decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Monday, March 01 2004 @ 07:27 AM EST

Sigh. FUD to the right of me. FUD to the left. Where to begin?

First, though, before I wade through it, Red Hat has filed a response to SCO's opposition to their request to supplement the record, and we should have it later today.

Now to this morning's FUD.

Blake Stowell has a "poor-SCO" interview, in which he deplores the "extremist" element that no one has yet provided proof exists:

"One thing that has been disappointing, though, is the virulent and personal attacks against SCO from some people in the open-source community. We're a company defending one of our core business assets, and we're doing this through the courts, as the legal system requires. We should not be subjected to personal insults, physical threats, DDoS attacks and all the other things.

"Even reporters who write stories that are not anti-SCO are subjected to tremendous pressure and attacks. It's troubling that for a community founded on principles of cooperation and openness, there's this element that is so rigid and violent."
Don't tell me the Three Musketeers of FUD, DiDio, Enderle, and Lyons, are going to be trotted out again. "Disappointing," my foot. This is an antiLinux propaganda campaign, and SCO's strategy absolutely depends on it.

LinuxInsider, whoever they are, goes along with the charade, which is a very big giveaway that while they may be insiders, they aren't likely *Linux* insiders. I had never heard of them. SCO's is a campaign of defamation in the press, not in the courts, despite Stowell's sanctimonious hypocrisy. If SCO would stop their defamatory PR, they might have a moral leg to stand on. This interview is a verbal attack on the Linux community. If you attack someone's mom, it doesn't matter that you used a polite tone of voice.

He offers to help the community out in the future, though, and seems to envision some kind of partnership:

"Open source will probably be around for a very long time to come, and I'm sure SCO will continue to participate in and benefit from open-source software. One way the company might continue to work with and help open source is in putting some mechanisms in place to assure that proprietary software doesn't make its way into open source. I'm sure this will continue to be a concern among open-source developers going into the future."
Thanks, but no thanks. If that is SCO's dream, they'd best wake up and smell the coffee. It may prove difficult to "benefit from open source software" without the good will and cooperation of the community. It might be wise to make another plan and try to rip benefits from some other community. Stowell says he's at peace representing SCO as their PR person:
"As long as I can go home at night and know that I was honest with the media, I was respectful of another's point of view and tried to not burn any bridges, I think that I can feel very at peace."
Honest with the media? Respectful of another's point of view? While in the same interview he defames the community? I've got news for Mr. Stowell. Any bridges to the Linux community fell down long ago.

Just after I wrote this, the respectful Mr. Stowell is found respectfully saying this about Groklaw and me:

Blake Stowell, the company's director of public relations, says: "I think the unfortunate thing about Groklaw is that many people reference the site as a supposed 'credible resource' and take a lot of what is posted there as the absolute truth. I find that there is so much misinformation on Groklaw that is misconstrued and twisted that it's probably one step above a lot of the ranting and dribble that takes place on Slashdot.". . .

It may be that kind of intransigence that leads SCO's Blake Stowell to hint at darker motives. "Doesn't anyone find it the least bit ironic," he asks, 'that Pamela Jones lives ... less than 10 miles from IBM's worldwide headquarters, and that Groklaw is hosted, free, by a nonprofit outfit called iBiblio, which runs on $250,000 worth of Linux-based computers donated by IBM and a $2 million donation from a foundation set up by Robert Young, founder of Red Hat?"

"Call me crazy," adds Stowell, "but I somehow think that Pamela Jones isn't just a paralegal with nothing better to do with her life than host a Web site called Groklaw that is dedicated to bashing SCO. I think there is a lot more to her background and intentions than she is willing to reveal publicly. I believe that Big Blue looms large behind Pamela Jones."
It is tempting to call him crazy, given the kind invitation, but I think he has no such excuse. And Linux"Insider"? This is yet another Linux"Insider" article giving Stowell a soapbox from which to attack the Linux community, and by the way, nobody at Linux"Insider" bothered to contact me to find out if what they were about to print was true or to give me an opportunity to respond.

Details, details. When FUD is your aim, you don't need sources outside of SCO. That is not responsible journalism.

Happily, I have my own endless ink, so to speak, so I can print the truth on Groklaw. That is what Groklaw is for. To tell the truth. So, for those who might actually care, I don't have any connection to IBM. I have never worked for them. I have never even been inside an IBM building. They haven't given me any financial support of any kind.

Groklaw, I'm very proud to say, is hosted by Ibiblio, along with about a 1,000 other sites, including the world-renowned Project Gutenberg, which I'm sure you'll agree is well-known to be just a patsy for IBM. After all, if IBM gave some equipment to Ibiblio, and PG is hosted by PG, wink wink. Get it? It's hard for them to maintain the long-distance relationship, because PG is in Illinois, but maybe IBM has an office there or something equally suspicious. Or maybe one of them commutes to maintain the secret affair.

I live within ten miles of a Mobil station, actually. Now *that* is sinister. Maybe I'm a shill for Big Oil. It's David Boies who I believe lives on IBM's doorstep. Hmm. If we were going to decide affiliations by locale, what would that indicate?

They think I live where a previous hatchet job article in the media said I lived. That journalist based his conclusion on a P.O. Box address I deliberately opened where I don't live, back when I first bought the domain name. I didn't want my actual address known, so weirdo folks wouldn't show up at my door.

When the reporter, Dan Lyons, asked me where I lived, I said I'd rather he not print anything about that, because I was kind of frightened about suddenly becoming well-known, and I was worried about being stalked, because of some email I had received. I thought he agreed. I made the same request to Bob Mims of the Salt Lake Tribune, and he honored my request.

When Lyons' attack on Groklaw was printed, to my disgust, I saw he'd printed what he thought was my residence. It wasn't, but he thought it was. I thought it was one of the cruelest and most hard-hearted things I had ever witnessed in my life. I simply had never before known anyone personally who would do something so callously vicious. I didn't know anyone who would endanger someone just for a "scoop". McBride complained because someone on Slashdot posted his address and home phone, which by the way were already on the internet, publicly available. If I recall correctly, at Harvard, he called it a form of cyberterrorism. What is the difference? Are they not doing the same thing to me?

Lyons spent almost two months trying to find a financial connection between me and IBM, and he failed. He failed because there isn't any, so he used innuendo instead to hint at what he knew was not true. SCO talks about being attacked? Needing bodyguards? Look what they are doing to me, and then judge for yourself who is most at risk. They should be ashamed. How do they pray at night? I believe they claim to be devout. Somebody in their church needs to sit them down and explain the Golden Rule. SCO's Mr. Stowell needs to acknowledge that what he said is not true and apologize. Frankly, I think they should pay to relocate me. And LinuxInsider needs to print a retraction, making it clear that they were mistaken about my having any ties to IBM. As for SCO's immoral attacks, and that of others, I leave that to God and to history. But one thing is for sure, if anything bad happens to me, you will know who is responsible.

Then there is an editorial in the Washington Times, where Gene Schaerr scolds us for not understanding how well the Microsoft antitrust settlement is working:

Sometimes people simply refuse to see the light. . . .As it waits for an appellate ruling, this anti-Microsoft cabal is arguing that the company is shirking its responsibilities and the settlement is proving completely ineffectual. If only they would take off their blinders, they would see that this case has drastically changed the industry and that competition is healthy.

From the beginning, it was clear to virtually everyone that the settlement was in the best interests of the industry, the economy and consumers. The agreement removed the cloud of government regulation that had been hanging over the entire industry and sent the message that it was time to focus on innovation and competition, instead of regulation. . . .

The evidence is clear and irrefutable: Microsoft is living up to its obligations, and competition is thriving throughout the software industry. The mythologies on which the anti-Microsoft cabal bases its cries for more regulation of Microsoft have been shattered. It is time for it to step back and watch innovation, competition and growth take over.
Well, say. Speaking of verbal abuse, y'all. At the risk of being further scorned by Mr. Schaerr as an irrational dope who doesn't yet accept that the earth revolves around the sun, or a member of a cabal (say, that can't be good, right?) I might just ask, who is Gene Schaerr that he is so hot about critics of Microsoft? The Post says he is antitrust counsel to the Association for Competitive Technology.

That sounds innocuous. Let's just see if we can find a Microsoft connection, though. ACT is -- I'll let them tell you themselves:

The Association for Competitive Technology (ACT) is a national education and advocacy group for the technology industry. Focusing on the interests of small and mid-size entrepreneurial technology companies, ACT advocates for a "Healthy Tech Environment" that promotes innovation, competition and investment. ACT has been active on issues such as intellectual property, international trade, e-commerce, privacy, tax policy and antitrust.

ACT represents nearly 3000 software developers, systems integrators, IT consulting and training firms, and e-businesses from across the country. While ACT members include some household names like eBay, Orbitz and Microsoft, our members are primarily small and mid-size companies.
There they are. It's like looking for NINA in an Al Hirschfeld drawing. You just know it's in there somewhere. You might enjoy a cartoon on how well the agreement is working out in changing Microsoft's behavior.

Speaking of Microsoft turning up in the background, SCO's new licensee, an ISP nobody ever heard of, can be found on Microsoft's website, held up as a case study, dated September 2003, of a company that thought they wanted to go to Linux and then switched back:

EV1Servers.net Leading Hosted Service Provider Deploys Windows-based Hosting Solutions Faster than Linux-based Solutions

Business managers at EV1 Servers.net knew that there was a demand for a Microsoft Windows-based hosted service offering, but they did not think they could deploy Windows-based servers with the same speed or level of automation that they had achieved in their deployment of their traditional Linux-based systems. Yet with the introduction of the Microsoft Solution for Windows-based Hosting 2.0, which can take advantage of Automated Deployment Services (ADS)—a powerful new server purposing tool in Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition—EV1 Servers.net is finding that it can deploy a Windows-based hosting service in less than half the time it takes to deploy a similarly configured Linux system. And they can do it with much less hands-on involvement than their Linux deployments demand.
So they need a SCO IP license to run Microsoft "solutions"? Or is this another Microsoft solution for SCO? EV1's customers aren't so happy. [Update: As of June 2011, the link no longer resolves, Internet Archive doesn't have it, and a search for SCO Group on the site today provides only this comment from that date. The rest seems to have disappeared.]

Most of the other headlines are about SCO adding copyright claims and raising the damages figure as a result. "The amount is starting to become breathtaking,' said John Ferrell, an intellectual property attorney at law firm Carr & Ferrell, referring to the damages SCO and its attorney, David Boies, are seeking," reads one article. However, what they don't seem to figure in the math is that SCO just dropped their trade secret claims, right? And that was the basis for "terminating" the AIX license, right? And they were asking for triple damages on the trade secret stuff, right? So wouldn't you need to reduce the amount of damages to account for that dropped claim? I know it doesn't make as exciting a headline, but it would be more accurate. It's all Monopoly money anyway, unless someone can explain a rational basis for those astronomical figures.

If you go by what they wrote in their first complaint, they asked for damages for violations of trade secrets in an amount to be proven at trial, punitive damages and specifically for exemplary damages under Utah Code Ann. Section 13-24-1 "in an amount equal to twice the award under the First Cause of Action for misappropriation of trade secrets". So a fair amount of the original damages figure was for the trade secrets misappropriation.

Note that the termination of the AIX license by SCO was founded on their trade secret claim, and their copyright claims are all about the AIX code and only for use since the termination (which Novell says they have overrruled anyway), so conceivably dropping the trade secrets claim could impact on their ability to terminate the license and hence collect anything for infringement. Here's what they said justified "terminating" the AIX license:

35. Notwithstanding these provisions, IBM has subjected SCO’s UNIX trade secrets to unrestricted disclosure, unauthorized transfer and disposition, unauthorized use, and has otherwise encouraged others in the Linux development community to do the same. SCO, therefore, has terminated IBM’s license to use UNIX-based software products. (See letter dated March 6, 2003, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit E).
So, my math says, if they had no justification for terminating, or if Novell voided the termination anyhow, and the copyright infringement can only be for any "infringement" post termination, that adds up to, let's see, carry the zero... why, I get zero. Is that what you get?

UPDATE: A Groklaw reader, rjamestaylor, has found some info on the author of the article about Groklaw. You can read a couple of other articles he has written. Here he quotes a Ms. DiDio at length and then a Microsoft partner who paints an even rosier picture for Microsoft compared to Linux than she does. And here he quotes the same Microsoft partner, this time to minimize the effect of a study that showed Apache as having 67% of the server market. And here's a bio (at least it appears to be the same person):

Print-oriented work has included writing and/or photography for, Computerworld and other IDG publications (both print and online), Communique magazine (Microsoft Australia), TechNewsWorld.com, Compaq Computer Australia (now H-P), Digital Media World magazine, Fujitsu Australia, Amdahl Corporation., American Forests magazine and many more.
Did you spot NINA in the drawing? Yes, not only Microsoft but DiDio too.

  


The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today | 635 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Sounds Fair
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:13 PM EST
We should not be subjected to personal insults, physical threats, DDoS attacks and all the other things.

I agree. Groklaw should be working to stop these things, not defend them.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Graywing on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:15 PM EST
" We're a company defending one of our core business assets, and we're
doing this through the courts, as the legal system requires."

IANAL,But it was always my understanding that in a contract dispute or any
for that matter, You should try to resolve before going to court, that was
always the last option. Can some one help me on this?

---
Ahh!! The mind what a wonderful trap.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:15 PM EST
PJ - keep sane - and keep at it - we are all behind you.

[ Reply to This | # ]

"Linux Insider" is anti-Linux
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:16 PM EST
The publication is deliberately misnamed. Therefore, you may assume that their
content is equally deceptive.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Nick on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:19 PM EST
Aw, you're no fun. Here they go through all that trouble to spread rumor and
innudendo about you, and you just clear it right up with facts.

What a radical concept! If you are writing an article about someone, you
contact that person to ask if what you are quoting is accurate. I wonder if
journalism schools have heard of this new concept.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Nick_UK on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:19 PM EST
Calm down, Pamela... you write a good piece, and I just read that article on
Groklaw, and it is funny as hell :D

"team of legal researchers" - "Web Guru's" - "`no doubt
now that SCO's directors are either mistaken, or they're crooks.' He thanks
Groklaw for that."

So funny.

I would suggest that by the very mention of your work on this site getting such
a coverage, they are really worried about it - us :)

Nick

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO dropped trade secret claim - NOT(?)
Authored by: bobn on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:22 PM EST
Why does everyone keep saying this?

From http://www.gro klaw.net/article.php?story=20040207022922296

184. In furtherance of its scheme of unfair competition, IBM has engaged in the following conduct:

a) Misappropriation of source code, methods, trade secrets and confidential information of plaintiff;

[ Reply to This | # ]

Somewhat OT : EV1 bought what ?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:22 PM EST
Here's what they paid for : Under the terms of the agreement, SCO will provide
EV1Servers.Net with a site license that allows the use of SCO IP in binary form
on all Linux servers managed by EV1Servers.Net in each of its hosting
facilities.

I'm guessing this is something UNIX.
It wasn't a smart move on EV1's part and I think the 'no mention' of whatever it
is they bought is deliberate, another way to spread FUD.
After all, SCO just said it was their IP.

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ Expose?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:22 PM EST
'Call me crazy,' adds Stowell, 'but I somehow think that Pamela Jones isn't just a paralegal with nothing better to do with her life than host a Web site called Groklaw that is dedicated to bashing SCO. I think there is a lot more to her background and intentions than she is willing to reveal publicly. I believe that Big Blue looms large behind Pamela Jones.'"

Any idea what he might be talking about?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Xenographic on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:23 PM EST
Stowell: Our lawsuit against IBM is ongoing litigation that I unfortunately
can't comment on.
-----

Hmm, yes, I think it's true. The court must have shut them up, because rather
recently, they wouldn't hesitate to talk about the litigation...

Anyhow, about Linux Insider, I think you're right. For being 'insiders', they
don't seem to know very much. In fact, I remember them mostly in a negative
light, from various FUD pieces and whatnot which I cannot remember all of just
now. All I remember is the name, and that the quality thereof is on par with
that of a Slashdot troll post...

As for that ISP, there's not much to say about them that you haven't already. I
could investigate more, but it's pretty obvious as to how often they show up in
PR... I don't think that is coincidence; I think they just mean to use the PR
to their benefit to attract customers (though there are many who I would think
would be put off by their actions, too, so...)

I'm not surprised about the rest, though. I must commend you for sticking to
your principles of not posting addresses online, though. To be sure, they're in
the original documents you have to link against (and there's nothing you could
do about that), but you have always faithfully removed them from the
transcriptions.

Lastly, I have to wonder, what part of section 4 of the GPL does SCO not
understand?

"4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except
as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify,
sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate
your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or
rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so
long as such parties remain in full compliance."

IANAL, but should not their very public actions here void their license to Linux
under this clause, opening them up to copyright claims from everyone who has
made a significant contribution to Linux? I'm reasonably sure that the license
they offer on their website is incompatible with the GPL...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Stowell = Elmer Gantry
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:25 PM EST
See if you think this fits Blake Stowell:

"http://www.britannica.com/nobel/micro/733_33.html">Elmer Gantry

_____________

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: kurt555gs on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:26 PM EST
Who is 'linuxinsider'

They dont seem very penguinish to me.

I wonder if some one can do some digging

PJ has way to much class to blow up, lose it etc ........ I think 'THEY' really

underestimate PJ

Too bad for them

Cheers


---

* Kurt *

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:27 PM EST
An immediate war cry comes to mind...

But they are so close to falling. It's not time to lose control.

You don't want to take a giant swing out of balance to finish off a dying
ennemy. It's actually the time when he will be most unpredictable and you could
leave yourself open.
I know it sucks and cheapshots like this deserve to be punished, but we better
just back off for a few days and wait till the end of the week. It promises to
be their worst week yet...

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: MyPersonalOpinio on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:28 PM EST

Mr. Stowell, why don't you expand the radius a little bit more so that it covers all of Manhattan... your conspiracy theory could include tens of millions of people.

I find it mildly amusing the complaint about misinformation, oh, maybe he'll next say that the scanned court documents are "doctored" so that the world gets the wrong opinion?

Go Pamela!, BS's criticism is a compliment, in a twisted way. Probably he is jealous at how much more credibility you have compared to him.

[ Reply to This | # ]

EV1 forums...poof!
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:30 PM EST
lol.

EV1's forums are hosed now.

Thanks for taking my only source of support with that idiotic company! Now I
have to talk to their "techs".

Lord help us all and the morons at ev1/rackshack.

[ Reply to This | # ]

MICROSOFT AGAIN!!!
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:36 PM EST
quote:
"EV1Servers.net Leading Hosted Service Provider Deploys Windows-based
Hosting Solutions Faster than Linux-based Solutions

"Business managers at EV1 Servers.net knew that there was a demand for a
Microsoft Windows-based hosted service offering, but they did not think they
could deploy Windows-based servers with the same speed or level of automation
that they had achieved in their deployment of their traditional Linux-based
systems. Yet with the introduction of the Microsoft Solution for Windows-based
Hosting 2.0, which can take advantage of Automated Deployment Services (ADS)—a
powerful new server purposing tool in Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Enterprise
Edition—EV1 Servers.net is finding that it can deploy a Windows-based hosting
service in less than half the time it takes to deploy a similarly configured
Linux system. And they can do it with much less hands-on involvement than their
Linux deployments demand."

Is microsoft in the offence now????

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: coolmos on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:37 PM EST
I can't immediately remember that Gandhi quote i saw here often.

The fact that they address you on such personal level means you are being
noticed. Probably because they think you are a pain in the butt.
In my opinion, you just entered round 2 (or maybe 3) of this 'war'.

And yes, this is way below the belt. But what did you expect from this company
?

We're with you 99%. The other 1% is reserved for seeing the errors even you
could make.

Stay focussed !



---
A 699 license ? Is that the US variant of the Nigerian 419 scam ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:38 PM EST

LOL!

Blake has the wrong "source" of the pressure put on journalists that do not write "anti-SCO" articles.

The correct source of the pressure is from Microsoft and SCO, for these journalists to write what Microsoft and SCO tell them to write, without further investigation, in depth questioning, etc.

Just to nod understandingly and eat the pablum that they are fed and to spew it out without digestion.

At least I acknowledge my anti-SCO and anti-Microsoft bias. I would probably suffer a seizure if the Didio, et. al., acknowledged their pro-Microsoft and pro-SCO biases. Like "Yeah, that's gonna happen.".

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: dhall on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:40 PM EST
Linux Insider, owned by ECTNEWS

http://ectnews.com
aka
http://www.technewsworld.com
http://wwww.crmbuyer.com
http://ecommercetimes.com

You'll see some familiar names linked with these news sources. All the
aforementioned webpages have Groklaw listed as a "special exclusive".
They lay it on pretty thick.

This is almost as bad (and transparent) as election year shenanigans.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Polar Weasel on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:40 PM EST
PJ --

I posted this previously in an "OT" response to "Signal.h -- Part
2 of Warren Toomey's look at the ABI Files":

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then
you win."

- Mahatma Ghandi, In Philosophy

Does this quote count as "laughing at" or "fighting"?

We're definitely past "ignoring".

I'm sorry that you've had to experience both Mr. Lyons' betrayal involving your
address and Mr. Stowell's recent comments impugning your character and implying
that you are in any way associated with IBM.

Perhaps you can find solace by considering that you've become so much of a thorn
in their side that they're now snapping at the pain? Your dedicated
fact-finding and cogent analyses have been a source of great interest and
information for me and many others over the past months.

Please be strong; these comments are merely the thrashings of an entity in its
death throes.

-Polar Weasel

[ Reply to This | # ]

Washington Times, not Post
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:43 PM EST
Just a note, the Gene Schaerr article is in the Washington Times, not the
Washington Post.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/about-twt/

[ Reply to This | # ]

I hope GrokLaw is affiliated with IBM
Authored by: capitalist_pig on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:43 PM EST
I hope GrokLaw is affiliated with IBM, because I hope IBM data-mines this site
for their legal teams.

There is a lot of good information and thought here, and if it could be data
mined it would be very valuable.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Ninguino on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:43 PM EST
PJ:

Don't lose hope!. This attack only meants you (we!) are really hurting them, so
keep doing the good work. We are 100% with you.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:44 PM EST
PJ --

Two notes:

1) The editorial you linked to is in the Washington Times,
not the Washington Post.

I suspected so even before I saw the link! If you
really want a follow-the-money story, look to see who owns the Times.

2) I'm
afraid you got upset enough -- understandibly, I'll add -- to stoop to the level
of your enemies. Writing things like:

But one thing is for sure, if anything
bad happens to me,
you will know who is responsible.

Sounds almost like what
The Other Side would be saying.

BTW, I DO work for IBM, but they don't own my
brain. IAOAP.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: blacklight on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:44 PM EST
"If you go by what they wrote in their first complaint, they asked for
damages for violations of trade secrets in an amount to be proven at trial,
punitive damages and specifically for exemplary damages under Utah Code Ann.
Section 13-24-1 "in an amount equal to twice the award under the First
Cause of Action for misappropriation of trade secrets""

News flash: any number times zero is zero, so two times zero is zero.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: No FUD - Lets Follow Microsofts Lead on Security
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:44 PM EST
A very informative article on how Windows security will blow past Linux security
in the coming days. Since Mr. Enderle is one of the most lucid and unbiased
reporters I've ever read, Linux developers should take note.

http://www.technewsworld.com/perl/story/32976.html

No FUD here.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: legal insanity on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:45 PM EST
PJ, they are running scared, everything that has happened in the last few days
ties into it one way or the other, the troll count, M$ looking at XP Reloaded,
and Longhorn postponed till 2008, I have heard of EV1, but it's a spam related
issue(check Spamhaus). But I think what scares them the most, is the excellent
work that has been brought about by Groklaw, and the fact that a lot of the
members here are people they would like to know about, because of the knowledge
some have, that scares them, they don't know who, but they know it's truth, the
one thing SCO can not handle. and I for one know this site is not about bashing.
It's about getting to the truth, the facts. Something they don't want to happen.


---
Insanity Pleadings is the only Sensible Defense

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ's Badge of Honor
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:47 PM EST
PJ,

I hope you are taking the article about Groklaw for what it really represents.
When the FUD press points at your site, and starts throwing around words like
"vilify," "zealots," and "naive idealists," I take
it as a sure sign of your success. After all, if you weren't being effective,
and if people weren't taking you seriously, then the FUDsters would have no
reason to try to discredit you.

In other words, wear it as a badge of honor.

By the way, posters on sites like Linux.com and Linux Today have previously
suggested that LinuxInsider might just be an anti-Linux FUD site. On the other
hand, mixed in with the FUD stories, the site also carries some positive and
informative Linux stories, which could be there for credibility and cover, or it
could just indicate sloppy journalism (poor fact-checking, mixing lies with
truth under a misguided idea of "balance," and so on).

Either way, keep up the good work, and remember:

If no one is annoyed by what you are saying, then what you are saying is of
little importance.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:48 PM EST

Common tactic made to put people on the defensive:

I find that there is so much misinformation on Groklaw that is misconstrued and twisted that it's probably one step above a lot of the ranting and dribble that takes place on Slashdot.'. . .

Notice the very gross general terms used like "misinformation", "misconstrued" and "twisted".

No specifics, not even one instance.

If pressed for one, I am certain Blake, nor any other person at TSG, could present one solid piece of misinformation, or data that has been "misconstrued" and "twisted".

And the fact that Blake made this personal, tells me that TSG knows very well the power of Groklaw and they are smarting from the "intellectual spanking" as a result of not taking TSG's word as the gospell, but checking and re-checking it. Just tells me that Groklaw's existence is having a very big impact on TSG's pump, dump and exit scheme, IMHO.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:48 PM EST
Follow the money...

[ Reply to This | # ]

My Condolences
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:50 PM EST
I would like to extend some support to PJ. Seriously, You would think you were running for president or something, the way falsities are flying from their mouths.

Keep your cheer up though, because it really shows how desparate they are. In the beginning they had a lawsuit they could brag about... "We're suing IBM for $1 Billion, and they stole our IP, and they're mean, and big, and blue" Groklaw.net springs up and shows why the lawsuit is full of holes and exactly where the BS is coming from, and with information from so many sources that it can't possibly be repudiated... When the ground is crumbling beneath your feet, you'll grab for anything. Clutching at straws is an expression that fits SCO to a tee.

Thanks for all the hard work and for taking hits in the name of the open source community.

--James

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Here Here... - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:00 PM EST
EV1 Servers.net and Microsoft
Authored by: spiff on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:51 PM EST
PJ,

1. you're doing a fantastic job, stay cool: we're right here with you.

2. you're doing a fantastic job, stay cool: we're right here with you.

3. you're doing a fantastic job, stay cool: we're right here with you.

4. Can you get us organised so we can find out what the deal is with EV1
Servers.net and Microsoft

spiff



[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw.. ??
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:53 PM EST
No Blake.

It's... the BELOW_THE_EARTH PEOPLE.

they are hired by the marsians that need SCO destroyed because the mentioning of
the word SCO causes there brain to explode.
All the Yeti's in the himalaya are RIGHT now rallying the TROLLS in scandinavia
to defend the Finish work called linux.
Gremlins are untuning your cars in the parkinglot RIGHT NOW.. RUN BLAKE RUN....

retep vosnul.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: blacklight on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:56 PM EST
"Open source will probably be around for a very long time to come, and I'm
sure SCO will continue to participate in and benefit from open-source software.
One way the company might continue to work with and help open source is in
putting some mechanisms in place to assure that proprietary software doesn't
make its way into open source. I'm sure this will continue to be a concern among
open-source developers going into the future." BS

A backhanded acknowledgement that the SCO Group is a parasite of the Open Source
community, and can't survive without it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:57 PM EST
I have been reading Groklaw for some time now, and although I've always sided on Linux from the get-go, I know that Jones has been compiling completely unbiased research.

She posts a letter on her board and he calls it "twisted truth"? Why? Is this not the letter? Did she change the wording? Doesn't she always say she has No legal opinion? Where's the twist? Now SCO is attacking her personal life? Pamela Jones doesn't have anything better to do? If her blog has millions of hits a day, somebody must think it important. And once again, where's the twist?

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Groklaw & PJ - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:15 PM EST
The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: om1er on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:57 PM EST
"'Call me crazy,' adds Stowell..."

Cool. Allow me. Blake Stowell is freeking crazy. He told me to say that, too!

By the way, did you notice that the "defenders of SCO" in the LinuxInsider article were just two people - Dark Darl McBride and Crazy Blake Stowell? With enemies like that ....

---
Are we there yet?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Great advertising for Groklaw
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 01:57 PM EST
PJ:

It means you're winning. Everyone will want to see what the fuss is about. It's
a great intro for your site.


[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Xenographic on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:01 PM EST
Might want to check slashdot for more on EV1.

Apparently, they used to be rackshack.net, and had a better reputation back
then. It's possible that a change in management with the name change or
something like that might have caused their change of heart; I do not know.

Just more information, since this probably warrants a bit more investigation...

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO Claims EV1,bet signs Linux deal
Authored by: PeteS on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:02 PM EST
Article

Hmmm - given the other FUD, is this a part of the same?

---
Today's subliminal thought is:

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ, don't let it slow you down..
Authored by: Debrihmi on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:03 PM EST
that is what they are looking to do. Before I came to Groklaw, my faith in
humanity was at an all time low. It seems that everybody is out to make a quick
buck at the expense of Moral or Concious. Deformation seems to be the languge
of modern business; but thanks to your Integrity, you've made me and many others
see that our Community is larger than we thought and that we're stronger than
anyone else thought. There are many good people in our Community and thanks to
you we have a place were we can analyse and respond from..

Please don't fret, keep up the excellent work!


---
~
People want to be free..

[ Reply to This | # ]

Does anyone believe Darl
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:04 PM EST
"As SCO president and CEO Darl McBride himself has put it, 'The stakes are extremely high. The balance of the software industry is hanging on this.'"

Sorry Darl, but nobody in their right mind thinks that. The stakes are *extremely low*, and most if not all the risks are for your company. What do you think would happen if your company went out of business? Unix would die out?? Commercial software would become non existant?? The world economy would sour?? Tens of thousands of people out of work??

FUD at it's most basic.

[ Reply to This | # ]

No worries.
Authored by: arrg on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:05 PM EST
It's just a sign of them getting desperate. You have been a pillar of clarity
for all of us here and we appreciate it. They are starting to loose the fud war
and you are part of that reason. It's not surprising that they would then turn
in an attempt to discredit you. Just keep it clear and back it up with proof.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Campfire
Authored by: phrostie on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:05 PM EST
"I'm sure SCO will continue to participate in and benefit from open-source
software."

Wait, last i heard they were not interested in sitting around the campfire
singing, koom bi ya.

they must have realized that the campfire is where all the customers were all
the time.


---
=====
phrostie
Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of DOS
and danced the skies on Linux silvered wings.
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/snafuu

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Campfire - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:07 PM EST
The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:06 PM EST
FUD? More like FUBS.
(double entendre intended)

PJ, IF you were to be paid in the background, much better to be associated with
IBM than with SCOG, IMHO.

<sarcasm>
Now, let's see... oh yeah... then RedHat and Novell... yeah, they're paying you
off too... yeah, yeah, that's it...


I thought Caterpillar and John Deere were in Illinois... it would appear that
SCOG is trying to compete for "largest shovel of the year" award by
way of competition. They must have cleaned out the barn over the weekend...
</sarcasm>
...D

[ Reply to This | # ]

Feelling sick
Authored by: NeoThemis on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:08 PM EST
I have been reading Groklaw since its very beginning but
never posted because I felt like I had nothing significant
to say besides the now traditionnal "kudos" to PJ. However,
after reading Stowell's interview, I felt so sick that I just had
to say something. Reading PJ's last article made me really
physically ill. I know this does not bring any new information,
but I just had to say it.

I think Quebec has a motto that says "Nous nous souvenons"
litterally "we remember". The only thing I'd like to add is that
we (as a community) "_will_ remember". Such disgusting
attitudes cannot go on forever and be dealt with forever.
Somehow, "We will remember".

I know, you know, everybody with just an once of intelligence,
knows that SCO has no chance to prevail. They will lose as
surely as one plus one equals two. (Litteral translation of a
french's expression, I don't know if this sounds really stupid
in English...) But, when all this farce will be over, we will have
to remember. I hope PJ could write a book (I'll buy it without
hesitation) But maybe we will have to do our part too. What
about a web site, including quotes from SCO's executives,
so called analysts and so forth where we could just demonstrate
their bad faith, semi-truth and outright lies with a much more
aggressive tone than Groklaw's.
They wanted to ruin our reputation with FUD. We will ridiculize
them with facts. We have to make sure that no one is spared.
C|net, ZdNet, all their analysts etc...

"We will remember" and we will make sure that it will be remember.

NeoThemis

[ Reply to This | # ]

Blake Stowell reads LamLaw
Authored by: SteveJohnson on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:08 PM EST
Stowell's comments regarding Groklaw were foreshadowed by an article on LamLaw published Feb 22. It points out just how much damage the truth has done to SCO's business plans.

Here's Lam Law's web site. Scroll down to SCO's big mistake.

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ - Do you log IP addys?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:09 PM EST
It would be interesting to see how many hits Groklaw gets from thescogroup.com.

welovethescoinformationminister does this on their front page.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Who is LinuxInsider?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:11 PM EST
I notice that the head organisation of LinuxInsider is the
ECT News Network, of 15821 Ventura Blvd Encino CA.
A Google on that address also comes up with Sun
Microsystems Inc.

They say of themselves:
ECT News Network, Inc. is one of the largest e-business
and technology news publishers in the United States,
consisting of the E-Commerce Times®, TechNewsWorld?, CRM
Buyer? and LinuxInsider?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The SCOX Is Hurting Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:13 PM EST
Just goes to show Groklaw is hurting them, so they do the same old smear stuff,
whining about how they are the injured party. Can't be nice to wake up in the
morning and see that overnight, thousands of readers around the world have been
picking apart what you said yesterday and destroying your legal strategy.
(Those readers are also the geeks who control or contribute to purchasing
decisions, unfortunately for SCOX).

SCOX never got the GPL, they never got Linux, no wonder they don't get Groklaw.
PJ is like the graceful lightning rod conducting the energy of the community
(and doing a fantastic job). Folks like Poncewattle and DrStupid, Warren Toomey
(and all the others) help provide insightful content. There is no need for any
mystery backers, it is all there in the open.

So take the slime as a compliment, Grok is hitting home: archiving their
statements stops them being able to deny what they said before, publishing code
lineage stops them waving their hands. Leep up the good work!

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: miniver on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:14 PM EST

Minor typo ... the op-ed is from the Washington Times, not the Washington Post. Not that I'm a fan of the Post, but I wouldn't want to sink so low as to confuse the two.

The Washington Times is to ethical journalism as Sun Myung Moon and the Unification Church is to religion, but that's because the Moonies own the Washington Times. For details, see here: http://www.realjournalism.net/tim es.htm.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Cabalists?
Authored by: darthaggie on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:14 PM EST
I live within ten miles of a Mobil station, actually. Now *that* is sinister. Maybe I'm a shill for Big Oil.

Now, now, you know you're not a shill. The proper spelling is "analyst". As in "an analyst who studies Big Oil".

It's David Boies who I believe lives on IBM's doorstep. Hmm. If we were going to decide affiliations by locale, what would that indicate?

*tinfoilhat* That he's a double agent, a "torpedo" lawyer who's in the process of sinking TSG? and making a few bucks in the process??? */tinfoilhat*

Oh, yeah. TINC (there is no cabal)

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Cabalists? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:22 PM EST
  • Cabalists? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:22 PM EST
What have EV1 ACTUALLY bought???
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:15 PM EST
..from a thread on the Yahoo board..
<QUOTE>
SCO license flaw
by: rgriffith64
Long-Term Sentiment: Strong Sell 03/01/04 01:43 pm
Msg: 100318 of 100330

The SCO license is fatally flawed. It is for binary only code. Yet does not say
what a valid path for obtaining the binary code is. Or even what binary code is
licensed. Binary code comes from source. Someone must have the source to
generate the binary.

I have source code.
I compile.
I have binary code.

SCO has licensed the binary code I am ok.

I change the source.
I compile.
I have binary code.

SCO has licensed my binary code. I am ok.

Is SCO's IP in only the binary and not the source??? If SCO does not provide the
binaries, yet licenses them this means I get SCO's IP from someone else. The
base question is, it SCO's IP if I don't get it from SCO and it has no "SCO
IP inside" or "SCO IP license required to use" label. Prima-facia
no SCO IP. And anyone can probably take that to court.

At no point are signed binaries or any particular version of a binary OS stamped
by the SCO license.

EV1 definitly bought the Brooklyn Bridge.
</QUOTE>


[ Reply to This | # ]

Poor little SCO
Authored by: GLJason on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:17 PM EST
I can't understand why the powerful monopolistic open-source developers would possibly be upset with the little democratic freedom-loving company known as SCO... Maybe because they:
  1. Have called the GPL, the license that got thousands and thousands of developers to work on GNU/Linux over the past 15+ years unconstitutional and communistic
  2. Are trying to charge a license fee to run linux, violating the copyrights of every Linux contributor by encouraging companies to use their software against the license they distributed it under
  3. Have turned from Dr. Jekkyl to Mr. Hyde by going against everything the company has stood for in the past
  4. Have failed to act in good faith to remedy the alleged violations
  5. Are abusing the US Judicial system in order to artificially inflate their stock price
  6. Seem to make ridiculous interpretations of contracts they weren't even a party to
  7. Seem to think that the amount of code that IBM has put into Linux is worth hundreds of times what they paid for the Unix rights.
  8. Are trying to claim ownership of code written by others (errno.h, signal.h)
  9. Continually lie to the public and change positions on what the whole disagreement is about
  10. List court cases that they say support their position, but which in reality have nothing to do with it or support the other side

[ Reply to This | # ]

"Linux Insider" is biting the hand that feeds it
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:18 PM EST

Apparently Linux Insider is an anti-Linux website. And when I visited their
website I saw a huge IBM ad on top of the page. With FUD articles they have
been publishing IBM should pull their support and ads from this website
immediately.

Any IBM'ers out there who know the people to get in touch with at IBM? Linux
Insider is biting the hand that is feeding it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

GPL Section 4, is EV1Servers in trouble?
Authored by: weave on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:20 PM EST
First Off: Hang in there PJ. It never a good thing to have your name dragged in
the FUD around and the press should know better. The press is composed of
people: The good, The bad, and the Ugly! It's unfortunate, but we all seem to
remember the ones that cause problems and not the good ones that are
responsible.

Second: Is EV1Servers now in violation of Section 4 of the GPL? By having
purchased a license "Linux" license from SCO, is that considered
non-acceptance of Section 4 of the GPL. Can Linus and the rest of the kernel
developer now revoke EV1Servers right to use Linux by their actions of
purchasing the SCO License? IANAL so I really wonder. Any guesses anyone?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:23 PM EST
Something interesting about the "Microsoft Case Study" is the odd little tidbit that they go out of their way to talk about 'pushing floppies into bare metal machines' to go from a totally blank slate to a fully deployable system in 45 minutes - they seem to forget to mention that the Windows machines are almost certainly coming pre-installed. Short of a network boot (which they could more than likely do with Linux and remove the physical step if necessary) you still have to load some kind of media to bring up a 'bare metal' machine.

How much 'manual intervention' is required to take the same 'bare metal' box and install whatever flavor of Windows they're using?

Reasonably typical of a company looking almost desperate to make themselves look good no matter what the expense..

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: MK on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:24 PM EST
Who do they think they are influencing with all this FUD? Anyone who has read
this site, knows it is backed up by DOCUMENTED FACTS, not BASELESS ACCUSATIONS.
If you don't like the interpretation, than you are free to have that opinion,
but at least you get the facts. Thanks for flushing out another FUD spreading
site masquerading as a Linux site.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:25 PM EST
Groklaw publishes the actual court documents in an accessible format. That is a
tremendous service. PJ you provide rational explanations of the legal process
and bring together credible sources of alternate information. This is more that
anyone else is doing. You also clearly and articulately express your opinions as
you have a right to do.

There are a number of over the top posters here who are understandably angry at
what SCO is trying to do. Some of their comments are intemperate at best. They
are also in the great tradition of computer exchanges in chat rooms, usenet, and
other similar venues.

It is clear that some people are confusing the editorial content of Groklaw with
the opinions of various posters and attempting to tar everyone with the same
brush. Don't take offense. In the words of Joe Kennedy, don't get mad get even.
Keep up the fight.

I find it interesting that an apparently credible legal position for IBM can be
build like an open source software project, with many people contributing the
little part they understand something about.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Right on schedule
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:26 PM EST
PJ, Blake's comments just reinforce what we already know: that you're doing a
wonderful job of exposing the SCO criminals for exactly what they are. Thank
you for doing such a great job!

I would also like to point out that this is FUD week. SCO is due to release a
non-earnings report in a couple of days and they are scrambling desperately
trying to fing something to offset the bad news.

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ wins Oscar. PJ is under attack.
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:26 PM EST
Now I am confused :)

At least one thing in common is that both PJs are famous.
And the dark lord is in fear.

[ Reply to This | # ]

EV1 Servers.net
Authored by: nattt on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:31 PM EST
Can EV1 Servers.net now be taken to task for breaking the GPL because they
bought the SCO licence? Can the copyright holders of Linux now sue EV1
Servers.net?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Correction
Authored by: Jude on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:35 PM EST
Don't tell me the Three Muskateers of FUD, DiDio, Enderle, and Lyons, are going to be trotted out again.

Isn't that supposed to be the Three Stooges?

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Correction - Authored by: Nick_UK on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:41 PM EST
  • Correction - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:26 PM EST
The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Thomas An. on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:35 PM EST
PJ, their responce is excellent news.

Their unsubstantiated comments qualify as the proverbial mud-slinging; this is a
tell-tale sign of success.

Psychological warfare is perfectly normal. They want you angry, because anger
tends to cloud human judgment.

Turn on your "wipers" and lets keep 4-wheeling in the SCO FUD outback.
Stay focused, stay "Vulcan".

Thomas

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: SCO stock perched for conversion?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:37 PM EST
SCOX is dropping daily. It has stayed below $13 since last Thursday. At what
point does their Royal Bank of Canada stock face imminent conversion? Can we
hope that after Judge Wells finally rules, that RBC will be standing in line
with their hand out?

Just curious.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:42 PM EST
IMHO, this kind of cheap snap-shot at you actually backfires, making them look
like they are running scared.

Keep it up.

We are with you.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Shills running ahead of SCO PR
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:42 PM EST
    Groklaw is hosted, free, by a nonprofit outfit called iBiblio, which runs on $250,000 worth of Linux-based computers donated by IBM

It seems that some long-time Microsoft astroturfers were spouting this line before the press release even came out:

ShillSpotters

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ Open Letter 2
Authored by: miss_cleo_psy4u on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:44 PM EST
Maybe it's time for a second Letter to SCO.
re: The SCO Hit Men

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: kalimar on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:44 PM EST
I always forget. Is the crud flowing from Stowell and others about Groklaw and
PJ considered libel or slander or both?

[ Reply to This | # ]

An Orchestrated Litany of Lies
Authored by: PM on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:49 PM EST
I can just imagine this exchange:

SCO: Groklaw is just an orchestrated litany of lies.

PJ: OK, tell me which parts are wrong.

SCO: Oh, no, we cannot do this. It would be the same as identifying the
infringing code in Linux.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: blacklight on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:49 PM EST
"When the reporter, Dan Lyons, asked me where I lived, I said I'd rather he
not print anything about that, because I was kind of frightened about suddenly
becoming well-known, and I was worried about being stalked, because of some
email I had received. I thought he agreed. I made the same request to Bob Mims
of the Salt Lake Tribune, and he honored my request.

When Lyons' attack on Groklaw was printed, to my disgust, I saw he'd printed
what he thought was my residence"

That has the look and feel of an intimidation attempt by our friend Dan Lyons.
I've got admire the man's zeal: he not only reports the news, but tries to make
them and shape them, too.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Catch 22-ing EV1Servers.net with GPL Vs SCO
Authored by: NZheretic on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:58 PM EST
If you are an EV1Servers.net customer with a linux hosted server with root access, you could effectively Catch 22 the company with a GPL Vs SCO licensing paradox.

1) Logon to your EV1Servers.net hosted Linux webserver.
2) Download a copy of the Linux kernel binary and all the related module binaries.
3) EV1Servers.net are making use of derived works under the terms of the GPL. They are obligated to provide the source code under the terms of the GPL if they make the binaries available to the customers.
4) Under the terms of the GPL, EV1Servers.net must either make the binaries available on the same place, or link to a site ...
http://www.fsf.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#SourceAndBinaryOnDifferentSites

Note, however, that it is not enough to find some site that happens to have the appropriate source code today, and tell people to look there. Tomorrow that site may have deleted that source code, or simply replaced it with a newer version of the same program. Then you would no longer be complying with the GPL requirements. To make a reasonable effort to comply, you need to make a positive arrangement with the other site, and thus ensure that the source will be available there for as long as you keep the binaries available.

5) Any such arrangement in (4) would be a violation of the SCO Group's License with EV1Servers.net - Catch 22.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Affiliation by location...
Authored by: javajedi on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 02:59 PM EST
Well now, according to the location theory, I live less than 10 miles from a McDonalds (doesn't nearly everyone? :) ) And they use SCO software to run their registers if I am not mistaken. Ergo, according to "Stowell logic" (credit where credit is due) I must have some connection to them in some mysterious unproveable way. Even with this tenuous affiliation with them, I must say that the unfounded FUD being spread in SCO press releases has, so far, been completely unfounded and never backed up by facts (we are talking real facts here). On the other hand, EVERYTHING that has been pointed out here on Groklaw has always had factual evidence linked and cross referenced so that the reader could follow the path to enlightenment for themselves.

Lets' see... balancing things out here... Unfounded accusations and FUD with no evidence or path to follow to facts for backup (SCO), Calm comments based on actual fact, researchable and tracked so that people can follow the same trail to the facts and come to their own conclusions (Groklaw)...

Sorry Blake, I'll have to side with the Groklaw folks on this.

I wonder if my ability to order McDonald's hamburgers will be revoked now? Oh well, it is a chance I will have to take!

---
The Matrix is real... but i'm only visiting...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Enderle runs in "Insider Linux" sister publication?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:00 PM EST
Looking through the comments here shows this:

The same company owns "Tech News World" and "Linux Insider."
Enderle appears in Tech News World. Sooooooo . . .

Have I got it about right?

[ Reply to This | # ]

My Response To LinuxInsider
Authored by: jmsjnsn on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:01 PM EST
I sent a little note to LinuxInsider/ECT News/David Halperin via their Corrections page:
http://www.linuxinsider.com/perl/contact_form.pl?to=corrections
Their parser wouldn't take plain text paragraph marks or html tags so it formats terribly. It ended up looking about like the following when I previewed it. Quality site. Anyway:
http://www.linuxinsider.com/perl/story/32990.html [Writing Linux History: Groklaw's Role in the SCO Controversy by David Halperin 2/1/04] "'Call me crazy,' adds Stowell, 'but I somehow think that Pamela Jones isn't just a paralegal with nothing better to do with her life than host a Web site called Groklaw that is dedicated to bashing SCO. I think there is a lot more to her background and intentions than she is willing to reveal publicly. I believe that Big Blue looms large behind Pamela Jones.'" Responsible journalism in an article regarding sco v. LINUX, especially on a site entitled LinuxInsider, would be appreciated. Please take a queue from Pamela Jones and DOCUMENT this assertion. If it's correct, it would be NEWS, if it is not, it would be par for the SCO-course... --James Jensen, [e-mail address]

The point is the same. sco insinuates dirt, we ask them to please 'put up or shut up'. They can't because it's not there so they won't, but that doesn't stop them from denigrating individuals or groups.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:04 PM EST
I wouldn't jump to conclusions that LinuxInsider is either a SCO or Microsoft
shill. Having been a reporter for years, I would jump to the immediate
conclusion that a small, newer publication of that nature has no editorial
respectability and is completely beholden to whom they want future advertising
contracts with. Occam's Razor. Roughly quoted, when unsure, let the simplest
explanation suffice.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO gets a customer, and it's news?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:07 PM EST
My goodness, what does that say about SCO? If your business gets a customer,
would you make the headlines?

[ Reply to This | # ]

EV1 forum off-line; Most Likely Not Slashdotted.
Authored by: rjamestaylor on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:08 PM EST
Clicking the link to EV1's customer forum reveals a MySQL error some may think is the result of a "slashdotting" of the page -- it isn't:
    Warning: mysql_connect(): Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/tmp/mysql.sock' (2) in /var/www/html/admin/db_mysql.php on line 40
This isn't a "too many connections" problem. Someone shutdown the database.

My guess? Complaints from customers don't look good on a publicly accessible site, especially when the site is getting media attention due to controversy-feeding press releases.

(It is possible that MySQL was shut off due to too many connection attempts swamping the machine. But that would mean EV1's server couldn't handle the load - quite embarrassing for a "premier" web host.)

By the way, many hosting companies have a policy that if you become a nuisance through other people targeting your web site(s) resulting in reduced service to other customers, regardless if you are innocent or not, they reserve the right to cancel your account without prior notification. If you do something explicit that stirs up a hornets nest they'll drop you faster than an AOL dial-up connection.

If a customer of EV1 had a press release linking it to SCO I bet EV1 would pull that customer's plug. Probably with a press release letting everyone know that the offending customer was removed (so please don't swamp us). EV1 must have realized this action on their part would not be positively received by its customers.

So, realizing the ill-will it would generate against itself, EV1 must have really been bent over a barrel to have signed this agreement with SCO. I pity EV1.

---
SCO delenda est! Salt their fields!

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Golden Rule
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:09 PM EST
Somebody in their church needs to sit them down and explain the Golden Rule.

Since the Golden Rule reminds me an awful lot of the GPL, I'm not surprised that SCO doesn't understand it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Mark_Edwards on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:09 PM EST
So are we now going to see EV1 getting a supoena from IBM
soon? I expect IBM will be very interested to see what SCO
have licenced to EV1 ! Have SCO licenced IBM's code?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Ares_Man on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:12 PM EST
Typical action from a knee-jerk company who know their own inevitable future but
do not wish to admit it. Just be positive knowing that the more trouble SCO gets
into, the more violently and relentlessly they'll attack. Don't think too much
on today. Think joyfully of tomorrow. There be many here on Groklaw that are
greatful for what you started and are behind you all the way; but also remember
that Groklaw is just one of many subcommunities that are fighting the same war.

When the FUD clears the sun will shine brighter.

[ Reply to This | # ]

E1servers can't handle the load?
Authored by: PengyDaPenguin on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:15 PM EST
Looks like the forums site for E1Servers is having a bit of trouble now. You can
connect to it, but the database isn't available because of a socket error. Hrmm,
I'm pretty sure that Linux would be able to handle the flood of interested
Groklawians properly, but instead they decided to go with Windows. Oops!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Stowell is a sexist pig!
Authored by: Tsu Dho Nimh on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:15 PM EST
""'Call me crazy,' adds Stowell, 'but I somehow think that Pamela Jones isn't just a paralegal with nothing better to do with her life than host a Web site called Groklaw that is dedicated to bashing SCO. I think there is a lot more to her background and intentions than she is willing to reveal publicly. I believe that Big Blue looms large behind Pamela Jones.'"

So ... PJ couldn't have done this all by herself? He doesn't think a female can start and run a blog, and organize a group of volunteers? Women can't research? His sexist piggitude is showing more strongly than usual today.

My comment to PJ ... You GO girl!

[ Reply to This | # ]

I like this
Authored by: 106ja on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:17 PM EST
"'Call me crazy,' adds Stowell, 'but I somehow think that Pamela Jones
isn't just a paralegal with nothing better to do with her life than host a Web
site called Groklaw that is dedicated to bashing SCO. I think there is a lot
more to her background and intentions than she is willing to reveal publicly. I
believe that Big Blue looms large behind Pamela Jones.'"

Well I belive that this tells much more about SCO than about PJ. This is a SCO
way. They looms large behind DidIo , eNdErle etc. They spent their buks on PR.
So they just can't figure out how could somebody make Groklaw without being
loomed large bay IBM.

BTW PJ looks a bit upset. No good lady. No good at all. Be happy. What if they
COULD use some truth agains you? That will be painfull. So "Don't be sad,
be like a sun at noon" if this is the best they could told against your
work, than you realy have to feel revieled.


---
Don't judge me by my english. My native langue have no X's or Y'es

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:19 PM EST
First they ignore you.
Then they laugh at you.
Then they fight you.
Then you win.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:27 PM EST
Pam,
Don't take this personal. Consider it that Groklaw is making a difference, and
is starting to get noticed. When you are a leader, people try hard to take you
down. Keep up the good work and please keep the stuff flowing!

[ Reply to This | # ]

LinuxInsider is sponsored by...
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:27 PM EST
IBM! Blake, get it right, dude! Your real enemy is obviously LinuxInsider, since
they are openly accepting advertising dollars from IBM and they are associated
with the Linux community (just look at their name), it all fits. LinuxInsider is
just a front for IBM.

BS smells worse than an overused outhouse!

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:27 PM EST
Every PR from the SCO move is being countered with facts that can withstand the
scrutiny of the toughest judge anywhere. The open and collaborative effort to
dig up the facts is proving to be more powerful than having high-profile
lawyers. Community backlash was anticipated from the hackers, but not help in
the from of legal research. Remember, the public has short memory. SCO must keep
changing the media game and repeating the FUD. Soon someday will start
believing. Remember Goebbels, Microsoft.

But then this groklaw business starts to become dangerous. Sure, the majority of
the press folks will write down what the SCO/MS says. Frequent change of tactics
helps to maintain the interest in the newsfeed from SCO. But what if people
getting tired starts to look at the views from the otherside. Then groklaw
becomes a threat. Time to react before it's too late. What happens if the
community loses it's guide... Break the top authority. Mere human. Nobody can
face a continuous stream of lies and allegations with calm. Ask the press if
groklaw has published even one article that was not against SCO? More, more...
Soon the source of all troubles will crumble and the supporters will
vanish at loss to do the next thing...

But then, they did not realise the stuff PJ is made of...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Pam, and all... This is just Validation...
Authored by: cfitch on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:32 PM EST
...for all the many hours of effort that everyone has contributed here. It's
reached the point where SCO officers like Stowell have to attempt to discredit
Pamela and Groklaw.

What else can they do? As Lewis Mettler pointed out, SCO has seriously
underestimated the power of the Internet and it's ability to rapidly disseminate
information to interested parties. This whole legal morass created by SCO seems
to be just a giant scam designed to make money for SCO and injure Microsoft's
largest competitor, Linux. Groklaw has helped to debunk all of the
misinformation propagated by SCO and the un-informed traditional IT media
entities. The truth threatens SCO's actions so they have to do something, and in
typical SCO fashion, they resort to name calling and vague claims.

Further, IT reporters (I apologize in advance to real IT reporters for the
insult) such as Enderle and Lyons are threatened by Groklaw and Pamela since
they no longer are the primary "authoritative" source for information
on the SCO case. Enderle, Lyons, and Didio are threatened by the success of
Linux, and the success of its supporters. They, too, have to lash out and
attempt to discredit Groklaw, etc. or face a slide into irrelevance and join the
ranks of the unemployed. Some time ago, it was pointed out that there is a
significant Microsoft bias inherent in the IT media for the simple reasons that
Microsoft is a large advertiser and most IT publications don't like to see the
boat rocked by the emergence of a new major player in the IT world. These
attacks by Enderle, Lyons, Didio, etc, are the prime examples of the battles
that are being fought to attempt to stop the growth of Linux and other new
technologies.

Alas, for them it is too late, the genie's out of the bottle, and they are
losing. Too bad, so sad, better luck next time!

Though I'm sure it's not needed, I have some advice for Pam and other Groklaw
members: follow IBM's lead. Don't sink to the level of Enderle, Lyons, Stowell,
Didio, etc. They don't deserve the attention. Be cool, calm, and collected and
respond to their whining with the truth. They obviosuly can't handle the truth
since their actions and comments are proof of that.

Keep up the work all!

Christopher F.



[ Reply to This | # ]

Strangely anagolous
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:33 PM EST
Stowell is afraid of PJ for the same reason that SCO is afraid of Linux
contributors -- she's doing Stowell's job, only she produces much more and does
it without pay. How's a PR guy supposed to make a living when people are
willing to publish well thought-out arguments for free?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Curious wording of SCO's EV1Server press release
Authored by: slimjimmonk on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:37 PM EST

Is seems to me, the SCO press release about EV1Servers.net licensing is curiously worded.

The SCO IP licensing program was created in response to customer requests...

Are SCO's customers actually asking to have money extorted? Would any sane business do that? I'm just glad I'm not one of their customers.

In reference to EV1Servers.Net, how does this apply to them? From the Microsoft link above and NetCraft.com, EVServers.Net is apparently a Microsoft shop. How many Linux servers does thier license actually cover?

<tinfoil_hat>

They have a token Linux presence, prehaps one server kept in a disused lavatory, in the basement... Microsoft gave EVServers a sweeeet deal if they would buy SCO IP license (whatever that is). SCO gets the benefit of a press release that SOMEONE FINALLY bought their bull and Microsoft gets the benefit of tarnishing Linux.

Another curiosity, I found it interesting that is was reported as EV1Servers.Net not EV1Servers.net.
</tinfoil_hat>

PJ, thanks for all your work!

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ -- Plenty of rumors for the mill...
Authored by: Xenographic on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:43 PM EST
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=98863&cid=8433077

^^^ You might want to read that, PJ.

Granted, the above is an anonymous post on slashdot (hardly trustworthy, but
might be good for a lead), yet it is rather interesting. It might shed more
light on how and why that company is in these PR campaigns.

The poster there makes it sound like there's some clueless element of their
management which just wants to always catch "the next big thing" ...
I don't know, but that would be a reasonable explanation. There's plenty of
other info on EV1 there, as well.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Whoa, girl, whoa !
Authored by: The_Pirate on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:45 PM EST
PJ, relax and grab some coffee. I can nearly see the smoke pouring out of your
ears.

I know that nasty feeling: i tried it a few times myself.
I spent some time on one of the Greenpeace ships (that's the origin of my name
tag :). When we did actions, and got too close for our opponent's comfort, the
verbal cowflake-throwing started. Instantly.

You've probably seen something similar in court a few times too.

Take it as a (relatively) good sign: you and this community are nibbling at
their heels. You are way too close for comfort, so they try to get rid of you.

It won't work. It never does. It only makes them look worse than ever.

The attempt to publish your adress is a dirty one. But a nice trap, too. It just
exposed _them_, not you.

Prepare yourself, there will be more dirt arriving. Share it with us - i'm sorry
you are the one getting it, but you are the figurehead of this project. And
remember, the nastier it gets, the closer we are to their little secrets. So
it's really a backward measure of success.

Let's keep snapping at their heels, ok?
Big hug for you !

[ Reply to This | # ]

Nevermind that Blake Stowell !!!
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:46 PM EST
You are incredible, PJ, for continuing in the face of personal attacks like these. You should know that the world is here with you. The other side only have a few self-interested "journalists".

I am writing this from Lausanne, VD, Switzerland, where because of the timezone, I have often in the last few days found myself reading groklaw before the trolls have been moderated away... so I know what's been happening. Now that this site is popular the FUD machine is trying to subvert it. They will learn of course that it's not possible any more than it's possible to steal the work of the thousands who have contributed to the kernel.

Please keep going. If there's anything we readers can do, don't hesitate to ask !

-mark

[ Reply to This | # ]

Nevermind that Blake Stowell !!!
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:46 PM EST
You are incredible, PJ, for continuing in the face of personal attacks like these. You should know that the world is here with you. The other side only have a few self-interested "journalists".

I am writing this from Lausanne, VD, Switzerland, where because of the timezone, I have often in the last few days found myself reading groklaw before the trolls have been moderated away... so I know what's been happening. Now that this site is popular the FUD machine is trying to subvert it. They will learn of course that it's not possible any more than it's possible to steal the work of the thousands who have contributed to the kernel.

Please keep going. If there's anything we readers can do, don't hesitate to ask !

-mark

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: TerryL on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:47 PM EST
Enter Pamela Jones and Groklaw. A paralegal, Linux programmer and self-described geek,...

"...Linux programmer..." - I didn't realise PJ was a programmer... when did that happen?

What they can't get around, however much FUD they spread, is that GROKLAW has unearthed and made accessible, (by hi-lighting it), vaste quantities of REAL facts and information that contradicts the "theories" of SCOG. Those facts are there where anyone (including IBM, RedHat and Novell lawyers, intelligent investers and current and future Linux users) can access them, verify them and use them. Those facts are facts and they can't claim "The Linux Community" or GROKLAW or our new Linux Programmer and geek PJ created and faked them.

While they may be able to (mis)quote discusions and comments from over enthusiastic messages here and on ./ the REAL facts stand. It doesn't matter so much if the unthinking, unknowing public never get to read them in the lazy and/or unscrupulous press because the FACTS are available for use where they really matter, in the court room.

---
All comment and ideas expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of any other idiot...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Thick FUD for a reason
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:47 PM EST
Ah, FUD. Interesting coincidence that the Fud-meisters are in full swing right after such dramatic news from Germany. Can you say "Damage Control?" It's just another diversionary tactic. It is best to remain focussed, keep the attention to the facts that matter, and not fall into supporting their diversionist agenda.

Very interesting, though, about the Microsoft connection to the latest SCO "sale." Things are indeed fishy!

(sorry next time I will log in)

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: mdchaney on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:49 PM EST

So, my math says, if they had no justification for terminating, or if Novell voided the termination anyhow, and the copyright infringement can only be for any "infringement" post termination, that adds up to, let's see, carry the zero... why, I get zero. Is that what you get?

That's where they start, yes. Before IBM wins the countersuit, that is....

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: auric on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:49 PM EST
Ouch. There are some ugly people out there. Conspiracy theories are nothing
compared to real life. They can't attack the truth so they attack you. It means
they know they've already lost.

Keep up the sterling work, PJ! You're a great source of information and
inspiration. We know IBM and many others visit this site and we're all behind
you. A perfect example of the thousand-eyes approach to open project
development.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:51 PM EST
I just feel like adding a bit more irony here. Perform a google search for:
ev1servers OR rackshack adult

I wonder if those good Mormon boys at SCO realize who they're teaming up with!

-brendan

[ Reply to This | # ]

Contradiction?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 03:53 PM EST
'[...]I find that there is so much misinformation on Groklaw that is misconstrued and twisted that it's probably one step above a lot of the ranting and dribble that takes place on Slashdot.'. . .
When he says that, the immediate thing that pops into my mind is him saying "Groklaw/slashdot aren't reliable sources of information. I, on the other hand, can be trusted". He then goes on to say:
'Doesn't anyone find it the least bit ironic,' he asks, 'that Pamela Jones lives ... less than 10 miles from IBM's worldwide headquarters, [...]'
Right. On one hand he's claiming that groklaw information is not reliable (despite all the justification that things get around here), and on the other hand he's making claims that because PJ lives *near* IBM, she "probably" works for them. I can see lots of backing to that claim.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Why shouldn't IBM pay PJ?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:00 PM EST
If, as many of us believe, SCO actually pays Enderle, DiDio, and Lyons, it's
probably reasonable from SCO's point of view to believe that IBM pays PJ. They
have their paid media shills--and only their paid media shills--on their side,
so they probably can't even begin to conceive that someone might side with IBM
in this matter unless that person were being paid by IBM to do so.

[ Reply to This | # ]

More FUD from Electrical Engineering Times
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:03 PM EST

A brief quote from Electrical Engineering Times (registration required)

Finally, NetBSD has gained traction because it provides a "third option" for OEMs forced to choose between expensive, royalty-driven proprietary systems on one hand, and Linux on the other. While Linux's performance features are adequate for many embedded applications, its strict general public license (GPL) terms are often highly problematic, as evidenced by the recent spate of GPL-related litigation. The GPL requires that any modifications to the Linux kernel (or other software covered by the GPL, which includes thousands of modules and applications) must themselves be made open-source. This provision has left many OEMs wary of Linux in general, because kernel modifications and similar development often represent strategic IP. Moreover, many OEMs worry that releasing OS code may allow competitors to reverse-engineer the configuration of the underlying hardware. Finally, because the GPL is viral in nature, it may "infect" OEM-created software and create large-scale IP issues for vendors.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT - but Judge Wells issue's order
Authored by: blhseawa on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:03 PM EST
PJ,

On pacer, there is an entry saying Judge Wells issued a order granting TSG
request to amend complaint.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Forget the tinfoil hat, wear your high boots.
Authored by: RLP on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:05 PM EST
Boy they are flinging it all over the place today. I'd have to guess that this
attempted slime overkill is all about trying to drown out the German settlement
with noise.

[ Reply to This | # ]

David Halpirin (author of article) MS Shill?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:06 PM EST
http://www.writerfind.com/dhalperin.htm

Here's the author. Near as I can tell, he's never written anything else for
Linux Insider, but has for their sister magazine. Seems to have done quite a bit
of Microsoft writing. Feel free to ask him questions about his motivation :)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Rejoice
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:08 PM EST
The FUD proves you are having a major if not a colossal effect, on SCO, MS and
the all the irresponsible journalists out there. There credibility is negative
and going down even further. So rejoice in what you have set in motion.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Media trolling.. Beware.
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:08 PM EST
Really, I think Groklaw, Slashdot and others should be a bit more conservative
about posting 'news' like this.

Because:
1) There's nothing actually new being reported
2) The article does not highlight any new aspects or give new insights, nor is
it well-written.

Look at this "LinuxInsider" site, they conveniently list the most read
stories.. Guess what? Lots on SCO.

Basically, I feel these sites are 'flamebaiting' for hits.. and it's working. I
think that kind of behaviour should be discouraged. If the story is
inflammatory, on an unknown site, and fulfills the above points.

I suggest it be ignored. We're not missing anything, other than a chance to
promote bad behavior from certain less-than-serious web sites.

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ, try looking at it this way:
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:09 PM EST
>"Blake Stowell, the company's director of public
>relations, says: 'I think the unfortunate thing about
>Groklaw is that many people reference the site as a
>supposed "credible resource" and take a lot of what is
>posted there as the absolute truth.

Unfortunate, yes. For you.

>I find that there is so much misinformation on Groklaw
>that is misconstrued and twisted that it's probably one
>step above a lot of the ranting and dribble that takes
>place on Slashdot.'. . .

Only the SCO quotes. Millions of lines... gnarf!

>"It may be that kind of intransigence that leads SCO's
>Blake Stowell to hint at darker motives.

Indeed, it is difficult to reconcile SCO's statements with
reality, after all.

>'Doesn't anyone find it the least bit ironic,' he asks,
>'that Pamela Jones lives ... less than 10 miles from
>IBM's worldwide headquarters, and that Groklaw is
>hosted, free, by a nonprofit outfit called iBiblio,
>which runs on $250,000 worth of Linux-based computers
>donated by IBM and a $2 million donation from a
>foundation set up by Robert Young, founder of Red Hat?'


iBiblio does way more than host GrokLaw.
So ask them to license your IP already.
Non-profit, hippie, commie, civic-minded people. That's
the real problem with this country. Can't feel good about
winning unless someone else loses, hmmm? The old zero-sum
mentality.

> "'Call me crazy,' adds Stowell,

must....resist.....

>'but I somehow think that Pamela Jones isn't just a
>paralegal with nothing better to do with her life than
>host a Web site called Groklaw that is dedicated to
>bashing SCO.

Absolutely correct. She isn't. She doesn't. It's not.

>I think there is a lot more to her background and
>intentions than she is willing to reveal publicly.

Oh, I'm happy with 'The REAL Boss'.

>I believe that Big Blue looms large behind Pamela
>Jones.'"

And SCO looms small before her.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Stowell Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: tintak on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:11 PM EST
Keep on smiling PJ.

And lest we forget. SCOG have a very interesting earnings report to give out on
Wednesday. I wonder if the EV1 licence fee will be in it?

It could amount to millions.

---
'it is literally impossible' for SCO to itself provide
direct proof' Mark J. Heise 02/06/04

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: the_flatlander on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:13 PM EST
I find that there is so much misinformation on Groklaw that is misconstrued and twisted that it's probably one step above a lot of the ranting and dribble that takes place on Slashdot.
Well, Mr. Stowell is probably just talking about *my* mean-spirited attempts at humor at the SCOundrels' expense. I can't help it though, those guys are just *so* funny. But that has nothing to do with the good Ms. Jones's articles, and in that respect this is just another bit of subtle misdirection on the part of the SCOundrels; attempting to discredit PJ over a few rash things I may have said. (I note he still puts me a step *above* slashdot.)

It's okay though, it is still advertising for Groklaw. People might wander over to have a look, and find that Mr Stowell is, again, being less than completely accurate. I would guess that most people, given the opportunity, would find this site quite useful were they interesetedd in the truth about the SCOundrels' claims.

The Flatlander

Personally, I'd rate Blake's ranting several step *below* slashdot, but that's just me.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: the_spide on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:14 PM EST
Did LinuxInsider ask for permission to use the Groklaw logo at the top of the "Writing Linux History: Groklaw's Role in the SCO Controversy" story ?

Did they need to ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hang in there PJ---you have lots of support... More than SCO will ever have!
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:14 PM EST
From Night Flyer at work:

Veritas Vincit: Truth Conquers

The trouble is, sometimes it takes a while.

In the mean time, tell us what help you need, we're here, all around you.
------------------------------------------
That was good news from Germany. I presume SCO won't have any substantive proof
of their "IP" in Linux next month or in any month (unless they put it
there themselves).

Does that mean that after a month passes we don't have to worry about FUD from
SCO in Germany, or does it mean that SCO can start the FUD again a month before
they present their next claim of infringement on their I.P.?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Steve Martin on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:17 PM EST
Three words for you, P.J.:

ILLEGITIMI NON CARBORUNDUM

Keep up the good work.

---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffee, "Sports Night"

[ Reply to This | # ]

Stowell's Comment == Measure of Groklaw's Effectiveness
Authored by: banjopaterson on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:18 PM EST
If Groklaw wasn't effective then Blake Stowell would not have even cared to have
mentioned it. It is only because Groklaw is a thorn in their side that they
spread this FUD (well, less like FUD, more like lies and outright attack)
regarding PJ and Groklaw.

Pardon the biblical quote (I am a Christian), but one to encourage you PJ:

"The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood
it." (John 1:5)

Regards

Banjo

[ Reply to This | # ]

EV1 is running windows.
Authored by: defenestrator on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:18 PM EST
According to netcraft, EV1 is running windows 2000. Since, the license is for
Linux users why do they need an SCO License?

Perhaps they used play money.

We won't sue you for your pretend use of our pretend Intellectual property.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Don't worry PJ!
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:20 PM EST
(For SCO,) it will all be over soon.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Blake isn't at peace?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:21 PM EST
Stowell: "I see it as one of the biggest challenges I've ever had in my
career, and I'm of course very supportive of the company's efforts in this area.
As long as I can go home at night and know that I was honest with the media, I
was respectful of another's point of view and tried to not burn any bridges, I
think that I can feel very at peace."

Is he hinting to us that he isn't at peace? I think that is what he was trying
to say there.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Blake isn't at peace? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:03 PM EST
  • Well - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 08:46 PM EST
The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:24 PM EST
SCO's desparation shows in its tactics.

However, one thing I would like to point out is that the paragraph 35 you quoted
is no longer operative. The reasons that SCO now gives for terminating the AIX
and Dynix licenses are set out in paragraphs 6 to 12 of the newly amended claim.
These paragraphs are rather cleverly drafted in that they really say, in
effect, that any of SCO's allegations of wrongdoing by IBM that SCO makes
subsequently in its newly amended claim that SCO can sustain at trial, is, or if
the court so finds it, sufficient grounds for termination.

I can think of several things that IBM might attempt in an effort to counter
this tactic, but every one of them will give SCO further time to keep its
litigation ball in play.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Not a big deal
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:33 PM EST
at least for ev1servers.

According to netcraft.com, "The site ev1servers.net is running
Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000."

I wonder if SCO gave them a nice discount for all that re-licensed (through
Microsoft) SCO IP?

anonymous Pat

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:36 PM EST
Perhaps James Maguire should be added as the
fourth Musketeer. Enterprise Linux I.T. (heavy
with $M banner ads) put forth an article by
Mcguire called "SCO Adds Laundry List of
Complaints to Suit", stating "...a major court
ruling favoring the SCO Group..."
http://enterprise-linux-it.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_title=SCO_Adds_Laund
ry_List_of_Complaints_to_Suit&story_id=23267

[ Reply to This | # ]

A major win?
Authored by: k4_pacific on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:37 PM EST
This article on yahoo by James Maguire opens with this line:
"With a major court ruling favoring the SCO Group, its legal battle with IBM (NYSE: IBM - news) is shaping up as a high-stakes contest that increasingly may involve end-users."

The rest of the article seems to paint the judge's agreement to allow SCO to amend their complaint and IBM's not contesting it as a major win for SCO. (In reality, of course IBM is just giving SCO all the rope they could possibly ever need to hang themselves.)

Also contains this gem from someone at Gartner named George Weiss:

"Legal counsel is probably more important than ever for most of the enterprises that intend to deploy Linux or open source software."

Mr. Maguire has definitely been drinking the SCOberry Kool-Aid.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • A major win? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:33 PM EST
New Linux Insider Story about Groklaw
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:37 PM EST
There is a new linux insider story about Groklaw that came out today (March
1st):

http://www.linuxinsider.com/perl/story/32990.html

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:37 PM EST
How to deal with this symbolic* escalation of FUD by SCO

How to deal with this symbolic* escalation of FUD by SCO

1. Assemble a list of email addresses, fax numbers, cell phone numbers, street
and office addresses and other contact info for computer-related writers,
interested parties, legal authorities if applicable, official newspapers of
record if applicable, parties having a neutral standing with regards to ongoing
SCO-related court actions (these may or may not exist in the USA or elsewhere)
and anybody else I may have overlooked.

2. send a communication via letter (typed or printed), fax, etc. with a clearly
worded statement to the effect that personal attacks have commenced and include
as many sources as possible.


3. Do not include your personal views if at all possible. These may serve to
cloud the issue.

*symbolic in this instance indicates that interested parties are conspiring to
smear their opponents.
The key word here is conspiracy, of course. The best way to deal with this
pre-meditated attack on an individual is to expose it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Blake
Authored by: kberrien on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:38 PM EST
I can't wait until Blake and other other guys, after SCO folds, get new jobs in
the IT industry, with pro linux companies (who else is hiring anyways).

Then we'll hear much pro-linux out of their mouths.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:44 PM EST
I was surprised it took so long to focus their attack, last time it was the
whole linux community that was paid by IBM.

They were busy little beavers over the weekend.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:49 PM EST
I respect your honesty PJ and I've been reading your site for quite some time.
It is disgusting that SCO would attack you personally - Hang in there there are
quite a few of us out here that support you.

Yea, Yea, PJ's drawn out yet another lurker here.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Not OT - Idea for a new Groklaw Project?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:52 PM EST
It seems like every major SCO media offensive is timed to deflect attention from
something else that's bad for them. This is just another case in point.

Can anyone think of a quantifiable way that this hypothesis could be tested? We
could easily find anecdotal evidence, but how about numbers? Hit counters? I
don't know.

Any bright ideas?

Anthem

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: zjimward on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:54 PM EST

PJ:

I hope this doesn't mean that you will have to hire body guards. *Just kidding*
It is very amazing to me, but I've seen it by so-called business professionals
before, how they say one thing to make themselves look good, but are not better
than what they are accusing those around them of being.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What exactly did EV1Servers buy
Authored by: nicke on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 04:55 PM EST
One earlier post in this thread made me start wondering about this deal.

The only clearly legal SCO IP they can sell for Linux is the license to run the
SCO Unix shared libraries on a Linux machine. This makes everybody happy !

- The SCO shared libraries are binary only
- They do not license the linux kernel, only parts of SCO Unix, keeps RedHat off
their backs
- EV1 can offer their Linux customers the possibility to run SCO Unix programs
on their Linux boxes. ( Big deal )
- Looks great to the press

The pressreleases are not very informative.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:03 PM EST
That was again a lovely FUD fight. You are super.

Marc

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:04 PM EST
Congratulations! Groklaw is now at GHANDICON-2.

Soon they will actually attack you, probably with an attempt to take down the
site. Perhaps a third-party cat's-paw will file baseless charges against
iBiblio. You or MathFox may be personally sued.

If this happens, please remember:

- The more vicious and cowardly the attack, the more desparate they reveal
themselves to be.

- Your work is priceless and benefits everyone. You can no more refrain from it
than you can stop breathing.

- You have many friends and even more admirers. We will help in any way
required.

- Each stage in the struggle takes less time than the previous. Any actual
fighting will be over quickly.

-AIB.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Physical location = ??
Authored by: Turing_Machine on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:04 PM EST
I'm sorry to point this out to Blake and the rest of TSG, but this is not the 19th Century. The growth of the suburbs in the 30's, 40's and 50's pointed that out. Now there is this new-fangled thing called "The Internet." Now people can tele-commute. Imagine, being thousands of miles away from your employer, working every day.

Let's be honest, folks. If your JOB was to work on a webpage, your location would mean exactly what? Hrmm, it seems to be about the value of TSG's IP claim. You would think Blake was aware of this, since they had been talking about thousands of SCO programmers, and their office could hold, what, 100? But, like it has been for some time, it is a case of selective amnesia.

TSG knows that SOMEONE bought SOMETHING from Novell, but when pressed for specifics, it seems blury. Oh, but they DIDN'T buy it from Novell when Novell tries to enforce their rights in that agreement.

Or when there were a million lines of TSG code in Linux. Or maybe there is a million lines of FOSS code in UnixWare. Whatever. Whichever option makes people owe TSG money, regardless of how little factual support there is for it.

Maybe this is a case of believing REALLY hard? Someone call Tinkerbell. I think TSG is out of Pixie Dust. What they are speading now certainly is magical, at least for agricultural endeavors.

This all being said, I can honestly say that I have had my slight reeservations, waiting for the other TSG shoe to drop. This attack has made ME feel better. I know THEY know there is no case. I'm sorry that you are their target, PJ, but, for what it is worth, your efforts have enlightened an entire generation of people as to the effectiveness of truth.

---
No, I'm not interested in developing a powerful brain. All I'm after is just a mediocre brain, something like the President of the AT&T --Alan Turing

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Pixie dust - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:57 PM EST
Unintended humour
Authored by: bruce_s on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:08 PM EST
Just reading another comment and part of Blake Stowell's
statement appeared to me that Blake does not get out
enough "I believe that Big Blue looms large behind Pamela
Jones.",
Blake, it's called the SKY and those white fluffy things
are called CLOUDS. That big yellow ball is called The SUN.

Bruce S.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: hutcheson on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:09 PM EST
Pammy is our darling!

I know how you feel, I think: I've been attacked for public-service work that
impeded with someone's perceived income stream (never $3-going-on-5 billion,
however). When a greedy scammer is doing something sleazy for the money, he
automatically assumes everyone in his way is being paid to interfere.

But look at the other side: a real man is known by the enemies he keeps, and you
have a splendid collection. And the virulance of the attack indicates how badly
they feel hurt.

Their reaction is inevitable -- Lyons (nobody will ever again suspect he has
even a bone sliver of journalistic integrity: he's nothing but a sock puppet for
the emperor Ballmertine, and we all know it) is being paid under the table to
foist off Bill Gates' fantasies as reality, and he naturally assumes you're
doing the same -- that's the only motive his mind can still imagine. And Darlth
-- he expected hate, but he must have read the site and seen contempt instead --
when he was expecting to be seen as Software Fuhrer of the New Information Age,
he's being shown up as a cheap marketing hack who can't tell software from soft
soap, an incoherent raver rather than the silver-tongued orator he evidently
imagines, and as lawyer -- the standing joke that was so funny the other lawyers
noticed.

But: have you considered how disastrous a mistake that angry outburst was?

People are going to go see ibiblio, and what will they see? An abominable IBM
FUD-machine, or one of the finest online archives on the net? Do you think
anyone that matters can't tell the difference?

People will go to groklaw to see the Den of Iniquity, and what are they going to
see? TODAY?

-- The German settlement, such a disastrous admission that their IP claims were
totally without foundation, let alone merit.
-- Lyons in the middle of that despicable attempt to physically threaten the
webmaster.
-- Promises of an inside report on the forthcoming non-earnings report (sure to
attract financial reporters totally disinterested in the techie stuff)
-- A detailed critique of IP claims, with historical detail, contrasting sharply
with SCO's terse one-line allegations of mass copying.

All information they can't get elsewhere. It will be addictive. Microsoft has
bought a lot of media outlets, but the others will know where to come to get the
real scoop -- and even the M$ shills will have to come here to know which bit of
their anatomy is about to be gnawed to death by ducks.

Like many of you, I'm assuming that the judge sat on the Darl&Blake rumor
mill: now imagine, if you can, the two cons watching the rim of the caldera
collapse on them, needing desperately to make new promises and threats to pump
the stock, and NOT BEING ABLE TO because of the judge's remarks.

What are they going to do? Shut their mouth and hold in the hot air --
physiologically impossible. Who can they attack? Well, almost everyone on the
other side is already involved in one lawsuit or another ... all that's left is
Groklaw.

Lightning rod indeed: grounding the static, and leaving behind an incapacitated
capacitor. Splendid work indeed, and splendid news. I foresee Bill Gates is
going to be shopping for new sock puppets in the very near future. And I suspect
ibiblio is going to need more bandwidth soon also.

Make no mistake. This was not a defeat. This wasn't even a victory. This was a
glorious rout for the Dead End Row gang. Never before have they stuck a foot so
far in a mouth before shooting themselves in it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO signs EV1Servers as a licensee ?
Authored by: mindovermatter on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:11 PM EST
Any additional information on the story running on Slashdot that SCO has signed EV1Servers.net as a licensee ? Here is a link to the story

[ Reply to This | # ]

Offensive.
Authored by: RSC on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:21 PM EST
that it's probably one step above a lot of the ranting and dribble that takes place on Slashdot.

I am truely offended by that statement.

It strikes me that someone of Mr. Stowell position, should be more considerate in his statements about the general public.

I have on occasion, posted to this site. I also read what PJ puts on this site everyday. And I take offence at having what I post on this site classed as a lot of the ranting and dribble.

It amazes me that an individual who works for a conpany that is on the verge of collapse could even think about slamming their potential customers is such a way. This is not PR, it is insulting.

What it is show, to me anyway, is that PJ and the groklawsters must be getting too close to the real truth. Why else would he single out PJ and groklaw for such insulting comments.

I have been a reader of groklaw for some time now, and I can not see how PJ or the contributors here deserve such a nasty response for this man. Perhaps Blake needs to re-think his life choises, and find a job he is better suited to, as I do not see how he can be classed as a PR officer.

Lastly, I must say that Dan Lyons has a lot to be ashamed of. This disturbing betrayal of trust in regards to the release of personal details on PJ in unforgivable a journalist. ISPs' and internet base businesses get large fines for the "accidental" release of personal informaion. And yet this so call journalist has no quarms about spouting out this type of information. My distrust and dislike of the media has just been re-inforced by this shear idiocy.

Please PJ, do not let this type of shameful act deter you from continuing your outstanding work here on Groklaw. As I have said before, without you, SCO would have already won.

RSC.

---
----
An Australian who IS interested.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Offensive. - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:56 PM EST
  • Offensive. - Authored by: Observer on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 06:18 PM EST
  • Offensive. - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:44 PM EST
The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:26 PM EST
having issues logging in, so I'll post this as an anonymous user.

Theoretically, since Red Hat Linux is distributed under the GPL, and subsection
four states that no one may sublicense the work under a separate license, less
the GPL's allow use be revoked, would that mean it would be possible for Red Hat
to revoke EV1's use of Red Hat software? Seeing as EV1 purchased the license to
from SCO, who is the "sublicensing" party here? Would SCO then lose
GPL rights for it's own Linux software, and could have that bit on them now?

[ Reply to This | # ]

"How do they pray at night?"
Authored by: freeio on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:33 PM EST
Have you ever read C.S. Lewis' book, "The Screwtape Letters?"

My point here is simply to say that you should never try to project your values
upon someone else. Their values may be quite a bit different. The
reinforcement they get may be of a different sort, and in an entirely different
direction.

I have worked for several companies where, when visiting the senior boss'
office, I expected to see knee marks on the floor in front of either a dollar
or a schedule. It was obvious from their behavior that one or the other was all
they really ever truly worshipped.

---
Tux et bona et fortuna est.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Rico Question
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:40 PM EST
First a comment and then a question. PJ if Groklaw hadn’t been here would we
have found out about the possibility that AT&T released them to ANSI. Or
would the thorough wrecking job of SCO’s case with reguard to errno.h and
signal.h by Mr. Toomey have been done? I think not, this in a nutshell is why
you were attacked. The best response is to keep up the good work. I have a
question that may be relevant to the current FUD storm. I’ll make this a
theoretical, if a company were to run afoul of the RICO act and another company
had been shilling for them would that company have a problem? What if a third
company had arranged for the second company to act as a shill?

bobm
ianal

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Rico Question - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:15 AM EST
I warned a few months ago, that PJ's in physical danger
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:44 PM EST
They will attack her. It's too much money involved.

[ Reply to This | # ]

You go, PJ
Authored by: Scriptwriter on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 05:49 PM EST
PJ, I know you know I'm behind you 100%, but I just wanted to say it again.

You can't get any better validation that what you're doing is right than the
howls of protest from SCO and their friends.

---
They can have my copy of Linux when they pry it out of my cold, dead flippers.

irc.fdfnet.net #groklaw

[ Reply to This | # ]

"mechanisms" sounds ominous
Authored by: moirganw on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 06:21 PM EST
BS: "One way the company might continue to work with and help open source
is in putting some mechanisms in place to assure that proprietary software
doesn't make its way into open source."

Another commented that this might refer to insisting that all Unix licensees
submit code to The SCO Group for review before submitting to free or open source
projects.

Consider Stowell's statement in light of the letter to Congress and recent
pushes like SSSCA/CPDTPA and the Broadcast Flag, then tune your tinfoil hat to
2.4GHz.

Suppose "software as product rather than utility" proponents
(borrowing Moglen's language) convince Congress that there's a risk to their
industry that should be thwarted by policing open source contributions.

Ernest Hollins made it clear that he feels Congress has the right to impose
technological measures & he, others on his committee, Valenti & Eisner,
frustrated with Vadasz's claims that anti-p2p measures were not feasible,
expressed a willingness to push for it anyway. "if the computer and
content industry's can't agree, I think we'll pass our bill" (paraphrasing
heavily).

Might The SCO Group get some funding to pursue code watermarking systems?
Something that would pass all commits to SourceForge repositories through a
compare against hashes from proprietary source bases?

They've already worked with three groups including "MIT
mathemeticians" on this tech.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous Coward on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 06:26 PM EST
I think that PJ (and the entire crowd that helps with the site [converting PDFs,
analysis, etc]) should be proud that they got this kind of broadside.
They went for the your a cook and conspiracy theorist trying to bend anything to
fit your view of the world line of attack. The type of person that shouldn't be
listened to because what they say just doesn't fit reality (and it usually
works, look at how much gets dismissed as conspiracy theory and then not looked
at again [not saying that all those theories are true but what our general
reaction to the label is]).
I'd say they are really scared of what this site is doing if they get out such a
heavy propaganda weapon to try and silence it in the mainstream media.
So kudos to all that are helping making this site great.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCOX Numbers - FUD Now Causing Drop in Share Price
Authored by: sjgibbs on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 06:30 PM EST

I've gotten hold of some SCOX share price data and compared it to the dates of Press Releases listed on the SCO homepage.

It seems that between the time of the IBM lawsuit being filed (2003-03-03) and the Open Letter (2003-09-09) Darl had an incentive of 88 cents per share for talking rubbish - thats the mean increase in stock price over 7 days following each press release.

Now since that letter (which if you remember talked a load of rot about copyrights and accused the community of all sorts) things are different - now whenever a new piece of FUD is released by Stowell the stock price takes a tumble of 64 cents per share.

These facts may all be unrelated, and there is a cause/effect relationshp to map, it could be that SCO issue press releases now to counter the effects of legal filings and court transcripts so the drop was already happening. PJ's postings might have gotten attention from major investors, but certainly there is a change in the manner and consequences of SCO PR.

I have the data in OO Calc format - right click to save.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Lady Pamela
Authored by: m_si_M on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 06:35 PM EST
A great day. First the German settlement and then Mr. Stowell.
I don't know if anyone noticed, but PJ was knighted today, though unfortunately
not by a king or queen, but by the enemy.
There's no reason to be upset. Everybody should be walking around with a smile
in the face, especially PJ.
It was only a matter of time, until one of those guys would come up with new
stupidities. But today Mr. Stowell admitted, that the truth really hurts them.
(The next move of SCOG will probaply be litigating the truth, because it's doing
harm to their business).
We all know who's working so hard for the truth.

Congratulations, Lady Pamela

---
C.S.

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ Has loyal supporters here
Authored by: javajedi on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 06:43 PM EST
PJ, I am sure that I am not alone in these thoughts here. You have a large contingent of loyal supporters who all appreciate your hard work and dilegence, tirelessly getting the truth out before the community. Darl once made a point of saying that he needed to hire bodyguards due to threats made against him. PJ, I have no doubt, and I would be happy to volunteer my services, that we could make history yet again as a community. Imagine if you will, the world's first "Open Bodyguard Service" Hundreds, thousands, of Linux and Open Source enthusiasts taking shifts guarding you wherever you go! :) We could all wear Blue shirts with the Groklaw logo, Big Blue behind you indeed!

I don't actually think this is too far from possible. We are all behind you 100% PJ!

---
The Matrix is real... but i'm only visiting...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Buy PJ a beer
Authored by: TimDaly on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 06:46 PM EST
Ok, so today is stress day. What say we each click on the
amazon button donate enough to buy PJ a beer?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: legal insanity on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 07:01 PM EST
I know what it is, SCO has to hire ppl to read all the posts, and it's too much
for their brains to digest, so now they have to hire more ppl, and that is
taking to much money out of their war chest.

---
Insanity Pleadings is the only Sensible Defense

[ Reply to This | # ]

Spectacular own goal coming up ?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 07:01 PM EST

Now we've all been assuming that EV1 were "scared" into buying this
license to prevent the risk of being sued.

What if their plan was to get a license, get a bunch of publicity, and then in a
week's time come out with "Hey, we realised that SCO are just trying to
extort money out of innocent Linux users. We are tearing up the contract, and
are now also suing SCO for fraud, and 2 billion dollars damages"

Now that would be sweet :-)

Man, my tinfoil hat is working overtime today !

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: PM on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 07:09 PM EST
Blake is lucky that he is not in UK, Australia, or NZ.

PJ could sue him for libel in these countries, and it would be over to Blake to
file affirmative defences and round up the supporting evidence. I am not
kidding, this is the way it works. These defences would be readly knocked to
pieces (ie resulting in a summary judgement situation) leaving Blake to
negotiate down the damages the best he could. The whole thing would be wrapped
in 6 to 12 months and probably never get to court. The costs to PJ would be
miniscule compared with in USA.

Because of this I am extremely careful what I say on ng's.

[ Reply to This | # ]

WANT TO REALLY SUPPORT PJ? HIT THE PAYPAL BUTTON
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 07:18 PM EST
If you were as mad as I was to read of Lyon's treachery or Stowell's ..... I
can't find the right words...LIES...hit the PAYPAL DONATE button or the CLICK TO
GIVE Amazon button and keep PJ well fed and well rested so that she can continue
her fine work.

[ Reply to This | # ]

link to Groklaw attack?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 07:35 PM EST
" When Lyons' attack on Groklaw was printed, to my disgust, I saw he'd
printed what he thought was my residence. "

sooo... where is this story? I searched on Forbes.com but didn't find anything

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 08:00 PM EST
Did anyone else notice that when TSG was asked to comment on the IBM litigation,
the FINALY said "No comment on ongoing litigation." Well, the barn
door's been open so long, that the animals have left, and the barn rotted away,
but not we'll shove that door shut.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO to sue end user tomorrow March 2, 2004
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 08:03 PM EST
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5167829.html

[ Reply to This | # ]

Letter to EV1Servers.net
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 08:09 PM EST
Here's my message to headsurfer@ev1.net. Why don't you send one of your own
right now?

Sorry, to have to tell you this, but you've been ripped off. Unless
of course you are really anti-Linux and trying to give credibility and support
to SCO's attacks against Linux. Assuming this is not the case, SCO found a fool
and parted him from his money.

I think you will soon see that the number of
your customers who leave and the number of new customers you lose because of
your decision to support SCO will end up costing you far more than you would
have spent on the remote chance that SCO had filed a frivolous lawsuit against
you.

Did you bother to ask SCO any of the following:

1. Exactly which files
and lines of code in exactly which versions of the Linux kernel does the license
cover?

2. How does SCO have authority to claim ownership of any code in the
Linux kernel when the ownership of the copyrights are disputed by Novell? And
the ownership of IBM's enterprise code is also disputed.

3. Does SCO have
signed legal documents that transferred the Unix copyrights from AT&T/USL to
Novell, then from Novell to Santa Cruz Operation, and then from Santa Cruz
Operation to Caldera?

4. Does SCO offer your money back if it turns out SCO
doesn't own any copyrighted code in the Linux kernel? And shouldn't the money
remain in escrow until SCO has undisputed ownership of the System V copyrights
and then proves ownership of code in the Linux kernel?

5. Can the Linux kernel
be patched for security updates with a run-only license?

6. Why isn't SCO
fulfilling its obligation to mitigate damages by attempting to stop the
distribution of the allegedly illegal code in the Linux kernel? It appears that
SCO wants perpetual injury to continue so they can collect royalties
indefinitely.

7. Don't I forfeit the rights granted under the GPL by accepting
this license?

8. Doesn't copyright law only govern modification, distribution
and public display and not use?

9. Exactly what type of "IP" that SCO
continually refers to is allegedly in the Linux kernel? Copyrights, trade
secrets or patents?

And a whole bunch more here: http://lwn.net/Articles/42784/

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: legal insanity on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 08:13 PM EST
oh let me guess, they must be thinking of the lehman bros, if they do file a
lawsuit it would be a huge mistake, talk about giving red had more ammo.

---
Insanity Pleadings is the only Sensible Defense

[ Reply to This | # ]

EV1Server-MicroSoft Conspiracy?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 08:15 PM EST
Microsoft provides the SCOG $millions in loan cum licensing deal to attack their
No. 1 threat, Linux.

Microsoft touts EV1 in Win2003/Linux case study.

Netcraft names EV1 the top Win2003 hosting provider.

EV1 has amazingly low, low pricing for Win2003 servers.

EV1 buys SCO IP license just days before Q1 conference call, and on the day of
the PIPE and Boies deals deadline.

Coincidence or Conspiracy? Let the DoJ make the call.

http://ev1-sucks.com/nuke/

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: reh on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 08:23 PM EST
PJ,
Chill... they are upset because they can't attack the data on the site (hey, the
data is mostly court papers!), so they have to attack the operator. That is a
common way of deflecting an argument - try to change the subject or direction of
the subject. Think of it this way - we are bigtime now on this site. He just
gave great publicity.

Now, if Darl wants to feel like someone is attacking him, let him read the Yahoo
Financials - those people hit his wallet! And, geez, they are not nice!

We WILL have the last laugh, and it will be the loudest!

---
Murphy was a frellin' optimist....

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: a_dreamer on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 08:23 PM EST
PJ, regarding your work . . . the greatest validation you could possibly receive
is to hear the squeals and moans of those you dragged into the light of truth.
It's kind of ironic that the attacks come in the form of unfounded
generalizations and inuendos, the very things you have been exposing. (The
bullies are just upset because some girl beat them up.)

Thanks for all that you've been doing. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

Craig

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 08:47 PM EST
The following quote, painted on a six-foot high canvas, hangs in the lobby of Red Hat's office in Raleigh, NC...

First they ignore you,
then they laugh at you,
then they fight you,
then you win.

Mahatma Ghandi


Keep up the good work, PJ! - Joe

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 09:07 PM EST
PJ & other Groklaw readers... I would like to encourage
you to be strong in the face of these attacks... "Do not
panic at the first sight of the enemy"...

In my opinion, Groklaw has always sought to expose the
facts & deception surrounding the SCO & MS$ attacks
against the Open-Source Community. This is obviously
diluting many of their efforts to squash the Open-Source
Initiative... In many cases, completely nullifying their
efforts.

This would tend to cause an enormous amount of
frustration, especially where enormous amounts of money
are concerned. Gates & SCO are only concerned about two
things... money & power...

They will passionately both defend & attack anyone/
anything that comes between them & their attainment of
perceived happiness... derived from money & power...

Groklaw (you PJ), the Groklaw community... in fact anyone
who opposes them, will be attacked... They will justify
any tactics... So, be neither surprised, nor
discouraged... See it as a sign that the battle in now
beginning to turn in our favour...

Be strong & fight the good fight... valiantly... & you
will prevail...

Des Aubery... :-)

[ Reply to This | # ]

What we need
Authored by: twhlai on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 09:34 PM EST
Maybe what we need is a movie about a courageous paralegal known as PJ who
exposes a crooked software company which relies on fraud and intimidation. And
the movie would star Julia Roberts.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Lies, Damn Lies, and SCO
Authored by: trekkypj on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 09:46 PM EST
What is clear is that SCO fears Groklaw. They fear the influence and respect
that PJ has won for herself in the legal research that she has carried out which
pokes major holes in SCO's case against IBM, and indeed their allegations re.
linux code.

SCO can't win fairly; so they are desperately trying to get a fool's mate by
trying to cause people to doubt the points made by PJ and by the users of this
website on the SCO question. Remember one thing, PJ. When a multimillion
corportation like SCO resorts to such tactics, then you know that they fear you,
because you have the power to break SCO in the way it deserves, by telling the
truth to as many people as you can.

And that is why Groklaw is such a unique phenomenon. Don't ever give up, no
matter what they try. They are in the wrong here and the day will come when all
the lies, manipulations, threats and FUD's will return to haunt, and ruin, SCO.

IANAL, AND IANACP, but I do use Linux regularly. I'd switch over completely, but
then I wouldn't be able to play Baldur's Gate 1 or 2, and while I love the whole
ethos of the Linux/GNU system, I just can't abandon Windows because as bad as it
is, I need it.... for now :(

But I only give Windows an 8GB HDD, while Linux gets 40GB :D I even play RTCW
under Linux!


---
"I am free of all prejudices. I hate everyone equally."
WC Fields.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Some lessons here
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 09:51 PM EST
There are some lessons here that SCO and people of similar mind should learn
from Groklaw.

1) So you want to pick on weak oponents. Open source is easy to attack,
developers looked like weak oponents. They, in general, don't have the ability
to fight back. Or do they?

2) So you think you can spread FUD about OSS and people will believe you, there
is no voice to refute it. Or is there?

The true power of the open source development community is its ability to come
together, focus on a goal, and produce results. Look at all of the geat OSS
software around!

Well, its not just software. Community of like minded people can come together
and become a powerful force. PJ is the leader of this particular movement in
response to an attack from SCO. There is no shortage of people that want to get
involved. Groklaw, under PJ's leadership, provides the forum. Things are working
out very well indeed! SCO and friends have taken so much pain from Groklaw that
they are reduced to striking back with wild attacks. Groklaw is doing a LOT of
good!

A warning to all. Groklaw is the first community defense of a legal challenge to
OSS. We are all learning to develop our voice as we go. The next SCO that wants
to try will face an already well established community that is concerned about
the legal standing of OSS.

[ Reply to This | # ]

whre is this hatchet job?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 09:53 PM EST
"They think I live where a previous hatchet job article in the media said
I lived. That journalist based his conclusion on a P.O. Box address I
deliberately opened where I don't live, back when I first bought the domain
name. I didn't want my actual address known, so weirdo folks wouldn't show up at
my door.

When the reporter, Dan Lyons, asked me where I lived, I said I'd rather he not
print anything about that, because I was kind of frightened about suddenly
becoming well-known, and I was worried about being stalked, because of some
email I had received. I thought he agreed. I made the same request to Bob Mims
of the Salt Lake Tribune, and he honored my request.

When Lyons' attack on Groklaw was printed, to my disgust, I saw he'd printed
what he thought was my residence. It wasn't, but he thought it was. I thought it
was one of the cruelest and most hard-hearted things I had ever witnessed in my
life. I simply had never before known anyone personally who would do something
so callously vicious. I didn't know anyone who would endanger someone just for a
"scoop"."

Where is this article?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Book signing
Authored by: kberrien on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:04 PM EST
"..I believe that Big Blue looms large behind Pamela Jones.'"

PJ, when you come to Boston on your book signing tour, please sign mine, Big Blue PJ.
Keep up the good work. We love ya!

[ Reply to This | # ]

.....something missing.....
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:44 PM EST
There is something missing from the M$ conspiracy theories.
It is something noted here.
The fact that those in power receive solicitations to "help" them as often as we receive offers for new credit cards.
And nothing sells better than a working product.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Tip Jar....The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: tce on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:51 PM EST
Well the best way to show support in the face of personal attacks is to hit the
paypal Tip Jar.

Consider it serviced and passed.
Next.

TCE - In no way connected to IBM, other then with respect.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Bad Guys Now Know They Will Lose!
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 10:58 PM EST
Personal attacks are clear indicators that the bad guys have run out of better
ammo. Do NOT say or do anything that might give the bad guys more ammo.
Hold Truth high for all to see and keep an unwavering faith in all that is Good

and Holy. In the end, we each must fight Evil as individuals but we draw
Strength from our fellowship.

On a sucessful note, the SCOundrels are clearly planning for after this ill
conceived attack on the Software Community. That can only mean that they
are planning exit strategies away from Daryl and SCOG. The references to
sleeping and the pipe dream of mending fences signal psychological defenses
at work. The reality of the situation for those that work for SCO must
generate a surealistic environment full of denial and deception. When all they
do is lie, how can they trust each other to watch their backs?

Just see how easy it is to write inflamatory and baseless FUD! We are know
that Daryl completely trusts his minions even when they are talking behind
his back. We all know that the SCOundrels sleep just as peacefully as they
desparately want us to believe.

Just listen to Daryl. Imagine working for Daryl.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Coincidence?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:20 PM EST
SCO is headquartered just a few miles from a large cattle ranch. I find it
difficult that McBride, Stowell and Sontag continue to spout large quantities of
bovine excrement and yet proclaim they lead a software company. I think (using
Stowell's logic) that they are most likely paid operatives of the beef industry,
trying to dispose of the unwanted byproduct of it, and diverting attention from
the real culprits.

Keep it up PJ, the truth getting out must be taking a toll on them to draw this
attention from those morons.

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO lawsuit prediction
Authored by: Walter Dnes on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:39 PM EST
IBM has been reported recently to be migrating their desktops over to linux.
This qualifies IBM as "a big linux user". SCO amends their lawsuit
against IBM, and they can claim to have met their promise to sue a big end-user.
SCO's lawsuits have jumped from 1 billion, to 3 billion, to 5 billion $. So
this one should push the total claim to 7 billion.

To summarize; the March 2nd lawsuit will be against IBM, and will raise the
ante to 7 billion $. Remember, you heard it here first.

[ Reply to This | # ]

LinuxWrongsider scared of Groklaw?
Authored by: hutcheson on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:39 PM EST
Anyone else notice that linuxinsider does REFERER checking on that link PJ
provided, and sends a browser (Mozilla, in my case) into an infinite loop if you
go there from groklaw? But works fine if you cut and paste into a browser
window?

Well, take that, PJ! and I guess all your misinformation is well and truly
refuted now, huh!

[posting from spitting distance from Frito-Lay/Pepsi headquarters, and no doubt
subliminally influenced thereby]

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Fritos? Pepsi? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 09:45 AM EST
EV1servers.net users unhappy too
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:49 PM EST
I just skimmed the user forums at ev1servers.net and virutally none of the
people posting (almost all of which created accounts long ago, so they did just
show up to bitch about the license) were favorable. The most positive the I saw
was people saying they would reserve judgement until they heard more. I did see
Groklaw mentioned (in a positive light).

I know if I hosted there, I'd be moving on.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:53 PM EST
PJ;

I'm suprised that you missed this one (although I haven't read all the posts -
perhaps someone else caught it):

"As long as I can go home at night and know that I was honest with the
media, I was respectful of another's point of view and tried to not burn any
bridges, I think that I can feel very at peace."

SCOwell admits that he is not telling the truth. He states that he thinks he
"can feel very at peace", if he were honest with the media, respectful
of another's point of view and tried to not burn any bridges. How can he not
burn bridges attacking not only the open source community, but their own
customers. (And to think that at one time I just about bougth their Linux).

Keep up the good work, PJ.

Dale Kerby
SLC, Utah

[ Reply to This | # ]

Validation for you PJ by SCO Group!
Authored by: Nick Bridge on Monday, March 01 2004 @ 11:59 PM EST
That was a BIG mistake on the part of Stowell.

The problem (for SCO) is: You have the evidence on your side.

Everyone will have ample opportunity to decide for themselves.

This is really great. Even painting it like you're on IBM's books, just like they did with Eric Raymond! What was it Raymond said?

Raymond: It's beyond me how can have the gall to talk as though we need funding or marching orders from IBM to mobilize against you. IBM couldn't stop us from mobilizing!

I'm not being paid by IBM - I could use the cash - but I'm not taking handouts from Microsoft either. Something SCO Group definitely cannot say.

Everyone knows Ibiblio. They were there for you when you needed a more capable host than Radio blog

Raymond suggested that SCO would be their own worst enemy - this is proving true. I was going to say "Have Faith", but faith is unnecessary when you have concrete facts to rely on!

[ Reply to This | # ]

IBM is paying?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:19 AM EST
IBM is paying people to oppose SCO?

Darn, like an idiot, I've been opposing SCO all these months for free!

Quatermass

[ Reply to This | # ]

LinuxInsider and Stowell, The Flimsy-FUD Man
Authored by: grouch on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:34 AM EST
(PJ 'nuked' my first draft of this, at my request. I re-did it to make it a bit more civil. Somebody else is sure to dissect and analyze the other FUD stories in the blizzard. I just can't resist taking on The Flimsy-FUD Man).

That Univention injunction and settlement terms must be really scaring the SCOundrels. After being mostly silent since the hearing of Feb. 6, they are all out baying at the press to keep reporters from noticing the real headline of SCO's rapid retreat from Germany.

...malware writers had launched a denial-of-service attack. Just a few weeks ago, the company was hit again by a reportedly similar DoS attack. Overall, SCO has been the subject of a great deal of criticism from the open-source community after charging that its proprietary Unix System V source code was illegally used in IBM's AIX operating system and Linux distributions.
Accused, tried, convicted: guilt of "the open-source community" by association.

...we have yet to provide a forum for SCO directly.
Who's this "we"? If that is limited to LinuxInsider, it may be correct. But, I have noted no lack of willingness on the part of the "press" to happily regurgitate anything and everything SCO chooses to feed them.

Stowell:
"The only issue that SCO as a company has had with open source is when elements of the community choose to take proprietary software and contribute it into open source."
What elements? What proprietary software? When was it contributed? Into what open source software was it contributed? Who did it? Where is the code? It's been a year and SCO has yet to answer any of these questions with enough specificity or with evidence. It took a court order to get SCO to produce anything, and even then, what they produced may be insufficient even to comply with that court order. The Judge has not yet ruled.

Stowell: "We're a company defending one of our core business assets, and we're doing this through the courts, as the legal system requires."
SCO is a company whose core business assets have been in decline in value for so long it risked disappearing. So, SCO created a new core business asset: litigation by publicity. SCO is not defending anything in court; SCO is playing the court system's safeguarding mechanisms. SCO has used every delaying tactic the courts have allowed in order to avoid even specifying exactly what the case is about. Even in the face of court orders to produce discovery, SCO has delayed. When given a wondrous opportunity to defend their core business asset in court, SCO ran for the cover of a settlement and then launched PR to keep that settlement out of the headlines. SCO avoids courtrooms. SCO likes the press.

Stowell: "Even reporters who write stories that are not anti-SCO are subjected to tremendous pressure and attacks."
It's poor SCO, Stowell, and reporters against the evil open-source community. Sorry, but this is insufficient to generate enough sympathy to excuse lies and half-truths. Try honesty and facts and you won't feel such "tremendous pressure and attacks." I repeat the year-old mantra: Show us the code.

Stowell:
"While some people might disagree with me and the company, we have no intention of trying to destroy Linux or derail its future."
Some people might disagree with you? Check your financial reports, if you trust such documents from SCO. They reveal that you're not selling any Linux licenses. Out of many millions of Linux users at every level including governments, corporations, charitable organizations and personal computers, you don't have any Linux license sales except 1 to Microsoft and 1 to Sun Microsystems. And it's not clear if even those 2 are licensing deals. I'd say the "some" in this case equals the world.

Stowell, you are either a liar, mind-bogglingly ignorant, or a fool. Pick one. Linux, as you would force it to be, would no longer be Linux. It would be destroyed. Either this is your intention, in which case you are a liar, or you do not understand even now that Linux is about freedom, in which case you are mind-bogglingly ignorant of your target, or you somehow believe you can have a free thing that is not free due to the cage you want to put it in, in which case you are a fool. You cannot steal Linux, lock it into your shrinkwrap box, seal it with your anti-humanity EULA, extort payment from its users for your destruction of it, and still have it be Linux.

Stowell:
"We do, however, firmly believe that there are intellectual property issues with Linux that have to be addressed."
Show us these "intellectual property issues." You've been whining and crying and screeching to the press for a year, and yet you still don't seem able to decide whether you are talking about trade secrets, copyrights or patents. Why did you settle out of court with Univention in Germany instead of providing evidence to the German court to back your claims? When confronted with put up or shut up there, you shut up. Please do so everywhere else, as well, until you can provide any court-quality evidence to back up any of your claims. Or are you simply following the agenda of Microsoft, from their Sept. 2002 internal Linux Strategic Review:
"Linux patent violations/risk of being sued" struck a chord with US and Swedish respondents. Seventy-four percent (74%) of Americans and 82% of Swedes stated that the risk of being sued over Linux patent violations made them feel less favorable towards Linux. This was the only message that had a strong impact with any audience.
Is your intent simply to make people "feel less favorable towards Linux"? Is that the real meaning behind your statement that you don't intend to destroy Linux or derail its future? You're really just doing this to help out your buddy Microsoft who is having problems competing with Linux?

Stowell:
"SCO believes there have been significant misappropriations of our key Unix-on-Intel software that have caused people to migrate to Linux (because they get all of those same benefits for free) versus continuing on a Unix-on-Intel platform through SCO."
Courts don't rule on your religious beliefs, Stowell. Try providing some evidence. Oh, wait, you ran when the German court gave you 3 choices: 1. Stop your lies, 2. Pay hefty fines, or 3. Back up your claims. Since you didn't back up your claims, your beliefs must not be very strong ones.

Stowell:
"Two years ago, if you were to ask an IT professional who owns the core Unix operating system source code, you probably would have received a blank stare. Today, I think SCO has successfully educated the marketplace that SCO owns this core Unix source code from which AIX, HP-UX, Solaris and dozens of other Unix operating systems were derived."
I think you're being silly. Stowell, you only took 1 year to confuse "the marketplace". That is not the same as "an IT professional". That IT professional would likely give you a blank stare, wondering where in the world he or she might start attempting to educate someone silly enough to ask about ownership of "the core Unix operating system source code". Do you mean the ancient, original AT&T Unix operating system, with contributions freely given from all over the world? Do you mean the Berkely Software Distribution, which was free and arguably the main reason Unix operating systems survived and thrived? Do you mean any of the multitude of modern commercial Unix operating systems, with mountains of source code added and owned and controlled by such as IBM, HP, Sun? Do you mean the code that Novell allows SCO to be license collection agent for? Stowell, you may not like the fact that your company paid millions for the right to be an errand boy, but the only "core Unix operating system code" your company owns is some old, obsolete stuff that is useful for teaching concepts to new programmers. The Asset Purchase Agreement between Novell and your alleged predecessor in interest, Caldera, doesn't transfer the copyrights to the source code for which you are the errand boy collecting license fees for Novell.

Stowell:
"At the same time, we also operate as a software company with sales of our own Unix operating systems, OpenServer and UnixWare -- as well as other complementary solution products. This is where the lion's share of our current revenue comes from."
Stowell, did you lie to the SEC? If you didn't, then your assertion to the reporter must be a lie. The documents filed with the SEC show that "the lion's share of [your] current revenue comes from" two, count 'em, 2 "license agreements" with Microsoft and Sun Microsystems. On the other hand, in the same SEC filing, you said, "Our UNIX products and services revenue has declined in each of the last four years." That must be a weak, pathetic, starving lion with such a share.

Stowell:
"Our lawsuit against IBM is ongoing litigation that I unfortunately can't comment on."
Gee, Stowell, this is a very recent development! It seems that prior to the hearing of February 6, you and your cohorts were trying to never miss an opportunity to yap at the press about the "ongoing litigation". What happened at that hearing? Did that mean judge give you a dose of reality?

Stowell:
"As long as I can go home at night and know that I was honest with the media, I was respectful of another's point of view and tried to not burn any bridges, I think that I can feel very at peace."
Perhaps if you began being honest with the media, began being respectful of another's point of view, and stopped burning bridges, you will, indeed, find peace. Otherwise, I think your peace is a self-delusion. Linux users didn't start this war. We will finish it, using facts to counter your unsubstantiated claims, your innuendo, and your lies. We will combat your dishonesty in the media, combat your disrespect of the copyright property and generous efforts of programmers, testers, documenters and users of Linux, and will make sure the bridges that you burn in public will be remembered. The fires you lit and the ashes they result in are being documented and those documents preserved on corporate, organizational, and personal computers around the world, for posterity.

Stowell:
"Open source will probably be around for a very long time to come, and I'm sure SCO will continue to participate in and benefit from open-source software. One way the company might continue to work with and help open source is in putting some mechanisms in place to assure that proprietary software doesn't make its way into open source. I'm sure this will continue to be a concern among open-source developers going into the future."
You bet your disingenuous lips open source will be around for a very long time. I'm sure SCO won't. As for those mechanisms, it seems to me they're in place; you certainly haven't been able to show any improper proprietary code making its way into open source. You've had a year and the financial backing of Microsoft, Sun, Baystar, RBC and your pumped stock, and yet you still can't show any code that doesn't garner a giggle from programmers and historians. As for the concern, there are mechanisms that are springing from your failures that will prevent any future litigation sharks of your low ethics and high greed from lasting as long as you have in any future attempts of theft such as yours. Where are the mechanisms that prevent you from stealing GPL code and concealing your theft behind your packaged binaries, lock-down EULAs and threats of the DMCA?

Stowell:
"Every business has to change along the way, but I'm confident that SCO's future business will continue to involve the customer set that we've always been focused on through our company's reseller channel: small-to-medium businesses and branch-office retail customers."
Do you mean the customer set that is rapidly running away from SCO to Linux? If not, then did you lie earlier in the article when you complained they were moving to Linux? How will SCO remain in business when (1) according to the financial reports filed with the SEC, SCO's sales have declined for 4 years straight, (2) SCO's main source of revenue stems from this SCOsource thing, which put SCO in the middle of lawsuits it tries every way it can to avoid presenting evidence in? Why should those customers stay with SCO when you sent threatening letters to them? Threatening your few remaining customers does not seem like a good way to safeguard the future of your business.

Stowell:
"Thanks for giving me the opportunity to tell a side of the story that not many people get to hear."
Thanks for being a repeating the same old stuff we've all been hearing from you in the press for a year. It makes it so easy to refute, over and over and over.

Just to rub a little salt in the wound, everything I've asserted as fact above can be verified either directly by documents SCO has attested to and which are available as copies at, or originals linked from, or by links to other verifiable documents, provided at:
The Groklaw Quotes Database
SCO Financials
SCO Archives
Legal Docs

So, SCO and Stowell, run away from the facts as fast as you can, lest another Univention come along to put you in a position where you have to pay up, put up, or shut up.

[ Reply to This | # ]

EV1
Authored by: GLJason on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:04 AM EST
I wonder how much of this will show up in SCO's financial report. I wonder how much the license cost. SCOX says they can't say how much that anyone has paid or even what the names of any other companies are due to confidentiality agreements. Who do you think probably requested that? My money's on SCOX. I think they're going to some companies and offering a ridiculously low price for indemnity, if the company signs a confidentiality agreement. Great publicity for SCOX and the company only has to pay a pittance.

I wouldn't doubt it if SCOX sold a few blanket licenses for certain companies for only $1. If you're a company and you had the interests of your shareholders in mind, wouldn't you pay $1 for the perpetual right to use Linux on as many computers as you want? SCOX's indemnity license may be worthless, but for a company it might be worth $1 to guarantee SCOX won't file a frivilous lawsuit against you. The publicity from being able to say that companies are actually buying the worthless licenses may increase their apparent value to other companies. That's only true however if the price those companies paid remains confidential.

[ Reply to This | # ]

FUD. . .
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 01:06 AM EST
Face it people, a defensive war can not be won. Ask the French (WWII), ask the
U.S. (Vietnam), ask Hussien.

The same holds true with FUD. SCO uses fud in an offensive capacity. They, not
us, have the initiative. In other words, we (FOSS) are always reacting to the
SCO fud campaign.

What needs to happen is simply this -- take the initiative away from SCO. Make
them react to us and keep reacting to us.

There are numerous ways to do that and here are a couple. I assume that some
readers have points of contact with the main stream media. Use them -- against
SCO. Additionally, how about that OSDN Linux defense fund? Maybe, just maybe,
we can convince those folks to turn it into a Linux Offense fund. Grab various
developers and have them initiate suits, from various federal court circuits
around the country and foreign country court systems. SCO will be forced, at a
cost, to react to each. Also, why not just pass the word to everyone you know
to cease using SCO products. Mcdonalds for example -- tell a franchise
manager/owner that you will no longer patronize their business if they continue
to use SCO products. Lastly, EV1servers.net which bought a SCO license -- use
it against them. Do everything legally possible to bring about their demise.
Harsh lessons make for long memories.

There are literally thousands of other ideas out there waiting to be
implemented.

Besides, I am offensive by nature.

krp

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:01 AM EST
Stowell, McBride and the upper brass can say whatever they want. I've gotten
sick of the whole charade that I just tune it out.

On a lighter note, if you look around, you can still find Caldera Linux for sale
in some stores. For example, I found some boxes for sale at Future Shop (you
won't find it listed on the website though). Caldera-SCO's tune has changed a
lot since then.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: ashnazg on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:18 AM EST
chicken = "EV1Servers.net"

SCOX Investors and Analysts: Why did SCO settle with Univention rather than
demonstrate the evidence it has claimed to have for nearly a year?

Blake Stowell: Ladies and Gentlemen of this supposed jury, SCO's accusers would
certainly want you to believe my client was displaying misappropriated code on
August 18th, and they make a good case. Heck, I almost felt pity myself. But
Ladies and Gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to
consider.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is PJ. PJ is a Linux programmer from North Carolina
who hacked code and ran from the FUD. But PJ lives in New York. Now think about
it. That does not make sense. Why would a Linux hacker, a long-haired Linux
hacker, want to live in New York with a bunch of clean-cut lawyers? That does
not make sense.

But more important, you have to ask yourself what does this have to do with this
case. Nothing. Ladies and Gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case. It
does not make sense. Look at me. I'm a director of public relations defending a
minor software company licensor and litigator and I'm talkin' about PJ. Does
that make sense? Ladies and Gentlemen I am not making any sense. None of this
makes sense.

And so you have to remember when you're in that jury room deliberating and
conjugating Eldred v. Ashcroft, does it make sense? No. Ladies and Gentlemen of
this supposed jury it does not make sense. If PJ lives in New York you must
acquit.

I know we seem guilty. But ladies and gentlemen this is PJ. Now think about that
for one minute. That does not make sense. Why am I talking about PJ when a
company's life is on the line? Why? I'll tell you why. I don't know. It doesn't
make sense. If PJ does not make sense you must acquit. Here look at the chicken,
look at the silly chicken.

The defense rests.

[ Reply to This | # ]

One More Time -- Contract Dispute, not Copyrights.
Authored by: LionKuntz on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 02:24 AM EST
ONE MORE TIME...

Copyrights must be tried in federal court. As of today, February 25th, 2004,
this is a CONTRACT DISPUTE, not a copyrights lawsuit. It is being tried in a
Utah State court.

SCOG has registered copyrights in 2003. Only these exact copyrights which are
already registered can be sued about in federal court. No other
"copyrights" can be the subject of an infringement case.

Very specific files have been itemized in SCOG's legal papers. A motion to add
copyright infringements is pending related to very specific files, but the
motion has not yet decided by the presiding judge.

Only those VERY SPECIFIC files listed as infringing may end up contested in
eventual copyright lawsuit.


Debates and discussions on all of the version of Unix, and all of the files in
Unix, constitutes FUD, causing Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt to readers of this
Groklaw.net website.

Please FOCUS on the issues actually in contest, and restrict yourself from far
afield speculation which only serves as surrogate partisan SCOG agents spreading
FUD.


Note the advice given when you post replies:

"Important Stuff

* Please try to keep posts on topic."


The subject matter of this above article did not warrant the 168 replies made
previous to this one, nor is the public less in Fear, more Certain, and holds
less Doubts, because of abstract debates and discussions not even distantly
related to the actual court case being tried.

If a day went by that there were only 20 researched replies to an article
instead of 300 wandering comments, you will know the public is actually learning
the meaning of the actions and counter-actions of the legal skirmishes. 20
researched messages demonstrates a much higher degree of intelligence than 300
messages, and is not a failure of Groklaw, but a measure of Groklaw's success in
drawing focus to the actual legal issues which deserve audience-participation
researched comments.


Questions for clarification are always welcome, but what possible value is there
from assertions and arguments about hypotheticals which are not part of the case
in court?


ONE MORE TIME...

Copyrights must be tried in federal court. As of today, February 25th, 2004,
this is a CONTRACT DISPUTE, not a copyrights lawsuit. It is being tried in a
Utah State court.

SCOG has registered copyrights in 2003. Only these exact copyrights which are
already registered can be sued about in federal court. No other
"copyrights" can be the subject of an infringement case.

Very specific files have been itemized in SCOG's legal papers. A motion to add
copyright infringements is pending related to very specific files, but the
motion has not yet decided by the presiding judge.

Only those VERY SPECIFIC files listed as infringing may end up contested in
eventual copyright lawsuit.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: pajamian on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 03:26 AM EST
IANAL, etc.

My understanding is that the GPL is a license to distribute and copies made
inside of an organization doesn't qualify as distributing under the GPL, so
unless they distributed the OS outside the organization they wouldn't be in
violation.

Also, what would be the point in going after the victim?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Gene Schaerr, ACT, Microsoft, Sun Myung Moon
Authored by: LionKuntz on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 03:42 AM EST
"Then there is an editorial in the WASHINGTON TIMES, where Gene Schaerr
scolds us for not understanding how well the MICROSOFT antitrust settlement is
working:..."

"...Gene Schaerr, a partner in the D.C. office of Sidley Austin Brown &
Wood, is antitrust counsel to the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY."
--- http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040229-105339-2040r.htm

======================
http://www.prwatch.org/spin/July_2001.html

Sunday, July 1, 2001

MICROSOFT Front Group Applauds Pro-MICROSOFT Court Ruling
The ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY, which was created and FUNDED BY
MICROSOFT to defend its interests against charges of antitrust violations, has
applauded last week's appeals court ruling reversing the order to break up
MICROSOFT. "From the outset of this trial, the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE
TECHNOLOGY (ACT) has consistently argued that preserving the right of a company
to add features to their products is the central issue in this case,"
states an ACT news release. ACT is one of several "think tanks,"
including THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE and the NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNION, that have
received substantial funding from the company while espousing its position
regarding the antritust issue. Some of these financial ties were disclosed when
Oracle, one of MICROSOFT's leading competitors, hired a private investigator to
literally dig through ACT's trash in search of incriminating documents.

======================
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:Z__T_DhC8oAJ:www.opensector.org/1061911226/+%
22Cato+Institute%22+%22Association+for+Competitive+Technology%22&hl=en&i
e=UTF-8

See ARCHIVES.ORG for original page...



Linux success means EU should go easy on MICROSOFT?

Posted by NDA on Tuesday August 26, 08:20AM

Summary:
Update: More of the same from the CATO INSTITUTE.
[http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-23-03.html This article was published in the
WASHINGTON TIMES, Aug. 17, 2003]


The growth of Linux in Europe means that the EU should back down from its
efforts to penalize MICROSOFT for anti-competitive behavior, writes Jim
Prendergast in FoxNews.com. Prendergast, who is the executive director of
Americans for Technology Leadership, says that the EU is being pressured by
MICROSOFT's competitors. A U.S. judge who rejected the same sorts of sanctions
that the EU is considering, calling them "market engineering," he
argues.

What is Americans for Technology Leadership? Its web site describes it as
"a broad-based coalition of technology professionals, consumers and
organizations dedicated to limiting government regulation of technology and
fostering competitive market solutions to public policy issues affecting the
technology industry." Its has 10 founding members, which include - you
guessed it - MICROSOFT Corp., along with the large retailers CompUSA and
Staples.

Body:
Another founder is the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY, also backed
by MICROSOFT. And there is "CITIZENS AGAINST GOVERNMENT WASTE," a
pro-MICROSOFT organization that includes MICROSOFT's home page on a short list
of "Technology Reform Links."

Then there's Clarity Consulting, which describes itself as a close MICROSOFT
partner: "Clarity also began its close partnership with MICROSOFT in 1995
by actively helping its Developer Tools division. Clarity’s insightful and
relevant feedback on the popular development tools started an ongoing
partnership with key corporate decision makers at MICROSOFT that continues
today."

How about the Computing Technology Industry Association? MICROSOFT is one of
its 8000 members, and the organization submitted pro-MICROSOFT comments to the
U.S. Department of Justice on the proposed anti-trust settlement.

Finally, there's the Small Business Survival Committee, which labeled
settling the MICROSOFT suit one of the most positive developments in 2001.

======================
Google: Interesting company ACT keeps with CATO, CEI, Sun Myong Moon...

[PDF] Statement of Jonathan Zuck
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
... The ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY (ACT) has always supported the
creation
of innovative e ... noted in a paper prepared for the CATO INSTITUTE, that: “if
...
www.actonline.org/documents/020718OrbitzTestimony.pdf - Similar pages

[PDF] Helping Washington Get IT. April 8, 2002 F. James Sensenbrenner ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
... Property Re: Digital Music Copyright Issues The ASSOCIATION FOR
COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY
(ACT) submits ... Wayne Crews of the CATO INSTITUTE has noted “Today, with
...
www.actonline.org/Documents/020408HouseIPDRM.pdf - Similar pages

CEI.ORG: Competitive Enterprise Institute
... Mr. Fallon helped create the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY, and is
a
contributing member to the CATO INSTITUTE, the Reason Foundation, and The ...
www.cei.org/pages/sfallon.cfm - 16k - Cached - Similar pages

Tech leaders cheer and jeer MICROSOFT ruling | CNET News.com
... Jonathan Zuck, president of the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY. ...
Levy, a senior
fellow in constitutional studies at the CATO INSTITUTE, praised the ruling ...
news.com.com/news/0-1003-200-6405392.html - 56k - Cached - Similar pages

Wired News: MS: Everybody's Got an Opinion
... Bob Levy of the libertarian CATO INSTITUTE: "To settle the case ...
Jonathan Zuck,
president of the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY, funded in part by ...
www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,48118,00.html - 23k - Cached - Similar pages

Wired News: MS Woos with Free Junket
... said he believes that groups like the CATO INSTITUTE -- which did ...
Jonathan Zuck,
who heads the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY trade association, said
...
www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,21919,00.html - 18k - Cached - Similar
pages

MICROSOFT’s Macrohard Sell
... Union, Americans for Tax Reform and the CATO INSTITUTE, all of ... Created
new trade
groups such as the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGY and Americans for ...
www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/6/12/51120 - 26k - Cached - Similar pages

Linux Today - The New Price Tag for Breaking Up MICROSOFT? $310 ...
... to janitors for the nightly trash from the ASSOCIATION FOR COMPETITIVE
TECHNOLOGY,
but the ... tanks like Americans for Tax Reform and the CATO INSTITUTE) has run
...
linuxtoday.com/ news_story.php3?ltsn=2000-09-28-006-21-NW-CY-MS - 87k - Cached -
Similar pages

ZDNet UK - Comment - MICROSOFT pays court to Washington
... It's not like MICROSOFT is a stranger to the CATO INSTITUTE. MICROSOFT
gives the prominent think tank an undisclosed amount of cash ...
comment.zdnet.co.uk/declanmccullagh/ 0,39020670,2137135-2,00.htm - 46k - Feb 29,
2004 - Cached - Similar pages

IPA Articles - CATO INSTITUTE
... Network Services, BellSouth Corporation, MICROSOFT, NYNEX Corporation, Sun
Microsystems
and Viacom. News releases from the CATO INSTITUTE -- while often urging ...
Description: Article explores the CATO INSTITUTE's funding and advocacy, which
include large tobacco industry funding...
Category: Health > Addictions > ... > Tobacco > Industry >
Supporters
www.accuracy.org/articles/cato.htm - 11k - Cached - Similar pages

======================
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+site
:www.unification.net+%22Sun+Myung+Moon%22+%22Washington+Times%22

Searched pages from www.unification.net for
"SUN MYUNG MOON" "WASHINGTON TIMES".
Results 1 - 100 of about 163. Search took 0.21 seconds.

Rev. SUN MYUNG MOON - TWELFTH WORLD MEDIA CONFERENCE - THE MISSION ...
REVEREND SUN MYUNG MOON SPEAKS AT. ... I first announced the founding of The
Washington
Times in 1982 ... experts predicted, even if I founded a newspaper of acceptable
...
www.unification.net/1992/920822.html - 18k - Cached - Similar pages

Rev. SUN MYUNG MOON's Projects
Rev. SUN MYUNG MOON's Projects. ... Highway Project; The Sekai Nippo (Newspaper
in Tokyo ... Theological
Seminary; WACOM Industries; The WASHINGTON TIMES; World Culture and ...
www.unification.net/misc/orgns.html - 17k - Cached - Similar pages

Rev. SUN MYUNG MOON - Father's Words in Washington DC
Rev. SUN MYUNG MOON. ... But what is the newspaper doing or the UPI for that
matter ... In
the midst of that, at the 20th anniversary of The WASHINGTON TIMES, I told the
...
www.unification.net/2003/20030517_1.html - 41k - Cached - Similar pages

Rev. SUN MYUNG MOON - OUR FRONT LINE
REVEREND SUN MYUNG MOON SPEAKS ON. ... it would be crazy to start a new
newspaper to compete ... They
predicted that The WASHINGTON TIMES would not last six weeks, but ...
www.unification.net/1983/830904.html - 27k - Cached - Similar pages
======================

Salon.com News | Bad Moon on the rise
... Rev. SUN MYUNG MOON has cemented ties with the Bush administration -- and
gained
government funding for his closest disciples. - - - - By ...
www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/09/24/moon/ - 33k - Cached - Similar pages

George W. Bush Charlton Heston Rudolph Giuliani John McCain Alan ...
Rev. SUN MYUNG MOON. Here's a guy the Republicans don't want us to
know about. The Reverend SUN MYUNG MOON, head of the Unification ...
home.earthlink.net/~zkkatz/page76.html - 26k - Cached - Similar pages

======================
And don't forget my own webpages...

http://Ecosyn.US/scum02.html CEI, Koch connections
http://Ecosyn.US/scum01.html CEI, everbody connections

======================

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: ekj on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 03:52 AM EST
PJ.

I understand that it's very annoying to have people make personal attacks on
you, totally unfounded in fact, because of what you post here.

But please realize, the only reason they stoop to personal attacks and various
vague claims is that they where unable to find fault with the actual content of
this site.

The only way to deal with this sort of crap is to take the high road. Stay
rational. Stay focused on facts. Provide evidence and logical explanations where
the opposition provides flim-flam and vague beliefs.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: tstone856 on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 04:18 AM EST
Some advice for future contact with reporters:

First, All reporters, even honest, sincere ones, have motives. If someone asks
to interview you, it is perfectly OK to ask for a bit of background from the
reporter. To wit, interview the reporter first. This doesn't always help, but,
sometimes it gives you a clue or two about the reporter's motives.

Second, One of the best results I ever got came from a telephone interview that
came out of the blue. Don't distrust too much. Most of the reporters in the
world are working on a piecework basis. They just want a publishable piece that
someone is willing to pay for.

Third, By the very nature of Groklaw you've placed yourself at a nexus of
"attitude" about a variety of issues. This appears to be generally
good for the public. It may not necessarily be good at all times for you. Give
yourself some space: A lot of people won't. You're providing a solid public
service. Be proud of it. You have a right to be. But don't let it become you're
identity.

Fourth, Answer a reporter's questions as honestly as you can. Identify your
limitations in knowledge, role, and time. An interview is not a one-way street
unless you choose to let it be, or the reporter's motives dictate that that is
all the result there will be. You can't control the latter.

Fifth, Disappointment with the results of an interview, even an honest, open one
that you feel good about is always present in some degree. The reporter leaves
something out, or chooses an inappropriate slant; A variety of things can shade
the results (Don't forget the role of editors.)

And some general advice:

Sixth, Those who make threats, obscene suggestions, and the like have their
reward. Don't acknowledge them with a response. Don't forget them, they have
after all raised a signal of potential intent. Keep a baseball bat, metaphorical
or real, handy. And, occasionally, offer it some exercise.

Seventh, Be prepared. I have a feeling that your time in the spotlight is just
beginning. You truly are an adept spokesperson for a rather unique, and yet hard
to define social movement. Buy a pair of shades.

---
Rick

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Khelmar on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 04:52 AM EST
Yes, PJ, how DARE you twist the facts in this case by **POSTING THE ACTUAL COURT
DOCUMENTS**! How callow! How one-sided and prejudicial!

How can SCO not see that you're not doing anything other than giving them some
more rope to hang themselves with?

Maybe they're just angry that if they had done as good a job in researching this
case as you have, they might have realized what was going on before they rolled
their little snowball into hell.

Is it hot in here? =)

---
--
Mike Dark
darkmich@wsu.edu

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 06:01 AM EST
did anyone notice these two items in one of the articles.

1- SCO "owns" LINUX
2- the reason they have not show the ip infringement - "due to the fact
they could only get initial damages"

very bogus claims

[ Reply to This | # ]

Time for a little inspiration?
Authored by: lordmhoram on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 06:50 AM EST
I've been thinking a lot about the Gandhi quotation, and how difficult it is to
fight - and win - a war from the high moral ground. If an enemy is prepared to
fight total war, from the utterly committed point of view that the "end
justifies the means", then how can the opponent prevail unless he/she is
prepared to fight on the same terms?

Difficult one. In some ways, I suppose that Gandhi was probably the first person
in history to manage to achieve victory whilst not relinquishing the high moral
ground - but it proved largely to be a Pyrrhic victory given what happened
afterwards.

Anyway, before I ramble off completely at a tangent, here's a link to a site
containing a few more quotations - from someone else who knew how to fight a war
(the last paragraph seems peculiarly appropriate:)

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=391

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes, 'shame' on you PJ
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 07:18 AM EST
That prospect pleases Pamela Jones, who has been quoted as saying,
"Litigation isn't a long-term business strategy, even if you 'win.' It's a
one-time payout. Then what? If you have no product people want, that's the final
chapter, especially if people really don't like you and what you stand
for."
It may be that kind of intransigence that leads SCO's Blake Stowell to hint at
darker motives.
http://ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/32990.html

Yes, imagine suggesting that "litigation isn't a long-term business
strategy". Next you'll be suggesting that companies should supply products
or services in order to make money - then where would we be? ;-)
Seriously PJ, keep your chin up. SCO are going down...

[ Reply to This | # ]

By Darl, I've figured it out!
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 08:15 AM EST
Here is my conspiracy theory:
SCO is nothing more than a pawn in the Linux TCO FUD campaign. This whole
exercise in futility is that the SCO IP claim is nothing more than a TCO
smokescreen thought up by MS. The SCO Pump N Dump scheme is just used to help
pay the SCO trolls and make everyone think this is about stock manipulation.
Microsoft knew they needed something to hold off the Linux onslaught. So, they
decided to use the "last" company anyone would think that they,
meaning MS, could be affiliated with. A company that had successfully sued them
in the past. And now EV1 Servers.net, a company we see that was used in a TCO
FUD study, is being shown again that the TCO of Linux is too high. Most
probably a Didiot will cite EV1 Servers.net in a new TCO study that has yet to
be written. I would not even be surprised to learn that EV1 Servers.net was
paid by MS to "offset" the SCO IP license costs. Which simply would
show that MS is funneling money to SCO via third-parties; at the same time
produce further TCO FUD.

Maybe the delay in the release of the Longhorn OS is simply MS is waiting for
new enhancements to Linux. We've seen how MS adds OSS to it's proprietary worm
magnets. So, it stands to reason that they need to cut corners on the core
while the UI is made all pretty... ;^)

That was my 2 cents...

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ promoted to honorary Wookiee
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 08:39 AM EST
Just look at that big bully PJ picking on poor little us. Ignore the lies an
misdirection we've been spewing for a year or so.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today - Amdahl Corporation
Authored by: JoeyTheSaint on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:16 AM EST

Just in case anyone didn't know, there's absolutely no love lost (at least historically speaking) between Amdahl and IBM. For one thing, Amdahl's alliances clearly put them in a different camp. For another, it's worth noting that FUD was first coined by Gene Amdahl in reference to Big Blue and their marketing techniques.

---
-Joe.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Nice Compliment, PJ
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:38 AM EST
If you look at what he is saying here: "'Call me crazy,' adds Stowell,
'but I somehow think that Pamela Jones isn't just a paralegal with nothing
better to do with her life than host a Web site called Groklaw that is dedicated
to bashing SCO. I think there is a lot more to her background and intentions
than she is willing to reveal publicly. I believe that Big Blue looms large
behind Pamela Jones.'" Stowell believes that you are so good at what you
do that they only possible explaination is that you are part of the IBM legal
team and you were selected as the point person to handle the public
dissemmination(sp?) and analysis of information surrounding the SCO case.

I think you should be very proud that your professionalism and obvious impact
has created this high level of respect. I know I appreciate the detailed
(mostly) unbiased analysis of each piece of the case and hope, after you take a
couple of deep breaths, you realize how this further validates your
credentials.

Stay above the fray and get some sleep!

Long time reader, first time poster.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Did IBM make a mistake?
Authored by: maroberts on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:35 AM EST
In allowing SCO to amend (read totally rewrite) its claims without getting some
rulings on the current claims?

SCO escaped a court ruling whether there was a breach of trade secrets in
Linux/AIX etc, and thus effectively the termination reason given could be
regarded to be still nominally valid.

Opinions?

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Czechoslovakia option
Authored by: bruce_s on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 11:53 AM EST
Just looking at the ev1 forums with the statement from the "Head Surfer", and a comparison with the "SCO IP License" and the piece of paper Neville Chamberlain waved after the Munich pact came to mind.

(Hopefully avoiding Godwin's Law)

Bruce S.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I live less than 10 miles from SCO
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:16 PM EST
But I see right through all their FUD. Way to go PJ!

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Bob045 on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 12:25 PM EST
Absolutely had to create an account and say Congrats to PJ!

You have scared them. Scared them stupid.

I have been watching this case ever since the first allegation came up. Ever
since then I have been watching to see if they could be serious about it.
*Shakes head*

They are, and if their methodology can be compared to warfare then they have
made their moves based on Nazi Germany in WWII. The endgame for them will also
be the same.

Carry the torch PJ, darkness cannot stand against the Light!

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ gets compliment from SCO
Authored by: rsa on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 05:49 PM EST
Look at it this way if you hadn't struck a nerve with the SCO bunch they
wouldn't even mention you but as it is you have made public their nasty little
scam.
We are all proud of you and the work you do here
At least you can say you haven't stooped to their low level and staied on the
high road.
Please take it easy and enjoy the fact that you are doing the right thing, and
obviousley they can only come back with lies and inuendo.
Keep up the good work and thanks.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 08:52 PM EST
It's the one time I wish PJ and Stowell lived in New South Wales, Australia.
NSW has some of the world's most draconian libel and slander laws. Normally
they are abused by fat cats to censor the media, but the laws might actually be
put to some good use against Stowell.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:11 PM EST
Hi, just wanted to say, hang on PJ. By the way, I wanted to float an idea to
you. I've been hanging on to the domains scolicense.com, scoreport.com,
scofiles.com, ibmlawsuit.com, and a couple more along those lines. Since they're
largely useless to me (Haven't updated them in days), would you like me to post
something on them? Consider me to be at your disposal in this matter. If you
want my email, run a whois on the domain names. It's largely a spam sucker email
address, but I check it now and then.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The FUD Is Mighty Thick Today
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 02 2004 @ 10:48 PM EST
But one thing is for sure, if anything bad happens to me, you will know who is responsible.

While your humor is often this dry, chivalry demands I ask: Do you require protection, Ms/Mrs Jones?

-Tomas

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )