gotta say i don't like where this is going

sco claims it owns unix
sco sues ibm over unix code in linux
microsoft privately helps fund sco's suit
eventually looks like sco is full of it
turns out novell owns a fair whack of unix
microsoft and novell enter a patent agreement
sco loses suit. sco dies off
---------------------------------
so what will probably happen next is 5 years down the track:
novell sues ibm over unix code in linux
microsoft privately helps fund novell's suit
novell points to sco ruling
ibm loses. novell goes on suing spree. linux becomes illegal.
microsoft sue novell for use of patents not covered in their agreement
microsoft kills unix

of course, who can really predict what exactly is going to happen in the next 5-10 years anyway.

Also, note the judge ruled that SCO is "liable to conversion".

... http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070810165237718 ...
Finally, the court concludes, as a matter of law, that the only reasonable interpretation of all SVRX Licenses includes no temporal restriction of SVRX Licenses existing at the time of the APA. The court further concludes that because a portion of SCO's 2003 Sun and Microsoft Agreements indisputably licenses SVRX products listed under Item VI of Schedule 1.1(a) to the APA, even if only incidental to a license for UnixWare, SCO is obligated under the APA to account for and pass through to Novell the appropriate portion relating to the license of SVRX products. Because SCO failed to do so, it breached its fiduciary duty to Novell under the APA and is liable for conversion.

I'm a little vague on the meaning but I gather this means that no matter how the money is hidden, given away, spent, or converted to other forms; Novel is entitled to go after the holders of that money and take it back and declaring bankruptcy (edit: perhaps) does not protect against conversion.

more here...
... http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070915093130746 ...
Keep in mind that Novell has already gotten a ruling from the Utah court that SCO is liable for conversion back on August 10. That money, whatever the amount eventually proves to be, is not a debt, I don't reckon. It's Novell's money. It always was. SCO didn't pay it, but it was never SCO's money, according to my understanding of the ruling. Let me give you an example just to illustrate. If I rob a bank, I can't then run to bankruptcy court and file for protection so I can keep most of the money. That money was never mine, so I can't offer to pay the bank back at 10 cents on the dollar. I have to pay over whatever I stole, 100% or to the limit of what I have left in real life. Of course, I guess I could hire four law firms and some accountants to make sure that's how it works, and by the time we finish studying the law and filing blizzards of paperwork and the lawyers get paid before the decision is actually reached about whose money it is, why, rats. There's no money for the bank. I haven't got it any more. My lawyers do, but what can you do?

You may have noticed at the very bottom of the page of the court's explanation of Chapter 11 bankruptcy the following notes:

NOTES

1. Debts not discharged include debts for alimony and child support, certain taxes, debts for certain educational benefit overpayments or loans made or guaranteed by a governmental unit, debts for willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity, debts for death or personal injury caused by the debtor's operation of a motor vehicle while the debtor was intoxicated from alcohol or other substances, and debts for certain criminal restitution orders.11 U.S.C. § 523(a). The debtor will continue to be liable for these types of debts to the extent that they are not paid in the chapter 11 case. Debts for money or property obtained by false pretenses, debts for fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, and debts for willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity will be discharged unless a creditor timely files and prevails in an action to have such debts declared nondischargeable. 11 U.S.C. § 523(c); Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4007(c).

So not everything is dischargeable in bankruptcy, and some things can be, but the creditor in certain cases can petition to block. In short, while I don't yet know what exactly Novell's position is in this new and very complex context -- you'd need to research case law to know that, which is likely what Novell is doing as we speak, although it's very possible they expected this and already know what the next move will be -- I think we can expect some moves from Novell. The hearing on all the motions filed will be on Tuesday, September 18, at the bankruptcy court located at 834 Market Street, 6th floor, Courtroom 3, in Wilmington, Delaware at 9:15 AM Eastern. I wouldn't be surprised to see Novell in attendance.

This is a sad day for lawyers employed by SCO.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Can I be the first to say "<Nelson Voice> Ha ha!</Nelson Voice>" *pointing finger at SCO.*

Don't be surprised if they get ordered out of bankruptcy.

I'd be VERY surprised if that happened. Chapter 11 courts tend to let many shady things slide in an effort to protect the employees of the company.

Don't be surprised if they get ordered out of bankruptcy. Novell (who will be entitled to a lot of money from winning their suit) may well file a motion for Fraudulent Bankruptcy. In other words, SCO is claiming bankruptcy to avoid paying Novell.

It will be interesting to see if any of the executives end up facing criminal prosecution from Justice or the SEC (they're almost certainly going to be facing civil suits).

What future plans?
Haven't they already sued everybody?

I love The Inq's headline:

SCO files Chapter 11 bankruptcy
Seeks court protection from its own lawsuits

L'inqage: http://theinquirer.net/?article=42372

I'm really sad to see them go. Really, really sad.