From: Gordon Darling on
<http://www.pcworld.com/article/192955/
jury_sides_with_novell_in_longrunning_sco_battle.html>

Regards
Gordon





--
ox·y·mo·ron
n. pl. ox·y·mo·ra or ox·y·mo·rons
A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are
combined, as in Microsoft Security, Microsoft Help and Microsoft Works.
From: spike1 on
And verily, didst Gordon Darling <me(a)privacy.net> hastily babble thusly:
> <http://www.pcworld.com/article/192955/
> jury_sides_with_novell_in_longrunning_sco_battle.html>

Now now, I'd hardly say screwed.
Screwed implies they were victims.
They did it all to themselves. Fucked would be a better term, but there's no
again in that, they've been fucked since 1996.

--
| spike1(a)freenet.co,uk | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
| Andrew Halliwell BSc | |
| in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
| Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
From: Daniel James on
In article <4bb2822c$0$24121$afc38c87(a)read01.usenet4all.se>, Gordon Darling wrote:
> <http://www.pcworld.com/article/192955/jury_sides_with_novell_in_longrunning_sco_battle.html>

SCO? Haven't they gone bust yet?

I don't see this as "SCO gets screwed" so much as "courts laugh in the face of SCO as they attempt ill-founded nuisance court actions".

Cheers,
Daniel.


From: unruh on
On 2010-04-02, Daniel James <daniel(a)me.invalid> wrote:
> In article <4bb2822c$0$24121$afc38c87(a)read01.usenet4all.se>, Gordon Darling wrote:
>> <http://www.pcworld.com/article/192955/jury_sides_with_novell_in_longrunning_sco_battle.html>
>
> SCO? Haven't they gone bust yet?

Yes, they have. It is now the court appointed trustee who is pushing the
law suits.

>
> I don't see this as "SCO gets screwed" so much as "courts laugh in the face of SCO as they attempt ill-founded nuisance court actions".

Something which takes 6 years to settle is hardly "the courts laugh
in the face of SCO".

>
> Cheers,
> Daniel.
>
>
From: Folderol on
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 19:38:08 GMT
unruh <unruh(a)wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> wrote:

> On 2010-04-02, Daniel James <daniel(a)me.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <4bb2822c$0$24121$afc38c87(a)read01.usenet4all.se>, Gordon Darling wrote:
> >> <http://www.pcworld.com/article/192955/jury_sides_with_novell_in_longrunning_sco_battle.html>
> >
> > SCO? Haven't they gone bust yet?
>
> Yes, they have. It is now the court appointed trustee who is pushing the
> law suits.
>
> >
> > I don't see this as "SCO gets screwed" so much as "courts laugh in the face of SCO as they attempt ill-founded nuisance court actions".
>
> Something which takes 6 years to settle is hardly "the courts laugh
> in the face of SCO".
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Daniel.

The worst of all is that the perpetrators of this farce are apparently
living very comfortably. The real instigators and fund managers remain
hidden and out of reach, although I'm sure we can all guess who has the
finance, and track record.

--
Will J G