decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Slashdot spreads fud | 697 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Slashdot spreads fud
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 09 2012 @ 12:05 PM EDT
Novel's board of directors in a meeting voted to NOT transfer what SCO was
saying they transferred. There was no theory that was possible with SCO.

Slander of title was never ever possible.

Where did you get that impression that SCO had any legs to stand on at all ?
You can be excused for believing what certain members of the "paid
press" were writing, that as pure junk, but was repeated by others in the
press that were taken in by the error(s) - so some believed what was written,
without knowing the story as it unfolded here on Groklaw. Check the research
documents on Groklaw, you will find that SCO never had a chance at any of their
declarations (unless they fooled a jury maybe, but on appeal, SCO would have
still lost in the end on the facts - 10's of million dollars of legal fees
later).



[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )