The newest posting has an interesting paragraph... It refers to SCO
Oh. It sued IBM. But, that does not mean that SCO thinks it has a case that can stick against IBM either. It may only mean that they (SCO) thinks that IBM will settle for money and SCO never will have to prove any IP claims. If you do not have to prove them, you do not have to have them. At least in theory anyway. And, of course the plan by SCO was to extort money from as many Linux customers as possible (again, without showing any proof). And, of course the plan by SCO was to harm Red Hat's business and reputation so much as to cause them to pressure IBM to clear it up. So you have the attack upon Red Hat. And, you have an attack upon Linux customers. And, it is all an illegal effort to cause enough harm to force IBM to pay up or settle way short of any requirement on SCO's part to prove in a court of law any of its rights (IP or other) have been violated. Thus you have SCO asking the court NOT to accept a case that would require SCO to prove their claims or as I put it (since they, SCO are a**h****) "shut the f*** up".

Very unlawyerlike.