Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 21 2013 @ 04:40 PM EST |
One suspects that any stuff referring to the IBM litigation is not
"obsolete" and therefore should not be disposed of by fair means or
foul! Please note that they are only disposing of "obsolete!"
records! (I hope) which is why nobody objected!
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 21 2013 @ 04:46 PM EST |
Maybe they can now accuse IBM of spoliation, since IBM failed to object to the
destruction of the documents. Then, on all related matters, the jury will have
to draw all inferrences in a light most favorable to SCO...
(I am not a comedian, though that fails to keep me from lame attempts at humor)[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Steve Martin on Thursday, February 21 2013 @ 07:13 PM EST |
Not only is there a live court case pending against IBM, but
there is another one still live (notwithstanding the BK stay)
wherein Red Hat is the plaintiff, charging SCO Group under
the Lanham Act. Like the IBM case, the Red Hat case was
initially stayed in favor of other SCO Group litigation, then
it was stayed due to BK.
---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffe, "Sports Night"[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 22 2013 @ 05:00 AM EST |
For most of the cases, discovery is done. Novell and IBM
already have all
of SCO's records
that they's going to get.
Red Hat are the only case that
are potentially affected.
Red Hat filed their case because SCO
was affecting
their business, so they wanted an answer
faster than the IBM/Novell cases were
going to give one. Unfortunately the judge stayed the Red
Hat case until IBM
& Novell were
done; this made the Red Hat case mostly pointless for Red
Hat.
Groklaw did a good job of explaining that SCO's
allegations are
baseless, so the damage to Red
Hat's business was minimized. Given the rulings
in IBM and
Novell, it's likely Red Hat could
win the important bit (a
declaration of non-infringement) on
summary judgement without having
to
present much evidence at all. The only remaining reasons
for Red Hat to keep
the case
alive were the possibility of damages (unlikely now that SCO
have no
money to pay damages),
and as insurance in case SCO do a zombie act and try to
rise
from the grave. So Red Hat are
unlikely to spend any money on lawyers
for that case - they
really have nothing to gain at
this point. They'll just
leave it stayed until SCO
disappear.
[Disclaimer: Almost everything I know
about US law and
these cases I learned from Groklaw] [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 23 2013 @ 09:59 PM EST |
SCO has a court order allowing it to "dispose of any obsolete property as
the trustee deems reasonable and appropriate." Presumably, because the
trustee is still open to pursuing the IBM litigation, the trustee will deem it
reasonable and appropriate to destroy any records that don't support his case
against IBM, while preserving those that do. If there were ever a new trial with
a round of discovery, the preponderance of SCO's remaining evidence would be
more favorable to SCO than the first time around.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|