Replies

I knew Boies a little in the '80s. He is a very good lawyer. His advice here is on how to frame the case for a jury, not about preparing the case. I've seen Boies in action in takeover cases. I've seen some of the best in the business in New York in action, and Boies is one of the very best. I have never seen anyone better prepared than he was on the matters I saw him work.

I've seen Boies in action in takeover cases. I've seen some of the best in the business in New York in action, and Boies is one of the very best.

Then he probably should have stuck to those kinds of cases: Microsoft, lost; Gore, lost; SCO, losing.

I have heard he's a good lawyer in general though, very eloquent and very prepared. Even the paralegal founder of Groklaw (which the MS/SCO lackeys here will say is useless because of its admitted free software bias) has praised Boies' past work.

I knew Boies a little in the '80s. He is a very good lawyer. His advice here is on how to frame the case for a jury, not about preparing the case. I've seen Boies in action in takeover cases. I've seen some of the best in the business in New York in action, and Boies is one of the very best. I have never seen anyone better prepared than he was on the matters I saw him work.

I was extremely impressed with his pure cross-examination skills in the Florida case, and clearly he's tenacious in that respect. That's why he took Bill Gates apart.

But in the SCO-IBM case his complaint is built, in what seems to be Boies' typical style, out of a strained and arguably-wrong general theory of derivative works, and also a strained and clearly-wrong interpretation of the breadth of the Confidentiality Clause in the IBM-ATT contracts.

It would seem that his litigation strategy and jury-framing strategy are the same, i.e., to steer the factfinders away from the words on the page and argue at a higher level that it was 'wrong' for IBM to participate in the creation of a newer, better UNIX, and that IBM should pay because it has deep pockets, and that Canopy/SCO must own something because they paid Novell a lot of money for whatever they have.