Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Groklaw
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Intellectual Property Law
: GroklawHearing in AutoZone set for November 2 at 9 AM
By Pamela Jones et al.
And the second filing of the day is a stipulation to extend time for SCO to respond to the motion. Indeed, they have an uphill climb since AutoZone requires them to prove they actually own the copyrights, an uphill climb made more so by Novell filing for review en banc of that very issue. If you recall, at the hearing on September 22, 2008 they discussed how to go forward, and the judge basically said that they'd go forward with the ruling in Utah, and while SCO could argue that the court was wrong, and ask for a judgment nevertheless alternatively and then after all the appeals, if Utah was wrong, they'd have to redo.
But for now, it's Utah's decision that is the one SCO has to deal with, because Novell filed for a rehearing en banc, and as I understand the rules, that puts us back to Go, with the picture being that the case is on appeal, with no final appellate decision. And SCO has to prove a complete chain of title, and I don't think they can. I don't think anybody can, actually. USL distributed the early code without copyright notices.
Full post as published by Groklaw on September 17, 2009 (boomark / email).

Dead is Dead, or, Federal Court Jurisdiction is Dead on Remand.
Preliminary hearing starts for Israel Mireles
Seventh Circuit reignites AutoZone's trademark infringement claims against OilZone and WashZone
Opti Inc. v. Apple Computer Markman Hearing
CLE: Here are some CLE's this week and beyond at the LBA








