Print 13 comment(s) - last by xphile.. on Jul 23 at 11:56 PM

Amount still far short of Novell's demands

The convoluted case of SCO v. Novell dealt a heady blow to the SCO Group Wednesday, with United States District Judge Dale Kimball ordering the company to pay $2.5 million to Novell for improperly claiming, and collecting royalties for, the Unix operating system.

SCO originally filed the lawsuit in 2004, accusing Novell of claiming ownership over Unix SVRx code that SCO acquired after a complicated chain of sales between the two companies. SCO says it owns all rights to the SVRx code – a claim that Novell disputes.

Kimball’s ruling (PDF) was ultimately a reversal. After finding that the contested software was indeed owned by Novell, he proceeded to slap SCO with a variety of charges including unjust enrichment, conversion, and breach of fiduciary duty.

The IP rights in question originally came from Unix System Laboratories, formed as a division of AT&T. AT&T, however, sold all of USL’s assets to Novell in 1993, and then Novell sold the both the USL assets and additional work to Santa Cruz Operation in 1995. The Santa Cruz Operation marketed and sold a PC-based Unix until 2000, after which it sold its rights to Caldera Systems – who later changed its name to the SCO Group.

The sale between Novell and Santa Cruz Operation was far from straightforward, however, and the transfer was conducted through a vaguely-worded “Asset Purchase Agreement” (APA) that amounted, ultimately, to only a partial transfer of ownership. Novell claims the agreement did not include copyrights to the Unix SVRx source code. Judge Kimball’s interpretation of the APA sided with Novell in 2007.

In its SCOScource licensing program, SCO used its supposed ownership of UNIX to assert control over the Linux operating system, which it claims uses source code originally written for UNIX. The company then proceeded to attack a variety of companies that use Linux in their infrastructure, including IBM, DaimlerChrysler, and AutoZone. Much of the details regarding copyrighted code are still under seal in SCO v. IBM.

Groklaw called the reversal of fortunes “ironic,” noting that the case “started with SCO accusing Novell of slander of title, and asking for millions in damages.”

“Instead it has to pay Novell millions,” it added.

Many have described Novell’s victory as lukewarm; noting that the damages prescribed may not be enough to truly stop SCO in its tracks, despite the company’s already questionable financial situation – which includes Chapter 11 filings in September 2007.

Kimball’s ruling allows both parties to appeal the decision, and could prolong the already drawn-out case even further.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

There's only one word for it...
By plinkplonk on 7/18/2008 7:15:07 AM , Rating: 2

RE: There's only one word for it...
By Aquila76 on 7/18/2008 7:47:49 AM , Rating: 5
I think this is going to create a new in tech jargon - SCOed.

Any event that completely backfires on you:

I got SCOed at the bar last night. This hot chick was really a DUDE!

RE: There's only one word for it...
By theapparition on 7/18/2008 8:17:42 AM , Rating: 2
Did you pitch or catch?

RE: There's only one word for it...
By DigitalFreak on 7/18/2008 8:36:18 AM , Rating: 2
I'm betting Aquila76 was the catcher.

By Aquila76 on 7/18/2008 2:43:04 PM , Rating: 4
Are you stalking me???


By lexluthermiester on 7/19/2008 12:24:00 AM , Rating: 2
And we could apply the same ideal in another way.

SCO + owned = SCOwned

Just a thought, LOL!

And before I share my opinion I perhaps need to qualify myself. I live in Utah[where SCO in HQ'd] and am a supporter of the Unix/Linux platforms. I'm not a 100% Linux user but it'll happen someday. That said, as much as I would like to side with a local firm, SCO has been in the wrong since day 1. Their claims are absurd, and never had any serious chance of winning. SCO is no better in the whole "you stole it from me and now you're gonna pay" department than I.P. hording... err... holding companies. Microsoft and Apple are just as guilty of abusing the legal system, though not as bad at it. These decisions are setting trend and case law and will be vital to future legal movements. I've always liked Novell, but even if no one else does this will be a win/win in the long run.

My two cents worth...

By amanojaku on 7/18/2008 7:46:00 AM , Rating: 2
It's good to them getting some payback. Ha!

By BladeVenom on 7/18/2008 9:26:48 AM , Rating: 4
In my best Nelson Muntz's voice, "Ha-ha!"

By Grumpy1 on 7/18/2008 1:43:27 PM , Rating: 2
Poor SCO everybody picks on them

By lexluthermiester on 7/19/2008 12:27:08 AM , Rating: 2
WTH?!? Poor SCO? Are you mad or just loony?

By mattclary on 7/18/2008 8:48:34 AM , Rating: 1
SCOre: Pronunciation[skawr, skohr]noun, plural

SCOres, verb, SCOred

1. A reckoning of epic proportions. Usually occurs when one's opponent feels they have the upper hand, but fails in an epic manner. Not only is one's opponent thoroughly bitch-slapped, they will become the female in the relationship.

2.Slang: To succeed in finding a willing sexual partner via extensive corporate litigation.

By xphile on 7/23/2008 11:56:44 PM , Rating: 2
No dude - as in SCOre - the prOn magazine - where those with excessively large self opinions inevitably get f#%ked.

Die SCO, Die!
By Belard on 7/18/2008 11:45:20 PM , Rating: 2
SCO is getting what it deserves, but apparently - not enough.

Other companies like SCO?

RAMBUS - for their high latencey, super expensive RD-RAM. Who continues to sue anyone who makes RAM, including the competing DDR, DDR2, etc.

Intel - for Anti-competing practices (Forcing companies to NOT buy AMD CPUs via - threats of supply, etc)

"We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs
Related Articles
SCO Files Chapter 11
September 16, 2007, 3:30 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki