|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] This is scary. . .
|
From: Michael Lazin
> I am wondering, besides the SCO case, are
> there any other lawsuits claiming that linux violates patents?
>
>From a newsletter I got the other day (regarding the SCO litigation)
Editor's Note: Toasted SCO
SCO's tenure as the most despised tech company in the world may soon be over. As a matter of fact, its tenure as a company may soon be over, period, if a Novell legal filing posted on Groklaw last week turns out to be nearly as big as it seems to be.
Novell's legal filing on Groklaw.
Novell executives, you may recall, have long insisted that when the company sold its Unix code to what was then the Santa Cruz Organization, it retained the copyrights. The modern-day SCO, which is pursuing a $5 billion lawsuit against IBM for contributing SCO-copyrighted Unix code to Linux, didn't like this very much. No copyrights, most likely no lawsuit, either.
SCO's solution: sue Novell for falsely claiming to own the Unix copyrights, something legal types call "slander of title."
Novell's response: make SCO look like a bunch of bozos by shooting their legal case full of more holes than John Dillinger's hat.
Mission accomplished.
Last week, according to Groklaw (if you don't know what they're all about, go see for yourself), Novell produced minutes from a 1995 board of directors meeting clearly stating that the company retained its Unix copyrights. Since SCO has to prove that Novell's ownership claims are a "knowing falsehood," this document is more than just a smoking gun--it's a smoking cannon.
Things were already looking bad for SCO, since Novell has also produced, among other documents, a May 2003 letter from SCO asking Novell to transfer the Unix copyrights SCO supposedly already owned. SCO's attorneys have soldiered on through this charade with all the sincerity $31 million can buy, but it must be getting tough for these guys to show up in court with straight faces.
SCO isn't the only company in the world to turn litigation into a business model, but it was the most visible. Most of the legal pundits I've seen weigh in on this case, however, are convinced the company's ambulance-chasing days are over. Unless SCO figures out fast how to earn an honest living--a remote possibility, given the enemies the company has made--it might be time to dig a fresh hole in the corporate graveyard.
Matthew McKenzie
Editor, Linux Pipeline
mattcmp@sonic.net
www.LinuxPipeline.com
Assuming McKenzie's analysis is correct, MS is different because litigation is not its only source of income. That said, patent litigation may not hold the benefits MS expects.
--
_____________________________
artAlexion
art[dot]alexion[at]verizon[dot]net
Sent unsigned from web interface.
Confirm source if important.
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|