Judge Kimball dismissed the testimony of Novell management at the time Novell sold Unix to the Santa Cruz Operation, starting with CEO Bob Frankenberg who signed the APA without reading it, testifying that the copyrights were transferred; dismissed testimony from Santa Cruz management saying that's what they thought they bought and wouldn't have done the deal without them; dismissed evidence that Novell changed the copyrights in the code to read "SCO" when the deal went down; dismissed evidence saying Novell left the copyrights on the premises it turned over to the Santa Cruz Operation; and dismissed the now-famous 1996 Amendment 2 to the APA that was allegedly supposed to clarify that the copyrights were transferred, clarification the new SCO repeatedly sought again from Novell right before it filed suit against IBM in March 2003.And you thought Maureen had been banned from Sys-Con, didn't you? This is the kind of crap I've been reading from a multitude of pseudonyms on the Yahoo SCOX board for years now, especially over the last 12 months as the SCO v. Novell trial dragged on. Which tends to make me wonder. And this is the same writing style you can read on Maureen's very own G2News and LinuxGram websites (again you can go Google for them).
Instead he pretty much hung his hat on a declaration from Novell's former general counsel David Bradford, a last-minute witness that SCO couldn't depose because the time for depositions had passed, saying that he and Novell's outside counsel, a guy from Wilson Sonsini, changed the APA and omitted the copyrights to protect Novell in case the Santa Cruz Operation failed since Santa Cruz couldn't come up with the full price Novell contemplated for Unix. Novell submitted evidence showing that, as negotiations advanced back in '95, the APA was dumbed-down to exclude the copyrights and other IP.
Judge Kimball did not address testimony from a close friend of Bradford, swearing that Bradford had repeatedly told him he had nothing to do with the Novell-SCO deal.
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Maureen O'Gara Disparages Judge Dale Kimball's Ruling, Tries to Prove the Bitch is Back
Maureen O'Gara, that intrepid American technology [sic] journalist [sic], took a swipe at Judge Kimball's ruling in SCO v. Novell. And she did it behind the ".NETDJ News Desk" byline on the cutting edge Sys-Con website, Open Source version. (If you want the entire article, Google for it. I refuse to provide a link.) How much braver can you get? So what was in the article that shows her writing fingerprints? Allow me to quote: