|
|
| Tuesdays filings in SCO-IBM |
 |
|
Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 02:26 AM EST
|
There has been some docket action in the SCO-IBM case, but the filings that are interesting are not available electronically. (Who doesn't want to read sealed documents?) Kimball signed the motion that allowed IBM to file an oversized reply.
The Pacer docket entries:
963 ADDENDUM K to 961 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion, filed by Defendant International Business Machines Corporation. (Clerks Note: Full document not scanned and attached due to size. Complete document will be retained in the clerks office for viewing.) (blk) (Entered: 02/20/2007)
[We only have the table of contents, listing the unpublished cases IBM referred.]
964 **SEALED DOCUMENT** ADDENDUM J - re 961 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion, filed by Defendant International Business Machines Corporation. (blk) (Entered: 02/20/2007)
965 **SEALED DOCUMENT** ADDENDUM I - re 961 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion, filed by Defendant International Business Machines Corporation. (blk) (Entered: 02/20/2007)
966 ORDER granting 962 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. Signed by Judge Dale A. Kimball on 2/20/07. (blk) (Entered: 02/20/2007)
-- MathFox
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: kh on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 02:55 AM EST |
| . [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: kh on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 02:58 AM EST |
| Try and make a clicky link [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Petition to get the UK government to use ODF ... - Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 04:42 AM EST
- Which Lawyers are Uncomfortable? - Authored by: DaveJakeman on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 06:12 AM EST
- Court filing that wasn't public yet - BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA - MOG and Lyons - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 07:55 AM EST
- Ballmer from a slashdot - GET THE FACTS - Authored by: dodger on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 11:02 AM EST
- Dell-Linux news pick - Authored by: Griffin3 on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 11:09 AM EST
- Triple Play: Mono to run Windows Apps natively - Dell focusing on Linux - Ballmer threatening - Authored by: clark_kent on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 11:29 AM EST
- Do not repond to MOG--PJ - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 12:05 PM EST
- question for mathfox - Authored by: sumzero on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 01:30 PM EST
- SCOX back below $1 - Authored by: DaveJakeman on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 01:43 PM EST
- Newpick- Dell gives desktop Linux its "full attention" - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 02:33 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: DaveJakeman on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 06:59 AM EST |
IBM doesn't get carte blanche to produce a 200-page monster.
I suspect the Court has had enough of wading through SCO's randomised,
distorted, waffly meanderings and has finally decided to confine this insanity,
starting - to be fair to both players - with IBM. Next time SCO enters a motion
to permit SCO to produce another tome of drivel, expect to see it limited
likewise. Also, expect SCO to produce their tome of drivel anyway, by
continuing their inherently self-refuting argument in the
conclusion/attachments/appendices/exhibits or wherever else they can sneak it
in.
---
I would rather stand corrected than sit confused.
---
Should one hear an accusation, try it on the accuser.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 08:05 AM EST |
Haven't checked for news in a couple days, looked in this AM, and Google News'ed
for related stories.
Saw a hit piece by some female 'journalist' (I've never heard of her, don't know
what her quals are...) over at CRN. She sounds like she is an O'Gara fan and a
gloater.
Saw the phony 'Where's PJ' blog that looks like something Darl is doing late at
night when he is lucid enough to (barely) use a keyboard.
I am *amazed* at the vitriol pouring out of these people towards PJ!
But it made me realize: These people are the ones who like DRM, MS OS'es,
frivilous lawsuits, etc etc - everything I *don't* like.
The poor little buggers have themselves all whipped up in a frenzy, hoping
beyond hope that they can use PJ as a strawman to say "Since she isn't
real, there must be No Truth in what Groklaw does!".
Sorry folks, your emperor ain't got no clothes, regardless of the existence of
PJ.
Yes, the Truth hurts you, and it is obvious that you are feeling the pain. Your
shrill cries make that point.
I sure would hate to be you.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: toads_for_all on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 10:03 AM EST |
I have always wondered about APA Amendment 2, like, what happened to cause
Novell and Santa Cruz to amend the APA a second time, and add to the "Excluded
Assets":
All copyrights and trademarks, except for the copyrights
and trademarks owned by Novell as of the date of the Agreement required for SCO
to exercise its rights with respect to the acquisition of UNIX and UnixWare
technologies.
Reading BIFF's blatherings over on Y!, it occurred
to me that it might have been the beginnings of Project Monterey. (I wonder if
BIFF will ever realize that he usually ends up making the opposite point of what
he is trying to make)
And what is the signifigance of it? Glad you
asked. It could mean that Santa Cruz knew that Novell retained all of the
copyrights, and that they believed in order to enter into "joint venture"
agreements, like Project Monterey with IBM, they needed some additional rights,
those "required for SCO to exercise its rights with respect to the acquisition
of UNIX [technologies] and UnixWare technologies" not already granted by the APA
and Amendment 1.
As I see it, The SCO Group can not claim rights The
Santa Cruz Operation didn't have, and knew they didn't have.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: gbl on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 01:24 PM EST |
| Now that Ballmer is regularly making the same accusations as TSG but, like TSG,
not actually producing any evidence, we have to concider what the next move from
MS will be.
It seems to me that MS will attempt to buy off another major
supplier of Linux. There are rumours about feelers being made towards Redhat.
Hopefully RH will not be tempted by the smell of money. But there is always
Oracle, a company that seems to be perfectly happy to hurt RH even though Oracle
is not an OS company.
I also believe that there will be a major attack on
Samba. Because Samba is "bug compatible" with the Microsoft SMB servers I think
that they might be in very dangerous waters because of the DRM and the
reverse-engineering restrictions (and it doesn't matter if it is all FUD, Samba
would still need a White Knight and we can't expect IBM to step up again - they
might, but it cannot be presumed.)
Groklaw has to start following Microsoft
statements in the same detail as it has followed TSG. No half-truths or spin
should go unchallenged. The witterings of Ballmer must be refuted every single
time else the FUD takes hold.
Microsoft can't beat Linux via technology or
product quality. They can beat Linux and all open/free software using FUD and
abusing the US legal system.
---
If you love some code, set it free. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, February 21 2007 @ 03:07 PM EST |
Here's a thread so that people can post their hopes for PJ to get better soon
under it :)
Hope you're better soon, PJ! And I also hope that those nasty SCO stalkers go
away.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: DustDevil on Thursday, February 22 2007 @ 12:57 PM EST |
Good to see you're still around!
---
All comments are my own, not that of my employer[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
