SCO Austria's Web Site Back Up

Friday, September 19 2003 @ 07:25 AM EDT

Contributed by: PJ

Thorsten sends us an update on the situation in Austria:

"update for SCO Germany vs. Austria's FFS:, which was shut down on 10th Sept, is back online. But now it's pointing to the clean site instead of! is also pointing to Is SCO Germany getting cold feet and rather not risk paying another fine?!" Here's hoping.

Thorsten also asks how Submissions work. It's like this.

You suggest, and I decide. If you write something masterful, I'll probably want to print it, so if you go to all that trouble, please let me know if you want your name used or not, and if so, if you want to be described in any way (meaning type of work, affiliation, etc. Let's stick to the basics, guys. No marriage proposals in Submissions, please. ; ) It'd be a good idea to submit the idea first, and then I can let you know if it's something I'd like to have done. You don't have to do that, but it'll spare you wasting time, if the subject itself isn't something I want to include on the site.

Make sure what you submit is full of checkable facts, please. Not just 2 AM thoughts. Not that they aren't interesting, I'm sure.

If you don't want your name used, that's fine too. And just sending me urls by themselves is fine too. Some of my best ideas for articles come from you. And that's the truth.

One submission in the box asks if I'll explain what is going on in Utah. The court lists an Order. Here's what it means:

IBM asked to depose Canopy and you'll remember they asked a lot of questions. Objections have been filed. It's common that the person or company being asked the questions objects to some or all of the questions. Somebody has to decide if the question(s) need to be answered or not, and that means a judge has to do it. The uber-judge may be too busy to listen to how one lawyer can't make it on Tuesday and needs the deposition changed to Thursday, blah blah, so a more minor judge sometimes gets to do that.

Details I can't give as to who is objecting and to what, because I'd have to be there in person to read the papers filed on that to know. But the issue has been delegated to another judge to handle just non-earthshaking matters, apparently, judging from the list on Pacer, and all the pukey details that precede the actual trial will be going through her.

Bear in mind that I'm going by what I see on the list, and as we saw earlier when it listed Canopy as a party, the clerk got it wrong. That happens sometimes. A lot.

So, now you know how Submissions work. I had to find out too. I'm new here myself. One more thing: if your submission needs to be seen fast, it'd be a good idea to email me to prompt me to look in the suggestion box.