[clug] CSIRO gets SCO's threatening letter SEC: UNCLASSIFIED

[Robert Thorsby]

IANAL, but I think that CSIRO should do the following:

1. Advise SCO that CSIRO has had no dealings with SCO and request SCO 
to provide details of the Agreement under which it (SCO) claims the 
right to make ANY demands at all and also to provide details as to how 
SCO came to be the party currently entitled to take action under any 
such Agreement.

2. Advise Novell that according to CSIRO's researches it (Novell) may 
be the successor in title to whatever Agreement SCO says applies under 
(1) and request Novell to confirm that it (Novell) has assigned all its 
(Novell's) right title and interest under the Agreement to SCO (or 
SCO's predecessor in title).

3. When SCO and Novell make conflicting claims [i.e., when BOTH claim 
to be the one true God] CSIRO should file a motion for a Declaratory 
Judgment in the appropriate Oz court (probably Federal Court) citing 
both parties as defendants.

The beauty of this is that Novell and SCO have to fight it out in an Oz 
court as to which of them (if any) has what rights under the relevant 
bits of paper -- and all CSIRO's legal fees (which, of course, will be 
substantial) have to be met by the loser (i.e., SCO or Novell).

These cases tend to be hugely expensive for the losing party.

[Naturally, when this court case is over, if SCO wins then CSIRO can 
start challenging the breadth of SCO's demands under the Agreement].

Robert Thorsby