The end of SCO maybe soon.
 

It seems in the Novell V SCO litigation, Novell may now have put into
play a death punch for SCO. If Novell's has its way (and the chances
look very good), the legal fighting fund so generously contributed to by
MS and Sun may get put into trust. If that happens it means is what
little money was left to pay the lawyers disappears and lawyers will not
work without paying (this gives SCO's high profile lawyers the prefect
exit strategy).

The trust is a strong possibility as the "unix patents" MS bought (and
it looks more and more like there is little evidence they actually
bought anything substantive) should have been paid to Novell as the
legal copyright/patent holder, with SCO keeping only 5%, when in fact
SCO kept the lot.

If the money disappears then SCO goes bankrupt and if the external
trstee decides the case is without merit, it stops.....

This could happen in a few months.....

:D

http://www.lamlaw.com/

(articles dated 1st and 4th August)

In the UK, if say a MP sue's a newspaper over slander or libel and in
order to do this "friends" contribute to a legal fighting fund, and
subsquently the truth is proven against the MP, then its not unkown for
the Judge to demand the list of people who contributed to the meritless
case and they find themselves in turn, having to pay damages.

Now the question is, if the case is proven meritless and MS and Sun
tried smoke and mirrors as a way to prop up SCO while it took on Linux,
would they in turn be liable?

Now that would be fun......

regards

Thing

Re: The end of SCO maybe soon.
 

thingy wrote:
> If the money disappears then SCO goes bankrupt and if the external
> trstee decides the case is without merit, it stops.....

Has Microsoft stopped funding SCO?

Re: The end of SCO maybe soon.
 

Peter wrote:
> thingy wrote:
>
>>If the money disappears then SCO goes bankrupt and if the external
>>trstee decides the case is without merit, it stops.....
>
>
> Has Microsoft stopped funding SCO?
>
>
>

MS bought a one off licence, listing un-specified patents, trouble is
SCO appears to hold no patents...

So the Q is what did MS actually buy? or was it just a front?

This deal was always questioned, now it is beginning to look like the
front it was.

I wonder what the world's reaction will be if it becomes clear, MS is
just funding SCO to do its dirty work.....somewhat anti-trust.

regards

Thing