01.26.11

Alleged Attack Site of Darl McBride Gets Suspended

Posted in Novell, SCO, UNIX at 5:47 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Darl McBride of SCO infamy is believed to be playing hide and seek, or perhaps just getting into a legal mess

A scandalous smear site which we wrote about a year and half ago is said to have been suspended:

This is for historians, in case any of them wonder who was behind the scurrilous smear campaign that showed up on SkylineCowboy.com: if you visit today, you get redirected to a WebHost4Life message that says the site has been “suspended”. I guess somebody didn’t pay his bills. The url of the redirection is http://www.webhost4life.com/templates/lightsOut.bml?lightsoutuser=cattleback

Cattleback. The name of the subsidiary that SCO created and transferred a patent to and then sold off in 2007 was, if you recall, Cattleback Holdings. And Darl McBride was alleged to be calling himself “Skyline Cowboy” on that site in litigation about the smear campaign and the “loan” McBride said he made to Mark Robbins, plus lots more, that ended up tossed out of court on a technicality. And here the web host says the user behind SkylineCowboy.com used the nym “cattleback”.

And in other news, SCO is looking to raise $600,000 by selling to unXis:

Yes, same old, same old. SCO proposes to sell to the winning bidder, surprise! unXis again. This time the purchase price is $600,000. A little water under that bridge. The last time unXis tried to buy SCO assets, even the bankruptcy judge wouldn’t let it happen, deciding to appoint a Chapter 11 trustee instead. And you know how well that worked out.

Very dodgy. From the people who call themselves after ranch items nothing can ever come that’s truly shocking. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment Mail Send this to a friend

From UNIX Battles to .NET Battles

Posted in GNU/Linux, Microsoft, Mono, Novell, Patents, Red Hat, Ubuntu, UNIX at 11:16 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Looking for reasons to sue Linux…

Summary: Wayne Gray’s case against Novell proceeds and opinions about Mono continue to come

Novell’s disputes over the UNIX trademark/copyrights withstanding (Gray vs Novell^*, not just SCO), there are many questions arising because of Novell’s passage of nearly 1,000 patents to CPTN, which Microsoft is heading [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7].

The key question is no longer just who gets UNIX copyrights. There is another question about patents now, as Novell helps feed the direct competition of GNU/Linux. It even puts this competition right inside the body of GNU/Linux (e.g. Mono) and the leader in this area, Red Hat, repels it continually. “Mono Vs Fedora: More Facts, less opinions” is a new post worth reading. To quote some bits:

I, and looks like many of Fedora’s contributors too, think like Free Software Foundation. Make a system Mono dependent is a gratuitous risk, because it’s based in Microsoft tecnology, who have patents over this tecnology. Must I say any thing else?

If you said yes, very well, I’ll say more. Why will you use your enemies’ pencil if you have yours? Why will you eat the apple of your neighbor, if in your yard there’s a lot of them? You’ll assume the risk of being without the pencil some day or hungry, this is a fact. You have no control about your enemies’ pencil or about the apples of your neighbors. If you begin to write better than your enemie, you’re using theirs pencil, and he’s able to stop you from writing. If you eat much of the yours neighbor’s apple, he’ll not give it to you anymore.

I’m trying to say that we lose many applications like Banshee, Tomboy and many others if Microsoft simply use the power of the patents it acquires. And can you imagine the size of the problem if in this day your system is stuck with that language.

We recently mentioned how Fedora drove away Mono boosters. Canonical ought to do the same because the next release comes with at least 3 Mono-based applications. █
_____
^* This was covered by Groklaw before (e.g. here), but it is still going on.

Permalink Leave Your Comment Mail Send this to a friend

01.22.11

SCO, CPTN, and UNIX

Posted in Microsoft, Novell, Patents, SCO, UNIX at 12:37 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

CaPTaiN Microsoft

Summary: Novell’s UNIX is moving to other hands and there is insufficient confidence that it will stay in safe hands

GROKLAW is down at the moment (has been down for a while), but it showed that SCO’s bankruptcy hearing had been delayed yet again (it happens all the time, repeatedly [1, 2, 3, 4]). It is becoming a source of comedy and ridicule working to the detriment of the legal system.

The SCO case has just proceeded as expected (covered a few days ago). Groklaw has some reports:

Our reporter at the oral argument in SCO’s appeal of its loss to Novell before the jury and before the judge in Utah District Court today has now filed his reports. It sounds from the reports like it went quite well for Novell, although we can’t be sure until the order issues, which could be months.

Would it amaze you if I told you that the report shows that SCO raised an entirely new argument today for the first time? That’s a no-no. Well, they are The Amazings. Also, SCO’s version of what the 10th Circuit ruling was after its first appeal is … well, read it for yourself, and you will see why the judges kept correcting SCO today.

Earlier today we found some articles which speak about Groklaw’s interpretation of SCO, Novell, Microsoft, and AttachMSFT [sic]. Groklaw opined that AttachMSFT may sell UNIX and/or the remainder of Novell’s patents to some entity which is hostile towards Linux. This relates to the patents passed by Novell to CPTN — a serious subject which was previously covered in [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. It is a sort of cartel, but there are more such cartels which are strongly connected to Microsoft and help mimic in an aggressive fashion something like OIN (mind the new press release “OIN Licensing Strength Continues in Fourth Quarter as OIN Announces Expanded Effort on Licensing the Linux User Community”), where their goal is to attack companies and attack Linux, unlike the OIN which merely defends something.

Erika Morphy from ECT has this recent article about it, predating the FSF’s complaint which was announced at its site as follows:

The Open Source Initiative (OSI) and Free Software Foundation (FSF) have sent a joint position statement to the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), urging it to scrutinize Novell’s proposal to sell patents to the newly-formed CPTN Holdings. Both organizations believe that CPTN Holdings may use these patents to attack free, libre, and open source (FLOSS) software. The full text of the statement follows.

Simon Phipps’ post was also aired in a Red hat site and the OSI’s announcement came from a Red Hat employee (both of them are in the OSI too). The main point to reiterate here is that CPTN may get more than it bargained for, depending on what AttachMSFT decides at a later date. UNIX too may be up for grabs, so something in this relationship needs to be derailed. Just about every single body/company with vested interests in Free/open source software wants CPTN to be starved or decommissioned. Coincidence? █

Permalink Leave Your Comment Mail Send this to a friend

01.19.11

OIN is Very Different From CPTN and UNIX Risk is Revisited

Posted in Microsoft, OIN, Patents, UNIX at 4:46 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Amiga UNIX

Summary: OIN cannot and would not sue, unlike Microsoft and its shells/pools; CPTN and AttachMSFT [sic] would be bad guardians for Novell’s virtual assets

THERE IS a new FUD/spin pattern and some news regarding CPTN [1, 2, 3, 4]. Owing to messages from Microsoft mobbyists, we realise that they currently try to spin OIN as an illegal thing. Now that Nexenta Systems joins the OIN [1, 2] which continues this amazing pace of over one joiner per week, it sure seems like there is stronger defence for Linux. And yes, OIN is defensive and unlike companies which claim their portfolios to be defensive, OIN has no shareholders and it cannot be sold. The latest announcement says:

Open Invention Network (OIN), the company formed to enable and protect Linux, today extended its community with the signing of Nexenta as a licensee. By becoming a licensee, Nexenta has joined the growing list of organizations that recognize the importance of leveraging the Open Invention Network to further spur open source innovation.

The mobbyists are trying to compare OIN to CPTN, which is of course laughable. The OSI has complained about CPTN and so has the FSFE in Europe (this one is the official statement). Meanwhile, at least two Microsoft/SCO boosters — Maureen O’Gara and Microsoft Florian — rave about the Microsoft patent cartel (CPTN) not being stopped by the European Commission. It should be added that trying to point a finger at OIN as total spin possibly means that they have something to conceal. It’s effective means of diversion.

IDG has just published this new report from CPTN, from which Groklaw quotes:

Additional details have emerged regarding the more than 800 patents Novell is selling to the Microsoft-led consortium CPTN Holdings for US$450 million, about two months after the deal was first announced.

[...]

While preparing to close the deal, Novell discovered that “19 of the patents to be sold to CPTN pursuant to the Patent Purchase Agreement are lapsed Australian, German or Austrian patent applications rather than issued Australian, German or Austrian patents.” Novell also found that one of the issued patents was referenced twice, it adds.

“As a result, if the patent sale occurs, CPTN would purchase 861 issued patents and pending patent applications and 20 lapsed patent applications,” the filing states.

CPTN has proposed that it be given additional issued patents and pending patent applications in Novell’s portfolio, in order to “unite certain patent families,” “compensate CPTN for the reduction in issued patents,” as well as other considerations. “Attachmate has informed us that they currently do not intend to consent to our changing the list of assigned patents under the Patent Purchase Agreement,” Novell said.

“Is this some kind of hustle,” Groklaw asks, “A Microsoft-organized consortium asks for Unix patents, which is what we heard Attachmate would get, and the answer is Attachmate won’t consent “currently”? Uh oh.” Groklaw later did a whole article about it, repeating some of the above:

The 882 patents turn out not to be 882 after all. There are only 861, and the Microsoft consortium would like some of Attachmate’s to make up for the few they’ve discovered don’t exist… Wait. What? Attachmate was to get only patents and copyrights associated with Novell’s UNIX and Linux businesses, right? Microsoft wants some of those? Like, um… some UNIX copyrights perchance? Novell says Attachmate won’t “currently” consent.

What about later? Is this some kind of hustle?

Yes, this is what we said about UNIX at AttachMSFT a long time ago, way back in November. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment Mail Send this to a friend

01.18.11

SCO vs. Novell Appeal Two Days Away, SCO Asset Sale Last Friday

Posted in Novell, SCO, UNIX at 1:55 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: The remaining assets of SCO are being sold (e.g. support for remnant of its customers) and the Novell case will resume shortly

The SCO case is not over just yet. This serves as a cautionary lesson regarding the litigation system (“legal system” sounds too good), which favours persistence and works quite well for lawyers (the longer the process, the more they will be paid).

Since we mentioned Groklaw in the previous post, it seems reasonable to mention its updates regarding SCO bills and SCO’s latest sale of business assets (said to have taken place 4 days):

SCO wants to have another auction. The first one was a fizzle, or so they seem to be indicating, even though at the hearing back in August on SCO’s desire to hold the first auction, they represented they had bidders lined up already. But no sale.

This isn’t just another way to delay until after the January 20th oral argument in SCO’s appeal of its loss to Novell, is it? Or avoid the inevitable discussion about defaulting on the Yarro loan, handing over the keys, and turning out the lights once and for all on SCO as we knew it? And what should us normal folks hope for in such a scenario as this?

That we knew The Rest of the Story of what’s going on behind the scenes, methinks.

The above gives away the date of January twentieth, which Groklaw is going to aim for and cover:

Synchronize your watches, and if you need to book a flight, now you know the day to arrange for. SCO is listed last for that day, but call the court if you plan to attend to verify closer to the date.

SCO is eternally in bankruptcy, as Groklaw helps show: “SCO has filed its monthly operating reports for October in the bankruptcy farce. Here are the September MORs, if you’d like to compare.”

Here is a new press release regarding a book with SCO vs. Novell in it:

Tenth Circuit’s The SCO Group, Inc. v. Novell, Inc.; Retirement Group v. Galante and Dowell v. Biosense Webster, Inc., from the California Court of Appeal

It will be interesting to see what AttachMSFT [sic] does regarding this whole case, which has cost Novell a lot of money (Novell really wants UNIX for itself). █

Permalink Leave Your Comment Mail Send this to a friend

12.17.10

UNIX Battles Carry on Whilst OpenSUSE is Being Lost

Posted in GNU/Linux, Novell, OpenSUSE, SCO, UNIX at 2:00 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Novell’s assets are being blown in the wind amid transition into new hands and accordingly new priorities

Groklaw continues to cover the SCO case, still neglecting to mention the possibility that — just like Novell sold its patents — AttachMSFT [sic] will sell UNIX, which was worth a lot of money to Novell (that’s why it fought against SCO, for shareholders). Pamela Jones recalls the early days of this case when she writes:

We also have transcripts of all the pre-trial hearings going back to 2003 in all the various SCO litigations, SCO v. IBM, SCO v. AutoZone, SCO v. Daimler-Chrysler, the SCO bankruptcy, and Red Hat v. SCO, all on that same page, as well as in SCO v. Novell, so you can deep-dive if you’d like to and follow the thread from the beginning to the end. Both sections have links to PDFs, text versions, and Groklaw’s reports from the courts. I hope you find it useful. I’m positive it will be useful for historians and law professors wanting to use the SCO saga to teach their students to have it all organized in one easier-to-find place. We’re still working on an Exhibits section, which we’ll add when it’s done, listing all the exhibits used at trial that we can identify from the transcripts and showing when they were introduced.

Novell’s new press release speaks about SUSE only in the context of appliances and Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols talks about it too. A few weeks ago we wrote about Novell throwing out there all that’s left in the pipeline before AttachMSFT [sic] takes over, probably as it may axe some of this portfolio. It’s a rocky and uncertain time for Novell employees. Therefore, the timing of this press release makes strategic sense. It helps hide reality by quantifying the wrong items, easily neglecting for example the declining impact of OpenSUSE, which may or may not qualify as a product (spin versus reality).

According to OpenSUSE’s community manager Jos Poortvliet and the OpenSUSE Web site, Alan Clark replaces the recently-departing Michael Löffler [1, 2] as OpenSUSE Board Chairman:

As you know, Michael Loeffler has left the openSUSE Board to pursue new opportunities, we are sad to see him go and wish him well. With his departure and with the upcoming Board elections, we have a desire to see a new Chairperson selected. The election rules state that the Chairperson be appointed by Novell and yesterday Markus Rex, General Manager of Novells Open Platform Solutions, presented Alan Clark to us as the new Chairperson.

Susan Linton continues to write about OpenSUSE, which other than those posts of hers hardly receives any press coverage. Linton claims:

Ubuntu takes a lot of punches from time to time for its marketing and even its interface. Some feel Ubuntu is dumbed down and oversimplified, while many others think it’s innovative and user-friendly. Where ever you fall in the debate, one developer thinks some elements of Ubuntu should land into openSUSE. In fact, he has packaged up and pushed them to openSUSE:Contrib.

Stephan Kulow explains how the project uses power, having previously encountered issues of neglect from Novell. These good folks should just fork it and move away from AttachMSFT [sic], which is likely to do to OpenSUSE what SCOracle [sic] did to OpenSolaris and now appears to be doing to OpenOffice. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment Mail Send this to a friend

11.29.10

Novell’s Last Week – Part V: AttachMSFT Might Sell UNIX

Posted in Microsoft, Novell, SCO, UNIX at 10:38 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Amiga UNIX

Unix Summary: Novell clarifies that UNIX was not sold to Microsoft, but it is being passed over to AttachMSFT, which has little or no reason to keep it

Linux Australia says that SUSE is safe from Novell’s patent sale to Microsoft, but what about all the other distributions and companies? As Groklaw resumes covering more news from SCO vs. Novell [1, 2] one has to wonder if AttachMSFT will even bother with this case. HP shows up in this case now, as well:

HP has now joined the growing group of companies reserving its rights in the SCO bankrupty regarding SCO’s Notice of Cure Amounts in connection with SCO’s hoped-for sale of its assets. But its reason is different: it can’t find all the contracts SCO says it has with HP, and neither can SCO.

This is a case which does not matter so much anymore. Think about it. It matters a lot less because even if Novell wins, Novell is a goner. Is UNIX safer in AttachMSFT’s hands?

One blogger asks: “Is Open Source under Siege? Let’s Hope Not!”

In the last months, Oracle has stepped away from the open software community, focusing more on short-term monetizing of the open source products they have acquired from Sun Microsystems. There are speculations that Red Hat might have sold out the wider Open Source community in favor of its own customers in a sealed patent infringement settlement, which might have a similar effect as Novell’s deal with Microsoft which has let to calls to boycott Novell.

Now, Novell has been acquired by Attachmate, apparently backed by Microsoft, with the side-effect that at least 882 of Novell’s patents will be transferred to a Microsoft backed consortium.

As we stated earlier, UNIX is not the main problem here (not in the short term anyway) because as John Dragoon clarified when it became a PR disaster, “Novell [is] to retain UNIX copyrights” (immediate coverage from The H):

Novell has announced that it will be retaining the copyrights to the UNIX operating system. In the wake of the acquisition of Novell by Attachmate, which included a sale of intellectual property to CPTN, a Microsoft led consortium, there were questions raised over whether that intellectual property included the copyrights to the UNIX operating system.

This was also covered in [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]. As one site put it very concisely, “Novell has said that the copyright to its Unix operating system will remain with Attachmate Corporation after the merger, and not go to the Microsoft led CPTN Holdings.” Well, but who controls AttachMSFT?

Charles Schulz from LibreOffice wrote: “This is a security announcement: #Novell still owns the #Unix copyright. The kept the nukes but sold the bioweapons?”

Novell’s PR blog has generally gone quite silent and posted very little [1, 2] compared to its weekly average (the PR staff is probably busy somewhere else). Red Hat’s Jan Wildeboer tells Glyn Moody: “IMHO #AttachMSFT will offer SUSE+UNIX as a package soonish to $BUYER.” That is a possibility too. James Turner says that patents are still the main problem to worry about:

Life is definitely less clear now that Novell is being consumed by Attachmate. For one thing, part of the deal involves transferring a big chunk of Novell IP to a company fronting for Microsoft. Hopefully, it’s just the normal collection of garbage software patents every big company seems to end up with, and not anything that would provide an avenue of attack against Linux.

Groklaw looks deeper as it tries to understand the nature of this deal:

Attachmate acquires Novell, then it combines Longview and Novell and then the combo is called Novell going forward. That’s what I read, anyway. So there will still be an Attachmate parent company and a Novell subsidiary, I guess, going forward, and Novell will hold the UNIX copyrights.

Anyway, here is Novell’s press release (spin) and some of the remaining coverage, the full extent of which is hundreds if not thousands of links.

In the next two parts we will look at investor lawsuits and proprietary software from Novell. █

Permalink Leave Your Comment Mail Send this to a friend

11.22.10

Hovsepian’s Mission Accomplished – Novell Decommissioned, Microsoft Gets the Patents and Maybe UNIX

Posted in Microsoft, Novell, Patents, UNIX at 10:15 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“Our partnership with Microsoft continues to expand.”

–Ron Hovsepian, Novell CEO

“[The partnership with Microsoft is] going very well insofar as we originally agreed to co-operate on three distinct projects and now we’re working on nine projects and there’s a good list of 19 other projects that we plan to co-operate on.”

–Ron Hovsepian, Novell CEO

Summary: Novell’s sale marks a special day of Novell coverage, probably the last of its kind

TECHRIGHTS will interrupt its normal flow of news today in order to concentrate solely on Novell. Just over 4 years ago Boycott Novell was launched and today Novell gives up and sells the business. It’s a special day which in many ways provides closure to a struggle I’ve been part of for more than 4 years. Today we all reach a milestone which many of us have been waiting for (not because it’s necessarily beneficial). It’s primarily about software patents, which are the #1 problem software freedom is facing.

Our latest software patents coverage (Microsoft’s last resort) will have to be delayed until later in the week. We reserve lengthy coverage for a later post and instead start with this press release (spin warning). Also see “Novell sold to Attachmate” (at LWN), which has not any comments yet.

Jan Wildeboer from Red Hat has just told me: “check CPTN holdings – they will buy certain IP assets acc to [the press release] [...]”

Separately he wrote: “Seems MSFT spinoff buys Novell “IPR”, rest goes to attachmate.”

Glyn Moody quotes Novell as stating: “sale of certain intellectual property assets to consortium of technology cos organized by Microsoft” (Moody adds: “not good (via @jdub)”).

Wildeboer concludes for the time being with: “So now MSFT own the copyright of UNIX? Interesting” (this was RTed many times in Identi.ca).

We warned about this and explained that Novell had become just a tool of Microsoft. Phoronix chose the headline “Novell’s Finally Sold: Going To Attachmate & Microsoft”. More later. █

WALTHAM, Mass., Nov. 22, 2010 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Novell, Inc. (Nasdaq: NOVL), the leader in intelligent workload management, today announced that it has entered into a definitive merger agreement under which Attachmate Corporation would acquire Novell for $6.10 per share in cash in a transaction valued at approximately $2.2 billion. Attachmate Corporation is owned by an investment group led by Francisco Partners, Golden Gate Capital and Thoma Bravo. Novell also announced it has entered into a definitive agreement for the concurrent sale of certain intellectual property assets to CPTN Holdings LLC, a consortium of technology companies organized by Microsoft Corporation, for $450 million in cash, which cash payment is reflected in the merger consideration to be paid by Attachmate Corporation.

The $6.10 per share consideration represents a premium of 28% to Novell’s closing share price on March 2, 2010, the last trading day prior to the public disclosure of Elliott Associates, L.P.’s proposal to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Novell for $5.75 per share and a 9% premium to Novell’s closing stock price on November 19, 2010.

“After a thorough review of a broad range of alternatives to enhance stockholder value, our Board of Directors concluded that the best available alternative was the combination of a merger with Attachmate Corporation and a sale of certain intellectual property assets to the consortium,” said Ron Hovsepian, president and CEO of Novell. “We are pleased that these transactions appropriately recognize the value of Novell’s relationships, technology and solutions, while providing our stockholders with an attractive cash premium for their investment.”

Mr. Hovsepian continued, “We also believe the transaction with Attachmate Corporation will deliver important benefits to Novell’s customers, partners and employees by providing opportunities for building on Novell’s brands, innovation and market leadership.”

“We are very excited about this transaction as it greatly complements our existing portfolio,” said Jeff Hawn, chairman and CEO of Attachmate Corporation. “Novell has an established record of innovation, impressive technology and brand assets, and a leading ecosystem of partnerships and talented employees. The addition of Novell to our Attachmate and NetIQ businesses will enhance the spectrum of solutions we can offer to customers. We fully support Novell’s commitment to its customers and we look forward to continuing to invest for the benefit of Novell’s customers and partners.”

Attachmate Corporation plans to operate Novell as two business units: Novell and SUSE; and will join them with its other holdings, Attachmate and NetIQ.

Attachmate Corporation’s acquisition of Novell is subject to customary closing conditions, including regulatory approvals and clearance under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, and is also conditioned upon the closing of the proposed sale of certain intellectual property assets to CPTN Holdings LLC. In addition, the transaction is subject to approval by Novell’s stockholders. The sale of the intellectual property assets to the consortium is subject to customary closing conditions, including regulatory approvals and clearance under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, and is also conditioned upon the closing of the merger with Attachmate Corporation. Novell currently expects these transactions to close in the first quarter of 2011.

J.P. Morgan is serving as financial advisor and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP is acting as legal advisor to Novell. Credit Suisse and RBC Capital Markets are serving as financial advisors and Jones Day is acting as legal advisor to Attachmate Corporation.

About Novell

Novell, Inc. (Nasdaq: NOVL), a leader in intelligent workload management, helps organizations securely deliver and manage computing services across physical, virtual and cloud computing environments. Novell helps customers reduce the cost, complexity, and risk associated with their IT systems through our solutions for identity and security, systems management, collaboration and Linux-based operating platforms. With its infrastructure software and ecosystem of partnerships, Novell integrates mixed IT environments, allowing people and technology to work as one. For more information, visit www.novell.com.

About Attachmate Corporation

Attachmate Corporation, owned by an investment group led by Francisco Partners, Golden Gate Capital and Thoma Bravo, enables IT organizations to extend mission critical services and assures they are managed, secure and compliant. Principal holdings include Attachmate (www.attachmate.com) and NetIQ (www.netiq.com).

Forward-Looking Statements

This communication, and all oral statements made regarding the subject matter of this communication, contain statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are based on the current expectations and beliefs of Novell and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements. Any statements that are not statements of historical fact (such as statements containing the words “believes,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “expects,” “estimates” and similar expressions) should be considered forward-looking statements. Among others, the following risks, uncertainties and other factors could cause actual results to differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements: (i) the risk that the proposed sale of intellectual property assets and the proposed merger may not be consummated in a timely manner, if at all; (ii) the risk that the definitive merger agreement may be terminated in circumstances that require Novell to pay Attachmate Corporation a termination fee of $60 million; (iii) risks related to the diversion of management’s attention from Novell’s ongoing business operations; (iv) risks regarding the failure of Attachmate Corporation to obtain the necessary financing to complete the merger; (v) the effect of the announcement of the sale of the intellectual property assets or the merger on Novell’s business relationships (including, without limitation, partners and customers), operating results and business generally; and (vi) risks related to obtaining the requisite consents to the sale of the intellectual property assets and the merger, including, without limitation, the timing (including possible delays) and receipt of regulatory approvals from various governmental entities (including any conditions, limitations or restrictions placed on these approvals) and the risk that one or more governmental entities may deny approval. Additional risk factors that may affect future results are contained in Novell’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are available at the SEC’s website http://www.sec.gov. Because forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, actual results and events may differ materially from results and events currently expected by Novell. Novell expressly disclaims any obligation or undertaking to update or revise any forward-looking statements contained herein to reflect any change of expectations with regard thereto or to reflect any change in events, conditions or circumstances.

Additional Information About the Merger and Where to Find it

In connection with the proposed merger, Novell intends to file relevant materials with the SEC, including a proxy statement. Investors and security holders of Novell are urged to read these documents (if and when they become available) and any other relevant documents filed with the SEC, as well as any amendments or supplements to those documents, because they will contain important information about Novell, the proposed sale of intellectual property assets, the proposed merger and the parties to these proposed transactions. Investors and security holders may obtain these documents (and any other documents filed by Novell and Attachmate Corporation with the SEC) free of charge at the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov. In addition, the documents filed with the SEC by Novell may be obtained free of charge by directing such request to: Novell Investor Relations at 1-800-317-3195 or from the investor relations website portion of Novell’s website at http://www.novell.com/company/ir/. Investors and security holders are urged to read the proxy statement and the other relevant materials when they become available before making any voting or investment decision with respect to the proposed merger.

Novell and its directors and executive officers may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from Novell’s stockholders in respect of the proposed merger. Information regarding Novell’s directors and executive officers is contained in Novell’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009, its proxy statement for its 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, dated February 26, 2010, and subsequent filings which Novell has made with the SEC. Stockholders may obtain additional information about the directors and executive officers of Novell and their respective interests with respect to the proposed merger by security holdings or otherwise, which may be different than those of Novell’s stockholders generally, by reading the definitive proxy statement and other relevant documents regarding the proposed merger, when filed with the SEC. Each of these documents is, or will be, available as described above.

SOURCE Novell, Inc.
Back to top