Novell Motion to Dismiss Denied (Groklaw) [LWN.net]

Groklaw reports that Novell's Motion to Dismiss in SCO v. Novell has been denied. "In short, [Judge Dale Kimball] is a careful man, who scrupulously distinguishes between matters of law and questions of fact. So, discovery, here we come. This doesn't mean that there can't be later motions, after some discovery gives the judge something concrete to go on. And it doesn't mean he believes SCO. He can't favor either side, until discovery produces sufficient facts to reach a definitive decision. That doesn't mean he doesn't have a private thought or two."

(Log in to post comments)

Novell Motion to Dismiss Denied (Groklaw)

Posted Jun 29, 2005 8:34 UTC (Wed) by petegn (guest, #847) [Link]

question is just where are they getting the fundsa from right now after the amount they must have paid the bunch of hyenas (there legal team) they cant have more than a few bob left unless of course one of the rumours IS TRUE that would explain why they are still around and not dead and gone.

Novell Motion to Dismiss Denied (Groklaw)

Posted Jun 29, 2005 12:01 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

Why rely on rumour? They publish their accounts, as they are obliged to as a publicly traded company (albeit sometimes with, ah, delays).

Novell Motion to Dismiss Denied (Groklaw)

Posted Jun 30, 2005 7:16 UTC (Thu) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]

I doubt it'll go on.

Novell's next move should be to file for summary judgement that copyrights did NOT transfer, as there is no agreement in writing.

All SCOG have to do to defeat this is to produce documentary evidence they should hold. Except that, as far as we know, they can't (and if they do, they're now in deep doodoo in the IBM case :-)

No documents, motion granted, case collapses. As do all the other cases...

Cheers,
Wol