As you probably found out before I did, SCO just sued Novell. They don't like it that Novell registered for copyrights on Unix. Certainly, the competing copyright claims should be resolved before SCO can successfully sue anybody else for copyright infringement, because if they sued someone, Novell could stand up and tell the judge in essence: "I am the correct party to settle the issue of who has the copyright. The hapless end user that SCO is suing is in no position to know who has the rightful copyright, so SCO is suing the wrong party. It should settle this issue with me."

I am both appalled and thrilled. Appalled because I can't believe that SCO is interested in opening a new legal front. It's a little like Napoleon invading Russia. At some point, you are overextended. Then it's winter. Then it's over.

I am thrilled because a Novell win would block SCO from suing anyone for copyright infringment, using the DMCA as a club. No one can infringe your copyright if you don't own one. Red Hat is asking the judge to declare that Red Hat is not infringing on SCO's copyright. Novell, in contrast, will presumably be asserting that they own the copyrights so SCO has no copyright to infringe. So the Novell lawsuit is the complete copyright package in a frame, and it will answer the question: does SCO even have a copyright?

Obviously, if Novell prevails, it will impact almost every other case. First, the Red Hat issue would be won, without breaking a sweat. Contract issues that are not copyright-related could continue, so IBM still would have to carry the world on its shoulders in its case, but it has broad shoulders. Of course, a SCO win would have a damaging ripple effect in the opposite direction. I find it hard to believe Novell would have registered for the copyrights if it didn't feel confident of its position.

Here's the press release announcing the grounds SCO alleges for their lawsuit:

"Among the allegations in the suit:

* Novell has improperly filed copyright registrations in the United States Copyright Office for UNIX technology covered by SCO's copyrights.

* Novell has made false and misleading public claims that it, and not SCO, owns the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights.

* Novell has made false statements with the intent to cause customers and potential customers to not do business with SCO.

* Novell has attempted, in bad faith, to block SCO's ability to enforce its copyrights.

* Novell's false and misleading representations that it owns the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights has caused SCO irreparable harm to its copyrights, its business, and its reputation.

SCO is asking the judge for both a preliminary and a permanent injunction. And once again they want to have it heard in Utah state court, very much as they tried to arrange with IBM. It turns out Novell is a Delaware corporation with its principal offices in Massachusetts, not Utah, according to SCO's complaint. Whether Novell would like to stay in Utah state court or not is unknown. More here in the Register. You can read the Asset Purchase Agreement as text here. Amendment 2 is here This wasn't the only amendment though. Here is Amendment 1 and here is the Technology License Agreement. Here is the color coded Asset Purchase Agreement with Amendments 1 and 2 merged, so you can see it all together. All the attachment are here.

In other news, Red Hat, which already had a defense fund for programmers, now has one for users as well, the Open Source Now Fund, part of its Open Source Assurance Program:

"A key feature of the Open Source Assurance Program is an Intellectual Property Warranty. The warranty ensures, that in the event that an infringement issue is identified in Red Hat Enterprise Linux software code, Red Hat will replace the infringing code. Red Hat's warranty assures customers that they can use Red Hat Enterprise Linux and related solutions without interruption. The warranty is available for all customers having a valid registered subscription to Red Hat Enterprise Linux or related solutions.

"'Enterprise platform deployments are key investments that should be protected. Red Hat customers have the security of a trusted partner to guarantee a resolution should there be an issue for continued use,' said Bryan Sims, vice president of Business Development at Red Hat. 'We have provided this guarantee to many of our large enterprise customers and we are now extending this guarantee to all customers who use Red Hat Enterprise Linux.'"

And finally, because we all probably need a funny diversion, these folks are asking for entries in the Top 11 Lines of "SCO-owned source code found in Linux". Here are a couple of entries they list, but I am positive we have some among us who can come up with something far more clever:

* -- /** uh, like put code here, dude. */
* -- /** Darl was here! */

Finally, finally, since some are having trouble finding Attachment E, here it is on its own, thanks to Chris Brewer. I have to get some sleep, so here's your homework. Find any source code or binaries helpful to SCO on this list? And what is this a list of? Is it in fact a list of copyrights transferred?:

**************************************

ATTACHMENT E

Selling Copyrights in Product(s) of Business