|
HP: I'm In! Send All SCO's Bankruptcy Notices Please! - Gupta Prez of SCO Operations |
|
Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 09:26 PM EDT
|
Now it's Hewlett-Packard that has answered the call from the bankruptcy court and filed a notice of its interest in SCO's bankruptcy, its Notice of Appearance and Request for Special Notice [PDF]. You'll see that the wording isn't exactly the same as IBM's [PDF] notice. That's because HP is on the the top 20 creditors' list [PDF] (technically, the hilariously named "HP NonStop Royalty Accounting"), so it wants all notices of creditors' meetings too and any plans filed. Plans means this in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and as you can see in this section on who can file a plan, it can be the debtor, or if the debtor fails to timely do so or if the debtor's plan isn't accepted, then it could be the trustee, any of the creditors, an equity security holder, any party in interest. Someone has to come up with a survival plan on how to reorganize so as not to send SCO down the drain while also not totally stiffing the creditors or unfairly paying one to the detriment of all others, etc. So, with HP showing up, I'd say SCO's creditors' committee begins to appear. What a wonderful time to be named President of SCO Operations, Inc. How lucky can Sandy Gupta get?
In fact, he's "thrilled": "After having worked at SCO for over a decade, I am thrilled to better serve our customers and partners in this new capacity," said Sandy Gupta, President of SCO Operations, Inc. "As our primary focus, we will strengthen and expand our UNIX product offerings to our partners and reinvigorate our channels in doing so. The SCO UNIX partner and customer ecosystem has also represented a great channel to launch SCO Mobile products and services complementary to the core UNIX products." All executives quoted in press releases are invariably "thrilled", I've observed, no matter what it's about. We'll keep on the watch to see how thrilling this turns out to be. Indeed, the press release includes the "Forward Looking Statement" sentences, including these: We wish to advise readers that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from historical results or those anticipated in such forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to outcome and development of our Chapter 11 case, court rulings in our bankruptcy proceedings, the impact of the bankruptcy proceedings or other pending litigation, our cash balances and available cash, continued competitive pressure on the Company's operating system products, which could impact the Company's results of operations, adverse developments in and increased or unforeseen legal costs related to the Company's litigation, the inability to devote sufficient resources to the development and marketing of the Company's products, including the UNIX and mobile services and development platform, and the possibility that companies with whom the Company has formed partnerships will decide to terminate their relationship to the company, or reduce customers and resources devoted to, their partnership with the Company.
But back to HP. It's one of those companies SCO, in the IBM litigation alleged in its Second Amended Complaint was influenced by IBM to keep SCO from succeeding in its business after SCO dreamed up SCOsource. Remember that whole story [PDF] about the famous Ms. Smith of IBM who SCO claimed became furious at LinuxWorld in 2003 when she first learned about SCOsource and allegedly talked to a guy at HP and tried to talk HP out of doing any further business with SCO? HP denied it, saying it decided instead not to talk to Ms. Smith again, and indeed it continued to show up as sponsoring SCO Forums. Anyway, according to SCO, HP was another company SCO claimed was out to get them after IBM tortiously interfered. I do hope SCO is right about that. All right. Calm down. I'm kidding. Sort of. Here are the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, which the notice references. Rule 2002 lists all the types of notices that are sent, all of which HP wants, as well as the notices regarding disclosure statements and plans of reorganization, here at Rule 3017. HP wants those too. HP wants to be involved, I take it.
When I was reviewing the old HP allegations, I came across some interesting tidbits I hadn't noticed at the time of the March 7, 2007 hearing in SCO v IBM. Brent Hatch told the court at that hearing that SCO was "well-funded". That is in addition to Stuart Singer denying that bankruptcy was imminent at another hearing, the one on January 23, 2007. Two representations, then, of sufficient funds to not end up in bankruptcy. Hatch said something else about those of you who attend the hearings. Unless I misunderstand what he said, I gather he thinks IBM pays you to attend. The context is that IBM had complained about some of the things Darl McBride had said to the media: MR. HATCH: Your Honor, the only thing that was raised was tab 11, and I just would indicate this is just more of the same. The part that was underlined in mine that she's saying was so horrible that Mr. McBride said, it says: There is no doubt that our enemy -- that would
be IBM, if anybody is not sure of that -- is well-funded and has deep pockets.
Now, anybody would be really hardpressed to stand here before me and tell me that that is not true, especially given our wonderful audience in the courtroom.
THE COURT: Some of the audience is yours, isn't it?
MR. HATCH: Yes, indeed, Your Honor. And I'm happy to have them say in public that we are well-funded as well. The point is: These are not actionable. They know it. These are brought to sidetrack the litigation, and the motion should be granted....
Now, based on that opportunity, SCO put together a licensing program for its libraries and approached Hewlitt Packard and other large companies to
confirm whether it would be a good idea and they would find support in the industry. Not surprisingly, the program was well received and would give an opportunity to protect SCO's intellectual property and give them a profitable business while enhancing Linux by making more UNIX applications available because, without applications, an operating system isn't really worth much. Everyone wins in such a situation. There was only one company that balked. IBM. So one can't help but wonder if Judge Kimball was influenced by these representations as to SCO's solvency and so didn't hurry to fund the constructive trust Novell asked for. If so, SCO is now reaping the benefit, as it gave SCO the window of opportunity to run to bankruptcy court and stay almost everything else. I think that kind of has to bite SCO on the ankle at some point. SCO can't hide in bankruptcy court forever.
******************************
ANNE MARIE KENNELLY (State Bar No. 55666)
HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY
[address, phone, fax]
Corporate Counsel for Hewlett-Packard Company
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
In re:
The SCO GROUP, INC., et al.,
Debtor(s).
Case No. 07-11337(KG)
(Jointly Administered)
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND
REQUEST FOR SPECIAL NOTICE
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rule 9010 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, Anne Kennelly, Corporate Counsel for Hewlett-Packard Company, hereby gives notice of appearance in this case on behalf of Hewlett-Packard Company ("Creditor").
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that, pursuant to Rules 2002, 3017 and 9007 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure and such other rules or statutes as may be applicable, Creditor hereby requests that (1) all notices given or required to be given in this case to creditors, any creditors' committee, or any other parties in interest, whether sent by the Court, the Debtor, any trustee, or any other party in this case and (2) any disclosure statements or plans of reorganization filed in this case, and any notice of hearing on such disclosure statements or plans of reorganization, be served on Creditor at the following address:
Anne Marie Kennelly
Corporate Counsel
Hewlett-Packard Company
[address, telephone, fax, email]
Dated: September 25, 2007
By: ____[signature]_____
Anne Marie Kennelly
Hewlett-Packard Company
[address, phone, fax, email]
|
|
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 09:32 PM EDT |
Post corrections to Groklaw here, please.
Summarize your correction in the
title line of your post for best results.
Thanks.
--- Free minds,
Free software [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 09:35 PM EDT |
Comments about Groklaw News Picks can be consolidated here for easy
reference.
--- Free minds, Free software [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 09:37 PM EDT |
Comments whose topic does not match the current article can be placed
here.
Yippee!
--- Free minds, Free software [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Privacy threats are no longer 'terra incognita' - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 10:02 PM EDT
- [OT] HP-Microsoft conspiracy - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 10:20 PM EDT
- Any filings for October 5 in BK Court? - Authored by: bezz on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 10:45 PM EDT
- [OT] RIAA Crimes and Trials news discussion thread - Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 11:03 PM EDT
- John Deep v. RIAA, Boies, et al. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 11:43 PM EDT
- Ars Technica's dispatches from RIAA trial in Duluth - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 01:45 AM EDT
- MS still messing up the standards boards - Authored by: Winter on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 03:30 AM EDT
- ebay: Botnets are "Linux-Happy" - Authored by: jplatt39 on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 03:43 AM EDT
- ebay: Botnets are "Linux-Happy" - Authored by: Winter on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 04:10 AM EDT
- ebay: Botnets are "Linux-Happy" - Authored by: gtall on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 05:28 AM EDT
- ebay: Botnets are "Linux-Happy" - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 05:35 AM EDT
- I doubt it - Authored by: kh on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 06:29 AM EDT
- ebay: Botnets are "Linux-Happy" - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 07:12 AM EDT
- Why Rooted? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 07:25 AM EDT
- The only Botnets I have ever encountered are Zombied WindoZe boxes. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 09:35 AM EDT
- root not necessary for phishing/spamming - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 10:15 AM EDT
- I wouldn't be surprised if it was reasonably accurate that the phishing sites were on Linux - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 11:20 AM EDT
- Interesting - when I called them about a MAJOR fraud attempt against me, ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 06:16 PM EDT
- MS live workspaces in the press - Authored by: Winter on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 04:00 AM EDT
- BK Court - Authored by: crs17 on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 06:15 AM EDT
- Kiwi boffins prove that booze makes you clever - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 09:22 AM EDT
- Sandy Gupta is SCO Prez. Daryl upgraded to Emperor of Unix. Film @ 11 o clock. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 09:27 AM EDT
- OOXML Critic Fired from Finnish Standards Board - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 11:55 AM EDT
- SUN too controlling, OpenOffice forked - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 12:03 PM EDT
- New filings on the SCO bankruptcy docket - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 02:02 PM EDT
- open.NET? Microsoft To Make .NET Libraries Available Under "Open Source" - Authored by: DannyB on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 02:13 PM EDT
- [OT] Groklaw Off Topic Thread - Authored by: DannyB on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 02:37 PM EDT
- EU Opens In-Depth Probe of IBM's Telelogic Buy - Authored by: tiger99 on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 04:49 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 09:54 PM EDT |
FYI, NonStop is the name of the architecture for Tandem computers that HP
obtained via Compaq (via Tandem originally). I would assume that SCO owes them
royalties for some feature or another that was incorporated into SCO's UNIX.
"NonStop Royalites" does have a nice ring to it though.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- NonStop - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 11:39 PM EDT
- NonStop - Authored by: red floyd on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 11:01 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 10:13 PM EDT |
I don't know if anyone else noticed, but I don't think HP is that
interested in the proceedings. They sent the notice via first class mail. The
PDF, page 3, says that it was mailed on September 27 and it is just showing up
now.
If it were me, I'd at least have sent it via Certified mail with a
return receipt.
By the way, my real interest is in the objections that
were due today. Either they weren't sent or the court clerk is a little slow in
getting them into Pacer. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 10:23 PM EDT |
Why do they lie so much? Because it gets them what they want and there are
hardly ever any negative consequences. The BSF crew know how to really push the
limits while keeping just this side of sanctions.
If BSF ever pulls this on the USPTO, that will be the complete end of the
"system of trust" that has prevailed over there.
You are right, they cannot hide in BK court forever, and their debts aren't
going to be forgiven (as happens in personal BK), which leads me to wonder what
they have planned next. I am sure they have something up their sleeve,
something right along the line of illegality, yet another trick. Their strategy
is to never lose by always staying one step ahead of the slow court system which
gives the benefit of the doubt.
But I wonder, what is their ultimate goal? Not losing is a far cry from winning
and I really don't see how they can win, in any significant way. Why are they
doing this now? Their business is collapsing, they have no FUD street cred
anymore. Is it just for a few bucks of salary? Are people there truly deluded?
I just don't see why they don't just fold, go Ch. 7, and move on to another
scheme. Just about *anything* else seems more likely to be a better use of
their "skills" than this carcass at this point.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- The lies - the strategy ? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 10:45 PM EDT
- Why fold into Chapter 7? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 11:20 PM EDT
- It's a game to them - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 12:27 AM EDT
- The lies - Authored by: PolR on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 12:51 AM EDT
- The lies - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 09:26 AM EDT
- The lies - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 06:12 PM EDT
- They can't go chapter 7 yet... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 09:56 AM EDT
- The lies - Authored by: red floyd on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 11:03 AM EDT
- Ralph's long term strategy - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 12:32 PM EDT
- Because - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 02:48 PM EDT
|
Authored by: kawabago on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 11:15 PM EDT |
The executives have to stick it out till the money is gone, then they can walk
away saying, "We did our best!" If they all left now it would look
like they were gaming system because, they are gaming the system. Or should I
say were, they lost the game long ago, now they're just trying to stay out of
jail.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 11:38 PM EDT |
My theory on Sandy's promotion:
Sandeep Gupta's duties at SCO included convincing Judge Kimball that Linux
contains infringing code by using his technological credentials to flood the
court with technobabble. He was unable to rise to this task, probably because
he is still contaminated with a few clinging shreds of decency.
Consequently the inner circle at SCO has punished Sandy by making president of
the company. And he can't escape because leaving SCO would amount to a
significant demotion. No one else will hire him into a similar position so far
beyond that commeasurate with his level of wisdom and experience.
-Wang-Lo.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2007 @ 11:59 PM EDT |
First I've seen mention of this...a wholly owned subsidiary?
It's not the same as The SCO Group, Inc.
I suppose it's just listed as a SCOX asset?
Anybody know what they're doing besides SCOX' mobile stuff?
bkd[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 12:08 AM EDT |
Tandem was formed by former HP execs.
Link
But, this
HP-NONSTOP Royalty Accounting
does not make sense to me since it is allegedly
based in Texas.
Tandem headquarters are in Cupertino.
Something smells
fishy.
Perhaps that is why HP is really interested.
---
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Filias Cupio on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 12:08 AM EDT |
Big companies like HP must be creditors in a lot of bankrupcy proceedings. How
do such companies deal with it? Is there some section of their legal department
where they have four people who do nothing but represent the company in such
cases? Do they outsource it? Can they sell their debt (deeply discounted) to a
third party who specializes in such proceedings, and who then tries to make a
profit by extracting more than they paid for the debt? Could someone
theoretically go around buying up (and so consolidating) SCOs debts so as to
become one of the top creditors, and hence get a seat in the creditor's
committee?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Dark on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 01:18 AM EDT |
"All executives quoted in press releases are
invariably "thrilled", I've
observed, no matter what it's
about."
Not always. Sometimes they are
"excited". I often find
that slightly creepy. The things I get "excited" about
are
usually not appropriate in a business setting, so I wonder
what goes on in
those board rooms.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 01:34 AM EDT |
MR. HATCH: Yes, indeed, Your Honor. And I'm happy to have them say in public
that we are well-funded as well. (article above)
(Mr Singer) Novell likes
to say that SCO is on the point of bankruptcy. It has no proof of that. Transcript from
Jan. 23, 2007 Novell Hearing (transcript page 39)
I note that Mr
Hatch's statement was not that they were well funded, merely that he was happy
to have them say it.
I also note that Mr Singer did not actually deny
bankruptcy.
Is SCOX or their representatives at risk of having made a
false statement under oath?
Are there any stronger/more recent statements
denying imminent bankruptcy?
(I'm known on other sites as from-downunder) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- "It has no proof of that." - Authored by: skip on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 05:55 AM EDT
- Damage limitation - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 06:50 AM EDT
- Wrong way around? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 07:57 AM EDT
- Perjury? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 07:44 AM EDT
- Perjury? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 09:01 AM EDT
|
Authored by: sproggit on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 01:46 AM EDT |
With my apologies in advance - because this isn't a very kind suggestion to make
- here's a theory behind Sandeep's recent promotion.
The Board of Directors of the Good Ship SCO have realised that it has more holes
below the waterline than hull, that it's now a virtual certainty that it will be
wiped out, either by bankruptcy switching to Chapter 7, or by the outstanding
claims from Novell for payment, or by the IBM Counterclaims, which, by virtue of
the August 10 ruling, are going to exact a heavy toll.
In recognition of this the remaining architects of this entire
(farce/scam/strategy) have decided to hoover up as much of the remaining cash
that exists at SCO by awarding eachother promotions and bonuses and taking pay
rises. I suspect that the role of President will result in Gupta receiving at
least a moderate increase in his base salary and bonus numbers.
Perhaps this is just part of the process of making it harder for Novell to show
the Court what happened to the $30 Million they are claiming. Perhaps it's just
"Grab what you can! We're going down!"
Either way this is just cynical, plain and simple.
I am starting to wonder if there is a half-way escape route here. I wonder if,
behind the scenes, Darl will concede to the Bankruptcy Court that his Unix
business is toast and that he'll let the creditors have that. If only, pretty
please, he can spin off the Me Inc business and keep that for himself...
After all, he must realise that noone in the industry would offer him a job
after this.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 03:23 AM EDT |
Really, why not? What's going to stop them?
Alternatively, what's to stop them coming out, waiting for the court motions to
pile up, then going straight back in (rinse, repeat)?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 04:22 AM EDT |
Can this be used in the bankruptcy court as evidence determining SCO's position
(no financial judgments against it have been issued)? Or can this be used
against SCO or its' representatives for misleading the court and/or investors?
Clearly there was a purpose for making this statement and it had nothing to do
with forecasting the possibility of bankruptcy, which I believe had been planned
long , long ago. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: BobDowling on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 04:26 AM EDT |
MR. HATCH: Yes, indeed, Your Honor. And I'm happy to have them say
in public that we are well-funded as well.
Did he say this
under oath? Is it perjury yet? Do lawyers even take an oath?
Presumably lawyers in court are exempted from such petty restrictions as
speaking the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
"Justice delayed is justice denied." - William Gladstone (1809 -
1898)
Discuss with reference to the SCO group. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: AndyC on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 04:26 AM EDT |
I had a thought about SCo and the bankruptcy court this morning while I was
thinking about getting up, has the court accepted SCOs application for Chapter
11? Would it be possible for the court to say "No. We can see from your
financials that you have enough money to remain in operation for a good long
time yet, so this case is dismissed."
The only reason why they would try Ch. 11 is to avoid the Constructive Trust,
but that hasn't (won't?) been applied yet. So, according to the balance sheet,
yes, they are losing money, but they have plenty left to reorganise without
bothering the court with Ch. 11. Can the court reject their application?
Andy[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Ian Al on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 05:13 AM EDT |
It was easy to have some fun with IBM, Novell and the creditors' non-committee,
but what are HP up to? I can't believe that HP want to make an example of SCOG
for not paying their bills. The money does not justify the legal costs already
incurred so it cannot be debt recovery. HP were not interested in SCOG's scam,
but were important to SCOG's Unix business. However, HP can let that slide and
provide their own Unix and Linux solutions. So, it's not HP's revenue or
reputation that needs protecting.
Let's try a conspiracy theory. Nope. If HP were involved in a SCOG conspiracy
they wouldn't draw attention to themselves by these requests. Perhaps Darl has
something on them from the pretexting days. I can't see how HP's action would be
helpful or harmful to anyone in SCOG.
So, I have the begging bowl held out to you. What possible reasons could there
be for the active HP interest?
---
Regards
Ian Al
Linux: Genuine Advantage[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: MrCharon on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 05:30 AM EDT |
"Customers simply needing updated core SCO UNIX technology will have
greater capabilities as well as future mobile plug and play
functionality."
I don't ever recall them saying core SCO UNIX
technology before.--- MrCharon
~~~~
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 07:34 AM EDT |
The bottom right corner text on the first page of the original PDF reads:
"NOTICE OF APPERENCE AND REQUEST FOR SPEICAL NOITCE". Note the
incredible mispelings "APPERENCE", "SPEICAL" and
"NOITCE" - and it's all uppercase!
This made me wonder whether Esker works for HP. Or did he just leave his
mega-yacht once, break into the lawfirm office and introduce this as a funny
easter egg (esker egg?) for us? On all further pages, that text is spelled
correctly. Things that make you go hmm - or ROFLMAO. To teh tyop! :-)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: rand on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 10:15 AM EDT |
Anybody else find interesting the number of original USL partners on the
creditor list?
We always say "Novell bought USL from ATT", but Amdahl, Fujitsu, Sun,
Motorola, ICL, Olivetti, NEC, OKI Electric, III and Toshiba were all in on the
fun, too.
I don't believe the details of the Novell-ATT deal were ever fully revealed; is
it possible SCOG inherited those buy-outs or other royalties and is still paying
for them?
---
The wise man is not embarrassed or angered by lies, only disappointed. (IANAL
and so forth and so on)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: The_Pirate on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 10:28 AM EDT |
PJ, couldn't you apply to the court to get all the docs sent? Like HP and IBM?
After all, here is a pretty sizeable gang, all with a outspoken interest in the
proceedings...
Besides, we'll get hold of all the stuff sooner or later anyway (Thanks to the
people that went to court!), so why not include us on the mailing list?
Or is that too far fetched?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Yossarian on Wednesday, October 03 2007 @ 11:08 AM EDT |
That's SCO claim, and it is some *great* PR for IBM.
Just think how many of Linux supporters feel thankful to the
company that has put big $$$$ to defend *free* Linux. Such
support gives IBM one more reason not to settle with SCO
but fight till no SCO will remain.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|