OFF-TOPIC - The SCO suit

[MemphisHank at aol.com]

True, the potential impacts of U.S. litigation -expense- and -duration- 
shouldn't be ignored, if one wants to speculate re. the outcome and/or re. the 
interim tactical aspects of SCO v. IBM (and the IBM v. SCO counterclaims).  (Those 
factors can be huge.  I often use documentation of U.S. lawsuit duration, 
costs, and granularity to educate clients about the potential long war they might 
find, versus the fast battle they assume, when they inquire re. initiating a 
lawsuit.)

As a former litigator (I moved away from that side in '83!), I can assure you 
that many experienced U.S. lawyers and businesspeople see some U.S. 
litigations wrapped up (with varying outcomes) due to huge costs in cash and effort 
(without even considering other possible adverse decision-driving factors, like 
possible negative impacts on customer, "partner", and supplier confidence, 
regulatory impacts in some situations, etc.).  

In that regard, many folks marveled re. the massive costs and years involved 
in the U.S. (Dept. of Justice) v. IBM antitrust litigation of earlier times.  
(Insert here caveat re. antitrust litigation perhaps being inherently more 
abstract and hence protracted and expensive than i.p. litigation - but that's 
debatable here, given the particular nuances of the SCO v. IBM situtation.)

And, yes, one task (tactic?) sometimes seen in U.S. commercial/i.p./etc. 
litigation is "trying to kick out an initially involved key individual", for 
various reasons.  (E.g., in the now settled Canopy Group [of Utah] v. Computer 
Associates contract litigation, C.A. moved to exclude the C.G. General Counsel 
from access to materials disclosed under the litigation document-sharing 
["discovery"] process.)  

Those desiring a fast outcome in SCO v. IBM (a) should research the durations 
of big-league U.S. litigation, particularly in "issues of first impression" 
(new legal questions) and (b) might be disappointed, given the pace of such 
processes.

Henry W. (Hank) Jones, III
Intersect Technology Consulting -and-
Law Office of Henry W. Jones, III
Austin, TX
memphishank at aol.com
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3