 @ 02:14 PM EDT
4. Even if the other points were somehow proven, large portions of the UNIX code cannot be used against IBM.

"that would bind" - and there's the real crux
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 27 2013 @ 03:07 PM EDT

It should bind would be more appropriate given that McBride has proven there are people in the world willing to sue with absolutely nothing to sue on.

Oracle has proven there are people willing to sue against promises made from a predecessor (java, android, Sun).

Unfortunately the US Courts appear to be an open invitation for any game including games that should not exist in the first place.

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Counterclaim 10
Authored by: Wol on Tuesday, May 28 2013 @ 12:31 PM EDT
Don't forget also, that SCOG claimed copyright in the code, stating that they
acquired said copyright from Novell.

NOVELL NEVER CLAIMED TO HAVE OWNED THE COPYRIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE!

If you read Novell's filings, they all have weasel words to the effect of
"inasmuch as we may own any copyrights in Unix, we do XXX". Just
compare the two conflicting copyright registrations.

So the SCOG lawsuit has added no information whatsoever as to who owns Unix,
other than to show that it was never transferred to SCOG.

Cheers,
Wol

[ 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 )