Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Novell (NOVL) dirt cheap, good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KSHITIJ DOSHI who wrote (30084)	1/28/2000 12:16:00 PM
From: Paul Fiondella	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42771

Okay guys let's not get litigious yet ...at least until we have something to fight over that actually makes one of the parties richer! ================ The general public, such as myself, are only interested in what has been publicly announced. Whether Novell has a relationship with AT&T or not, or how one characterizes that relationship is not of interest here. Just the facts with a documentable public source. I assume that these companies constantly talk to each other. Nobody ever rules an advanced technology out in the internet age. However unless Scott was privy to confidential agreements involving Novell/AT&T discussions and even if so, the proper way to address this issue is through private email, not in a public forum. You should not appoint yourself as the "public enforcer". I believe Al Pacino has that role.

To: KSHITIJ DOSHI who wrote (30084)	2/1/2000 10:33:00 AM
From: Scott C. Lemon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42771

Hello Doshi, Interesting post ... > This is highly objectionable, unless the information relating > to ATT and NDS is in public domain. And I attempted to state that I had no other confirmation of this situation ... but a source or sources who indicated this was the case ... > If this stuff is not in materials released by Novell, then Scott is > dangerously close to breaking obligations about not revealing > information that is available to him as an ex-employee but he is > inviting others to commit a breach of confidence as well. Hmmm ... jumping to conclusions? If someone close to Novell, or a Novell employee (such as yourself) has provided this information to me ... since I have left Novell ... how would I be involved in this speculative "breach"? You are correct that employees have to make judgements of what information is "public" or useful for any purpose ... But you are jumping to conclusions about me ... if you were to live here in Utah you would understand that the conversations that can be overheard even at lunch have valuable information. Microsoft would have a field day ... ;-) > While I am a Novell employee, the above is my opinion only and is > not influenced by my employer. And, I have no information to offer > on this topic. And we all know about opinions ... ;-) Scott C. Lemon