Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th Sep 2007 21:36 UTC, submitted by dylansmrjones
SCO, Caldera, Unixware Yahoo reports that SCO has filed [.pdf] for bankruptcy in order to protect assets. "The SCO Group today announced that it filed a voluntary petition for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. SCO's subsidiary, SCO Operations, Inc., has also filed a petition for reorganization. The Board of Directors of The SCO Group have unanimously determined that Chapter 11 reorganization is in the best long-term interest of SCO and its subsidiaries, as well as its customers, shareholders, and employees." Groklaw has a story on it, too.
Thread beginning with comment 271657
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Wrong chapter
by sbergman27 on Sun 16th Sep 2007 03:01 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Wrong chapter"
Member since:


May I suggest The nice thing about LamLaw is that Lewis A. Mettler is a real, honest to god, attorney. He's not just a paralegal pretending to be one.*

The stays on the current court cases are automatic, yes. But the bankruptcy court can lift them. I (as a citizen, not a lawyer!) cannot imagine it *not* ascertaining what is owed to Novell as part of the bankruptcy proceedings.

* Oddly enough, there are no real legal qualifications for a paralegal. There are no educational requirements. Not even a high school diploma, so far as I can tell. No state or federal licensing. Just an optional certification. And no experience requirements. I guess I could call myself a paralegal, buy a domain name, pay my monthly hosting fees, and do my own blog. How about Has a nice ring to it, don't you think? ;-)

Edited 2007-09-16 03:12

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Wrong chapter
by Geoff Gigg on Sun 16th Sep 2007 14:12 in reply to "RE[8]: Wrong chapter"
Geoff Gigg Member since:


That's an interesting article. I would say even more opinionated than PJ. But maybe entitled to it given qualifications.

Please note that I never cited any PJ opinion, just the SCO filing. So Groklaw's take on the matter never entered into anything I said. Not sure why you kept bringing up PJ's lack of qualifications, paralegal only, etc.

[But on that topic, I also noted that lamlam said "Stay tuned. Read Groklaw. (Forget the trade press ...)" So he must think it is of some worth - maybe for the documents?]

My take was simply that SCO did this as a delaying tactic, which they are expert at. How long they can spin it out, who knows? It probably seemed to them like the only choice they add to try to stay in the game. A last throw of the dice.

The interesting thing added by the lamlaw commentary, as you point out, is the power of the bankruptcy court to change things and take control.

I'm a little surprised at lamlaw's confidently asserting that the probable course will be for that court to take Novell's et al's claims still under dispute into immediate consideration and force the proceedings to continue, and/or move to Chapter 7. But obviously I know nothing next to the experts.

Tuesday will indeed be interesting! It is fascinating to watch all this legal maneuvering for its own sake, let alone what's at stake.


Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: Wrong chapter
by sbergman27 on Sun 16th Sep 2007 20:15 in reply to "RE[9]: Wrong chapter"
sbergman27 Member since:


Yes, Lewis is as down on SCO and Microsoft as is PJ. And as down, in fact, as am I. ;-) He does a pretty good job of separating fact from opinion. His blog posts actually have more opinion and less fact than does the average GrokLaw article. I like his site better because he does not make any pretense about the opinions. In fact, he relies upon his own ability, as an attorney, to separate her opinion from the facts, in a legal sense.

Yes. I know that you did not cite PJ's opinions specifically. I apologize if I over-reacted a bit on the negative side. I simply think that PJ has an overinflated view of her qualifications... despite the boilerplate disclaimers. PJ is *not* the Oracle of Delphi. And to be blunt, I believe that she is a loose cannon, and, very possibly, dangerous in the long run. But that is neither here nor there in this thread, now.

Yes, the interesting bit is the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court. Remember, big (creditor) companies use their power to destroy small (debtor) companies. They don't want the debtors to be able to hide behind a legal rock where they can't be gotten to. And they have used their legal might over the years to see to it that it doesn't happen.

And besides that... it's *right* for the bankruptcy court to consider the likely, looming, debt that SCO faces. It affects not only Novell, but *all* of SCO's creditors, from Novell, all the way down to that charity for orphans that they owe money to.

SCO's toast.

Of course... IANAL. ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 2