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.
The copyright issue is addressed directly in two of the cases. The first is by IBM in their counterclaim in SCO v. IBM. The issue is central to a pending motion by IBM, stating that IBM violated no copyrights in its Linux related activities. It is also addressed by Red Hat in the Red Hat v. SCO case.
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 ...
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.
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. Daniel Wallace, a United States citizen, sued the Free Software Foundation (FSF) for price fixing. In a later lawsuit, he unsuccessfully sued IBM, Novell, and Red Hat.
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]
The second case was an investigation begun on the EC's own initiative that looked into IBM's alleged discriminatory behaviour towards competing suppliers of mainframe maintenance services. In its initial reaction [ 2 ] to the EC's decision, IBM said that the allegations had been brought forward by "satellite proxies" of rival Microsoft .
IBM's original OS/360 sort/merge program, 360S-SM-023, program name IERRCO00 (alias SORT), supported only IBM's first-generation direct-access storage devices (DASD) [d] and tapes (2400). Support for second-generation disk drives was provided by IBM program products such as 5734-SM1 and the later 5740-SM1 (DFSORT, alias ICEMAN, also SORT).