US Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells has also lifted a stay on the discovery process and ordered IBM to provide SCO with requested documents and copies of its Unix products within the same 45-day timeline.

Lindon, Utah-based SCO was originally ordered on December 12, 2003 to detail which specific lines of code from its Unix System V and IBM’s AIX and Dynix Unix variants it is claiming IBM has contributed to the Linux operating system.

The company failed to fully comply with that order by the deadline of January 12, 2004, with SCO’s general counsel, Ryan Tibbitts declaring to the Utah court that SCO’s engineers had reached the conclusion that parts of Linux have almost certainly been copied or derived from AIX or Dynix/ptx. SCO also failed to provide a number of files of current and former officers and directors.

Tibbitts also told the court that it was unable to identify the source of the contributions to Linux for technologies such as Non Uniform Memory Architecture, Remove Copy Update, and the XFS and JFS journaling file systems, because it did not have recent enough versions of IBM’s Unix operating systems to compare Linux with.

The new deadline gives SCO 45 days to identify all specific lines of code that it says IBM has contributed to Linux from AIX and Dynix, all specific lines of Unix System V code that it believes IBM’s code to be derived from, all lines of code in Linux that it claims rights to, and all lines of code that SCO has distributed to other parties.

Meanwhile IBM has been ordered to provide SCO with all non-public contributions it has made to Linux and all documents generated by employees involved with the company’s Linux project, including chairman and CEO Sam Palmisano and VP of technology and strategy Irving Wladawsky-Berger.

IBM also has provided SCO with releases of AIX and Dynix, although this has been restricted to the 232 products previously offered by IBM’s attorney David Marriott, rather than every version of the operating system ever produced.

IBM has also been ordered to provide the identification of 1,000 of its most important potential witnesses, as agreed by both SCO and IBM, rather than the original 7,200 potential witnesses suggested by IBM.

Both companies have also been ordered to provide source logs to identify how documents have been kept and to file additional memoranda with the court detailing how SCO’s recently approved second amendment to the case will impact their claims and counterclaims.

This article is based on material originally published by ComputerWire