AutoZone Update - And Another Update - And Another

"AutoZone's filing was so powerful, it inspired a settlement. Future victims of SCO's SCOsource Silliness -- and that is obviously the hope, to ramp it up again someday if all the stars align just right -- might wish to take notes on how they did it. Although we can't read the confidential settlement, we can see what inspired it, and that alone is helpful.

"AutoZone, if you recall, wrote: "AutoZone denies that Santa Cruz purchased the UNIX technology from Novell, Inc. or that SCO acquired this technology from Santa Cruz." But it also denied that any of SCO's legal rights were violated. AutoZone had licenses and agreements with third parties, it pointed out, giving it the right to run the code it used, or didn't actually use but which was found sitting on a forgotten server. It also was going to make SCO prove that it owned any proprietary code in that third-party code SCO challenged, such as CompX, and it pointed out that SCO failed to register copyrights in the code it claimed ownership of, so it wasn't entitled to statutory damages as a matter of law, even if its legal rights had been violated."

Complete Story

Related Stories:

• Darl Is Out, Farewell Master Gamer(Oct 22, 2009)
• What Happens to SCO Next? -- Some Possibilities(Aug 03, 2009)
• AutoZone Trial Set for August 10, 2010 [Hardy Har] - Updated(Jul 31, 2009)
• SCO's Proposed Amended Complaint Against AutoZone, as text - Updated(Jul 07, 2009)
• Computer Business Review: AutoZone Dismisses SCO's "Unnecessary" Legal Claims(Jun 20, 2005)
• Groklaw: AutoZone Will File to Correct SCO's "Material Mistatements"(Jun 03, 2005)
• Groklaw: AutoZone Files Another Status Report(May 27, 2005)
• Groklaw: Autozone Files Emergency Motion to Stay(Sep 03, 2004)