That's All Folks! (for SCO at any rate)

It's official - SCO is toast, the request for a retrial has been DENIED.

From the article on Groklaw:

Judge Ted Stewart has ruled for Novell and against SCO. Novell's claim for declaratory judgment is granted; SCO's claims for specific performance and breach of the implied covenant of good fair and fair dealings are denied. Also SCO's motion for judgment as a matter of law or for a new trial: denied. SCO is entitled to waive, at its sole discretion, claims against IBM, Sequent and other SVRX licensees.

CASE CLOSED!

So after six years and God only knows how many man-hours of dealing with their spurious claims they have lost. Again. Although there have been quite a few "face-palm" moments which have had me muttering "stop pandering to the damned litigious munchkins" through gritted teeth, it looks as if Judge Stewart has been making sure that when this is over there is no room for SCO to try and appeal the decision.

From the Final Judgement itself:

This matter came before the Court for trial on March 8, 2010, through March 26, 2010. Based on the Jury Verdict and the Court’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Final Judgment is entered as follows:

1. Judgment is entered in favor of Novell and against SCO on SCO’s claim for slander of title pursuant to the Jury Verdict.

2. Judgment is entered in favor of Novell and against SCO on SCO’s claim for specific performance pursuant to the Court’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.

3. Judgment is entered in favor of Novell and against SCO on Novell’s claim for declaratory relief pursuant to the Court’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Specifically, the Court declares:

a. Under § 4.16(b) of the APA, Novell is entitled, at its sole discretion, to direct SCO to waive its purported claims against IBM, Sequent and other SVRX licensees;

b. Under § 4.16(b) of the APA, Novell is entitled to waive on SCO’s behalf SCO’s purported claims against IBM, Sequent and other SVRX licensees, when SCO refuses to act as directed by Novell; and

c. SCO is obligated to recognize Novell’s waiver of SCO’s purported claims against IBM and Sequent.

4. Judgment is entered in favor of Novell and against SCO on SCO’s claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing pursuant to the Court’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case forthwith.

SO ORDERED.

DATED June 10, 2010.

BY THE COURT:

____[signature]_____________
TED STEWART
United States District Judge

SCO can, of course, still try and appeal - but given the wording of the final judgement their chances of victory (not to mention the company surviving long enought to get to court) are somewhere between slim and none. This also nails the lid on the coffin of their other court cases.

SCO have approximately one month to decide on their next course of action - assuming, of course, that they don't slide into Chapter 7 bancruptcy in the meantime.

Thank you PJ for keeping us informed, amused and well-armed against the common enemy ;-)