And what's a better metric to evaluate a case's merit than the way parties are behaving and their rhetoric? Maybe the conclusion of several other financial analyst groups? Now that's extremely professional... . I thought an "analyst" is supposed to actually have a clue on the matter, not just jump in and project his vision based on the above arguments. What about the technical part, which is the core of the case? . SCO's actions don't make sense, neither at a "common sense" level nor at a technical level. From those perspectives they are outrageously bogus, insulting. But somewhere in between (let's call it "analyst/lawyer level"), things suddenly start to make sense and the case appears to have merit. This never seizes to amaze me! . I can't believe there's not a single mention of the many fallacies in this case. SCO's been distributing GPLed software for years and they still are while at the same time claiming that very license to be invalid! Isn't THAT bothering you, Rob? I guess not, Darl's rhetoric is more important... . fm