 |
|
 |
| |
Welcome to virtuallinux.org. You are currently reading the article "SCO Again Asks Court To Reconsider Dismissal Of Claims Against IBM". All articles on virtuallinux.org pertain to the ongoing assult on the worlds greatest Operating system. Continue on reading about "SCO Again Asks Court To Reconsider Dismissal Of Claims Against IBM"
SCO Again Asks Court To Reconsider Dismissal Of Claims Against IBM
Posted on Tuesday, December 19 2006 @ 15:57:49 EST by linuxwiz |
|
 |
|
 |
| |
The company has filed a new motion asserting that the court's November decision was procedurally and substantially flawed.
The SCO Group has been called many things by the programming
community, many of them unprintable. But one thing the renegade Unix developer can't be accused of being is a quitter.
Despite the fact that a judge earlier this year threw out 187 of its claims of breach of contract and copyright infringement against IBM, and despite another judge in November refusing to overturn that decision, SCO isn't giving up.
The company has filed a new motion asserting that the court's November
decision was procedurally and substantially flawed, according to
documents filed last Thursday in the U.S. District Court for Utah. SCO
argues that "the rules of procedure do not support such a result under
the circumstances of this case."
In its original suit, filed in 2003, SCO claimed that IBM's contributions to the open source Linux community are illegal because those contributions contain code that belongs to SCO.
Utah District Court magistrate judge Brooke Wells in June
dismissed 182 of the company's 294 claims. Judge Wells said the
dismissed claims lacked the specificity needed to hold up in court. She
said SCO, in most instances, failed to identify which lines of code IBM
is alleged to have stolen. Wells left intact more than 100 of SCO's
claims, but most observers felt the decision effectively gutted the
case.
U.S. District Judge Dale Kimball upheld Wells' ruling in a decision handed down Nov. 29.
In its filing last week, however, SCO asked Kimball to
reconsider his decision to uphold the ruling. In addition to a
procedural complaint, SCO cites "new evidence not in the original
record." The company believes such evidence would be revealed if it's
allowed to reopen the deposition of several IBM programmers that were
interviewed earlier in the case. SCO claims such a deposition would
defeat Wells' and IBM's arguments that its claims lacked specificity.
"We submit that such supplementary testimony is likely to
expose the central flaw at the heart of IBM's motion -- that the
information (version, file, and line) of stricken technology items is
either not known to individuals who disclosed such technology (and thus
not reasonably known to SCO), or, in fact, is already known to IBM, who
cannot then possibly sustain a claim of prejudice justifying striking
these items from SCO's case."
IBM in September asked the court to dismiss the suit in its entirety.
Source
|
|
 |
 |
 |
| |
|
 |
|
| |
Article Rating
Average Score: 0
Votes: 0
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
Welcome Anonymous
Login:
Membership:
