SCO What?
I'm struck by the almost unanimous chorus of indifference that has greeted the news that a court has reversed one part of an ealier ruling regarding who owns the Unix copyright:For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment with regards to the royalties due Novell under the 2003 Sun-SCO Agreement, but REVERSE the district court’s entry of summary judgment on (1) the ownership of the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights; (2) SCO’s claim seeking specific performance; (3) the scope of Novell’s rights under Section 4.16 of the APA; (4) the application of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing to Novell’s rights under Section 4.16 of the APA. On these issues, we REMAND for trial.
As well as Groklaw, others that are distinctly unimpressed are Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, Roy Schestowitz and Eric Bangemann.
And me to that list: SCO still has everything to prove, and very little money to prove it with. And even if it *did* prove anything, all it would gain would be the right to be ground into very fine particles of dust by IBM's legal department....
4 comments:
Suicide by lawsuit.
*Slow* suicide by lawsuit...
Considering the legal fees and Novell's decreasing likelihood of getting anything out of SCO in the end, maybe it's a suicide pact.
Good point.
Post a Comment