|
| Authored by: LocoYokel on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:25 PM EDT |
Please title error > correction.
Not that there should be any in an article this short.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:25 PM EDT |
| Does the legal system work? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: webster on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:26 PM EDT |
.
Please put down what you would like to say to the jury in closing. Do this to
the end of the trial. Sometimes a fact or phrasing or analogy can be totally
persuasive in irrefutable. So give it a try.
Pick a side and an argument.
These could be inspirational either to use or rebut.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: LocoYokel on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:27 PM EDT |
Please set us know which News Pick you wish to discuss it your title.
Also, please follow PJ's house rules and post HTML in clickies.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:27 PM EDT |
| eom [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: LocoYokel on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:28 PM EDT |
Any discussion not pertaining to this posting by PJ.
Please follow the rules and put HTML in clickies.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: GriffMG on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:31 PM EDT |
tSCOg must have invented teflon too
B-(
---
Keep B-) ing[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:32 PM EDT |
Is there anyone who still thinks that Judge Stewart is acting in any way
impartial?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Imparitality? - Authored by: MDT on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:34 PM EDT
- Time will tell - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:45 PM EDT
- Impartiality? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 10:16 PM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: LocoYokel on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:34 PM EDT |
I get the impression that this judge either intends to force this issue to
another appeal or he seriously wants to stack the deck against Novell.
Maybe if he makes it bad enough the Supremes will notice, grant certiorari and
order a stay until they hear the case.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:42 PM EDT |
I thought Brennan was doing wonderful last week.
He nailed Mr. Frankenberg. He nailed Mr. Mattingly.
I loved it.
I could almost feel the disgust the jury must be feeling when seeing Brennan and
Acker at work.
Thank you.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: bishopi on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:44 PM EDT |
I'm thinking that to have moved for a mistrial, today's session must have been a
real doozy..... going to be real interesting to see what's in the reports.
Ian
---
Naughty SCO, EVIL SCO, BAAAAAAAD SCO![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: AntiFUD on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:46 PM EDT |
So sad in fact that I had to go to lamlaw.com and re-read the article that he
wrote on march 12 to cheer me up, I guess I shall have to wait until I can read
Judge Stewart's reasoning as to why, and on what grounds, he denied that SCO had
not 'opened the door'.
Color me Grumpy
---
IANAL - Free to Fight FUD - "to this very day"
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 08:53 PM EDT |
What would happen if one of Novell's witnesses would tell the jury that
ownership of the copyrights had been decided in court previously in their favor?
Just like what SCO did with their witness?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- What If? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:00 PM EDT
- What If? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:10 PM EDT
- What If? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:10 PM EDT
- What If? - Authored by: nattt on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:10 PM EDT
- What If? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 10:15 PM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: bugstomper on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:09 PM EDT |
Were there?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:19 PM EDT |
it's possible, I suppose, that the judge is leaning towards an end-of-trial
summary judgment or directed verdict on the slander of title charge--and that
declaring a mistrial, or even allowing Novell to present evidence that would be
a red flag for an SCO appeal, would undermine this eventuality.
We've seen judges to this before in the SCO case history--rule SCO's way on
intermediate motions, than smack them down at the end.
Or maybe not.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- This could be good news... - Authored by: inode_buddha on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:33 PM EDT
- Waffles - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 16 2010 @ 12:37 AM EDT
- Waffles - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 16 2010 @ 01:34 AM EDT
- Waffles - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 17 2010 @ 11:52 AM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: MikeA on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:20 PM EDT |
Doesn't surprise me that the motion to admit the evidence
was denied. But I
would like to read the reasoning, and see
what alternatives the Judge
suggests.
Question: would the judge provide alternative relief, or
would Novell have to request a specific alternative
themselves?
---
“'Unifying UNIX with Linux for Business' are
trademarks or registered trademarks of Caldera International, Inc." [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:20 PM EDT |
I don't think Judge Gross would have to petition himself for chapter 7. Perhaps
you mean Judge Cahn?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:24 PM EDT |
| Could we all please stop jumping to conclusions about bias and fix until we
have all the facts?
And if you don't like the system, change the system.
Calling the system a
joke isn't a solution. Going to law school and becoming a
judge is a solution.
Registering people to vote and campaigning for legislators
who uphold rule
of law (including habeas corpus) is a solution.
Sure, there
may very well be problems with the system. There may be
systemic problems with
the system. Many here are systems engineers. What
is the problem with the
current system? Fix it. Convince enough people that
your solution is useful and
necessary to clean out the bit rot.
I suppose a lot of it is venting. But I
think it's showing disrespect until we
know all the facts, and if law clerks
are reading these comments to think
about cert, we may want to be slightly more
respectful of the system as it's
currently instantiated.
Not that people
haven't been venting about
the
legal system since the dawn of democracy. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:37 PM EDT |
Been there, done that.
It appears all Groklaw posters missed Kimball's bias.
All of you are a bunch of retards and filthy rats![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: inode_buddha on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:38 PM EDT |
Okay then, let's watch SCO lose after having *everything* tipped in their favor.
---
-inode_buddha
"When we speak of free software,
we are referring to freedom, not price"
-- Richard M. Stallman[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: webster on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:46 PM EDT |
.
The SCO part of the trial is going on. Novell gets to go at SCO maligning their
title "to this very day" also. We have a long way to go.
~webster~
.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- 9 more days? - Authored by: UncleJosh on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 09:58 PM EDT
- Relax - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 10:07 PM EDT
- Relax - Authored by: bishopi on Monday, March 15 2010 @ 10:42 PM EDT
- Yes, but - - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 16 2010 @ 04:23 AM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: Tufty on Tuesday, March 16 2010 @ 01:22 AM EDT |
I wonder if Judge Stewart is wondering why he didn't recuse himself.
---
Linux powered squirrel.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: ak on Tuesday, March 16 2010 @ 03:26 AM EDT |
By denying those two motions the judge seems to have crossed a line. But I will
wait with my final judgment until I have read his written reasons to deny the
first motion.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, March 16 2010 @ 05:48 AM EDT |
Hey, I said 'I'm speechless'.
OK
<rant></rant>
---
Regards
Ian Al
PJ: 'Have you read my open letter?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 16 2010 @ 10:39 AM EDT |
Something I've always wondered... If SCO has a surprise witness or three up
their sleeve, could Novell have one in the form of Judge Kimball?
"What is your conclusion with respect to the copyrights of Novell, and
whether any transferred to SCO?"
"What do you base that conclusion on?"[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
