Here's the latest from Roy Schestowitz of BoycottNovell.com:

Novell’s de Icaza: The Man Who Gives GNU/Linux to Microsoft

I've been following this story for a while now. I'm not the first to compare Novell to SCO. It seems fair to compare them without being hyperbolic.

Now that the Novell sideshow appears to be finished, subject to any appeals either side might bring (or even requests for reconsideration), I think it's time to turn our attention back to the main tent, and that would be SCO v. IBM, which will be ramping up in due time.

Novell has filed its Response to Debtors' Second Motion to Extend Exclusivity [PDF], and you could sum up its message to the court like this: Enough already, but if you do grant another extension, please let it be the last. SCO's position is that it can't file a plan until Utah reaches a decision on how much SCO owes Novell. Oh really?

SCO's new position is that UnixWare is just another interchangeable name for UNIX and that SCOsource was about UnixWare, not Unix System V, but here's some more evidence that they are not the same thing and that SCOsource was primarily about UNIX System V. In this article, I'll restrict myself to things SCOfolk used to say about what SCOsource was about. As you will see, before the Honorable Dale Kimball ruled in August that the UNIX copyrights didn't pass from Novell to SCO, SCO said SCOsource was about UNIX System V source code. Now that it's time to pay Novell for those System V licenses, SCO says they were really UnixWare licenses.

In August 2003, a little more than three months after the SCO Group had filed a lawsuit against IBM, seeking damages for alleged breach of contract, I had an email exchange with Blake Stowell, who was then the public relations manager of the former company.

The never ending story surrounding SCO's litigation over alleged copyright infringements contained in Linux as well as the copyrights to Unix has taken yet another twist: The SCO Group, currently subject to proceedings under Chapter 11, is causing a stir as details in relation to their payment obligations emerge.

There appear to be a few parallels between what SCO did and what Microsoft is blustering about. They are both concerned about their so called ownership of intellectual property. They both threatend the suppliers and end users of Linux with lawsuits and fines. They both made deals with certain companies to exempt those companies from their browbeating.