Since I've seen a couple Monty Python quotes, here's a sketch retooled to fit SCO :) Hope you enjoy :)

SCO's Verbal Argument

(a judge takes his seat)

Judge: Good Morning.

SCO Lawyer: Good Morning, your honor!

Judge: Ah, thank you.

SCO Lawyer: What can I do for you, sir?

Judge: Well, I called this hearing to hear your reasons why you are suing IBM. More specifically, to hear what kind of evidence you have against IBM.

SCO Lawyer: Ah, evidence!

Judge: In a nutshell, yes. So I thought to myself "a bit of verbal argument from SCO might do this case good and shed some light on what this is all about."

SCO Lawyer: Come again?

Judge: I want to know about the code.

SCO Lawyer: Oh, I thought you were complaining about Mr. McBride's open letters!

Judge: Oh, heaven forbid - I find those laced with humorous snippets of verbose prose!

SCO Lawyer: Sorry?

Judge: The letters are funny.

SCO Lawyer: So he can go on typing then, can he?

Judge: Most certainly! Now then, some evidence please, my good man.

SCO Lawyer: Certainly, sir. What would you like?

Judge: Well, eh, how about some SMP code violations?

SCO Lawyer: I'm afraid we couldn't actually find any, sir.

Judge: Oh, never mind, how about JFS?

SCO Lawyer: I'm afraid we won't have that till after discovery from IBM.

Judge: Tish tish. No matter. Well, stout lawyer, let's see what you have about NUMA.

SCO Lawyer: Ah! It's still waiting on someone to put it on a cd, we were expecting it this morning.

Judge: It's not my lucky day, is it? Aah, RCU then?

SCO Lawyer: Sorry, sir.

Judge: Memory Allocation?

SCO Lawyer: Normally, sir, yes. Today the courier's van broke down.

Judge: Ah. USB?

SCO Lawyer: Sorry.

Judge: LPT ports drivers? Serial ports?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: Any evidence about IDE drivers?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: SCSI?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: SATA?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: Floating point emulation?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: Video drivers?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: Keyboard drivers? Vi, emacs, sendmail, x-windows, man pages, bash shell?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: "Tux Racer", perhaps?

SCO Lawyer: Ah! We have evidence for that, yessir.

Judge: (suprised) You do! Excellent.

SCO Lawyer: Yes sir. The media it's on tho, it's ...ah...it's a bit smudged up...

Judge: Oh, I don't mind a bit of a reading challenge.

SCO Lawyer: Well...It's very smudged, actually, sir.

Judge: No matter. Fetch hither the evidence of IBM's wrong doing!

SCO Lawyer: I ... think it's a bit more smudged than you'd like, sir.

Judge: I don't care how ****ing smudged it is. Hand it over will all speed.

SCO Lawyer: Ooooooooooohhhh...!

Judge: What now?

SCO Lawyer: The paralegal's eaten it.

Judge: Has he.

SCO Lawyer: She, sir.

(Pause)

Judge: Grep?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: Gzip?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: You... do have some evidence, don't you?

SCO Lawyer: (brightly) Of course, sir. It's a lawsuit, sir. We've got...

Judge: No no... don't tell me. I'm keen to guess.

SCO Lawyer: Fair enough.

Judge: Uuuuuh, Gimp?

SCO Lawyer: Yes?

Judge: Ah, well, let's see the evidence on Gimp!

SCO Lawyer: Oh! I thought you were talking to me, sir. Mr. Gimp, that's my name.

(Pause)

Judge: KDE?

SCO Lawyer: Uh, not as such.

Judge: Uuh, GNOME?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: Ximian?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: OpenOffice?

SCO Lawyer: Not today, sir, no.

(Pause)

Judge: Aah, how about how you found your evidence then?

SCO Lawyer: Well, we weren't expecting to have to answer that.

Judge: Weren't expecting?... It's one of the single most important pieces of discovery!

SCO Lawyer: Not according to SCO, sir.

Judge: And just what is the most important piece, "according to SCO"?

SCO Lawyer: Our MIT analysts.

Judge: Is it?

SCO Lawyer: It's our number one piece of evidence, sir!

Judge: All right. Okay. 'Are they here today?' he asked, expecting the answer "no".

SCO Lawyer: I'll have a look, sir ... nnnnnnnnnnnnnnno.

Judge: It's not much of a lawsuit, is it?

SCO Lawyer: Finest money can buy!

Judge: (annoyed) Explain the logic underlying that conclusion, please.

SCO Lawyer: Well, it's so full of legal jardon, sir!

Judge: It's certainly uncontaminated by the burden of evidence...

SCO Lawyer: (brightly) You haven't asked me about Pine, sir.

Judge: Would it be worth it?

SCO Lawyer: Could be....

Judge: Have you - (to McBride)SHUT THAT DAMN WORD PROCESSOR OFF!

SCO Lawyer: Told you sir....

Judge: (slowly) Have you any evidence that IBM misappropriated SCO UNIX code into the PINE e-mail program?

SCO Lawyer: No.

Judge: Figures. Predictable, really I suppose. It was an act of purest optimism to have posed the question in the first place. Tell me:

SCO Lawyer: Yes sir?

Judge: (Deliberately) Have you in fact got any evidence against IBM at all?

SCO Lawyer: Yes, sir.

Judge: Really?

(Pause)

SCO Lawyer: No. Not really, sir.

Judge: You haven't.

SCO Lawyer: No sir. Not a scrap. I was deliberately wasting your time, sir.

Judge: Well I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to sentence you to death.

SCO Lawyer: Right-Oh, sir.

(The Baliff takes the SCO Lawyer out of the courtroom . A few minutes later, a distant scream can be heard while the lights in the courtroom dim momentarily)

Judge: What a senseless waste of human life.

(derived as a parody from Monty Python's 'Cheese Shop' sketch)

--Brent

David Boies: Sorry to have kept you waiting, but I'm afraid my lawsuits have become rather silly over these past few months, so it takes so long to get to the court. Now... what are we doing again?

Darl McBride: Uhh, well... I have got a silly lawsuit against Linux and I'd like to hire shyster lawyers to help me develop it.

David Boies: I see. May I see this silly lawsuit of yours?

Darl McBride: Well, I'm going to sue IBM for working on Linux.

David Boies: I see. That's it, is it?

Darl McBride: Ah, well, yes, that's it.

David Boies: Yes, yes, yes. It's not particularly silly, is it?

Darl McBride: Well, uh... umm... it's part of my strategy of going forward...

David Boies: I mean, it's just not silly. It's a straightforward contract dispute.

Darl McBride: Yes, but I feel with $50 million from some sucker... I mean investor... I could make it a lot more silly.

David Boies: Mr. McBride, the very real problem is one of money. I'm afraid that silly lawsuits are no longer getting the kind of support they need. You see, there's software patents, the DMCA, the Disney copyright extension extension extension, silly lawsuits. They're all supposed to get the same funding. But last year the suckers... I mean investors... spent less on silly lawsuits than they did on crack cocaine. We're supposed to get 348 millions pounds a year to cover our entire silly lawsuits portfolio. Shill analyst?

Darl McBride: Yes, please.

David Boies: Hello, uh, Ms. Didio, uhm, could we have two bogus press releases about Linux developers stealing code from SCO, please.

Ms. Didio: Yes, Mr. Boies. [Didio dutifully does as her master commands]

David Boies: Thank you, Ms. Didio [turns to McBride] She's dumber than a box of hammers; believes anything you tell her, no matter how ridiculous. You see, the Amazon lawyers can sue you for clicking a button just once instead of twice... and Eolas, cunning little... you're really interested in silly lawsuits aren't you?

Darl McBride: Yes!

David Boies: Right, well, consider this. How about we accuse IBM of stealing code, refuse to provide any evidence even during the court discovery process, demand payment from end-users despite having no legal basis for doing so, tell Red Hat we're not harming their business, and to really make it silly, claim that Lessig and Moglen don't know the first thing about constitutional law or the GPL.

Darl McBride: Wow. That is silly.