Novell Wins Remand Contest- Case Stays in Federal Court - It's
Copyright Proof Time, 06:39 PM
Der Vertragsanhang, der SCO angeblich das Copyright übertragen hat
ist nicht klar, daher wird der Prozess nicht als Vertragsverletzung
an das Bezirksgericht zurück verwiesen. Dies bedeutet zugleich, das
SCO nicht weiter gelten machen kann der alleinige Copyright Inhaber
zu sein, vielmehr muss das jetzt geklärt werden. Das Bedeutet
natürlich für alle anderen Verfahren, das SCO nicht mehr als
eindeutiger Copyrightinhaber auftreten kann.
SCO Loses Motion to Bifurcate - SCO Motion to Delay Partly Denied,
Partly Granted,
es ging um: Plaintiff The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") hereby moves this
Court for an Order separating the trial of Defendant International
Business Machine Corporation's ("IBM") patent counterclaims
(counterclaims nine through twelve) from the trial of the primary
claims and counterclaims in this case. The grounds for this Motion
are as follows:
SCO and IBM have asserted various claims arising from the same
nucleus of operative facts and the central issue in this case of
whether IBM's disclosure of AIX and Dynix/ptx through its involvement
in Linux violated the licensing agreements IBM entered into with
several third parties.
IBM has interposed four unrelated patent counterclaims into this
case. The discrete issues arising from the breach of the license
agreements should not be tried before a jury together with IBM's
unrelated patent infringement counterclaims where the only common
thread between the licensing agreements claims and the patent
counterclaims is the identity of the parties. To assist in juror
comprehension and reduce both prejudice and delay IBM's four patent
counterclaims should be tried separately and should proceed on a
separate discovery schedule.
(Muss jetzt weg, daher keine Übersetzung, sorry)
Trelane
Copyright Proof Time, 06:39 PM
Der Vertragsanhang, der SCO angeblich das Copyright übertragen hat
ist nicht klar, daher wird der Prozess nicht als Vertragsverletzung
an das Bezirksgericht zurück verwiesen. Dies bedeutet zugleich, das
SCO nicht weiter gelten machen kann der alleinige Copyright Inhaber
zu sein, vielmehr muss das jetzt geklärt werden. Das Bedeutet
natürlich für alle anderen Verfahren, das SCO nicht mehr als
eindeutiger Copyrightinhaber auftreten kann.
SCO Loses Motion to Bifurcate - SCO Motion to Delay Partly Denied,
Partly Granted,
es ging um: Plaintiff The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") hereby moves this
Court for an Order separating the trial of Defendant International
Business Machine Corporation's ("IBM") patent counterclaims
(counterclaims nine through twelve) from the trial of the primary
claims and counterclaims in this case. The grounds for this Motion
are as follows:
SCO and IBM have asserted various claims arising from the same
nucleus of operative facts and the central issue in this case of
whether IBM's disclosure of AIX and Dynix/ptx through its involvement
in Linux violated the licensing agreements IBM entered into with
several third parties.
IBM has interposed four unrelated patent counterclaims into this
case. The discrete issues arising from the breach of the license
agreements should not be tried before a jury together with IBM's
unrelated patent infringement counterclaims where the only common
thread between the licensing agreements claims and the patent
counterclaims is the identity of the parties. To assist in juror
comprehension and reduce both prejudice and delay IBM's four patent
counterclaims should be tried separately and should proceed on a
separate discovery schedule.
(Muss jetzt weg, daher keine Übersetzung, sorry)
Trelane