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
SCO and IBM Agree on Something: Unsealing Documents
Monday, June 20 2005 @ 02:06 PM EDT

The parties in SCO v. IBM have finally actually agreed on something. That seemed worth a headline in and of itself. They've reached an agreement on what documents to unseal, and there are a lot of them. Here's SCO's Notice of Unsealing [PDF]. An easy way to figure out what the documents are is to go to our IBM Timeline page and match the docket numbers and dates.

Among the documents that will be unsealed are Exhibits S1, S2, S3, S5 and S7 to the Declaration of Jeremy Evans, which we just wrote about over the weekend. Note that there have been several Declarations by Mr. Evans, so you have to note the dates filed to distinguish them. For example, there is on SCO's list a Declaration by Jeremy Evans dated October of 2004 that will be unsealed, along with Exhibit 10, but that isn't the same as the December 2004 Declaration that had the soon-to-be unsealed or redacted exhibits attached. If you go to our IBM Timeline page and search for the word Evans, you'll see what I mean. I think the one that will be unsealed is this one:

[317-1] -- 04-Oct-04 -- SEALED Declaration of Jermey O. Evans Re: [316-1] brief reply

The one that had the exhibits soon to be unsealed is this one:

[348-1] -- 01-Dec-04 -- Declaration of Jeremy O. Evans Re: [346-1] Memo in Opposition to IBM's Motion for Summary Jgm on Breach of Contract Claims (Portions filed under seal)

There will be a redacted version of S8 made available. Only two exhibits will remain totally sealed, S4 -- Agreement for Licensing of AIX Source Code and Related Products between Argus Systems Group, Inc. and IBM Corp. and S6 -- IBM/Supplier Technical Services Agreement between IBM Corp. and CETIA.

SCO's Memorandum in Opposition to IBM's Motion for Summary Judgment on SCO's Breach of Contract Claims, the motion the Exhibits supported, will also be unsealed, this one:

[346-1] -- 30-Nov-04 -- SEALED DOCUMENT entitled: Memorandum in Opposition to IBM's Motion for Summary Jgm on SCO's Breach of Contract Claims

And this Jeremy Evans Declaration will also be unsealed:

[288-1] -- 19-Aug-04 -- SEALED DOCUMENT filed by SCO entitled: Declaration of Jeremy O. Evans in Support of Pla/Cntlclmdft SCO's Supplemental Memorandum Regarding Discovery

A lot of the documents regarding the Palmisano deposition will be made available, as well as some of the Sandeep Gutpa materials regarding IBM's Tenth Counterclaim, the noninfringement counterclaim. No doubt the parties will fight some more about unsealing, and in fact one of the documents to be unsealed is docket number 432, SCO's Objections to IBM's Privilege Log, but just having all that they've agreed to so far is wonderful, and I look forward to reading them a lot.


  


SCO and IBM Agree on Something: Unsealing Documents | 55 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
SCO and IBM Agree on Something: Unsealing Documents
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 03:07 PM EDT
and I am looking forward to you assesment of them.

Bill T

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections here please
Authored by: tiger99 on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 03:14 PM EDT
Only if needed!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic here please...
Authored by: tiger99 on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 03:18 PM EDT
And please remember to make clickable links, where appropriate, and post in HTML
mode, preferably testing them in preview first.

[ Reply to This | # ]

IBM's next unsealing documents
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 03:19 PM EDT
We should be seeing a similar document from IBM soon, detailing what Docuents
IBM filed under seal which both parties agree can be released.

I'll be interested in comparing this list to the proposed list and see if they
simply released the documents they both agreed on of it there was some give and
take.

---
Rsteinmetz

"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk

[ Reply to This | # ]

"Declaration of Brian W. Kernighan" not to be unsealed
Authored by: ak on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 03:34 PM EDT
The document I am most interested in, document 252, the "Declaration of
Brian W. Kernighan. Filed under seal and placed in the sealed room" is not
among those documents to be unsealed.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Document Transcriptions
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 04:07 PM EDT

I count five (5) documents that still need to be completed as text: #442, #443, #445, #446, and #448.

Before all the previously filed redacted motions by IBM are completed as text, there's going to be a whole slew of new documents to transcribe.

[ 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 )