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's Chapter 11 Trustee Moves to Settle AutoZone
Thursday, October 22 2009 @ 11:46 PM EDT

Edward Cahn, the Chapter 11 Trustee now running SCO Group, wants to settle and be done with SCO v. AutoZone. He sees no value in further litigation. So he has filed a motion asking the court to approve the settlement he has worked out with AutoZone.

Can you believe it took this long? It's been in the Top Ten Stupidest Cases of All Time Hall of Fame since 2004. Evidently Mr. Cahn does not share Darl's gambling ways, nor his zeal to punish SCO customers who switched from Unix to Linux. SCO put AutoZone through an experience it never deserved, but it looks like all the horses are heading home to the barn. At last.

The motive mentioned is the desire to save the costs of further litigation. That's how much the Chapter 11 Trustee thinks of SCO's chances, I'd opine. On page 5 of the motion, it says that further litigation "would likely yield minimal additional benefit to creditors".

So now we know why Darl is so hopping mad and trying to put together a posse of revolting shareholders. Their dreams of second homes from the litigation lottery are turning into mere mirages in the desert. That's not Mr. Cahn's fault. It's called Reality. The end of this saga was obvious from day one.

The filings:

10/22/2009 - 935 - Motion to Approve Settlement Agreement With AutoZone (Attachments: # 1 Notice # 2 Exhibit A - Under Seal# 3 Exhibit B # 4 Certificate of Service) Filed by Edward N. Cahn, Chapter 11 Trustee for The SCO Group, Inc., et al.. Hearing scheduled for 11/20/2009 at 02:00 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. Objections due by 11/10/2009. (Attachments: # 1 Notice # 2 Exhibit A - Under Seal# 3 Exhibit B# 4 Certificate of Service) (Fatell, Bonnie) (Entered: 10/22/2009)

10/22/2009 - 936 Motion to File Under Seal Exhibit A to the Trustee's Motion to Approve Settlement Agreement With AutoZone (related document(s) 935 ) Filed by Edward N. Cahn, Chapter 11 Trustee for The SCO Group, Inc., et al.. Hearing scheduled for 11/20/2009 at 02:00 PM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. Objections due by 11/10/2009. (Attachments: # 1 Notice # 2 Exhibit A # 3 Certificate of Service) (Fatell, Bonnie) (Entered: 10/22/2009)

The request to keep the terms confidential is intriguing. It cites a case where the debtor was allowed to allow a company to sell some of its stuff cheaply, and they court said it could be kept confidential, because otherwise the debtor might find it hard to enter into negotiations with others at a higher rate.

What might that tell you about this settlement? Me too. Look at page 6 of the motion to seal, the last sentence in paragraph 21:

Additionally, disclosure of the terms contained in the Settlement Agreement could hamper the Trustee's ability to maximize the value of the Debtors' estates through prolonged litigation.
My, but that dream dies hard. Or maybe he's just saying that because it's his job to try to maximize the estates' value, and who knows what the future might bring. But AutoZone, if there are no objections by November 10, will be free of SCO forever, and I am glad for them.

If SCO walks away with nothing much to show for its expense for this litigation, Darl may just decide to object, and then who knows what all might leak out? The motion says that the settlement agreement is conditioned on the court ordering the terms be confidential, as well as any portions of the transcripts of the hearings, so if Darl wishes to fight it, he has an easy method.

However, as the motion points out, this is an exercise of the Chapter 11 Trustee's business judgment, and if Darl could compete on *that* battlefield, the judge wouldn't have replaced him. So I expect the settlement to be approved, with maybe some huffing and puffing and I'll-blow-your-house-down drama first.

There will be a hearing on this motion on November 20th at 2 PM, but the terms are apparently going to be filed under seal, and the motion asks that any portions of the hearing dealing with the terms also be held in camera, so even if you went to the hearing, you'd be asked to leave. Still, I hope some of you can go.

This part of the SCO saga is winding down, and it feels mighty fine.


  


SCO's Chapter 11 Trustee Moves to Settle AutoZone | 505 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
OFF Topic here
Authored by: SirHumphrey on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:05 AM EDT
For anything not about this case

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections thread
Authored by: SirHumphrey on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:07 AM EDT
korexion -> correction

[ Reply to This | # ]

News Picks thread
Authored by: SirHumphrey on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:11 AM EDT
Name of the News Picks please.
Clickies following the HTML Formatted option like this, if you have them. The
RED text

Here's how to post in HTML. Don't forget to set post mode to HTML.
Allowed HTML Tags:<p>, <b>, <i>, <u>, <strike>,
<a>, <em>, <strong>, <br>, <tt>, <hr>,
<li>, <ol>, <ul>, <sup>, <sub>,
<blockquote>,[code]
Clickable links:
<a href="http://www.example.com/">Like this</a>

[ Reply to This | # ]

kind of torn here
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:11 AM EDT
Part of me wants to see AZ compensated for the troubles caused by Darl&co.

Most of me wants to see no further squandering of the resources that rightly
belong to Novell.

Aaargh. Some innocent party is gonna get screwed on this one.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Reading between the lines:
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:15 AM EDT
Re

"confidential, because otherwise the debtor might find it hard to enter
into negotiations with others at a higher rate"

One interpretation of that justification is that that to mean they had to agree
to pay some of Autozone's expenses and are trying to avoid setting a precedent
for other cases?

I wonder what sort of settlement they are talking to RedHat about? I bet RedHat
won't go away with a confidential settlement - they'll want some public
grovelling from SCO.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Actual evidence of infringement Thread:
Authored by: SirHumphrey on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:17 AM EDT
This is where Darl et al can place the actual evidence for posterity

1.The contents of Blepp's Briefcase
2.File, line and version of ACTUAL infringing code
3.Complete lineage of all alleged copyright material, with sworn testimony to
support same

[ Reply to This | # ]

le mot juste
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:20 AM EDT
"revolting shareholders" - such a pitch perfect choice of words PJ.

Now I'm sure that not all of SCO's remaining shareholders are revolting, but any
that choose to follow Darl certainly will be.

bkd

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's Chapter 11 Trustee Moves to Settle AutoZone
Authored by: red floyd on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:36 AM EDT
"Additionally, disclosure of the terms contained in the Settlement
Agreement could hamper the Trustee's ability to maximize the value of the
Debtors' estates through prolonged litigation."

Could be parsed multiple ways.

It could be saying that prolonged litigation in AZ could hamper the Trustee's
ability to maximize estate value.

---
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a *CITIZEN* of the United
States of America.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Payback for a Mormon
Authored by: The Mad Hatter r on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:49 AM EDT


So now we know why Darl is so hopping mad and trying to put together a posse of revolting shareholders. Their dreams of second homes from the litigation lottery are turning into mere mirages in the desert. That's not Mr. Cahn's fault. It's called Reality. The end of this saga was obvious from day one.

The end of the saga may have been obvious to anyone who understood the issues. To those who don't, like MOG and Darl, well, they still are probably more than a bit confused.

Some of the consequences on the other hand, will have hit earlier than others. Both McBride and Yarro claim to be devout Mormons. Many Geeks in the local area are also devout Mormons.

Mormon Temples are special places. If you haven't been inside one, it's impossible for me to describe the incredible feeling of peace and tranquility. The closet equivalent if you are a Catholic is a cathedral. Other congregations have their own equivalents.

The Temple is a bit different though, in that access isn't open to everyone. To get access to the temple, you have to be interviewed by your bishop (who leads the local ward, or congregation) and by your Stake President (a Stake is a group of wards). One of the questions asked when you apply for a Temple Recommend (or permission) is Question 9 (see here for a complete list of temple questions which asks "Are you honest in your dealings with your fellowmen?"

My immediate response on meeting either McBride or Yarro would be to complain to the Temple Presidency (the organization that operates the temple) about their being allowed to attend, and specifically citing question 9. I would also refuse to take part in any ordinances that were taking part in, and I know that I'm not the only Mormon who would react this way.

I haven't checked to see if this has happened. however I strongly suspect it has, and that the payback for their actions has been going on for a long time now.

---
Wayne

http://crankyoldnutcase.blogspot.com/

[ Reply to This | # ]

Darl's "Dear Edward" letter
Authored by: Totosplatz on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:53 AM EDT

Darl's "Dear Edward" letter, quoted in the earlier Groklaw story, is his way of trying to get himself off the hook for criminal activity in bringing these frivolous lawsuits. He goes on and on about possible deals, when Cerberus won't even return his calls, as if they were 'done deals'. The Skyline Cowboy is obviously very sincere in his beliefs, but perhaps belongs on the Ward for the Delusional.

All hat and no cattle!

"Hoppin Mad"

---
Greetings from Zhuhai, Guangdong, China; or Portland, Oregon, USA (location varies).

All the best to one and all.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Skyline Cowboy? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 07:13 AM EDT
    • Skyline Cowboy? - Authored by: J.F. on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 01:21 PM EDT
      • Skyline Cowboy? - Authored by: Vic on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 01:23 PM EDT
        • Skyline Cowboy? No - Authored by: tyche on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 02:34 PM EDT
        • Desperate Darl - Authored by: gvb on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 02:34 PM EDT
          • s/rl/n/; - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 03:43 PM EDT
            • s/rl/n/; - Authored by: Vic on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 08:25 PM EDT
              • s/rl/n/; - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 24 2009 @ 12:04 AM EDT
                • s/rl/n/; - Authored by: Vic on Saturday, October 24 2009 @ 07:24 AM EDT
AutoZone's "I double-dog dare you to prove it" gambit has paid off
Authored by: SirHumphrey on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 01:10 AM EDT
21. The Trustee respectfully submits that the Settlement Agreement is fair and reasonable, is in the best interests of the Debtors' estates, and is well within the range of reasonableness and, accordingly, should be approved. The Settlement Agreement resolves ,complex, fact-intensive issues and further review and/or litigation with respect to such issues would be costly and the results uncertain. Moreover, further review and/or litigation with respect to such issues would likely yield minimal additional benefit to creditors.

In other words, SCOXQ.BK would prefer NOT to have to answer this:

And significantly, "AutoZone denies that Santa Cruz purchased the UNIX technology from Novell, Inc. or that SCO acquired this technology from Santa Cruz." So SCO will have to prove all that in this court of law, because AutoZone is directly challenging the chain of ownership. As for files like CompX and DecompX that AutoZone had, AutoZone doesn't know if it is true that SCO owns any proprietary code in them. Let SCO prove that too. In any case, even if they did, AutoZone’s alleged use of any such code "is lawful use based on agreements and licenses with third-parties."

http://groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090831213009700

All your BOLD are belong to us

[ Reply to This | # ]

A company for Darl, a company that is a pariah?
Authored by: Totosplatz on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 02:11 AM EDT
Let me suggest that Darl should go to work for M$ as V.P. of World-Wide
licensing. That would shake things up! The lawsuits would fly like the feathers
from a pillow!

:)

---
Greetings from Zhuhai, Guangdong, China; or Portland, Oregon, USA (location
varies).

All the best to one and all.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Under Seal?
Authored by: complex_number on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 02:40 AM EDT
I'm guessing that this is at the behest of SCO and that AZ have gone along with
it just to get the case ended.

But will this still hold true when SCO goes into Chapter 7 and is dissolved?

Could AZ then disclose the Terms of the Settlement? IMHO, it would be very
interesting to the Novell, IBM & RH Lawyers especially if SCO has admitted
that they didn't have a crooked leg to stand on from day 1. (I'm clearly
guessing here)


---

Ubuntu & 'apt-get' are not the answer to Life, The Universe & Everything which
is of course, "42"

[ Reply to This | # ]

Darl may just decide to object
Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 03:13 AM EDT
"I object!"

"On what grounds?"

"On the grounds that it will be detrimental to my penny stock"

"Overruled"

Darl is better off selling some cattle.

If he can rustle up some.

---

You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's Chapter 11 Trustee Moves to Settle AutoZone
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 04:18 AM EDT
How can the terms remain confidential when SCO is in bankruptcy?

SCO accounts are largely open, so that creditors can inspect them. Therefore
large cash flows in or out would be fairly obvious, no? And presumably things
like contracts that require future "license payments" from AutoZone
would have to be listed as assets. And if nothing at all shows up in the
accounts, then presumably that means that the case was dismissed without
payments in either direction.

Is there any other way that a significant fiscal settlement could have been
involved, where it is not immediately obvious in the filed SCO accounts?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Terms confidential? A devious plot.
Authored by: rfrazier on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 05:02 AM EDT
Perhaps it is part of a devious plot to quieten McBride.

1. Come to terms with AutoZone.

2. Request that the terms be private.

3. During the hearing on the terms, McBride objects and says that he wants to
see them.

4. Since the court is in open session, and the judge wants it to stay that way,
Gross rules that each relevant party can have a printed copy of the agreement to
study, but only if they sign something recognizing the court ordering them not
to disclose the contents elsewhere.

5. McBride signs the agreement, reads the terms, and doesn't like them.

6. The terms are leaked to certain elements of the press.

7. Unbeknownst to McBride, the Trustee and AutoZone agreed that there could be
slightly different wordings of the settlement agreement, and each of the parties
at the hearing on the agreement was given one with different wording.

8. The settlement leaked to the press uses the wording in the McBride version.

9. Profit.

Best wishes,
Bob

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's Chapter 11 Trustee Moves to Settle AutoZone
Authored by: eggplant37 on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 06:23 AM EDT
Why am I suddenly reminded of the Star Trek original series episode titled
"Day of the Dove?"

In the episode, the Enterprise crew are trapped on board the ship headed on a
course out of the galaxy, pitted in a perpetual battle with members of a Klingon
crew that was taken on board after their own ship was annihilated. Kirk and
Spock discover that there's an alien being on board that's arranged for them to
have all the weapons they'd ever need to keep fighting, resurrects the dead and
heals the wounded so they can keep fighting, for the alien feeds off the
negative emotions involved. Once discovered, everyone ends up laughing the being
off the ship and life is good again, and relations between the Federation and
the Klingons takes a turn for the better.

I think Darl's leaving the company and the events immediately surrounding that
event are directly comparable to that episode, where suddenly we're seeing the
worst of the litigation being settled and everything taking a turn for the
better now that he's gone. And I'm just laughing my behind off.

Anyone else think so?

[ Reply to This | # ]

settlement with AutoZone
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 06:36 AM EDT
"Edward Cahn .. has filed a motion asking the court to approve the
settlement he has worked out with AutoZone"

Could you remind us of what exactly was in the settlement ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Get that red dress out, Pamela
Authored by: trevmar on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 06:49 AM EDT
Get that red dress out, Pamela
It sure needs an airing. It has been in the closet for far too long.
.
Maybe only wear it for an hour or two (the bankruptcy court might over-rule),
but this result has been an awful long time in coming, and it is time to relax,
just a little...
.
It seems so long since I was shown that code fragment under NDA, and immediately
figured this was all a sham. I tell you what - I will resolve to put on my red
beret from 10am EST to 1pm EST, to celebrate this turn of events...
.

[ Reply to This | # ]

A Change of Tone
Authored by: DaveJakeman on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 07:49 AM EDT
7. On March 3, 2004, the Debtors filed suit against AutoZone in the Federal District Court for the District of Nevada (the "Nevada District Court"), where AutoZone is incorporated. The Debtors brought a single claim for copyright infringement based on AutoZone's alleged use of UNIX copyrighted meterials in Linux and asked the Nevada District Court to impose a preliminary injunction against AutoZone.
This, coming from the plaintiff.

But were Darl still around, the "alleged" would be omitted. A good sign we are returning to reality. The Improbability Drive has been throttled back some. When reality is fully restored, it could appear cold, stark and naked.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Cerberus
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 08:25 AM EDT
The "hopping mad" link above includes the following description, by McBride:
The most promising of these investors was Cerberus Capital Partners, one of the largest hedge funds in the country. Cerberus sent us a term sheet that would include a $25 Million credit line, $3 million of which would be accessible within weeks, and invited us to enter into discussions to negotiate/counter the terms of the potential deal that they were proposing.
The name Cerberus is in reference to the mythological Cerberus , a three-headed dog which was:
employed as Hades' loyal watchdog, and guarded the gates that granted access and exit to the underworld
Possibly a fitting name for this secretive company run by Stephen Feinberg:
Feinberg, who is 47, sports thinning brown hair and a wispy mustache. Without any notes, he launches into a meandering speech. Between long pauses, he wends his way through market analyses that seem deliberately vague. At the heart of his speech, he sums up the philosophy that guides his company: Reveal as little as necessary; be anonymous; be invisible. “We try to hide religiously,” he says. “If anyone at Cerberus has his picture in the paper and a picture of his apartment, we will do more than fire that person. We will kill him. The jail sentence will be worth it.” There are a few nervous laughs.
That quote is from an article called "The Most Dangerous Deal in America. Inside the secretive world of Cerberus Capital — and why its plan to save Chrysler spooks Wall Street". Strangely, there are at least two photos of him, at Wall Street Manna and TheTruthBaoutCars .

In Wikipedia Cerberos are described as dealing with Government Services, Real Estate, Firearms , Entertainment, and other business. Among notable partners is (was?) Ezra Merkin, charged with civil fraud by the State of New York, for "secretly steering $2.4 billion in client money into Bernard Madoff's Ponzi fraud without their permission. John W. Snow, President George W. Bush's second United States Secretary of the Treasury is chairman since 2006.

A quick search for Merkin, Snow and Maddoff on Google seemed like... Well, I'm not sure I can even guess why McBride wanted to have a deal with these guys.

A banana perspective in a nutshell?

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's Chapter 11 Trustee Moves to Settle AutoZone
Authored by: JamesK on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 08:29 AM EDT
"So now we know why Darl is so hopping mad and trying to put together a
posse of revolting shareholders."

As far as I know, Darl's actions have always been revolting. ;-)


---
IANALAIDPOOTV

(I am not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV)

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • :) (N/T) - Authored by: RPN on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 07:47 PM EDT
No point in sealing. This says it all.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 09:32 AM EDT

Additionally, disclosure of the terms contained in the Settlement Agreement could hamper the Trustee's ability to maximize the value of the Debtors' estates through prolonged litigation.

If I were one of SCO's intended victims, that statement tells me all I need to know: that the terms agreed between SCO and Autozone were more humiliating to SCO than anyone ever expected. So any initial offer of settlement I made to Autozone would start with SCO paying me a large sum of money as compensation for all the bother they've given me. If they insisted on haggling, I might offer to give them the same terms as Autozone gave them, if they wanted to reveal what those terms were.

Under no circumstances would I want to give them a better deal than they got from Autozone. And if I don't know what those terms are, I'd assume the worst for SCO.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's Chapter 11 Trustee Moves to Settle AutoZone
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 11:44 AM EDT
One down, three to go.

If they want to "maximize" further revenue, might Redhat be last?

Since Redhat was stayed pending Novell and IBM, and to admit that Redhat did not
infringe would be to effectively close the door on any further "Unix in
Linux Binary License" fees forever.

Since Redhat bought suit primarily on that issue, it is hard to see them letting
go for anything less than that.

If I remember properly, and perhaps I'm wrong, I think they also made a claim
against lost business based on SCOg FUD.

They might be willing to forego that and legal fees, rather than try to get
blood from baked clay.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's Stock up 73% Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 12:33 PM EDT
I'm amazed at all the claims of victory here today. If by nature of this case
being settled and not litigated constitutes a victory for AZ then the kool aid
has been passed around here too much. In my opinion, SCO won this hands down,
especially from a legal perspective. If Autozone, who has much deeper pockets
than SCO, thought they had a slam dunk defense, they would have never settled.
SCO now has new money coming in and investors are buying into that today with
the stock price going sky high. The terms are confidential, that's going to
make other targets nervous. I can't see this a win for anyone other than SCO
since this is what they've been seeking from Novell, IBM, Autozone and many
others whom they threatened and will threaten to sue. Settle. They now save
money from litigating, they get money coming in, it was Darl's wet dream from
the beginning. Is everyone here blind?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Dear Mr. Cahn: WHERE'S THE INFRINGING CODE?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 01:35 PM EDT

If anyone at subsequent proceedings can get Mr. Cahn's
attention, please ask him where the infringing code is. We've
been wondering.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What were the terms?
Authored by: Alan(UK) on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 01:49 PM EDT
SCO 'Can we settle?'
AZ 'Yes'
SCO 'We cannot offer you any money otherwise we would have to tell the
shareholders, creditors, and world+dog that we were backing down.'
AZ 'No problem.'
SCO 'Really?'
AZ 'Just bring Darl's head on a plate'
SCO 'Done - that's two problems solved.'

---
Microsoft is nailing up its own coffin from the inside.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Why the hopping mad?
Authored by: Sunny Penguin on Friday, October 23 2009 @ 10:19 PM EDT
"So now we know why Darl is so hopping mad and trying to put together a
posse of revolting shareholders."

"Hey shareholders, Look a Wookie"

I suspect he wants to keep the share holders from suing in his own direction, he
is distracting them into looking in another direction.

---
EOD is a science of vague assumptions based on debatable data taken from
inconclusive experiments with instruments of problematic accuracy by persons of
questio

[ Reply to This | # ]

Settling SCOZone v Auto - or - Pepto, Bismol & Coke - or ...
Authored by: webster on Saturday, October 24 2009 @ 12:54 AM EDT
... Well anything is better than litigating against a bankrupt company with an unlimited lawyer credit.

It didn't take long. This is the first one. The only thing this suit was designed for was FUD. It was "counter-productive" --embarrassing even with Zone's "Your-fly-is-open" defense. Imagine SCO getting somewhere with Novell and being blown out of the water by AZ. A win would not even have covered copying charges.

No doubt, the discovery plan gave Judge Cahn pause. The lawyers may be free but the documents and experts aren't. That would be money SCO doesn't have. If they do, they need it for bigger fish. He also blinked at other prospects of this disaster. With bankruptcy, silence, and peace, AZ couldn't refuse. One hopes they held out for a clause letting them back into it if any Malice turned up on SCO in the other suits. With Darl gone and a reputable fellow as Trustee this is a reasonable option. SCO would resist but we'll never know.

The trustee motive is strictly business. FUD is not his style. He has to take the Appellate decision seriously. He can't be too cheap with that. If he can raise some money for the Novell suit, he will have to use it. SCO still has some duanting hurdles. The better the UNIX business side looks, the easier it will be to settle the suits.

In these suits everything has a price. AZ probably could have settled long ago with a token payment and FUD permission with a partially sealed, partially open settlement. Parts of the suit against them was so absurd and ignorant they didn't have to cave. They waited and won, --as much as you can against a bankrupt entity. They are probably immune from SCO suits forever. They may have shielded others, too.

Novell and IBM should object to the sealing. Gross will be sure to approve it then since he thinks they are draining SCO with needless, expensive opposition.

AutoZone is not worth a battle from Darl. If he persists in FUD, he must have a side deal with an interested fairy or a contestable share in any winnings. Win or lose they will be at each others throats like hyenas at the carcass.

~webster~

[ Reply to This | # ]

Oh my, you're all wrong!
Authored by: Ian Al on Saturday, October 24 2009 @ 04:41 AM EDT
It was a long time ago in a land far, far away... But, that's another story.

A. Nonymouse said this, previously,

I don't think its LEGAL!

The motion, page 4, cites the narrow grounds that allow the bankruptcy court to seal something like this. Those grounds are:

a) Trade Secret,

b) Confidential Research, development

c) (Confidential) Commercial Information.

The motion, page 5, then cites a case, Orion Pictures. Orion was about protecting confidential commercial pricing information in a commercial market; that pricing info would otherwise not be public info if not for the bankruptcy proceeding.

I don't see this settlement, on its public face, meeting the statutory test for a bankruptcy court being allowed to seal the terms.

This is truly odd for a Federal Trustee, who is a retired federal judge.

He's right! And Ed knows that Judge Gross knows he's right. You see, what he has done is petitioned to have the settlement sealed using an erroneous argument. It will take some considerable time for Judge Gross to come to a decision because... Well, it just does. That's how it works.

So, Darl is kept fuming while his pitchforks rust and his torches splutter out waiting for the signal for revolt. However, when Ed and the Judge's very cunning plan finally plays out, it is too late for the revolting shareholders. Ed 'regretfully' and gleefully reveals the full ignominiousity of SCOG's win to all the world, and us.

Priceless!

But, I know what you're thinking. Ed has not had enough time to get to know Darl such that he would want to play such a devious trick on him. You know, I think Ed might just be quicker to the draw than dear old Skyline.

---
Regards
Ian Al

Linux: Viri can't hear you in free space.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO's Chapter 11 Trustee Moves to Settle AutoZone
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 24 2009 @ 11:57 PM EDT
The trustee is responsible for protecting the interests of the creditors, not
the stockholders. Observe the GM stockholders of 2008: Chapter 11 has wiped them
out, GM is under new ownership (former creditors) and new management. Frankly,
that's the best case scenario for SCO--their day to day business is a shambles
and there is little prospect for its recovery. If the trustee and the court see
liquidation as being in the best interests of the creditors, liquidation it will
be. Darl and the other stockholders have no say in the matter: they get only
what's left after the lawyers, tax and and creditors are paid. SCO's financial
statements suggest there will be nothing left for the stockholders.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What about brand value of Autozone?
Authored by: peope on Sunday, October 25 2009 @ 12:53 PM EDT
Doesn't the reputation for Autozone have any value?

I'm not thinking of the reputation within the FOSS movement.
Rather the reputation of being accused of wrongdoing.
An accusation that will not be cleared.

An accusation that will in part tarnish the reputation of the company.

Just a public statement where they are cleared of all wrongdoing would suffice.

Maybe that is part of the sealed conditions?

What do you think?

[ 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 ) 		Site layout based on Woodlands theme by Bryan Bell.
Groklaw logo by John Crowley.
News Picks logo by Ted Thompson.
Powered By GeekLog
Created this page in 0.07 seconds