[Eug-lug] SCO back from the dead?

[larry price]

On Feb 18, 2008 8:25 PM, marbux <marbux at gmail.com> wrote:
> So pertinent questions might be:
>
>  1. Who arranged the UAE "investment" and loan?

I'm sure it's entirely coincidental that Microsoft is pouring a bunch
of money into the UAE
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?col=&section=theuae&xfile=data/theuae/2008/January/theuae_January854.xml

> 2. Why would any sane investor invest in or loan money to SCO without any
> realistic hope of getting the money back from SCO? 17 per cent interest
> isn't worth the risk of non-payment for a company in SCO's position. SCO's
> hope of recovery is a very long shot at best. One might suspect that the
> investment and loan is at the very least secured by an unidentified player
> and more likely a quid pro quo for value that falls due on the date the
> bankruptcy court approves the plan, if ever.
>
entirely coincidental

> 3. Why might the bankruptcy court conceivably agree to dilute the recovery
> of the unpaid creditors even further by allowing SCO to borrow millions at
> credit card interest rates from a new creditor?
>
> Unfortunately, we may never learn the answers to questions 1 and 2. But  it
> will be fun to read the briefs and see what the bankruptcy court has to say
> about question 3.

Wow, I'm glad that there are people like you and the Groklaw crew out
there, I do not have the tolerance required to sift through that
particular pile of long and tedious arguments of insidious intent.

Speaking of network legal issues what do you all think of the
wikileaks.org case?

I'm not a lawyer, but some of the stories I read made me very dubious
of the judge's injunction, defendants in civil cases are supposed to
have a right to respond; and notification by email is not equivalent
to service of notice.