[SASAG] For those following SCO vs Novell, SCO vs IBM, etc

[Jim Hogan]

On 8/10/07, spam at tprophet.org <spam at tprophet.org> wrote:
> This is almost certain to be appealed.

On what basis do you believe this particular ruling might be appealed?

> Legal garbage like this  invariably drags on for years.

At this point, in this case, it would seem that you presume that
Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP would be willing to work on this
supposed appeal (that "drags on for years") on a pro bono basis.

Are *you* are in a position to fund the continued efforts of BSF?  SCO won't be.

Jim

>
> -TProphet
>
> Joe Szilagyi wrote:
> > Leeland wrote:
> >  > Well this is just a great way to end the week. I am going home on
> > this note!
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > Judge Kimball has ruled that SCO does not own the Unix or Unixware
> >  > Copyrights, instead Novell owns them and indeed had the right to
> >  > overrule SCO's attempt to force IBM to cease donating code to Linux.
> >  > Additionally, because of this ruling SCO now owes Novell more money
> >  > for licenses than it has liquid assets to pay.
> >  >
> >  > More info at http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070810165237718
> >  >  Buh-Bye SCO.
> >
> > This is really it, then? I wonder who'll finance and drive the next
> > assault on OSS et al, now that SCO is about to fade, er, burn away...
> >
> > - Joe
> >
> > http://www.joeszilagyi.com
> > http://www.seattleology.com
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Members mailing list
> > Members at lists.sasag.org
> > http://lists.sasag.org/mailman/listinfo/members
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at lists.sasag.org
> http://lists.sasag.org/mailman/listinfo/members
>


-- 
-*-  Jim Hogan
     Seattle, WA