My infatuation with SCO

[Thing]

Listen to me now and hear me later, If Microsoft stops pumping money into SCO's Anti-Linux Jihad, SCO is going down in a blaze.  Now they've begun suing their customers!  WTF?

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SCOX&t=6m&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

[Grok]

I read somewhere that the SEC is listening to complaints, but no official investigation has been announced.

[MrRaza]

It's seems odd, I think they're trying to make money off of this. When their a failing software firm, and at the same time fighting five major legal battles. I hope they go down fast and hard, especially for suing their former and present customers.

[tA-Kane]

You know how in courtrooms, there's sometimes references to how other similar-and-related lawsuits or criminal findings or etc are done? Well I've always thought it would be cool to sue someone for doing good, and then make sure I lose the suit, that way any future lawsuits will have a "in case x-y-z, mr. kane lost the suit for the very same thing", so that I know that when I, or someone I know, starts doing that same something good, I already know that there's previous lawsuits that're going to help me.

So perhaps SCO is doing the same? Suing people that use linux, making sure they lose, and then any future lawsuits against people that use linux will be simply thrown out? It might be their downfall, but it'd benefit millions (billions) of people down the road..., because they'd more more sure of the fact that they're not going to get into legal trouble for doing it.

[MyndFyre]

Yeah....  that's pretty dumb.

You know how in courtrooms, there's sometimes references to how other similar-and-related lawsuits or criminal findings or etc are done? Well I've always thought it would be cool to sue someone for doing good, and then make sure I lose the suit, that way any future lawsuits will have a "in case x-y-z, mr. kane lost the suit for the very same thing", so that I know that when I, or someone I know, starts doing that same something good, I already know that there's previous lawsuits that're going to help me.

Well first of all, you have to realize that any higher court has the power to reverse a past decision of a lower court.  You also have to realize that any decision ever made can be evaluated at the United States Supreme Court and reversed at any time when they choose to accept a case.

Also, do you know how this process works, in which the Courts review past case law?  There is an interesting example cited often and still quoted from a 1969 US Supreme Court case called Tinker v. Des Moines, fully Tinker et. al. v. Des Moines Independent Community School District et. al.  It can be seen in its entirety here.

You hear it quoted often when dealing with students at public school -- "do students give up their rights at the schoolyard gates?"  If you were to search FindLaw for US Supreme Court cases, using Tinker v Des Moines in the search field, you would come up with well over 500 responses, as it is so central to students' rights.  Decisions aren't based strictly on past decisions, but often attempt to use the same ideas and practices used in making a past decision.

So perhaps SCO is doing the same? Suing people that use linux, making sure they lose, and then any future lawsuits against people that use linux will be simply thrown out? It might be their downfall, but it'd benefit millions (billions) of people down the road..., because they'd more more sure of the fact that they're not going to get into legal trouble for doing it.

Uh...  yeah, that would be pretty dumb.  "people that use linux" is pretty broad, too; they wouldn't do something like that.  But no -- ultimately, a case can be argued to the Supreme Court, where it can reverse its own case law and change its decision.  There's not certainty of a fact down the road when you come into the arena of lawsuits.