Judge Calls SCO's Lack Of Evidence Against IBM 'Inexcusable'

Computer Business Review ^ | 6/30/06 | Matthew Aslett

[steve-b]

SCO Group Inc has willfully failed to comply with the orders of the court hearing its breach of contact and copyright case against IBM Corp, according to the Magistrate Judge, who has declared the company's failure to detail its evidence against IBM 'inexcusable'....

"Given the amount of code that SCO has received in discovery the court finds it inexcusable that SCO is in essence still not placing all the details on the table," wrote Judge Wells. "Certainly if an individual was stopped and accused of shoplifting after walking out of Neiman Marcus they would expect to be eventually told what they allegedly stole."

"It would be absurd for an officer to tell the accused that 'you know what you stole I'm not telling'. Or to simply hand the accused individual a catalog of Neiman Marcus' entire inventory and say 'it's in there somewhere, you figure it out'."...

[steve-b]

SCO's "case" reminds me of an exchange I recall from The Dukes Of Hazzard:

Roscoe: You boys are under arrest!
Bo: Arrest? What for?
Roscoe: For... for... for breakin' the law!
Luke: Roscoe... you have to be a little bit more specific....

[ShadowAce]

[petro45acp]

Hey SCO...

SFU!!!
SFD!!!

[AnotherUnixGeek]

"Given the amount of code that SCO has received in discovery the court finds it inexcusable that SCO is in essence still not placing all the details on the table,"

Hahahahahaha - SCO is getting the slapdown it deserves.

[Lx]

Did GE get banned?

[AZRepublican]

Really amazing any judge would allow SCO to continue. SCO cannot even gurantee it owns the copyrights.

[Boundless]

Full text transcript (and PDF) at Groklaw:
Wells' Order Granting in Part IBM's Motion to Limit SCO's Claims, as text
Plus the usual discussion.

[rzeznikj at stout]

He did, but he's back...

[TechJunkYard]

Even DiDio appears to have changed her tune:

Laura DiDio, a senior industry analyst of the Yankee Group who tracks SCO, says Wells's latest ruling isn't a surprise.

"I recall earlier rulings where the judge issued scathing comments to SCO. The onus is on SCO to show the smoking gun. The judge in this case is again asking SCO to 'put up or shut up,' " she said. "With each passing month that SCO doesn't come forward to exhibit evidence of its claims, it loses more and more credibility, and it doesn't help its case to sell Unix products."

What a shame. All of Darl's best friends are deserting him now, in his hour of need. /sniff

Anyone heard anything out of MOG?

[RJL]

the Magistrate Judge, who has declared the company's failure to detail its evidence against IBM 'inexcusable'....

I believe SCO has been very successful.

I believe that their objective was to slow or stop Linux and any open source operating systems and they have done just that for 2 ~ 3 years now.

I also believe Microsoft financed this charade through a third company.

Judge Wells should be deeply ashamed for taking so long to see the obvious and for the fact that she still hasn't put an end to the fraud in her court.

[LibertarianInExile]

SCO's "case" reminds me of an exchange I recall from The Dukes Of Hazzard:

Roscoe: You boys are under arrest!
Bo: Arrest? What for?
Roscoe: For... for... for breakin' the law!
Luke: Roscoe... you have to be a little bit more specific....

Does this exchange (and situation) remind you of anything? The more things change, the more they stay the same...sigh.

[clyde asbury]

A related article:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=335176

"Without a doubt, this is a major blow to SCO," said Pamela Jones, creator and editor of Groklaw.net, a Web site devoted to open-source software legal issues. "There has never been an operating system picked over with such care and determination to find fault, and Linux has come through utterly clean as a whistle."

[steve-b]

Judge Wells should be deeply ashamed for taking so long to see the obvious and for the fact that she still hasn't put an end to the fraud in her court.

IMO, Wells wanted to avoid the error made by the judge (I forget the name) in the Microsoft antitrust case, who made comments that provided an opening to appeal on the ground of bias. By bending over backwards to give SCO the opportunity to present their evidence -- if they had any -- Wells made sure the final decision was solid.

[dighton]

Scoff if you like, but SCO will make me rich.

;-)

[balrog666]

Yes, I too have shortsold SCOX.

[TechJunkYard]

I believe that their objective was to slow or stop Linux and any open source operating systems and they have done just that for 2 ~ 3 years now.

I disagree. I think the SCO vs. IBM case has helped to generate a lot of interest in Linux from people and companies who never heard of it before.

I also believe Microsoft financed this charade through a third company.

I'm with ya there.