Action on IBM's motion to compel
It looks like the judge is putting SCO on notice that they have a real deadline now, and should they fail to meet the November deadline without a mighty good excuse, the Motion is already set for oral arguments. She could instead have said that she wanted both sides to report back to her in November and then she'd see what to do. Instead, she set a firm date for oral arguments, so it's a kind of a warning that they've delayed as long as they can get away with."
Posted Nov 3, 2003 15:26 UTC (Mon)
by davidl (guest, #12156)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Nov 3, 2003 15:48 UTC (Mon)
by torsten (guest, #4137)
[Link] (1 responses)
Legal action. At last!"
Sleeping Beauty?
Posted Nov 3, 2003 21:21 UTC (Mon)
by nucklehead (guest, #15176)
[Link]
"Sleeping Beauty?" Herbie the Love Bug. :)
Posted Nov 4, 2003 0:37 UTC (Tue)
by DeletedUser16361 ((unknown), #16361)
[Link]
Posted Nov 4, 2003 2:03 UTC (Tue)
by edvac (guest, #13074)
[Link]
Finally, an industry that has been hobbled by archaic management styles, and resource-hoarding monoliths, is being set free. Deal with it.
Posted Nov 4, 2003 3:28 UTC (Tue)
by vblum (guest, #1151)
[Link]
On a slightly OT note: Groklaw's side-by-side comparison of IBM's counterclaims and SCO's
Legal action. At last!
Action on IBM's motion to compel
Action on IBM's motion to compel
Legal action. At last!" Action on IBM's motion to compel
Why is Linus both a genius and a RETARD? nO cLUE!!!
Action on IBM's motion to compel
Let's see, how does that go; first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. Action on IBM's motion to compel
I had a few questions to BayStar et al myself - let's hear the answer to IBM's ... (well, the Action on IBM's motion to compel
questions first, I guess).
response is highly entertaining. From the wording, one would get the impression that SCO
denies that Caldera, Inc., was founded in 1994, just one of many killing jokes. Truly worth a
read!