The latest filing from Novell is really interesting.

Novell is alleging that SCO tried to get Novell to enter into a "scheme"
with SCO to go after license payments from Linux users. What's more,
after Novell declined, SCO THEN asked Novell to transfer the relevent
copyrights. Sure does not sound like SCO really owns any relevent

Novell is also claiming that SCO has failed to uphold its end of the
old-SCO/Novell contract by allowing the details for the Linux licenses
and the Sun/Microsoft licenses to be audited.

Novell is claiming that SCO might owe 100% of the revenue from these

More interestingly, Novell is asking the court to force SCO to put the
revenue from these licenses into trust until the ownership of the
revenue is decided. This would have 2 effects:
1. Eliminate all of SCO's cash
2. Make it impossible for SCO to continue paying SCO's lawyers.

Of course this is just Novell's filing, and who knows how long it will
be before any decisions are made.

On another note, filings in the IBM case make it clear that just before
initiating the IBM lawsuit, SCO knew there was no SysV code imporperly
included in Linux. The Davidson memo is unambiguous about this (and it
clearly reflects further review AFTER Swartz' PRELIMINARY report).