SCO Grp v. Novell Inc

Filing 682

MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 629 MOTION in Limine No. 2 to Determine that First Amendment Defenses Apply to Slander of Title filed by Plaintiff SCO Group. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Appendix of Unpublished Cases)(Hatch, Brent)

SCO Grp v. Novell Inc

Doc. 682 Att. 1

EXHIBIT 1

Dockets.Justia.com

Page 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION C.A. No. 2:04CV00139

THE SCO GROUP, INC., a Delaware corporation Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant V. NOVELL, INC., a Delaware corporation Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff

-------30(b)(6) Notice to Novell, Inc. Deposition of Joseph A. LaSala, Jr. Wednesday, May 16, 2007 9:41 a.m. Ropes & Gray One International Place Boston, Massachusetts -------Reporter: Deborah Roth, RPR/CSR

093e1ec1-7c4e-42c7-847f-6b865b84be67

Page 66 11:09:14 1 11:09:18 2 11:09:20 3 11:09:21 4 11:09:22 5 11:09:24 6 11:09:31 7 11:09:35 8 11:09:39 9 11:09:42 10 11:09:43 11 11:09:46 12 11:09:46 13 11:09:47 14 11:09:51 15 11:09:54 16 11:09:57 17 11:09:59 18 11:10:04 19 11:10:06 20 11:10:10 21 11:10:12 22 11:10:16 23 11:10:19 24

Page 68
11:11:42 1 11:11:43 2 11:11:46 3 11:11:50 4 11:11:53 5 11:11:59 6 11:12:02 7 11:12:06 8 11:12:13 9 11:12:18 10 11:12:21 11 11:12:23 12 11:12:26 13 11:12:43 14 11:12:50 15 11:12:55 16 11:13:00 17 11:13:00 18 11:13:07 19 11:13:09 20 11:13:10 21 11:13:10 22 11:13:16 23 11:13:27 24

2003 press release, did Novell have a view at the time as to whether it helped it or hurt it in the market? A. I don't think we had a view as to whether or not that helped or hurt. Q. In terms of the various public statements and positions that have been made public, that have come to be made public, as you sit here, does Novell have a view as to whether those public statements have helped it or hurt it in the market or have had no effect? MR. BRAKEBILL: Form. A. It's our view that these statements collectively, once they were made public -and some -- we didn't talk about the January 13th one -- but I think it is our view that they helped us in the marketplace for a variety of reasons. Q. And what are the reasons that you can articulate, as you sit here? A. Well, one reason is that, as we discussed earlier, we think that they contributed to having the effect of calming
Page 67

Q. -- what do you mean? A. As we discussed, there was a lot of concern in the marketplace among certain members of the press, even among the analyst communities, that there was uncertainty about the ownership of the UNIX copyrights, and that's the -- that's what -- those concerns, in my view, were calmed down eventually, and I think part of that -- I wouldn't say all of it, in my opinion -- but part of that was due to these public statements, these statements that we made that eventually became public. Q. Do you have a view as to whether the June 6th, 2003 press release calmed down the marketplace with respect to the copyright transfer at all? MR. BRAKEBILL: Form. A. I don't think it did. Q. Do you think it had the opposite effect in the marketplace? MR. BRAKEBILL: Form. A. I am not sure, but I think it may have given, in part, SCO's reaction to it. Q. When you refer to "SCO's reaction to

Page 69
11:13:32 1 11:13:33 2 11:13:39 3 11:13:44 4 11:13:51 5 11:13:54 6 11:14:03 7 11:14:22 8 11:14:24 9 11:14:26 10 11:14:28 11 11:14:43 12 11:14:44 13 11:14:45 14 11:14:48 15 11:15:09 16 11:15:15 17 11:15:23 18 11:15:25 19 11:15:26 20 11:15:28 21 11:15:32 22 11:15:35 23 11:15:38 24

11:10:24 1 11:10:28 2 11:10:30 3 11:10:32 4 11:10:34 5 11:10:36 6 11:10:41 7 11:10:45 8 11:10:50 9 11:10:55 10 11:11:00 11 11:11:03 12 11:11:11 13 11:11:15 14 11:11:19 15 11:11:22 16 11:11:24 17 11:11:28 18 11:11:31 19 11:11:34 20 11:11:38 21 11:11:40 22 11:11:41 23 11:11:42 24

down the marketplace with respect to concerns that were being expressed to us about the ownership of the UNIX copyrights. We think once all these communications were made public, and I believe this was either in late 2003 or early 2004, that it resulted in some, I will call it, credibility with the OpenSource community for taking on the SCO allegations about LINUX, and those are two that come to mind, two benefits to us, to the company, that come to mind. Q. Did Novell make any of the public statements that we have reviewed today public in order to, in part, gain credibility with the OpenSource community? MR. BRAKEBILL: Form. A. Yeah, that was probably a consideration of ours at the time that these statements were made public, but it wasn't the only consideration. Q. When you say "calm down the marketplace," I think is the phrase you used -A. Yeah.

it," what do you mean? A. Well, I recall that subsequent to that press release being issued, SCO made public references to it and attempted to use it as a confirmation of its point of view with respect to the issue of ownership. Q. I wanted to move to Topic 7, which was "Novell internal communication and communications involving Novell concerning the statements referenced in Topic No. 6? A. Okay. (Document tendered.) MR. NORMAND: Thank you. EXHIBIT NO. 1101 MARKED Q. We have marked as Exhibit 1101 a three-page document titled "SCO 30(b)(6) Topic No. 7 (see also Topic S1)," and, Mr. LaSala, could you or your counsel briefly explain what this document is. MR. BRAKEBILL: This is a chart listing various filings in evidence that Novell has prepared in connection with Mr. LaSala in preparation for his testimony today, and Novell's understanding concerning

18 (Pages 66 to 69)
093e1ec1-7c4e-42c7-847f-6b865b84be67