We do need to get these exhibits, don't you agree? Or six months more discovery.
In other words, it is asking the court to throw out SCO's entire case, and to grant it judgment on two counterclaims without even going to trial on those two. And that is the way the people in our company feel.
It can't be, I thought. And can you do it this month? Correction: Added second half of document.
He now works for SUSE.
For example, IPX was contributed to Linux by SCO. Novell is trying to win. What would Microsoft's benefit or payback be? Is that not SCO to the max? No dips or huge peaks. The whole memo was filed under seal, and this is the redacted version.
One can't help but ask. And that is the way the people in our company feel. Goldfarb anything, since he's the businessman, not I, but isn't life's highway littered with companies who thought it'd be remunerative to be a Microsoft partner, only to end up as roadkill? They always act like such weanies when the tables are turned and somebody stronger than they are walks into the playground.
Another secret in SCO's mountain of secret offenses for which they would like IBM to pay them billions.
Since this seems to be my week to disagree with famous people, I'll say outright that I disagree with Richard on this point.
We are making the necessary changes so that this never occurs again. Or more time to respond to Novell's discovery requests.
If that were true, then how come they didn't at least know about the methods and concepts being in there?
What would be the business purpose here?
So we'll do it together. According to the witnesses, it just happened, and nobody knows quite how, because to hear them tell it no one was paying attention except folks who weren't in charge. Maybe the court would allow us to make copies of the DVD, minus the sealed materials?
They say they have them on DVD, though, so hint to the clerk: that means they are already digital. This is what the lawyers normally will have done before including a case in any brief.