Welcome!

Linux Authors: Gilad Parann-Nissany, Maureen O'Gara, Glenn Rossman, Hovhannes Avoyan, RealWire News Distribution

Related Topics: Open Source, Linux

Open Source: Article

SCO Asks for Five-Month Delay in IBM Trial

SCO Asks for Five-Month Delay in IBM Trial
By Maureen O'Gara
Article Rating:
April 9, 2004 12:00 AM EDT
Reads:
 16,413
Since SCO's enemies interpreted the fact that the Red Hat suit was put on a peg as a setback for SCO - wasn't it Red Hat that wanted the case to proceed? - they're going to dine out on this one.

SCO has asked the Utah court destined to try its $5 billion suit against IBM - unless of course IBM has its way and gets the case shut down - to postpone the trial date from April of next year to September 15 of next year because all the flaps over discovery have set the whole darn schedule back.

SCO says it wasn't its fault it couldn't get all the evidence of its thievery to IBM in a timely manner - IBM wasn't giving it what it needed for proof namely all the extant copies of AIX and Dynix. As a matter of fact, IBM is still supposed to turn over the documentation in question. Apparently on April 19.

IBM is expected to resist the new date and SCO's critics will accuse it of dragging its feet on its way to its eventual execution.

Published April 9, 2004 – Reads 16,413
Copyright © 2004 SYS-CON Media, Inc. — All Rights Reserved.
Syndicated stories and blog feeds, all rights reserved by the author.

More Stories By Maureen O'Gara

Maureen O'Gara the most read technology reporter for the past 20 years, is the Cloud Computing and Virtualization News Desk editor of SYS-CON Media. She is the publisher of famous "Billygrams" and the editor-in-chief of "Client/Server News" for more than a decade. One of the most respected technology reporters in the business, Maureen can be reached by email at maureen(at)sys-con.com or paperboy(at)g2news.com, and by phone at 516 759-7025. Twitter: @MaureenOGara

Comments (3) View Comments

Share your thoughts on this story.

Add your comment
You must be signed in to add a comment. Sign-in | Register

In accordance with our Comment Policy, we encourage comments that are on topic, relevant and to-the-point. We will remove comments that include profanity, personal attacks, racial slurs, threats of violence, or other inappropriate material that violates our Terms and Conditions, and will block users who make repeated violations. We ask all readers to expect diversity of opinion and to treat one another with dignity and respect.

Most Recent Comments
Thomas Frayne 04/11/04 05:11:29 PM EDT

SCOG has given IBM a marvelous opportunity to catalog the ways that SCOG tried to delay the trial and withhold the information that IBM and the judge properly requested, while complaining that IBM had not given information requested by
SCOG's improper fishing expedition.

On December 5, the judge ordered SCOG to supply this information and stayed SCOG's discovery from IBM. On January 12, SCOG defied the court order with respect to its claimed rights in Linux, asked for more time to get some minor items, and complained that the fish that IBM had given were not enough to allow SCOG to state its claims precisely.

On February 6, we found that SCOG had still not provided the basic information needed before SCOG would have a right to initiate discovery. The judge invited IBM to request dismissal at that point, but IBM suggested giving SCOG more rope (oops, time). SCOG ask for 30 days, so the judge pondered for a month, gave them an additional 45 days, and told IBM to complete its own response to a subset of SCOG's interrogatories defined by IBM with the same deadline.

I am sure that IBM will describe all this and more in its response to SCOG's motion to delay the trial.
Alex S. 04/10/04 11:39:06 AM EDT

At least if this judge has any sence.
stdsoft 04/09/04 10:16:25 PM EDT

<<
SCO says it wasn't its fault it couldn't get all the evidence of its thievery to IBM in a timely manner - IBM wasn't giving it what it needed for proof namely all the extant copies of AIX and Dynix.
>>

SCO didn't say that in the motion. In fact, SCO said that IBM turned over Dynix and AIX the day after the stay was lifted. This means that SCO actually has six weeks more than they told the judge was necessary. In addition, consider that SCO has had the latest version of Dynix and a prior version of AIX for at least six months. SCO has been unable to find any useful evidence of any kind. They delay is in support of the ever-diminishing hope that SCO can find some evidence... if only they have just a little longer. Judge Kimball isn't going to allow SCO any more delays. Expect this motion to be quickly denied.