Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 25th Aug 2009 14:45 UTC, submitted by Moulinneuf
Legal Not too long ago, Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw explained he had found the perfect husband for Lara Croft: Jason Voorhees. They both have way too many sequels all following a default plot, they both murder a lot and spend a lot of time underground, but most of all: none of them will ever just die. In that light, I suggest another husband for Miss Croft: Darl McBride. Instant update: Darl McBride responds. See inside.
Thread beginning with comment 380647
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

With all its faults, I still think the US court system is the most fair in the world, generally speaking. However, it's situations like this that make me question my feelings about its impartiality. There is absolutely no way that six or twelve random people could ever truly understand the situation well enough to rule fairly for either side. I think technologically complex cases like this should be decided by a panel of five or seven judges, with one or two impartial expert witnesses to clarify any questions the judges have about the technical aspects of the case. As difficult as it may be to find techies that are truly impartial given SCO's track record, it's got to be better than a box full of truly clueless local citizens, no matter how intelligent they may be in their own field of expertise.


Nah, it isn't that hard to follow at all.

FTA:
SCO claimed IBM had used Unix as a basis for making improvements to the Linux operating system, the basic software code of which is "open source," or freely available to the public. Companies such as IBM and Novell take the basic code and use it to create products and services that can be sold to other companies, often more cheaply than for-profit systems such as Unix and Microsoft's Windows.


-- Actually, the code that IBM put into Linux, which is SMP and RCU and the JFS filesystem, is IBM's code. Some of this code was written originally for OS/2, and some of it was written by Sequent (now IBM) for Dynix, and then also put into Unix.

FTA:
SCO claims that it saw a precipitous decline in sales of its Unix system after IBM modified Linux using Unix code.


-- Actually, the code that IBM put into Linux is IBM's code.

It doesn't matter if SCO has copyrights to Unix or not ... there is no Unix code in Linux. Any IBM code that is in Linux is copyright IBM.

As I said, it isn't really all that hard to understand at all.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

You're right, and to those of us who are in the tech field for employment or even as hobbyists, it's cut and dry. But put a savvy lawyer up there and I guarantee you he'll confuse the hell out of the jury by the end of the trial. A panel of judges isn't as easily swayed by petty lawyer tricks. I've seen it a thousand times and it never ceases to amaze me how much non-factual influence both prosecuting and defending attorneys can get away with during the course of a trial.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

You're right, and to those of us who are in the tech field for employment or even as hobbyists, it's cut and dry. But put a savvy lawyer up there and I guarantee you he'll confuse the hell out of the jury by the end of the trial. A panel of judges isn't as easily swayed by petty lawyer tricks. I've seen it a thousand times and it never ceases to amaze me how much non-factual influence both prosecuting and defending attorneys can get away with during the course of a trial.


There has to be a decision to take it to trial first.

Given that there is such a simple defence ... "there is no Unix code in Linux" ... what sane management would take this case to trial? They would get crucified in the countersuits.

Now I know that you might reply by saying that SCO management are clearly not sane ... but I would point out that it is no longer SCO management who will decide what happens with these lawsuits from here on in.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/08/sco-still-up-creek-...

The question facing the trustee—who is now ultimately calling the shots for SCO—is whether the company a) has the resources to fight on, and b) has a snowball's chance in The Bad Place of actually succeeding in court. The appeals court ruling doesn't do much for b) other than offering another (very) faint glimmer of hope for SCO. Since the judges upheld the $2.54 million award to Novell, that affects a), since it's money that SCO won't have to fund its litigation pipe dream.


A chapter 11 trustee has now been appointed.

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090825175606636

Reply Parent Score: 2