|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 05:17 AM EDT |
"If one deliberately shoots oneself in the foot, complaining
about pain in one's foot may cause onlookers to suggest not
shooting oneself in the foot next time."
Or, better yet, shooting oneself in the head, which is
considered a relatively painless procedure (well, the pain
levels are probably high but they don't last very long).[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jesse on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 05:25 AM EDT |
Thank you. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jesse on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 05:25 AM EDT |
Thank you. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Why Metadata Matters - Authored by: JamesK on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 10:51 AM EDT
- How Big Is the NSA Police State, Really? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 03:33 PM EDT
- Expert says Kiwis under constant surveillance - Authored by: soronlin on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 03:58 PM EDT
- Apple's new Mac Pro - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 04:26 PM EDT
- that link is 404'd - Authored by: nsomos on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 04:46 PM EDT
- Sorry - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 06:23 PM EDT
- PJ's comment on Wyden cites contradiction in eavesdropping answer - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 06:23 PM EDT
- For PJ - Apple Boots Google for Microsoft in Siri - WSJ - Authored by: Tim on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 09:11 PM EDT
- Epoch Times - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 11:08 PM EDT
|
Authored by: jesse on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 05:26 AM EDT |
Thank you. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jesse on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 05:27 AM EDT |
Thank you. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- iOS 7 vs. Android - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 08:53 AM EDT
- Using Metadata to Find Paul Revere - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 11:23 AM EDT
- SCO.com redirects to Xinuos.com - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 11:27 AM EDT
- escaping from a mobile theme ... - Authored by: nsomos on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 12:40 PM EDT
- For trendy high-income women only - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 01:15 PM EDT
- Professional Designers Call iOS7 'Ugly' And 'Inconsistent' - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 03:05 PM EDT
- As a Canadian living in Canada here's a suggestion for my American cousins... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 03:12 PM EDT
- DoD Warns Employees of Classified Info in Public Domain - Authored by: albert on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 06:41 PM EDT
- Spy vs Spy - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 08:32 PM EDT
- Let's step back - Authored by: om1er on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 08:53 PM EDT
|
Authored by: mpellatt on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 05:39 AM EDT |
SCO submits that it would also be appropriate
for
the Court to set
the case for mediation on a parallel track,
to determine whether the case can
now be settled in light of
the Novell rulings.
That little
snippet suggests to me that they've thrown in
the
towel, and really just want
the case closed so that the
final
stake can be driven into the heart of the
undead SCO.
On second thuoghts, maybe this is just another clever SCO
tactic.
They don't ask for the mediation to actually settle the
case, just
determine whether it can be settled..... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: mtew on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 07:30 AM EDT |
If one deliberately shoots oneself in the foot,
complaining about
pain in one's foot may cause onlookers to
suggest not shooting oneself in the
foot next time.
Please, no next
time.
This has to end!
--- MTEW [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: DannyB on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 08:59 AM EDT |
I seem to recall a private super duper priority loan of $2
Million to SCO
by some of the insiders and their friends, while SCO was in
bankruptcy.
Can't they do that again?
Doesn't SCO have a
share price target of $50? Doesn't SCO
still have four
phone book sized
binders laying around somewhere about how
fantastical
SCO's litigation outcome
will be? (Or did they shred that
along with
other incriminating
documents?)
Can't SCO simply produce Blepp's briefcase? Oh, wait --
but
SCO doesn't
even own Unix copyrights. But there still is the issue of
IBM 'hacking'
into SCO's public anonymous FTP servers to download the
Linux
kernel
source from SCO which SCO was making publicly available.
As for
outside investors, I seem to recall someone, umm...
who was it
again... seemed
to sound something like Boreen O'Hagra or
somesuch, but
she said that Middle
Eastern Investors were willing to give
SCO up to $25
Million -- they were
willing to put down their money and
roll the dice,
she said.
Look how
far SCO has come in ten years, it seems their
chances, of
something, are
better than ever now.
Can't SCO get some fresh new supporters in its
cheering
section? Oh
Florian, oh Florian, where are you . . . ?--- The
price of freedom is eternal litigation. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Gringo_ on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 09:42 AM EDT |
IBM says... "Not only does the Novell Judgment affect these
claims in important respects, but also the pending motions
were filed nearly five years ago and the body of relevant
case law has grown."[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: cpeterson on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 11:34 AM EDT |
Second, the possibility that new authorities may
exist does not
remotely warrant re-litigation of the same
issues. So, the fact
that IBM already
mentioned the issues means that they've already been
"litigated"? SCO has mentioned their issues numerous times,
and at length -
shouldn't we, by the same token, decline to
"re-litigate" those
issues? If IBM knows of
such authorities, it could have filed a
notice of
supplemental
authorities—the accepted procedure for bringing
additional
pertinent authority to the court’s attention.
Or, if
said party were not being represented by Boies
Schiller, they might have filed
a "motion for leave to file"
the said "notice of supplemental authorities",
which is a
method accepted by Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.
The procedure SCO suggests would adhere to the
ignored and/or wishfully
altered FRCP, which they
seem to use in a preponderance of their
dealings. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: red floyd on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 12:00 PM EDT |
Those Lanham Act counterclaims aren't going to vanish as if by magic.
---
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a *CITIZEN* of the United
States of America.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 12:05 PM EDT |
Has SCO tried to get the compliant Bankruptcy Court to hear the case instead of
the Utah district? I can't remember. Seems like they would have a better chance
in Delaware than in Utah.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Yossarian on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 03:04 PM EDT |
My suggestion to SCO is slightly different.
Please take your foot out of your mouth before shooting
yourself in the foot. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 03:59 PM EDT |
Co-lead, they sez? Interesting. He didn't argue before the
jury in SCO v. Novell, he was one of the in-the-gallery
group.
He did sit with Ted Normand during the charging/jury
instructions conference, opposite Michael Jacobs, Daniel
Muino, Patricia Svilik, and L. Rex Sears for Novell. If jury
instructions were his responsibility, one might also
remember those turned into a major fail for SCO when they
ended up appealing a different question than the jury
instructions asked.
I don't know how much noise he made on his Blackberry (and
he was one of the thumb-messengers) but he was, otherwise,
pretty quiet in court.
cpeterson[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 05:50 PM EDT |
SCO can't afford to wait while all that briefing goes on. Its cash
supply is such, it's now or never. It wants a quick ruling on the pending
5-year-old motions, and then it wants a trial on whatever claims survive.
I thought that trials aren't exactly cheap either. If SCO is
running out of money, can they finance a trial? It isn't just the cost of the
lawyers (some of whom are supposedly pre-paid). Their are also going to be
travel expenses, document handling expenses, expert witnesses, etc.
Boies may be pre-paid, but they're not going to be happy about
actually being forced to hold up their end of the bargain. They will be
privately kicking up a fuss and doing the minimum possible. They also won't be
willing to cover a single penny out of their pocket for expenses that are
outside of the contract.
SCO may be looking to settle, and are just
using the threat of a trial as a stick to get better terms. By "better terms" I
don't mean a large sum of money, as I don't see any reason for IBM to pay
anything when they can just stall while SCO runs out of money. I just mean
getting IBM to agree to call the whole thing off and let SCO walk away from it.
This whole thing has always been about the money, and now that there isn't any,
the main players on the SCO side don't like this game anymore.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jbb on Tuesday, June 11 2013 @ 08:59 PM EDT |
Since SCO has no money and no assets left after squandering millions, IBM's
counter-claims are pointless because there is no remedy available if they win.
Why waste the court's valuable time with issues that have no remedy? Therefore
the court should keep IBM's counter-claims in limbo and first give us a chance
to try our claims in front of a jury while IBM has both hands tied behind their
back. There is no point in the court even hearing IBM's counter-claims unless
we win.
Oh, and BTW, this will also give us a chance to crow to the press
about how well things are going, at least until the jury discovers we are full
of BS&F speak.
--- Our job is to remind ourselves that there
are more contexts
than the one we’re in now — the one that we think is reality.
-- Alan Kay [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 12 2013 @ 03:55 AM EDT |
If one deliberately shoots oneself in the foot, complaining about pain in
one's
foot may cause onlookers to suggest not shooting oneself in the foot
next
time.
I fear you might have given them an idea.. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 12 2013 @ 12:54 PM EDT |
In the context of this litigation? Nice to see PJ still has her sense of humor
intact :)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- But... but.... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 12 2013 @ 06:07 PM EDT
- Supreme Generals - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 12 2013 @ 06:33 PM EDT
|
|
|
|