SCO has filed a motion to stay taxation of costs until after the appeal they just filed notice that they plan to pursue. If you are getting that deja vu feeling, you're right. They
did this the last time too. It's almost word for word the same. The last time,
Novell opposed, and Judge Kimball
denied SCO's motion, ruling that "the court does not believe that a party's speculation as to the possibility of the underlying judgment being reversed on appeal is a valid reason for delaying a determination of costs."
SCO then
filed objections to Novell's list of costs. It got it
whittled down slightly.
And here is SCO, submitting the same motion on the same grounds that the court said wasn't convincing the last time. Are they just going through the motions, so Novell has the annoyance and costs of having to file an opposition? One might begin to suspect. And no doubt Novell will oppose again. It wants to be paid. SCO even cites
the same case [PDF] that didn't work for them last time, that Novell pointed out doesn't support their motion. What in the world is SCO thinking? Are they really trying?
I don't think SCO is giving this their all.Here's what never changes. SCO doesn't want to pay Novell anything if there is any way around it.
More...
