View Single Post
Old 07-21-2004, 02:47 PM   #1 (permalink)
laconic1
Junkie
 
SCO loses most of it's initial claim against DaimlerChrysler

Well, pretty much as expected, the judge in the SCO vs. DaimlerChrysler case threw out most of it. While this isn't as important as SCO vs IBM or Redhat it is still a win for the Linux community.

http://www.theregister.com/2004/07/21/sco_dc_tossed/

Judge junks most of SCO's complaint against DaimlerChrysler
By Ashlee Vance in Chicago
Published Wednesday 21st July 2004 21:51 GMT

It looks as if SCO will have to find another automaker to pick on after a judge granted the majority of DaimlerChrysler's motion to dismiss SCO's suit against it.

SCO fingered DaimlerChrysler back in March, claiming DC had failed to prove that it was in compliance with a Unix licensing agreement dating back to 1990. DaimlerChrysler later filed documents with the Circuit Court for the County of Oakland, Michigan saying it had since provided SCO with the certification. Given this evidence, Judge Rae Lee Chabot has decided to throw out SCO's complaint except on the issue as to whether or not DaimlerChrysler responded quick enough to SCO's request.

This leaves SCO in the position of hounding DaimlerChrysler about the delay or simply letting the matter go.

"We're satisfied that DaimlerChrysler did finally certify their compliance with the software agreement, but we are still interested in gaining some information on why they didn't certify within the allotted time," a SCO spokesman told CNET.

Growklaw, as always, brought the first word of the dismissal and has some rousing eyewitness accounts of SCO's day in court.

"The SCO attorneys all looked rather discomfitted by the Judge's rulings, realizing that she just gutted their case," writes one witness. "I could almost hear the screaming all the way from Utah."

The DaimlerChrysler matter is certainly the most nitpicky of all SCO's questionable claims. SCO was essentially looking for a way to trap customers who use Unix and Linux in the same shop. The idea being that a company signs a Unix license for a set number of servers but then potentially violates that license by running Linux that supposedly contains SCO's Unix IP on other servers. ®
laconic1 is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360