Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] SCO Won't Talk to Linux Foundation Site

Roy Schestowitz wrote:

> Hash: SHA1
> SCO Group Gets Key Ruling in Appeals Court
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | A spokesman for SCO could not immediately be reached for comment.
> | 
> | Jeffrey Neuburger, an attorney with Proskauer Rose LLP in New York,
> | wrote a blog entry last week on the most recent court rulings, arguing
> | that it "it remains to be seen whether SCO will survive to press forward
> | with the Novell and other litigations."
> | 
> | In an interview, Neuburger said that "[six] years later, we still donât
> | know who owns the rights to UNIX."
> | 
> | "In this case, nothing surprises anyone anymore," Neuburger said. "This
> | is an exceptional case, partly because of the tenacity of SCO. Their
> | [poor] financial situation exacerbates it. Then the fact that it
> | involves open source adds a focus or attention that might not have been
> | there, plus whenever you involve a company like IBM or Novell that also
> | adds interest."
> | 
> | Conspiracy theorists have also been watching the case, often questioning
> | how Microsoft Corp. would have been involved behind the scenes, backing
> | SCO against rivals, Neuburger said. "It all adds a lot of attention."
> `----
> http://www.linux.com/news/biz-os/legal/42614-sco-group-gets-key-ruling-in-
> Recent:
> The Chapter 11 Trustee's First Act: Wants to Hire a Lawyer
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | SCO's new Chapter 11 trustee, Edward N. Cahn, would like to hire a law
> | firm, Blank Rome. Well, honestly speaking, wouldn't *you* want a lawyer,
> | if you were chosen to decide what to do next with the SCO Group?

Well, if it were me that is the court appointed trustee of SCO
I would ask all employees and executives to a meeting and
explain frankly what each had done to put the company in
such a position and what kind of collusion directives they
are taking from micoshaft against investor's interests.
If any executive refuses to attend the meeting without
a lawyer present, then I will order all staff escorted out
of the building for a week and sequestrate all documents and assets
to take a snapshot of the company and its dealings.
Then I would let them back in and and caution each one before
they are put through an interview and ask them to take a legal
oath to only work for the investors interests as defined by
me before allowing them to enter the building.

And if they insist on having their lawyer present
at the interview, I will not allow them into the building.

> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090831225633954

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index