Judge Robert C. Jones has set a date for oral argument on SCO's recent Motion to Amend/Correct Complaint in the AutoZone case, and he has done so prior to AutoZone having time to file a response. The date is set for August 24 in Las Vegas at 9 AM. I surely hope some of you can attend. Here's the docket entry...

SCO has been a busy bee, filing a motion to amend/correct its complaint against AutoZone and a motion to amend/correct the protective order in SCO v. IBM.

Most of the attorneys who are listed as being involved in SCO v. AutoZone have been told that by the court they are in violation of Special Order 109, which is a requirement to participate in the electronic filing system.

SCO sent the AutoZone judge a letter [PDF], which leaves me in little doubt that SCO yearns to ramp up the AutoZone case, which SCO tells the judge is in part about OpenServer.

I thought you might like to see the actual filings in the Viacom v. YouTube/Google litigation. In April, Viacom filed a First Amended Complaint [PDF] and YouTube/Google has now filed its Answer [PDF]. If you'd like to see the original complaint and answer from 2007, for comparison purposes, we have it as text here on Groklaw.

The parties in SCO v. Novell have, as promised, filed their proposed jury instructions. And Novell has filed a new motion regarding letting the jury know about prior court rulings. SCO has, Novell says, once again crossed the line, despite the court's admonition not to do so. In its examination of Dr.

A SCO Trustee, Edward Cahn, wishes to end the case against AutoZone, but the Linux lawsuit stays for now, with or without McBride

I'm talking about Novell's November 2004 antitrust complaint against Microsoft, filed shortly after settling an different, OS-related, complaint with Microsoft for $536 million. You can view the second complaint, which I'll call the "WordPerfect" complaint, here [PDF] on GrokLaw.

Memorandum in support of SCO’S expidited motion to enforce the Court's Amended Scheduling Order dated June 10, 2004