Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 6th Dec 2003 19:42 UTC, submitted by Tom Curtis
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/20/13 6:17 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



<< SCO's entire legal strategy rested on the slender hope that they would be able to find a judge who could be dazed, confused and befuddled as easily the press. The judges ruling puts Darl & Co. on notice that they can't go on spreading FUD (and pumping thier stock) without being specific as to what they claim IBM misappropriated. >>
This was nothing, its called a procedure and it was hardly anything work cheering over. SCO will just have to stick with their derivative works argument.