Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
SCO Group, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corp., commonly abbreviated as SCO v.IBM, is a civil lawsuit in the United States District Court of Utah.The SCO Group asserted that there are legal uncertainties regarding the use of the Linux operating system due to alleged violations of IBM's Unix licenses in the development of Linux code at IBM.
Judge Kenneth Karas of the United States District Court in the Southern District of New York heard the case and granted IBM's request. Before releasing the public opinion, Judge Karas ruled that IBM must pay a $3,000,000 bond to Papermaster for any costs or damages that Papermaster might incur, meanwhile still unable to work at Apple. [3]
IBM. All claims in the SCO v. DaimlerChrysler case are dismissed except on the matter of breach of section 2.05, in that DC did not submit their response in a timely manner. SCO files an amended complaint in SCO v. Novell. August 2004 IBM files motion for partial summary judgment on breach of contract claims in SCO v. IBM. This judgment would ...
(Reuters) -GlobalFoundries and IBM said on Thursday they have settled dueling lawsuits in which GlobalFoundries was accused of breaching a contract with IBM and the computer giant was alleged to ...
Later court filings by the SCO Group in SCO v. IBM use SCO's alleged compliance with the license as a defense to IBM's counterclaims. [39] The GPL has become an issue in SCO v. IBM. Under U.S. copyright law, distribution of creative works whose copyright is owned by another party is illegal without permission from the copyright owner, usually ...
Wallace v. International Business Machines Corp., 467 F.3d 1104 (7th Cir. 2006), [1] was a significant case in the development of free software.The case decided, at the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, that in United States law the GNU General Public License (GPL) did not contravene federal antitrust laws.
The Commission sent a letter to IBM informing it about the imminent proceedings for abusing its dominant position, under EU competition law, inviting it to put a case. IBM sought to challenge the letter in judicial review proceedings, and the question was whether the letter was a reviewable act.
United States v. IBM: 517 U.S. 843 (1996) United States v. Manufacturers National Bank: 363 U.S. 194 (1960) United States v. United States Shoe Corp. 523 U.S. 360 (1998)