Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th Sep 2007 21:36 UTC, submitted by dylansmrjones
Thread beginning with comment 271790
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.





Member since:
2005-07-24
Geoff,
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. ;-)