|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 26 2013 @ 07:04 PM EDT |
I think the discussion of costs should be right up front, not later...
As in:
Judge: SCO, can you afford to pay costs? Can you pay damages if you lose?
SCO: Errrr mumble, mumble not really.
Judge: IBM, do you really want to play this lopsided game you can't win?
IBM: No, we just want to see Ralph in an orange jumpsuit.
Judge: Ok then, we'll proceed by SCO posting a bond in the amount of whatever
they can come up with. They can pursue their claims up to the point that IBM's
costs reach the bond amount. If they can't present a convincing case by then,
then IBM wins, collects the bond, and all else is dismissed with predjudice
against SCO. And to help streamline things and provide SCO an incentive to move
quickly, Ralph shall sit in jail until this whole charade is over. Longer if
IBM wins.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- No - Authored by: jjon on Wednesday, June 26 2013 @ 07:16 PM EDT
- No - Authored by: tknarr on Wednesday, June 26 2013 @ 08:53 PM EDT
- No - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, June 30 2013 @ 12:35 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 27 2013 @ 04:58 AM EDT |
See here:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-23030009[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jjon on Saturday, June 29 2013 @ 08:48 AM EDT |
IBM just
objected to those two
paragraphs, and made a couple of other objections I
wasn't
smart enough to see :-) Now we just need to see if the court
accepts
IBM's objections. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|