|
|
| PJ Responds to the Smear Campaign Against Groklaw |
 |
|
Friday, March 05 2004 @ 05:46 PM EST
|
As you know, Darl McBride, Blake Stowell and now Rob Enderle have stated as if it were true, that IBM sponsors Groklaw. McBride said it in the ZDNet interview by Dan Farber (at http://zdnet.com.com/1601-2-5168663.html at around 19:15 - sorry no link, Geeklog won't accept it without a www in it), Blake to LinuxInsider, and today Enderle picks up the SCO line, as usual. ZDNet has published
my reply. Here is the short version: IBM does not sponsor Groklaw and it hasn't given equipment or anything else to Groklaw. Groklaw is independent of any outside influence. It's a noncommercial site. Groklaw is me and a world full of volunteers who believe in what we are doing. The truth is there isn't enough money in the world to get me to do Groklaw. It's a labor of love. You can read the rest on ZDNet, because they were nice enough to correct the record, and it's nice to give them hits. You can click on their ads too, if you feel like it.
I never link to Enderle, because I don't want to support him in any way because I have found his work lacking in veracity and accuracy, and in case you feel the same, here is what he wrote about Groklaw today, so you don't need to go there:
"SCO did, however, have to develop a unique strategy with regard to Linux due to the unique nature of the Linux license and community. This uniqueness allowed IBM to position the Linux community against SCO and distance itself somewhat from the less-agreeable parts of the war and, hopefully, conceal the connection between the IBM decision maker and the resulting problem. These moves were incredibly well-orchestrated and apparently included donated equipment for sites like Groklaw. This unprecedented effort by IBM supports the position that IBM actually knows it misacted and is at extreme risk. No other explanation fits this massive and unique effort to destroy a vastly smaller firm." Don't bother writing to Enderle to defend me, please. That's another way he could "prove" that he has a wide readership, and there are some other ugly possibilities.
Decatur Jones' Dion Cornett, in his latest report on SCO, says "SCO may have bitten off more than it can chew" and one reason he mentions is Groklaw:
"Investment Considerations: - 1Q04 results were weak with revenue of $11.4M vs. our estimate of $14.2M and a pro forma loss of $.41 vs. our estimated $.10 loss;
- Revenue guidance of $10M-14M is below our previous estimate of $14.4 causing us to further reduce our estimates and target price to $2;
- New end user lawsuits likely to have negligible near-term benefit;
- Vast resources now stand aligned against SCOX, including a recent phenomenon called Groklaw;
- We reiterate our Underperform rating.
". . . .SCO probably misjudged, but then again who knew about Groklaw? Groklaw . . . . tracks the day-to-day events surrounding SCO and provides a forum for thousands of registered users and guests to provide insight. Like Open Source software, this community of volunteers often does intensive work that lawyers and analysts would otherwise have to do themselves. . . . Groklaw volunteers also routinely attend trial hearings, transcribe documents, gather news tidbits from around the world and piece together missing history from direct first hand experience.
"Never before has so much quality legal work been done for free The net effect is that SCO and its attorneys now find themselves facing an army of volunteers that quickly dissect and gather related information on virtually every public comment that SCO, its attorneys and its management make. Given UNIX’s 35 year history and involvement by thousands of companies, the magnitude of this benefit cannot be overstated. To put the numbers in context, the site routinely receives more than 1.5 million hits a week and a typical posting generates more than 60,000 page views and hundreds of comments. . . . Thus regardless of the validity of SCO’s claims, SCO surely faces a more expensive and difficult legal challenge than if Groklaw did not exist." Might this explain the smear campaign? I just noticed that analyst Amy Wohl posted this in response to my letter on ZDNet: "Groklaw is Invaluable
"Groklaw provides an invaluable service to the Open Source community. Not only does it provide a single place to find all of the documents in the SCO brouhaha, it also serves as a central place for any member of the information community to share their knowledge or comments. I've found more about Unix and Linux reading Groklaw, than I've found in all of my other sources combined!
"Posted by: amywohl Posted on: 03/05/04" Thank you so much. One of Groklaw's many talented volunteers found out some additional clarifying information in this older article about Ibiblio: "Beyond the money, [Paul] Jones counts on technology grants from companies such as IBM, which in 2000 committed to give $250,000 worth of equipment to ibiblio. Jones says ibiblio collaborates with IBM on some research that might be applied to future IBM products.
"'We share some research stuff with IBM. They're interested in self-healing software, and we don't fail all that much,' Jones says." The article has one other point of interest: "Ibiblio got its start in 1992 as SunSite. A press release that October announces the official launch of SunSite, a joint project of UNC and Sun Microsystems Computer, that 'will act as a central repository for a collection of public-domain software, shareware and other electronic material such as research articles and electronic images.'" UPDATE: Here's NINA: "Microsoft Corp. is a client of the Enderle Group, the consulting firm headed by Rob Enderle." Groklaw reader ra found it.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:11 PM EST |
| First post! Keep up the great work. I'm an addict of this site :) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- PJ's link - Authored by: pb on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:13 PM EST
- IBM ibiblio relation predates SCO suit by 3 years - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:40 PM EST
- Text of Monterrey Agreement - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:27 PM EST
- Yahoo analyst page - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 11:21 PM EST
- It's not SCO - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 02:33 AM EST
- Perspective - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 08:37 AM EST
- Addition to protective order - re: CA - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 09:47 AM EST
- URLs here - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:28 PM EST
- ZDNet commentary - Authored by: harrytuttle on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:46 PM EST
- Writer ties to microsoft? - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 02:38 PM EST
- Enderle Claims it was a pro/con piece - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 06:47 PM EST
- URLs here - Houston we have problem - Authored by: jmichel on Monday, March 08 2004 @ 12:29 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:17 PM EST |
PJ,
This just proves that you're doing a wonderful job.
Thank you, and keep up the good work![ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Great job, PJ! - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:26 PM EST
- Great job, PJ! - Authored by: VivianC on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:41 PM EST
- Great job, PJ! - Authored by: mklatsky on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:25 PM EST
- Great job, PJ! - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:38 PM EST
- Great job, PJ! - Authored by: dmomara on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:14 PM EST
- Great job, PJ! - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:45 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: Aerie on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:17 PM EST |
This is just pathetic. I hope those guys end up famous for being "the
little company that couldn't" to the world at large.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Pierre on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:19 PM EST |
PJ,
It seems to me that you are getting pretty close to being able to have your own
suit against SCO, and maybe eWeek. Are they treading perilously close to
libel/slander?
Pierre[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:19 PM EST |
Despicable Treatment, but to be expected I suppose.
It must be hurting them!
Gandhi had a quote for that
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: gakulev on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:21 PM EST |
Perhaps IBM has unlawfully contributed portions of SCOX's intellectual property
to the operating systems runnings on sites such as groklaw?
Just kidding...
---
Gakulev
May the source be with you.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:22 PM EST |
When I read these outrageous statements from Rob and SCO, I'm reminded of the
book "Animal Farm" from school. Every day they painted a new message
on the front of the barn.
When that message didn't work, they changed the message. Same story with SCO:
"It's copyright", no, it's contracts, etc.
I am truly impressed with the reserve you demonstrated in your response - That
shows class. (But I really liked the part of "no pipe" :^)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Animal Farm - Authored by: PM on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:47 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:22 PM EST |
So IBM threw a little equipment Ibiblio's way and to SCO that means IBM is
sponsering Groklaw. I wish there was a way to shut these guys down immediately.
Of course SCO would never accept any "under the table" sponsership
from any large software company. By the sounds of it, it goes against SCO's
morals.(Sarcasm)
I have to say, it is nice to see that the press is slamming SCO in 90% of the
articles I see today.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: bbaston on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:23 PM EST |
I love you, Pamela. I am proud to be a GrokLawyer. You lead, nothing can stop us
PJ Penguins now! Down with liars everywhere!
---
Ben
-------------
IMBW, IANAL2, IMHO, IAVO, {;)}
imaybewrong, iamnotalawyertoo, inmyhumbleopinion, iamveryold, hairysmileyface,[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:23 PM EST |
The "Linux community" never cared much about the SCO case against IBM
until SCO started claiming that the Linux kernel or code in Linux distributions
unrelated to IBM, except as IBM may have put them into the kernel, belonged to
SCO, and Linux users would owe something to SCO.
I suppose IBM could have purposely put code into Linux to anger SCO and then
have SCO make claims against Linux users, but SCO's complete lack of good faith
in helping remove the alleged violations makes that conspiracy theory fall
apart.
According to Enderle, this would have been part of IBM's conspiracy against SCO.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: dave booth on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:26 PM EST |
| darn, that astroturf sure burns when you get tackled..... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:28 PM EST |
Just another Thanks! for you, PJ. You're providing an extremely
valuable service for us, and it's much appreciated.
Larry N.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: stuman_uk_42 on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:29 PM EST |
hear hear, well said my dear lady
isnt it possible to sue these people for slander, and could the opensource
community have a class action lible/slander suite against SCO et al. for the
comments they have made about our Community
---
If in the long run we are all dead then surly in the short run we are all
screwed?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: gnutechguy99 on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:29 PM EST |
The trouble with Enderle is that he writes for eWeek which is usually more
informed in its reporting than most other trade magazines. However, Enderle has
sunk to a new low with these attacks against groklaw. Ultimately, I think they
will backfire, bit still is surprising watching a so-called columist sinking to
such professional lows.
I almost feel sorry for Enderle, as I wonder what his next career will be as he
has lost all credibility.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- eWeek, usually a good trade mag - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:44 PM EST
- As long as it draws hits he doesn't need credibility - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:45 PM EST
- eWeek, usually a good trade mag - Authored by: PM on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:51 PM EST
- eWeek, usually a good trade mag - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:05 PM EST
- eWeek, usually a good trade mag - Authored by: odysseus on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:59 PM EST
- eWeek, usually a good trade mag - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 11:09 PM EST
- Type Casting - Authored by: elder99 on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 08:10 AM EST
- eWeek, usually a good trade mag - Authored by: Jude on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 08:15 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:35 PM EST |
SCO's actions all the way around are reprehensible, and I don't even like Linux
(MacHead and proud of it). Personally, I find their attempts to smear Groklaw's
reputation especially distasteful. There's usually no greater sign of guilt or
desperation than blaming the messenger.
Keep up the good work, PJ.
L.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: EdisonRex on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:39 PM EST |
Thank you for your effort, and for setting the record straight, yet again.
Through the efforts of this site I have become educated enough to be able to
explain to our corporate legal team what the basic issues are; this from a
technologist who works with lawyers but has enough technology to have to
specialise in to want to avoid law issues.
Unfortunately we can no longer avoid law, it is honking a loud horn in the form
of obnoxious and imaginatively crafted suits against companies who could easily
be mine.
It seems to me that the fact that this site is now under attack means that it is
hitting a few nerves. It was ignored for so long, much like Linux was. Funny
that. These guys are so predictable, like schoolyard bullies except they are
supposed to be grown up and mature, yet they come out with these statements that
make me feel like they really are 11 and want to "get you" for what
you are saying.
Ignore Enderle, he will do himself in. The mainstream press, and the analysts I
talk to (who talk to people like me for technological background) are catching
on.
It is not even interesting anymore that Enderle repeats the same sources.
---
The chief cause of problems is solutions - Eric Sevareid[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: bobn on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:41 PM EST |
"Nobody kicks a dead dog." If you weren't having an effect, they'd
ignore you. If SCO and Enderle hate you, you must be doing right. Keep up the
good work.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- You said it - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 11:10 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: SlOrbA on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:41 PM EST |
In other words groklaw is sponsored by open source community and that is a thing
we know SCO or it's managment particulary can't grasp.
I'm sure IBM doesn't mind that mixup with the community and it self, but the
comunity is so much more versitale to the big blue, that even big blue is
sometimes lost with the idea of open source movement.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: haegarth on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:44 PM EST |
Nice work, PJ, but I wonder just for how long your response will last. Every 1
or 2 days there's some statement in SCOspeak, and while many journalists today
don't seem to believe SCO any longer, they still invite DmB and his companions
to interviews, letting them utter their lies again and again. The PR machine is
at full speed and in it's highest gear, and there seems to be no way it may run
out of gas too soon.
So I'm afraid this won't have been your last response concerning the subject.
You best be prepared. Just kidding, I know you are.
---
Where do you want to SCO today?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Mark_Edwards on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:48 PM EST |
Keep up the good work PJ !!. Looks like Groklaw has SCO on
the run !!!!!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:48 PM EST |
a server with bandwidth to somebody to start up a popular support? IBM can
afford to buy any lawyer in the wolrd, and the conspiracy theory that IBM
donated a whole PC (that should be a lot moneys, you know) to PJ is just not
even silly. Darl should have said IBM gave her a million dollars, a ferrari (or
whatever you drive over there) and house in florida. That's probably the bare
minimum bribe they can make up. A PC as a bribe from IBM -- oh, please, give me
a break...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:49 PM EST |
| Question: Have you considered suing Enderle? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:49 PM EST |
I think Enderle is the last journalist still clinging to
the SCO bandwagon. Everyone else has bailed out after
realizing that this wagon is heading for a cliff. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:50 PM EST |
His thesis, and his "proof" thereof, is without a doubt the dumbest
thing I
have read in years. He even out does SCO.
Wally Bass [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PSaltyDS on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:52 PM EST |
...was to click on the little Groklaw PayPal Donate button! The battle
against the willfully clueless is worth financing out of my own pocket. THAT
IS WHY I SUPPORT PJ AND GROKLAW!
Carry on smartly,
PJ!
P.S. Please excuse my shouting... :-)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: kjb on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:54 PM EST |
Hang tough.
You have brought this group together with YOUR leadership.
We got your back.
---
"No! Try not. Do, or do not. There is no try."
- Yoda[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: daak on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:56 PM EST |
Talk about ironic:
You know the big random ad that shows up in the middle of the page on ZDNet?
When I went to read your letter to the editor, it was an ad for IBM![ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: kberrien on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:57 PM EST |
SCO shouldn't be surprise at the Groklaw phenomenon, as they should have known
organized response from the community directly would arise.
If they
though differently then they just have stuck their hand in a lion cage, now
knowing what a lion is.
The lion has many forms, but its Groklaw
that provides the Roar!
You're doing the right thing![ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 06:59 PM EST |
I love how Stowell's defense to PJ's "Litigation isn't a long-term business
strategy..." is to claim her "motives" are in question.
Dear Blake, PJ is just the messenger, don't shoot her for your untenable
strategy. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:01 PM EST |
| It looks like SCO still doesn't understand the userbase behind linux; not to
mention people like PJ who are interested in principle rather than making money.
They think the only reason people will do a thing is if some big company is
funneling money into them.
What is most telling is that Microsoft is
funneling money into SCO, so perhaps this a basis for their ideology.
Or,
this could be just another case of SCO spreading disinformation and lies. Well,
I hope they get nailed for it someday.. It's really starting to grate on my
nerves.
You go PJ! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:03 PM EST |
Whilst I admit that I am no lawyer, isn't what Enderle just said potentially
libelous. His statements went beyond a simple misunderstanding of the current
legal situation to outright fiction. There is absolutely no proof whatsoever
that IBM is involved in some deep-routed, shadey consipracy against SCO; there
is, however, significant evidence to implicate Microsoft.
I cannot believe that IBM would stand for such rumours to be banded-about
without taking some action -at least demand a retraction. Does IBM have much to
gain from NOT taking legal action against eWeek?
Steve[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:05 PM EST |
| Today, I sent a complaint to Sharon Machlis of Computerworld about
some of
their coverage of the SCO lawsuit. She sent me this reply:
Once again, I appreciate you taking the time to write in. If
you want to
send in a letter or op-ed piece (unfortunately we don't pay for
those) to
be considered for publication, we'd be happy to consider that as
well.
Sharon Machlis, Online Managing Editor
Sharon_Machlis@computerworld.com
Groklaw readers might
want to take up her offer for an OpEd piece. Just
keep in mind that they want
articles with a broad appeal. Any
defense of PJ would be best placed inside an
article describing Groklaw's
role in this legal dispute. Good OpEd articles
also focus on an area
where the author has expertise and are concise.
Mike
Perry, Inkling Books, Seattle
http://www.InklingBooks.com/ [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Please Do not - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, March 07 2004 @ 03:37 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:05 PM EST |
| A quick Google search reveals that Enderle almost always speaks favorably
regarding Microsoft, and was a featured speaker at the Longhorn Developers
conference.
The Enderle Group's website offers services such as Counterpoint,
which "provides consulting services during the review process of a poorly
founded negative piece on a vendor or its products."
I wonder where Enderle is
getting his money? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:05 PM EST |
So is this statement true, or not?
When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM.
It would be nice to get some honest responses, and not just have the post
deleted like all others that question anything around here. But I bet it gets
deleted.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Pierre on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:13 PM EST
- now this is real silly - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:13 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: McMartin on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:14 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:14 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:22 PM EST
- The answer is probably yes - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:26 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Mark_Edwards on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:30 PM EST
- they got $86 millions from MS and now they cry over hundred-dollar server from IBM... - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:35 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:42 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:43 PM EST
- it's meaningless - Authored by: xtifr on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:46 PM EST
- Who makes the serves that SCOgroup.com and SCO.com run on?????? - Authored by: BigTex on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:47 PM EST
- Are you sure? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:50 PM EST
- Are you sure? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:06 PM EST
- I got yer "honest response" right here. - Authored by: LvilleDebugger on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:53 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:54 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: linonut on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:56 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:12 PM EST
- Stop, pay troll - Authored by: bmcmahon on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:54 PM EST
- TROLL ALERT! Pay this no heed. - Authored by: sbungay on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:17 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:25 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Glenn on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:46 PM EST
- Don't feed the trolls - Authored by: hardcode57 on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 11:14 PM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: PJ on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 11:40 PM EST
- Hey Mr. Paranoid - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 02:46 AM EST
- When you use a computer, IBM is involved - Authored by: rjamestaylor on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 04:31 AM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: blacklight on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 07:12 AM EST
- When you login to Groklaw, you are logging into servers donated by IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 11:08 AM EST
- A stones troll away . .. ... ..... ....... - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:26 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:09 PM EST |
'First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you
win.' ~Ghandi
Guess what..? ;-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: m_si_M on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:09 PM EST |
Now it's time to dig a bit deeper.
Can anybody out there obtain documents on the lawsuit between Darl McBride and
IKONOffice back in the 90's? Seems to me, there's a pretty good story behind it,
but I need evidence. If you'd like to help, send me some information.
---
C.S.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: WojtekPod on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:11 PM EST |
Great job, PJ!
Don't worry about them. They will try to sling mud at you (hoping that something
stays), but you have a great reputation and it's you who defend the *truth*. So
all they can do is bark at your great site. ;)
PS. Knowing as much as you do about the case, I would do also the same as you
for *free*. You cannot let these people spread their lies.
Unfortunately I don't have your skills. So all I can do is be your loyal reader
and inform anyone interested about your page.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: javajedi on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:11 PM EST |
| I seriously have to wonder if Mr. Enderle is aware of how to use Google, or a
web browser. The reason for my doubt is that a simple visit to Ibiblio's web
site yields the following blurb:
"Partners with ibiblio.org
Partners of
ibiblio.org include VA Linux's SourceForge and IBM who supply the hardware on
which ibiblio.org services are running. ibiblio.org runs using open source
software where ever applicable and attempts to promote open source ideals within
contexts other than software."
That is a direct quote from the following
link:
http://www.ibiblio.org/about.html
Pay extra attention to the
revision date at the bottom of this particular page:
"last revised: October
19, 2001"
I understand that IBM is a forward thinking company but planning
to provide servers that would ultimately be used to serve the groklaw site years
in advance is impressive! I want their crystal ball!
---
The Matrix is
real... but i'm only visiting... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: webster on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:19 PM EST |
Apparently Rob Enderle has "attacked" Groklaw and accused it of being
an IBM shill in the FUD War. Well excuse me. Since when has being associated
with IBM in this battle been an attack? Enderle depicts it as Giant IBM and
Groklaw against little Ole SCO.
If you didn't know before yesterday's memo, you certainly know now, it is the
abusive MONOPOLY and their paid minions, including SCO, against the Open Source
Community and Linux.
So PJ, thank them for spelling Groklaw right and being so in awe of you and your
allies.
---
webster[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: leeway00 on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:22 PM EST |
<troll>
I have proof that bogus micro loans have been taken out by IBM front companies
in several foreign jurisdictions on behalf of PJ. There are at least five rolls
of pennies & two books of stamps buried in Costa Rica waiting for PJ when
she finally takes a "vacation".
</troll>
Keep up the good work PJ. I read that you thought you would be writing into the
ether when you started this blog. Just shows what a timely idea & hard work
can translate into....along with the contributions of millions of sets of eyes.
Don't let the trolls knock you off message. Darl & Co. only have an
obsolete hammer along with cash for mercenaries & all the world looks like a
nail to them.
Leeway[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: RedBarchetta on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:27 PM EST |
I didn't bother reading the Enderle article, for the first time. When I read
his articles I get so outraged at his stupidity, I can only conclude that he is
trolling for hits. Thus my decision not to read his article.
Ignore
him folks, let's not give the troll increased hit counts. It only validates his
presence, which is the primary reason why people pay for his
verbal-vitriol.
The fewer the hits, the less his significance, the less
we'll see of this person. Ignore him.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: michaelp on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:28 PM EST |
| I would like to repeat the same that has been repeated many times: this site
and PJ are doing an incredible service.
Having a somewhat bizarre
combination of IT and journalism training, I find what's happening at Groklaw
groundbreaking.
I think that Groklaw is the beginning of something much
bigger than SCO, IBM, et al. Groklaw represents the beginning of open source
journalism and open source legal research. Powered by the Internet,
Groklaw represents the future of information of exchange; no longer will we be
dependent upon the economically-driven media. Sites like this hopefully will
emerge to cover practically any topic that comes up, bringing with them the
objectivity that is lacking in other avenues.
PJ, you will go down in history as
revolutionizing journalism as we know it. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: BigTex on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:29 PM EST |
Well said PJ. You have made an impact on this event!
BigTex[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:34 PM EST |
For me, the past week has been extremely enlightening. Previously, I thought
that the SCO case against IBM was based on a combination of stupidity and
ignorance; a grab for a quick pay-off from a character (McBride) known for
dubious litigation in the past. Today, however, it’s quite clear that SCO
represents just a player in a carefully orchestrated campaign to undermine
open-source software.
How many attempts throughout this episode have we seen: attempts by people to
group the open-source community with those who illegally trade Mp3 over the
Internet? The attempts by SCO to attribute unproven attacks on the SCO website
on the open-source community? Or to impose a false financial barrier, in the
form of indemnification? The list is endless…
All of these questions point towards something far more powerful than SCO.
I applaud you PJ and all who contribute to Groklaw. There is a great changing
coming to the computing industry, and there are a great many people with a great
incentive to see it fail. Groklaw stands between Linux and those who would do it
harm.
Thanks
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ujay on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:37 PM EST |
Let them smear - it will just bring more people into the fight. With SCO
spewing Lie after Lie, they obviously believe in the adage, tell a lie enough
times, others will think it's true. Our weapon is the truth, and with the vast
number of people contributing here, the truth comes out. This is what scares
the hell out of SCO.
This is an historic movement, where people in vast numbers have access to
resources and information. Only those who would have the public remain ignorant
would object to this.
Great job PJ.
---
cognito ergo sum : I hide, therefore I am[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Cpl_Laque on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:42 PM EST |
| They haven't given me any financial support of any kind. Not a dime.
Not a
promise. Not a grant. Not a PIPE deal. Not an envelope of money
under the table
from a cousin. Not a Thinkpad. Nothing. IBM does not
sponsor Groklaw.
Thats a shame really you think when this lawsuit is all said and done
IBM
could kick PJ a Thinkpad or 2...or a Zseries990 (drool)....zSeries [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jasonstiletto on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:44 PM EST |
The recient mentions of Groklaw- it seems it's on their lips every time they get
in front of the press any more indicates how concious they are of how effective
it is.. but there are lots of resources that sprang up. There's a Sco related Wiki, the We Love the SCO
information minister site, and of course, lamlaw, and those are just the ones off the top of
my head.
Groklaw isn't the first, nor the only site to focus on SCO, but it
is the most up to date, informative and best. If Groklaw didn't exist, another
site would have taken it's roll. This case is far too important to the open
source community to rely upon the traditional press as the sole coverage. For
various reasons, it appears that none of them take SCO's view.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: kawabago on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:45 PM EST |
Pamela doesn't need outside money to support Groklaw because the truth is free.
It is lies that cost money!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:46 PM EST |
HI, I'm Walther, from Argentina.
Today, whenever I try to accede to a internal
link in groklaw.net, I'm redirected by verotel.com to a porn page.
this doesn't
happen if I use groklaw.com to enter to the site.
Someone has experienced the
same strange behavior?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: RLP on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:49 PM EST |
Your secret sponsors need to donate a mainframe server and a couple of T3 lines
so the site doesn't get slashdotted every day.;)
I've complained to magazines and newsletters before about Enderle's uh,
reporting, and I'm not even a Linux fanatic or GPL cultist, just looking for
reliable systems that won't break the company. (BSD is interesting too, just
seems to have less support right now.) He's a troll, but that gets hits and that
brings in advertisers. Most of the industry press is ad supported so I guess a
little tabloid journalism is to be expected.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:49 PM EST |
I mean, *OF COURSE* IBM is paying off PJ, just look at her Mercedes and her
mansion and her diamonds -- oh wait, that's Pamela ANDERSON. Never mind.
Although I do think there should be a PJ pin-up calendar, but it shouldn't have
photos, it should have her twelve best articles...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:49 PM EST |
I tried and tried not to, but couldn't stop myself...
What I sent...
You asked, so I'll answer:
Have you ever seen IBM in similar litigation?
Have you ever found yourself stranded in the Andes mountains with only the
bodies of your friends as food? That has about as much relevance as your
question...do you actually have a degree in anything resembling technology or
writing?
When is a $40 million company ever a real threat to a $90 billion company?
When the $40 million company receives at least $100,000,000.00 (ONE HUNDRED
MILLION U.S. DOLLARS) backing from MICROSOFT. Enough said on that. When should
IBM have considered Microsoft a "threat"? When it was a $40 million
company? Maybe $30 million? Maybe $30 billion?
Can you recall an instance where IBM has aligned itself with a non-government
organization that allowed, let alone promoted, violent response?
If that's the impression "you" have of the Open Source Community, you
need to drop the crack pipe. Seriously.
What would IBM's response be if a partner, or ex-partner, tried to release Lotus
Notes or Tivoli, both technologies acquired by IBM, into the open-source
community without permission?
"If", I repeat, "IF" IBM were stupid enough to release it
under the GPL themselves, on multiple occasions, they wouldn't have a leg to
stand on...but, unlike SCO, IBM isn't run by Darl McBride & a team of
litigators.
Of course, "permission" is exactly what SCO gave...
http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/story/0,10801,79146,00.html
Perhaps you'll find this little bit of FACT interesting, if not a problem to
digest...
If SCO has no evidence and is in the wrong, why is the company being so
viciously attacked?
Read your question to yourself again S L O W L Y. Because, and I quote you,
"...SCO has no evidence and is in the wrong.."
"You" need to ask "yourself" this question: (edited to
correct "these" to "this")
How much did you get paid to write that rotten-smelling piece of flotsam?
Of course, we all know you feel that as long as the money is coming in from
"wherever", you don't give a rat's arse about silly little things like
"facts"...So, why am I not suprised you'll have little trouble
sleeping at night?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: snorpus on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:51 PM EST |
| First, PJ, let me thank you again for having the passion to develop such a
brilliant idea as Groklaw. If it weren't having an effect (on the community, if
not on the cases themselves), it wouldn't be drawing the attention of Darl,
Blake, et al.
Paradigm shifts are hard to recognize as they are
occurring. James Watt, I'm sure, did not envision the virtual extinction of the
buffalo when he was trying to get a cranky steam engine to work. Morse, Bell,
and Marconi were trying to solve problems of their day, not enable global
commerce and social interaction.
The Internet, and all the things (good and
bad) that it makes possible, is changing all the old rules. Everything from
romance to politics to dry contract disputes fall into the Internet sphere of
influence.
- The development of Linux (and other free/open software)
itself would have been impossible without the Internet.
- Amazon, EBay, and
Google are part of most everyone's vocabulary, even if they don't use
them.
- In the current U.S. Presidential campaign, one candidate built his
early popularity via the Internet.
- Lawsuits often affect a large part of
society, yet until now, their inner-workings have largely been obscured. In the
20th Century, just consider the various anti-trust suits: Standard Oil,
GE/Westinghouse, IBM, AT&T, Microsoft, etc.
A factor I seldom see
mentioned is that many of those in positions of power today are "boomers". We
might wear suits today (well, I don't, but I don't wear tie-dyed anymore,
either), but we remember demonstrations, marches, occupying offices, sit-ins,
and such. Now, as we worry about next semester's tuition for our kid's in
college, we also remember how, 30 years ago, we really cared about
things.
At least in me, SCO vs Open-Source has re-awakened those passions.
And reading between the lines of some of the comments I read here, a fair
percentage of those with interest in this issue have roots similar to mine.
I
think a fundamental mistake made by SCO (following the old paradigm of legal
actions) was ignoring the fact that many (probably most) of the people who
"been there, I did this, Joe did that, and Sue kept all the old files on her
Vax-10" are still around, still think of Unix as "their" baby, and Groklaw
publishes more of these historical documents every week.
What SCO is
attempting to do (pretty ineptly, I'm happy to note) is not only factually and
legally incorrect, but also morally incorrect. They are trying to extract
tribute on the basis of "it's easier to settle than fight our suit".
Failing
that, they now appear to be launching a smear campaign against Groklaw. (There's
an old saying that I've forgotten the punch line to: When the law's against you,
argue the facts... when the facts are against you, argue the law...
punchline???)
As an academic, allegations of intellectual dishonesty are the
worst accusations that can be made against me. I would imagine for someone in
the legal field, allegations ("These moves were incredibly well-orchestrated
and apparently included donated equipment for sites like Groklaw." of
improper influence are equally as serious.
Since a minimal amount of research
by Enderle would have discovered that ibiblio receives contributions from
a number of sources, the inclusion of the statement above is also, in my
opinion, beyond the moral pale.
---
73/88 de KQ3T [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: grumpy on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:51 PM EST |
If so: does anyone know the url?
Disclaimer: I should have done my googling but I did not ...[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ine on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 07:57 PM EST |
"a vastly smaller firm"
No so "vastly smaller" if Microsoft - the world's biggest software
company and a proven monopolistic bully - is using SCO as a surrogate to attack
both Linux and Unix, and cause general market mayhem among its competitors.
I have no idea whether MS put SCO up to this scheme, or whether SCO thought of
it all by themselves and found MS a willing partner or contributor. I am sure
IBM's discovery process can handle that far better than my uninformed
speculations can.
But SCO's activities align extremely well with MS's strategies for attacking
Linux (see the many Halloween documents, not just the latest). If it were just
SCO, they would have been history long ago (look at Netscape, Be, and other
companies that fall by the wayside - and Netscape even had Sun and AOL on their
side). With the Canopy Group, the two big licensees (MS and Sun), and the
mysterious investors who want to remain anonymous by using BayStar et al, this
is bigger than the "vastly smaller firm" called SCO, whatever the
composition and origins of this consortium may turn out to be.
Enderle is being disingenuous.
But we knew that.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: LvilleDebugger on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:01 PM EST |
| Link to PJ's Letter to
ZDNet 5-MAR-2004 [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:03 PM EST |
Hey P.J. - Great job, keep up the good work. I've been reading the site for a
couple of months now, and it is indded invaluable. One non-SCO related thing I
want to thank you for is making me aware of ibiblio - it's a wonderful site.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:07 PM EST |
Ummm....I guess I am just astounded that so many in the Open Source/free
software community are surprised that SCO and friendz are using nastiness in
their campaign. Of COURSE they are- it's called playing hardball. And the way
to deal with it is to fight back accordingly.
This ain't "Star Wars," this isn't "be kind to your enemy"
week. This is dealing effectively with lying, greedy cheats who will do
anything to win. This is, ultimately, fighting to win with a company (MS) who
has done anything it can to crush competition and remain on top. Their ideals
are profit and greed, and if you want to win, dispense with childish notions of
fair play.
Kick'em when they are down- that means aggressivley going after them on the PR
front when they lie, that means making OS software unavailable for their use.
Just like the developer of nmap claims he will do. Think it might hurt them if
they couldn't use samba, for example?
And when a journalist lies about something, well, they can be sued also. I
understand Enderle, which is why I don't get too upset with him. And which is
why I chuckled at his reaction when I told him that I called SCO up and asked to
be invoiced for using Linux on 15 servers <G>. Enderle knows the real
score, I just don't think he writes what he knows always. People are taking
definite sides in this little tiff. Do you really think DiDiot believes all of
the crapola that she has spouted- or could it be that (like a political
candidate) she spouts crapola because it will benefit her side?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: davidbakody on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:19 PM EST |
Groklaw illustrates just how-much Microsoft/SCO completely misunderstand
open-source and the the GPL. They just don't get it. They think Linux is about
people wanting free software, as in free beer, rather than people wanting to be
free FROM unethical companies like SCO and Microsoft. They just don't get it.
It's impossible for them to comprehend any of the new concepts they are being
presented with, hence they do what they do and it backfires on them on an almost
daily basis.
When Microsoft/SCO are faced with the open-source community circling the wagons,
locked and loaded with the truth backed up by facts, we are showing the world
what is possible when people around the world work together in this new paradigm
(sorry, I hate that buzz word, but I couldn't think of anything better)
I wish I were rich PJ. I would write you a big check and send you an army of
defense lawyers (I suspect they will soon be needed), but alas all I can give at
the moment is moral support. Good luck and the lovers of liberty will do what
they can to help you.
Cheers - David Bakody[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: eggplant37 on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:27 PM EST |
in the way that things will be done with computers.
What company could ever possibly pass up the opportunity to turn their products
loose on the 'Net and let the world *improve them for you*. You give away a
basic unit, and add on features and other benefits like 24 hour support for cash
and you'll drag them in.
I have just defined RedHat's business model. What's wrong with that??
Rich[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: krow on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:39 PM EST |
| I think Skiba has dropped his coverage. Y! appears to have the new numbers
showing up sporadically here.
(BTW, if you're
getting old numbers, I did put a screenshot of the new numbers on my site here.)
Check the "Earnings
History" dates. The last date on the new numbers is "Jan 2004." Reload if you
have "Oct 2003". This is a cut & paste from the history:
EPS Trends
Current Qtr Next Qtr Current Year Next Year
Current Estimate -0.34 -0.37
-1.27 -0.60
7 Days Ago 0.22 0.63 1.62 3.01
30 Days Ago 0.22 0.63 1.62
3.01
60 Days Ago 0.14 0.37 0.91 3.01
90 Days Ago 0.17 0.30 0.91
1.69
Also, while the earnings #'s have always had only Skiba's #s and 1
analyst, in the "Revenue Est" section, Y! has listed 2 analysts. In the new
numbers they only list 1. I'm guessing that's Dion Cornett and the earnings
estimates are his. But if they're Skiba's, I commend him on
changing.
Cheers,
Craig
---
Corollary to Clarke's Third
Law:
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:43 PM EST |
| This is only the warm up act. Imagine the impact of Groklaw in Washington. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: lmettler on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:45 PM EST |
Letter to the Editor: No IBM-Groklaw connection
It is truly a sad day when someone as dedicated as Pamela Jones (PJ) at Groklaw
has to be accused of being paid by someone else in order to post what are in
almost all cases publicly available documents.
There is no doubt that those at SCO think they the way you profit from deceit,
lies and fraud is to discredit one who really does not have an ax to grind at
all.
If SCO had any brains at all they would stay clear of any web site that simply
posts and publishes the many court documents and evidentiary studies that others
put together. No doubt these same people would charge the court system with
being paid off by IBM if they found an IBM laptop or typewriter somewhere in
their administrative offices.
Groklaw is the premier web site for documents in regard to the many SCO law
suits directed at harming the Linux industry. They include court documents in
the SCO vs. IBM case, the Red Hat vs. SCO case, the SCO vs. Novell case, the SCO
vs. DaimlerChrysler case and the SCO vs. AutoZone case.
Court documents mind you. Public records.
SCO thinks that there is something to gain by discrediting a public source of
information. They might as well accuse the local public library of being funded
by Al Quida. Maybe they have done that too. But, their PR department is too
busy trying to suppress the public documents and the public facts for these
cases they have started.
The problem is that SCO has sued innocent Linux customers while refusing to
charge IBM or even Red Hat with the supposed violations they charge the
customers with. And, it is deliberate. SCO knows that suing IBM for copyright
violations will mean they lose. That they know. And, that is why they have not
done so to date. SCO knows they can not prove that Red Hat violated any of
their copyrights. And, that is why they are asking the court to permit them to
not prove such claims in a court of law against Red Hat either. SCO actually
falsely represented to the Red Hat court that the Red Hat case should be put
aside because the copyright issues would be decided in the IBM case. The only
problem is that SCO told the IBM judge that no such copyright claims are being
pressed against IBM and have therefor begged out of answering discovery
questions that otherwise they would have to respond to. The truth is that SCO
refuses to sue either Red Hat, IBM, SGI, Novell or any other company for the
copyright violations they alledge must have been committed in order for any
Linux customer to be liable. But, they refuse to prove their claims before the
primary parties first rather than suing the end user who would have no idea
whether those claims are valid or not.
How do I know?
How does the public know that?
In very large part because Groklaw has spent an enormous amount of time and
effort to publish those public records on the internet. And, Groklaw has spend
the time and energy to publsh many factual studies as well. All of which have
been focused upon the factual claims of SCO. (The company that refuses to press
those claims against the primary parties they accuse of violating their
so-called rights.)
That is the only reason why SCO attacks Groklaw. SCO can not stand the that the
truth be told. And, that the truth be available for public review, inspection
and commentary.
In other words, they are attacking their own public documents. I guess they
want their conflicting stories and lies to be kept from the public. Instead
they want the public to think what they say they do rather than what they do.
To be honest, the trade press should be doing this job. But, they can not. And,
they do not. They are simply to busy to be bothered with investigating the
truth and going to the trouble of actually publishing the necessary public
documents that are required to understand how these cases are progressing. What
they claim. What they mean, etc. Instead the trade press all to often just
relies upon PR Press releases written and given to them by SCO rather than
accessing the necessary public documents to know whether what SCO says is true
or not.
But, guess what?
The trade press has discovered Groklaw too. Groklaw is an enormously valuable
resource for any journalist who does not want to be embarrassed by having a void
of knowledge surrounding the issues in the SCO legal cases. To be honest, if
you do not read Groklaw you most likely do not have the foggiest idea what is
going on. In fact that may very well be true even for the lawyers on both sides
of all of the cases. There is no doubt that they too use Groklaw as a valuable
indispensible resource. No doubt what so ever. Even the SCO lawyers depend
upon it on a daily basis.
IBM lawyers and Novell lawyers and Red Hat lawyers and even SCO lawyers know
what is going on in their own cases. But, only SCO has their PR machine in high
gear to misrepresent the facts of the cases to the press.
And that is why SCO attacks Groklaw.
Gosh. I mean how simple can it be? If anyone has a beef about one or more of
the documents you find on Groklaw I am sure PJ (as she is affectionately known)
would be more than willing to correct any factual error or mistake. There is
absolutely no need to have false or misleading material published on the
internet when you have no illicit motive or specific financial gain to clear.
That is in stark contrast to SCO and their effort to extort money from Linux
customers by suing them for precisely the same copyright violations they refuse
to press against IBM, Red Hat, Novell or anyone else.
My hat is off to Pamela Jones and the Groklaw site. It is more than a symbol.
It is the epidemy of what the internet should be. No other service can or does
serve this function.
Not only does it allow free expression of opinion as many sites do on the
internet but it also fully documents an enormous amount of publicly available
information.
And, I have to add one other explanation that can be verified by hundreds if not
thousands of Groklaw readers (including trade journalists). Just yesterday when
the now famous email was leaked to the internet, extensive discussion was taking
place not only on this site but also on SlashDot (/.) for at least 8-10 hours
before PJ would permit the email to be published on Groklaw. Anyone who reads
the site know this for a fact. The email was out there. It was public
knowledge. It was being discussed publicly all over the place. Yet, and I am
sure PJ will not mind my disclosing this bit of inside information, but Pamela
was not sure the email should be publish on Groklaw because it had not been
verified as legitimate. In fact, it was not until after SCO verified that it
was a valid memo, did it appear on Groklaw.
And, SCO is the company that levies the attack upon Groklaw?
If SCO wants to challenge any document on Groklaw they are more than welcome to
do so. If SCO wants to post their own comments on Groklaw they can do so and
have done so.
What SCO wants is to be the only one to speak to the public and the only one
that submits documents to the court and the only one who can discuss their law
suits against Linux customers, etc.
Unfortunately for them and of great fortune for the rest of the world, that is
not the case.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:47 PM EST |
Narcisstic jackasses like those running SCO love to "stir the pot" and
step in as the reasonable ones.
The only way to beat this game is stating fact and letting anyone with half a
mind understand what is going on.
It is impossible to keep this type of person from continuing to hook others into
the tales they weave for a short time.
Please everyone, do a google search on "narcissist bully" and read a
few links.
Simply arguing with these nut jobs is a waste of your time.
Presenting real facts (as Groklaw does) to give people the power to make up
their own mind is they best and only defense.
NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT. THEY WILL TAKE YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL AND BEAT YOU
WITH EXPERIENCE.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Brad R on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:51 PM EST |
I've been reading Groklaw for months, and have recommended it to other people,
but this despicable smear campaign has finally prompted me to register and
comment.
PJ, you're doing a fantastic job -- you have the admiration, respect, and
support of an entire community. You're also handling the smears with the utmost
of class. Keep up the good work, and if no one else has quoted this to you
lately, remember the words of Margaret Mead:
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can
change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: snorpus on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:52 PM EST |
| Mountaineers are Always Free.
The State Motto of West Virginia.
West
Virginia even has it's own home-grown LiveCD version of Linux, MEPIS.
If PJ
ever needs a place to hide out, she'll find it in WV. ---
73/88 de KQ3T [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: beast on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:52 PM EST |
Eolas' web
patent nullified
Eolas has 60 days to appeal. ---
Delay is
the deadliest form of denial. - J. Northcote Parkinson [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: James on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:53 PM EST |
Call me crazy, but I did not find this article to be too bad, in fact it seemed
fairly level handed when compared with their past articles. True they publish
Stowell's one-sided and completely unfounded accusations, but to me he came off
sounding petty, something like a conspiracy theorist in the middle of a rant.
They also say quite a few nice things about Groklaw and Pam, so who knows.
Maybe they're making an active effort to reduce damage to their name based on
those past articles.
Does anyone really believe that transcribed court documents are not
"credible resource(s)"??? That is the accusation Stowell makes, that
we are somehow misinforming the public by detailing the law.
Anyone should be able to see through this extremely weak argument.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: seeks2know on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:54 PM EST |
PJ,
Thank you so much for your wonderful contribution. Your integrity
and class shine through all the FUD. You are an inspiration to all of
us.
Dion,
Thanks for "getting" it. Among all of the superficial
parroting and biased analyses that pervade the investment community, your work
is rock solid. Whenever I see any work bearing Decatur Jones' imprimatur, it
will garner my full attention and respect. A tip of my hat to you,
sir.
To my fellow Groklaw contributors:
Isn't it grand seeing SCO
trying to denegrade our contribution. There is no greater recognition of our
significance.
Thanks to you all! ---
"The least initial deviation
from the truth is multiplied later a thousandfold."
-- Aristotle [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Clifton Hyatt on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:55 PM EST |
Original...
"SCO did, however, have to develop a unique strategy
with regard to Linux due to the unique nature of the Linux license and
community. This uniqueness allowed IBM to position the Linux community against
SCO and distance itself somewhat from the less-agreeable parts of the war and,
hopefully, conceal the connection between the IBM decision maker and the
resulting problem. These moves were incredibly well-orchestrated and apparently
included donated equipment for sites like Groklaw. This unprecedented effort by
IBM supports the position that IBM actually knows it misacted and is at extreme
risk. No other explanation fits this massive and unique effort to destroy a
vastly smaller firm."
un-spun version (WARNING! speculation alert)
:)
Linux did, however, have to develop a unique strategy with regard
to vendor lock-out due to the unique nature of the Microsoft Monopoly threat.
This uniqueness allowed Microsoft to position SCO against the Linux Community
and distance itself somewhat from the less-agreeable parts of the war and,
hopefully, conceal the connection between the Microsoft decision makers and the
resulting problem. These moves were incredibly well-orchestrated and apparently
included covert cash infusions for multiple lawsuits. This unprecedented effort
by Microsoft supports the position that Microsoft actually knows it misacted and
is at extreme risk. No other explanation fits this massive and unique effort to
destroy a vastly smaller entity.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: brendthess on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:56 PM EST |
| I admit to having read the article by Rob Enderle. However, I kept looking up
to make sure that the date wasn't April 1st. The article is full of logical
flaws and fallacies, so muc so that, if it showed up on Slashdot as a comment,
it would be modded as +5/Funny.
I mean, really:
Ask yourself these
questions:
-
Have you ever seen IBM in similar
litigation?
As if this was IBM's idea in the first
place?
-
When is a $40 million company ever a real threat to a
$90 billion company?
So what should IBM be doing? Ignoring them?
Or defending against the lawsuit. The point is is that, in this case, SCO is
not a real threat to IBM
- Can you recall an instance where IBM has
aligned itself with a non-government organization that allowed, let alone
promoted, violent response?
Nope. Still can't.
- If SCO has
no evidence and is in the wrong, why is the company being so viciously
attacked?
Perhaps because there are a large number of people who believe
they are lying, greedy, and a disgrace to corporate America?
These
Straw Men are just the start. I particularly liked his comment (after an
analysis of exactly how careful and downright paranoid the IBM legal department
is about infringing people's IP: If IBM's legal
department wouldn't have accepted even a minor risk, how did this one get their
approval? Particularly given that this one could potentially reduce IBM's rights
with regard to its own intellectual property? This supports the position that
a serious mistake was made.
Actually, this supports the position
that IBM sees no IP problems with what they have done. His conclusions, directly
opposing his arguments, are what makes this an especially poignant bit of either
humor or dementia.
*sigh* How the mighty have fallen...
Great work
PJ. Keep it up!
---
I am not even vaguely trained as a lawyer. Why are
you listening to me? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:56 PM EST |
| Your final comment is: Might this explain the smear campaign? I think it
is only part of the explanation. Think of the psychological concept of
"projection." As defined here,
"Projection is one of the defense mechanisms identified by Freud and still
acknowledged today. According to Freud, projection is when someone is threatened
by or afraid of their own impulses so they attribute these impulses to someone
else. For example, a person in psychoanalysis may insist to the therapist that
he knows the therapist wants to rape some women, when in fact the client has
these awful feelings to rape the woman." So, the SCO people keep talking
about there being a conspiracy backed by IBM to attack them, because they feel
guilty about being the front for a conspiracy backed by M$ to attack Linux. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 08:58 PM EST |
PJ this is SOGOODSOFARSOWHAT,
We all need to write any magazine or publication (Web or otherwise) and explain
our case clearly and calmly. I agree with your action not to support Endrele!
But by writing those that publish him and complaining maybe we can expose him
for what he is....a fraud...and an idiot. Maybe this way he will go hungrey
which is not nearly what he deserves. I mean i even have kinder feelings toward
Didio then that idiot RON.
anyways girl you go! You have a lot of people who believe and you and if you
really need just let us know. I am but a private citizen but i am willing to
help :)
Thank you PJ....you are the exception to the rule...an honest person who is
working to change the world :)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Jude on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:01 PM EST |
Does anyone else think "Rant for Rent Robbie"'s rants have taken on a
distinctly paranoid edge lately? That bit that PJ quoted in her article sounded
pretty far off the deep end to me. He also seems to be getting careless, and
putting forth his wild imaginings in a way that readers might interpret as
statements of fact.
I know he's probably a paid shill, but I'm starting to think he's coming
unravelled.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:06 PM EST |
What if Groklaw was in fact run/supported/sponsored by IBM? Will anyone
actually stop reading it? I know I won't.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:27 PM EST |
he is doing it really well.
sometimes i wonder if that might be what he is supposed to do ... just shoot off
his mouth, funnel money to lawers, and keep the lawsuits in play. i have this
image of him laughing at the mirror, and the persona he has created.
he and his brother might do ok, even if sco never does.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:31 PM EST |
I've been looking at the suprisingly vapid complaints against DC and AZ, and
some things stand out.
They are both very specific situations, and both companies are unfortunate
enough to have entered into some kind of licensing arangement with SCO or one of
SCO's "predecessors in interest". Thus, the suites don't really apply
to your typical Linux user who has fortunatly NOT entered into any such
arrangement (and mostly likely never will!). Ooooooh. Scary.
They are quite vague and insubstatial, even by SCO's standards. In both of them
I got to the end and was like ". . . what? That's the whole thing?".
Each one conists of less than 10 pages including summary, background, lot's of
peoples names and contantact info, and (in AutoZone complaint) a page and a half
at lists of old Unix manuals that SCO has the (as far as I know uncontested)
copywrite on. Like, is AutoZone being charged with copying the System V Unix
manuals or something? I mean, do we really need a page and a half of
"example copyrights" before getting to the various version of System
V. It's almost as if they were simply desperate to fill up space. BTW, you'd
think AutoZone had some hot new Linux distribution they way they are accused of
running ramshod over SCO's hallowed copyrights and methods and such.
The DC suite is based solely on DC's "failure to reply" to SCO's
belligerent demands to audit whatever code they've licensed in source form (for
like what, all their VAXen?) and all their linux installations -- again being
justified solely on the grounds of the old System V license. It's almost like
your safe, unless you got a license from SCO -- which would seem to imply, under
SCO's interpretation, that you have LESS rights when you enter into a licensing
arrangement with SCO (or one of it's predecessors in interest) then you did
before. How safe do you feel now, EV1?
Given all this, and the discovery of the ill-coceived BofA idea that was
presumably abandoned (close to the end of their original 90 day end-user
lawsuite timeframe, IIRC), and the timing (hours before their quaterly earnings
conference call), I have to think they simply threw this together because they
needed to do SOMETHING. It's like when they released code examples minutes
before their last conference call, before anyone had a chance to look at the
pedegree of the bits in question.
I don't think these suites are even expected to survive the first challenge.
They're like "I''m dancing as fast as I can!!!"[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:33 PM EST |
Um, except for the link here, it is not linked from ZDNet's front page, or any
SCO article I have found.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:40 PM EST |
I know this is now behind 200-some messages, but I want to add my 2 cents in
support to PJ and Groklaw. I've watching this site since the beginning , when it
was a blog, but even then, the only place where to get real information and
analysis of what was going on in this big SCOG swindle. For me, not a lawyer and
not a unix expert, this was the only place were to understand if there was
really something behind the claims or not.
Since then, this has grown bigger and better, but the spirit is still there. PJ,
you are making history. We are making history. We all know IBM is not behind
this. We are ANGRY at the efforts of McBride and co. to "monetize" the
big success of Linux. It's like watching one of those soapbox series, were the
bad guy is so bad that you can´t believe is true (remmeber J.R. in Dallas?).
But this is real, and each statment, each action, drove more and more anger.
SCOG will never understand this, but Groklaw, in fact, helped convert most of
that anger, from othwerwise very pacific people, into a very productive work. So
instead of /. with insults and irrational mails, this Groklaw community saw a
way to counteract. For once, the humble people could start acting as a factual
power, and influence the events. That's what I believe this is defining history.
Groklaw is the best example of the birth of the fifth power (the forth power was
the media, right?). Linux, of course is the result of the productive effort of
that fifth power, but Groklaw is the demostration that it can also become
independent of the big players, of the standard four powers that control the
world.
Anyway, folks, this is BIG, and I´m proud to be part of it (even if minimal
part, I realize).
So, GO Pamela!. Keep answering the FUD, but don't fail to anger, that would be
giving them already too much!. Just keep hitting them with the review of any
single statment they make. And, thanks![ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: scott_R on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:41 PM EST |
"this community of volunteers often does intensive work that lawyers and
analysts would otherwise have to do themselves"
There is something the author missed. Groklaw insures that the lawyers involved
do what they are paid to do. It's tough to say you did your best when
"amatuers" have made killer arguments for your side. Were a lawyer to
ignore Groklaw, they may very likely hurt their professional future.
In addition, Groklaw forces companies to fight the good fight. Companies no
longer have the "easy out" way of just settling with SCO to get them
off their backs. EV1 is a very good example of that. They gave in to SCO's
pressure, but now they face quite a bit of anger by their own customers.
Autozone, on the other hand, has garnered a better opinion, and from that
perhaps a larger customer base, by not giving into SCO's BS at the drop of a
hat.
Groklaw is truly one of a kind. That's too bad, because we could use
Groklaw-quality work in all sorts of areas (politics/lawmaking would be a top
choice). Hmmm, maybe someday, when we get to the point that we can clone people
successfully (body and mind), we'll have to make a couple thousand PJs. :)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:54 PM EST |
I hope all our readers are aware that Grocklaw is still hosted by ibiblio, which
is operated by an activity of the University of North Carolina. I hope our
critics aren't trying to imply that the donation by IBM of equipment to the
university has somehow tainted them also. This might not go over so well with
the many thousands of UNC alumni in the Research Triangle area. You might
sometime visit ibiblio.org; they host the Linux Archive, the Linux Documentation
Project, Project Gutenberg, and several regional cultural projects. It once was
the major "sunsite" before broadening its mission.
I might also add that ibiblio also distributes the signal of our local classical
radio station, WCPE-FM, on the internet with a half dozen streaming formats,
including the open-source Ogg Vorbis. You can check them out at http://wcpe.org
or http://theclassicalstation.org, or at the link on ibiblio's home page, and
listen with me as we read the latest from Grocklaw.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 09:56 PM EST |
Hang in there girl you are doing a wonderful job :) we all stand together
against the demon SCO. Yeah, Amen!
Daryl only listens to voices only he can hear.
"C'mon Darl your company owns Unix. That's just the begining of what you
own, the world will be yours someday. Everyone is jealous of you Darl. Oh, by
the way Darl they're out to get you too, better pack some heat. Wait what was
that? Watch out for Yarro too. Listen to me Darl arl arl arl rl rl"
Those good ole SCO boys are out there ere ere ere ...
from under the bridge
I realize I only work here but I don't do Windows.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:02 PM EST |
| When All act, All benefit... Linux will live on [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:03 PM EST |
If you stop to analyze the drivel coming from the SCO supporters for longer than
1 sec. your expanding concience begins to clarify. There's another scenario
very similar to the SCO vs. IBM conflict. I'm sure everyone who is well read
and seeks understanding about life knows what I'm getting at. It just goes to
show that the light of truth will illuminate all and rid the existence of
darkness. What is so funny is the way things are happening, just as it is
fortold, desperation will show the true intentions and shock even those who
defended the darkness....bruhaha..bruhahahah..bruhahahahah...flutters away to
view the results[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Waterman on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:05 PM EST |
| At some point, I seem to recall SCOG saying we ( Linux community ) were full of
conspiracy theories. Looks like the shoe is on the other foot and it is a size 8
shoe on a size 10 SCOG one at that. They're hurting and we know it. Keep up
the good work PJ and the rest of you here.
------------------------------------------------------
Even the trolls make
it fun coming here as you know one of them has to be either BG, DB, MH, BS, RE,
LD, KM, or DM. :-) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: converted on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:11 PM EST |
I can't help think of the book Cluetrain
Manifesto
They just don't get it eh PJ...
"It's difficult to have
a battle of the whits with the
defenseless." [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Night Flyer on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:11 PM EST |
As a regular reader of GROKLAW, and a semi-regular poster, I too can say
categorically that I am in no way connected with IBM (nor M$ nor SCO for that
matter) except that, on occasion, I have used some of their products in the
normal course of business.
In fact, for most of my 30+ years with computers, IBM was the company of
annoyance that we spent considerable energy trying to find alternatives to.
This peaked somewhere in the late-1980's. In a way, M$ has replaced them (and
more recently SCO) in this unenviable position of dis-affection. I note my
company doesn't use UNIX as of fairly recently, and Linux is springing up here
and there.
Of note, even at its arrogant worst I don't remember IBM doing what M$ seems to
have been caught at (doing smear campaigns and massive funding of lawsuits
through third companies, designed to undermine and eliminate honest
competition).
GROKLAW is a unique phenomenon. (1.5 million hits a week? - WOW - I bet large
companies dream of such a following, and never get it!)
I am proud to be even a small part of GROKLAW and the Open Source Community. I
wish there was more that I could do.
BTW, no one pays me to support the Open Source Community and no one pays me to
support GROKLAW.
--------------------------------------
My Clan Motto: Veritas Vincit: Truth Conquers[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:13 PM EST |
I have this image of the end of the move Hackers, where a computer
operator (played, I believe by Penn of Penn & Teller?) is sitting at the
console, and the bad-hat hacker with the beard and his clueless girlfriend and
co-heavy are all out yelling out all of the these hip movie cyberslang (like
"flu shot") and all the absurdly graphic viruses take control of the many
screens and blinken-lights because every hacker in the world has been mobalized
by the ambiguous underground japanese tv stars.
Except it's like like
SCO is at the console, and the attacks are each time somebody learns more about
the case, and the way information is collected and disseminated. Now, all of
his is effectively locallized around Groklaw -- thanks to both the obvious need
for such a centralized resource given the level of interest in the case, and
the hard work, dedication, and insperational example of PJ herself that has made
it one of such outstanding quality.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:21 PM EST |
PJ, don't let the turkeys get you down.
But more to the point, don't fall into the trap of answering their nonsense -
it's not necessary, and it just draws you into their game.
Groklaw is indeed an invaluable resource, and certainly is a clear
demonstration of the power of the open source community concept. It may
very well be just the first of a very new kind of community action for the
future - open law. This community can do more discovery in an evening than
an army of legal beagles can dig up in a month.
Keep up the good work!
---
Jim[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:21 PM EST |
[taken from SCOX/Yahoo]
Groklaw
/. for Truth Addicts
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:24 PM EST |
The text of the Monterrey, agreement can be found in this Santa Cruz Operation
SEC filing:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/851560/0000891618-99-000561.txt
Some highlights
2.0 OWNERSHIP AND LICENSES:
(a) Joint Ownership
All IBM and SCO jointly created Project Work shall be jointly owned by
SCO and IBM, including ownership of associated copyrights or
confidential information. Each party shall be free in all respects to
exercise or dispose of any or all of its ownership rights in the
jointly
created Project Work without accounting to the other party.
(b) Sole Ownership
1. IBM (or its third party suppliers) retains sole ownership of
IBM
Project Work and IBM Licensed Materials.
2. SCO (or its third party suppliers) retains sole ownership of
SCO
Project Work and Licensed SCO Materials.
3. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to transfer ownership
of any portion of the Licensed Materials or each party's
Project
Work from one party (or its third party suppliers) to the other
party. Subject to the terms, conditions, and licenses of the
Agreement, the owning party shall be free in all respects to
exercise or dispose of any or all of its ownership rights in
such portions of the Licensed Materials or Project Work,
without
accounting to the other party.
...
9.0 DISTRIBUTION OF UNIXWARE 7 AND IA-32 PRODUCT
The following provisions will apply to IBM's distribution, in the form
of Object Code, of the IA-32 Product as well as UnixWare 7 and any
subsequent releases of UnixWare 7 ("hereinafter SCO
Products").
Notwithstanding the foregoing, for the period of time from the
Effective
Date of the Agreement through June 30, 1999, the Agreement Number
094690
between IBM and SCO executed by the parties on February 23, 1995, shall
apply to IBM's distribution of the UnixWare 7 products. IBM will have
no
right to distribute the SCO Products in the form of Source Code,
provided, however, that IBM may, in any manner it sees fit and without
royalty to SCO, distribute any Licensed IBM Materials contained in the
SCO Products as well as any jointly created and jointly owned Project
Work which is contained in the IA-32 Product in accordance with the
licenses granted herein.
...
AND THE KILLER
15.2 Change of Control
Notwithstanding Section 15.1, IBM shall have the right to terminate
this
Agreement immediately upon the occurrence of a Change of Control of SCO
which IBM in its sole discretion determines will substantially and
adversely impact the overall purpose of the cooperation set forth by
this Agreement and applicable Project Supplements or will create a
significant risk or material and adverse exposure of IBM's confidential
and/or technical proprietary information (which is subject to, and to
the extent of, confidentiality restrictions) ("Information").
For
purposes of this Agreement, control shall be deemed to be constituted
by
rights, contracts or any other means which, either separately or
jointly
and having regard to the consideration of fact or law involved, confer
the possibility of exercising decisive influence (other than by an
entity currently exercising such influence or any entity controlled by
or controlling such entity) on SCO by:
1. owning more than half the equity, capital or business assets,
or
2. having the power to appoint more than half of the members of
the
supervisory board, board of directors or bodies legally
representing SCO, or
3. having the right to directly manage SCO's business activities.
Subject to a plan deemed adequate by IBM to protect its Information,
the
parties will agree to a wind-down period for activities under this
Agreement in case of termination for Change of Control. Such wind-down
period will take into consideration the party's outstanding commitments
relating to this Agreement and will not be less than 6 months. Any New
Entity (defined below) identified in Attachment B shall not be entitled
to any benefit of licenses granted by IBM under this Agreement in
relation to the IA-64 Product and shall not be entitled to receive any
Information, (including during any wind-down period). "New
Entity" means
the entity assuming control as described in subparagraphs 1 through 3
above and all of such entity's then current subsidiaries and
affiliates.
IBM's right to the Project Work upon a Change of Control shall be in
accordance with Section 15.4.
...
AND ANOTHER KILLER:
22.12 Assignment
Neither party may assign, or otherwise transfer, its rights or delegate
any of its duties or obligations under this Agreement without the prior
written consent of the other party. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
either party may assign or otherwise transfer this Agreement, or
delegate its duties and obligations under this Agreement, in whole or
in
part, to a Subsidiary . Further, IBM may assign or otherwise transfer
this Agreement, or delegate its duties and obligations under this
Agreement in connection with the sale or transfer of substantially all
of the assets of a business unit of IBM, without the consent of SCO
provided the assignee agrees in writing to assume all of the
obligations
of the transferring party under this Agreement, but IBM will promptly
notify SCO of any such assignment or transfer. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, IBM agrees that it will not assign or otherwise transfer
this
Agreement or delegate its duties and obligations under this Agreement
to
the entities listed in Attachment B.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Sunny Penguin on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:26 PM EST |
The SCO Group has once again overblown their own importance.
They truely are "A poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the
stage and is seen no more".
I do not have a link, but The SCO Group has previously claimed that "The
silent majority" was on their side. Meanwhile the world is getting ready
for a lynching.
According to The SCO Group, this only appears to be millions of angry people who
have given up much of their lives to enable Linux to grow into a world class
Operating System.
I for one am not fooled by The SCO Groups "See how stupid I am" act.
I know The SCO group execs are pure evil at heart and are a disgusting disgrace
to all devout Mormons everywhere.
Darl and company would like to publicly pretend they believe it is possible for
The SCO Group to come out of this stock scam as a viable company. They would
have us beleive they think they are in the right, and are just crazy or plain
wrong.
I see them for what they are, criminal stock "players" much more
deserving of jailtime than Martha Stewart.
Where is RICCO?
If the SCO Group gets away with this I am going into bridge real estate.
I hope my rant did not offend anyone except The Scammers.
---
Litigation is no sustituite for Innovation.
Say No to SCO.
IMHO IANAL IAALINUXGEEK[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:49 PM EST |
paraphrasing Billy Bragg:
The future's coming and you can't run from it,
if SCO's got a blacklist then I want to be on it!
Keep up the good work PJ!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:49 PM EST |
SCOG cannot sue anyone for using Linux. Period.
SCOG is suing its customers who once ran UNIXWARE.
SCOG and Micro$oft are misdirecting the public's and the Law's attention
away from the leaked email. So, they are getting the captive press to publish
lies about PJ and Groklaw and IBM, as though these lies make Micro$oft's
clear and provable violation of the Federal decree more acceptable.
SCOG is misdirecting their victim's attention away from the fact that SCOG
cannot sue anyone for using Linux, without the suit being dismissed and
SCOG being ordered NOT to sue anyone else.
SCOG and Micro$oft are losing this fight in such a public and humiliating way
that their corporate goodwill is now negative. I actually sympathize with their
employees, just as I sympathized with those Enron employees.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Night Flyer on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 10:50 PM EST |
I'm pretty sure that SCO does "get it".
However:
I wonder if the some of the sources of funds to SCO (reputed to be M$) gave the
condition that SCO do something anti-Linux that was publically visible (ie -
press releases and action in the courts) by a certain date and at a certain
frequency (every month?). This could explain the sense of urgency that SCO is
showing.
Or, more likely, if the stock falls below some trigger point, some people may
lose big time, and we are there now (and investor lawsuits are looming). What
we are seeing from SCO are acts of desperation, not acts of management.
Think of a cornered animal. They snarl a lot and strike out somewhat randomly
at anything close, teeth bared. Think of CS and DMcB, see any resemblance?
(What are the unemployment benefits like in Utah?)
Now: Do SCO's actions make more sense now?
---------------------------
My Clan Motto: Veritas Vincit: Truth Conquers[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: technoCon on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 11:04 PM EST |
I don't believe PJ is a Nazgul (IBM's legal team). What follows could be
construed to diminish her value and such a construction would be most assuredly
wrong.
I believe that if PJ didn't pick up the mantle of Groklaw, someone else would
have. That's the nature of Linux and Open Source. It's the self-organizing way
in which a mob of people with the same idea and motivation latch find someplace
to gather and collect notes. With enough eyeballs, someone's going to see every
angle. We're seeing ESR's bazaar model of collaborative effort in a legal
context.
That said, don't discount the Nazgul. They're good. Damned good. The Nazgul
fought the Feds for decades on anti-trust and they won. I figure the Nazgul are
the best legal talent that money can buy. IBM knows how to litigate in the mode
of permanent war. IBM owns more IP than anybody on the planet, I doubt they'll
screw this up.
I imagine some business school type will make a reputation studying the synergy
between the Nazgul and Groklaw.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Not a Nazgul - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:11 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: Mikie on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 11:13 PM EST |
AS another long time reader of groklaw, I appreciate the openess and verifiable
information that is posted here daily. PJ, thank you.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: borneo on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 11:33 PM EST |
SCOG says thats derivative work made by IBM to AIX belongs to them, so may be
they incorporate it in theirs own Unix/Unixware/openserver. Maybe they have been
licensing to M$ this derivative works. Who knows ?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 05 2004 @ 11:50 PM EST |
I will also join the legions of your fans in saying that you, PJ and all of the
other people who put so much time into this site, deserve every accolade you
get. This is the best place to get "no-B.S." information.
I didn't read Enderle (he gets me in blood-boil mode), but did read your
response, PJ. As usual, it was restrained, factual and classy.
As has been pointed out by others, you would not be in their cross-hairs if you
weren't having an effect. The only comfort I can give you is that, to these guys
it's not personal, it's business. To them, that excuses the most inexcusable of
behavior.
And the fact that Darl Mc Bride is anxious to find a backdoor-funding situation
for Groklaw amply illustrates that he "Doesn't get it". Not Open
Source, not collaborating for the common good, and especially not Groklaw.
However, there are a few things that I think the Groklaw and Open Source
communities should think about.
First, the SCO attacks will get worse as time goes on. To them, it would seem
justified. After all, nearly every one of us here has made some disparaging
comment about SCO, Mc Bride, or Stowell. In their minds, this is a tit-for-tat
battle and by slamming Groklaw and PJ, they are just doing what they see as
"following along" with certain behaviors. "You slam me, and I
slam you" is the mentality here.
Which means that we might consider reigning in our anti-SCO rhetoric a bit -
limit personal attacks and concentrate on the facts. Which is what Groklaw does
best.
Another thought has been suggestred before in a comment and I think it is
something that might be a good discussion. Perhaps all of the kernel maintainers
and other good folks who make Linux what it is combine forces and enter into a
class-action suit against SCO. Now may not be the right time, as some court
cases may need to be decided before any suit may have a chance of succeeding.
But it is something to think about?
The last thought is "Be careful what you wish for - you might just get
it". I think nearly every Groklaw reader who is on the side of legitimacy
would love to see SCO close up shop and fade into oblivion. Now, that would be
great, wouldn't it?
But how would it get slanted in the press? "Linux zealots drive poor little
UNIX company out of business"? Don't think this can't happen, as the press
already repeats SCO press releases verbatim (think of the "...leading
provider of UNIX solutions" line).
I think it is incumbent on us to limit personal attacks and get our point of
information out there. If/when SCO goes down the tubes, it should be presented
as a company with inept leadership that made outrageous, indefensible claims
that it couldn't back up in court. That's why they went down the tubes, not
because a bunch of stereotypical teenage Linux zealot hackers who live in their
parents' basement drove them out.
Like it or not, the public has a certain perception of computer literate,
technology comfortable people who have a certain amount of passion for the cause
of Open Source/Libre Software and it would be very easy to feed that
stereotype.
It's important that we use some restraint - as in "No personal
attacks" (not that they deserve it, of course) so we can prove that we are
"the better persons". Cheer loudly when the day comes, but be gracious
in victory.
--kb9aln--
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jet on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:07 AM EST |
Enderle absolutely makes me sick to my stomach. I was kind of tempted to read
his article, but you're right. Let's deny him the hits.
But his text sounds like it was written by Bill Gates himself. He simply cannot
comprehend that people would act out of "doing the right thing"; to
him, it *must* be driven by money, so a big corporation must be behind it
(Groklaw, that is).
So, its time to do something I've been meaning to do. Is there a way to donate
without using PayPal or Amazon? I don't really have much to give, and I don't
want to give a cut to others. But if there's no alternative, I'll do it.
John
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:16 AM EST |
It seems to me that SCO is afraid of letting the truth come out. That would be
against their PR campaign. So they start attacking PJ. I doubt that anyone who
has made these accusations have actually read anything from your site.
Keep on doing a good job. We, your reads, believe in you and are behind you
100%. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ErichTheWebGuy on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:19 AM EST |
you go girl!!!!!
---
Striving daily to be RFC-2550 compliant[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:24 AM EST |
| Go Groklaw! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:29 AM EST |
Sometimes eWEEK is worth reading,
From analysis ( spelling?) of the lawsuits by Eben,
"You now have a little company suing four immense
companies in different places on very different claims and
supposing that it can take all of this on at once. My
advice to potential and/or existing Linux customers who
might be worried about being sued by SCO is that the
lesson here is that your greatest danger of that is to be
a SCO customer,"
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1543168,00.asp [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Terry on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:45 AM EST |
PJ
Measures of success come in different forms. You already had the support of
those of us who sought to gain knowledge of what the issues were in the Unix IP
dispute. Your site has been a valuable resoure for building that understanding.
Another measure is the regular increase in traffic and consistent returns by
individuals interested in the progress of various cases.
And, of course, being recognized by TSG as a potent anit-FUD forum is a measure
of success. Now that they have been, to some extent, muzzled by Judge Wells they
are seeking another target. In typical TSG fashion they don't choose well.
So now PJ, you (and the Groklaw community) are right up there with IBM, DC, Auto
Zone + maybe Bank of America on TSG hit list. Not a bad group to be ranked with
given TSG criteria.
In another sense you rank much ahead of any of the other targets. You are trying
to promote a mechanism for reseaching and sharing knowledge on important issues
related to intellectual property and open source issues. Admittedly the site is
freeform and some activities could use a little improvement, but there is a
wealth of information posted here that would never appear in a more stiffled
atmosphere.
This openness and freedom to contibute are things that no corporation can
accomplish.
You are accomplishing this well; keep up the good work
---
"You can fool some of the people all the time. You can fool all the people some
of the time. But you can't fool all the people all the time." --Abraham Lincoln.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: whoever57 on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:55 AM EST |
Or is it just that they are now getting a clue?
A search for "sco" on news.google.com shows many articles that are bad
news for SCO and nothing positive. That's quite a change from just a month or so
ago.
Is it just that the news has been bad for SCO recently or are reporters
beginning to be skeptical of SCO's press releases and public statements?
---
-----
For a few laughs, see "Simon's Comic Online Source" at
http://scosource.com/index.html[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: JustFree on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:04 AM EST |
One think positive that I can say about Darl McBride is that he is bright.
Watching his interview he handle himself well. I would assume that since SCO has
a PR department, that he was coached before his interview.
I am not surprise that SCO has started mud slinging at Paula Jones and Groklaw.
This conspiracy theory is really bazaar. I first can to Groklaw when I was able
to determine that the PR spin that was going from SCO was just than. Many of the
news reports only chirped the information that came from SCO. Rob Enderle is
someone that I utterly refuse to read.
Sadly, Groklaw is the only real place to get valuable information. I feel that
Groklaw is the ears, eyes, and brains of those who care about Linux. We all have
different invested interest in Linux. Most of us want Linux to be free of
companies like SCO and Microsoft. The rest want an alternate to the companies
that just don't want to listen to use, and consistently sell inferior products
to Linux.
It infuriates me to hear that SCO believes that there is a conspiracy involving
IBM and Groklaw. I know that we sometimes try to like various conspiracies
between SCO and other organizations, but we are citizens. What I mean is that
when something frustrates or fascinates use we make suggestions based on the
information that we have. This is call free speech, some that USA and other
nations hold dear. We say these things as citizens, not representatives of
Governments and other organizations. IBM has their corporate image to consider,
and I applaud IBM for not taking the juvenile approach that SCO has taken. Darl
McBride did admit that IBM has said nothing publicly.
I know that SCO would believe that I am part of the conspiracy, since I live 6
miles from IBM. This is irrelevant, especially since one office of IBM Canada. I
don't know how many originations are from were PJ lives that are 10 miles ways.
There 400 square miles(actually 314) of real estate. It is really disheartening
to know that such dishonest thinks happen.
You have done a wonderful job PJ.
I am not going to discuss the many flaws in Darl's arguments. The only thing
that I am going to say is that he is convinced that he is right, even though
everyone can see that he is twisting the facts. If Novell never meant to sell
them the copyright to Unix, then case over. SCO has no case. The copyright that
Novell did sell was manuals. Case over.
The major pain his having to wait until the is over.
Groklaw is the flicker of light that leads Linux to the end of the tunnel.
Thanks PJ and Groklaw.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: AllParadox on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:14 AM EST |
P.J.: This is so far down that you will never read it, but here goes: I am an
old trial lawyer. Won some, lost some, tried far too many, altogether. I
reached the point where there were only three things I feared: Federal District
Judges, some guy named Larry Pozner, and some other guy named Roger Dodd.
If I had ever had a trial where I had to go up against something like Groklaw, I
would have given up, right there. Part of a trial is figuring out what the case
is about. That is the essence of lawyering. Either you get it or you don't.
Not very egalitarian. Another part is marshaling the facts and the evidence.
The time required is godawful. The lawyers read millions of pages of documents,
trying to sort out information from chaff. Months go by while you try to find
niggling little bits and pieces.
Time after time, I see posted on Groklaw names, descriptions of evidence,
details. From my experience, I know that these add up up to thousands of hours
of investigation by the Attorneys. Many posters complain that Groklaw is giving
away the prize. Far from it. IBM Attorneys can put every spared minute on the
lawyering. There is also a volume effect. One only needs to consider the
important pages, not the million or so others. Finally, there is much valuable
expert advice here, unburdened with the expert's personal hubris that usually
comes with it.
I know how I would have loved to review Groklaw comments if I had been an
Attorney on one of these cases. It is so much easier to drop a lame approach
when somebody else puts it into words that I can read at leisure.
In short, the contributions of you and Groklaw to the defendants are probably
not measurable.
I cannot conceive of anything better for the GPL and Linux than these trials, as
supported by Groklaw.
Thank you.
---
All is paradox: I no longer practice law, so this is just another layman's
opinion. For a real legal opinion, take out your money and buy one from
somebody wit[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:18 AM EST |
Years ago when I was seeking venture capital for my fledgling company I was
constantly asked if MS could duplicate what we had acheived. If the answer was
anywhere near yes the the VC's walked. For years MS has run like a bunch of
thugs employing their imense capital to destroy evey startup that entered the
arena and made a nich. Now they have turned their proxy's after Linux and gripe
when the community defends itself. Groklaw and the approach taken here would
have prevented the scam that the now attourneys for SCO worked for MS years ago.
Keep up the good work PJ, but, when SCO goes the way of the dinosaurs let's keep
this effort alive to continue to expose the agressive proxy attacks that MS is
orchestrating. Linux is going to open the playing field for innovative software
startups again and I for one look forward to it succeding![ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PM on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:49 AM EST |
Another reason why Groklaw is hated by the enemies of Linux. Microsoft and SCO
would like to see Linus so hung up that he cannot effectively do his kernel
work. Lo and behold there are many groups and people out there including
Groklaw who are effectively dealing with the enemies of Linus, that Linus is
able to get on with his work unimpeded. Seems that SCO had Linus in their
cross-hairs, but have thought better of it.
Hopefully the discovery requests in the subpoena served on Linus remain 'stayed'
by Judge Wells' December ruling.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: davcefai on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:56 AM EST |
| I think that there is an aspect to all this which has been touched on by various
contributors here but, possibly, not fully articulated.
(1) Groklaw is a
major threat to a whole school of Journalism.
The Endereles, Didiots etc
have been able to say pretty well what they liked up to a few months ago. So
what if a few people complained. Now their biased and sloppy work is under
intense scrutiny by thousands of informed readers, working together. Oh Dear!
They are going to have to work harder and report the facts instead of
regurgitating PR releases. Life has become a lot less comfortable.
(2)
Groklaw is a threat to the parasites who try to feed on other people's
work.
I wonder if the Eolas ruling would have gone the way it did if
there had been a Groklaw looking at it? If Amazon could have got away with
patenting the "one-click" method?
Groklaw tramples FUD into the mud, strips
away the smoke and mirrors and exposes the real face of SCO's campaign. This
bodes ill for the next scammers to come along. They may well have to face a
similar opposition.
Our interests are being threatened. Our access to real
facts has, up to now been limited.
The worm has turned!
No wonder they
are attacking Groklaw. Keep it up PJ!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:56 AM EST |
Just to keep Darl happy, I thought I would say something positive about SCO's
actions.
...
Sorry Darl, Can't think of one that doesn't involve some sort of negative, even
SCOX stock isn't doing too well.
Keep up the good work Darl, I look forward to the closing down sale.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Here's one - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 02:00 AM EST
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 02:03 AM EST |
Just have to say thank you to PJ, and this looks like a good thread.
Thank you! You are helping me understand this issue, and it means a lot to me.
-Nathan[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Vaino Vaher on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 02:25 AM EST |
Rob Enderle attacks PJ again in this article. He
repeats his accusation of IBM donations to Groklaw even after the publication of
PJ's denial.
Throughout the article he insinuates that OSS community is
behind the DoS attack against SCO's web site. On page 4 he all but directly
accuses the community for the same attack. I quote:
" We simply cannot
afford any precedent that would encourage a group to use viruses, DOS attacks
and additional illegal threats against any entity, be it a company or a
government. The courts, not the streets, are the place for such a
fight.
In my home country one can't make statements like that without
any proof or evidence. Isn't it time to call him up on it; to follow his own
advise: The courts, not the streets, are the place for such a
fight..
If I was in the position to sue for slander, I would do so. Eric
and Raymond: Isn't it time to ask for evidence?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: grouch on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 02:30 AM EST |
When you were a kid, did you ever take a magnifying glass and focus sunlight on
an ant? C'mon, 'fess up, it may be cruel, but most kids can't resist trying it.
SCO is now squirming under the focused light of Groklaw. Every way they turn,
the light follows them. All those eyes, watching; all that light, illuminating
their past, present, future; all those people, reporting, publicizing,
recording. They would dearly love to escape the light, so they squirm and run
around, but pointlessly, because the light stays focused.
Ever notice how often a liar uses the defense of "he's lying" when
they're cornered? Those who have to pay for praise assume that's the only way to
get it. Those who have to pay for assistance assume that's the only way it can
be obtained.
SCO never understood that attacking Linux is attacking the personal freedom of
each and every person using a computer. (Certainly, the rage and frustration is
highest in those who use Linux, but it is not exclusive to Linux users). The
rage needed an outlet. People needed a way to voice their objection to the
dastardly attack. People with information and abilities to combat the attack
needed a way to apply that information and those abilities. People who felt the
underhandedness of the attack but didn't understand the legalities that allowed
it needed a place to find the answers. The frustration and rage spiralled,
feeding each other. We needed a focal point to deal with the sneak attack and
the subsequent war.
PJ had the right combination to provide the focus. She knew the GPL, knew how to
research the legalities underpinning the GPL and the SCOundrels claims, knew how
to use the web to advantage, and knew how to present her findings in the proper
way to (1) translate legalese for us non-lawyers (at the same time giving us
much-needed relief with a humorous style), (2) provide court-quality
documentation of the attack, (3) maintain credibility by not allowing emotion to
overwhelm facts, (4) attract quality assistance. The focal point was born.
Thanks to PJ, we could all begin to grok the whole sordid tale of SCO's scheme
to steal one of the most generous gifts the world has given itself.
SCO doesn't like all those Groklawyers focusing their beams of light through
Groklaw onto SCO's schemes. Evil abhors the light. Since SCO pays for its
minions to attack, and it cannot comprehend a gift, SCO assumes that each of
those Groklawyers is a minion of SCO's enemy and Groklaw itself must be the
equivalent of SCO's hired publishers.
Instead of hundreds of little beams of light shining on bits and pieces of the
SCO sneak attack machinery, PJ provided us one large magnifying glass through
which we may focus our efforts. Using the very open methods by which Linux
itself has grown, Groklaw grows by allowing and encouraging each person to
contribute, in whatever way they can. The payment for such contributions?
"I helped stave off the theft of freedom."
IBM can't afford us. Sam Palmisano admitted as much, "IBM spends $5 billion
a year on R&D. And we're putting a billion dollars behind Linux. But even
all that is nothing compared to what the Linux community will generate
spontaneously."
SCO can't afford us. Microsoft can't afford us. We don't sell our freedom. When
you attack the freedom of one of us, you attack us all. When you try to steal
the gift that carries freedom from your EULA-lined cages, you face the focused
and controlled fight of us all. Evil can't hide from the light.
(John Crowley's donated logo for Groklaw is particularly apt. Or maybe IBM paid
him millions of dollars to produce that, in anticipation of the day they would
pay me millions of dollars to write this comment).
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 03:15 AM EST |
Keep out the good work PJ and other Grokers. Its nice to see some sense made of
the SCO debacle with the smoke and mirrors removed.
Greetings from New Zealand all!
Mark[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 03:30 AM EST |
OK, but it is a bit interesting that Ibiblio's owner is a "P. Jones"
too :)
Maybe this triggered Darl's reasoning, hmm?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 03:37 AM EST |
It's about facts...
SCO is wrong and that doesn't change even when they
starting a smear campaign agains groklaw
Btw something
different:
Eolas patent nullified:here
(Was about
plugins and web browsers,m$payed $500 miljon)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Greg on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 03:57 AM EST |
A Heads Up to the Media - KEEP TO THE FACTS
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 22 2003 10PM EST
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031122082956104#c26140
We discussed what Groklaw would become.
We are now in the Becoming Stage.
This forum has now grown and has, as a matter of fact,
become something that has proven the very essense of
what Open Source represents.
Even your willingness to delete comments from people
that do not register and have less valued comments.
What will happen next?
1) It is clear that as each day passes Groklaw is becoming
the record of choice for this Litigation.
2) It is clear that SCO's assumptions of a business model is flawed based on
work done here. Such as:
a) Model to Extract Money via threats
i) From Support Corps (IBM, Red Hat, etc.)
ii) From Customers (AutoZone, etc.)
b) Model to Strong arm Unix away from Open Source
c) Model to Support M$ in delaying Linux process
3) It is clear that all of these factors have now been
proven to some level. How much at each level is not
as relevant as that the facts are emerging. These facts
include strategy by people in M$ either by Gates Knowing or
not knowing.
4) It is less clear if M$ started the whole thing or
it just followed a natural path and at some point
M$ was recruited as the Open Source expanded, these
things can only be known by the people that are
trying to make this happen.
5) It is clear that this issue is not about who did
what or some crazy person going insane things. This is about
the money and the control of power based on a buisiness
model that both IBM and M$ mastered in the 20th century.
6) It is clear that this Open Source Model is a new
model for building wealth.
7) It is clear that this model shifts the Software
Asset driven wealth approach to a service driven
approach.
8) It is clear that a Ubiquitous Operating System
will emerge. And Linux will become that Operating
System.
9) It is clear that SCO has sold Unix/Linux to
M$ to be integrated into Longhorn for a 2006 release.
10) It is clear that Linux is gaining speed and
Market Share that directly competes with the
Licensing model that Microsoft enjoys.
11) It is clear that M$ has promoted an embrace
and Extend method of wealth generation where the
core asset is the code being developed. With
the Operating System being the heart of revenue
model driving M$ profitability.
12) It is clear that IBM model has been historically
a hardware vendor and their model is to drive
the sales of Hardware.
13) It is clear that IBM has a very large and effective
consulting arm that uses software to solve problems. And
this group is seeing M$ gain market share in their space.
14) It is clear that M$ is working toward Enterprise and
solving enterprise problems, Whitehorse and Widby.
15) It is clear that IBM has lost the OS war.
16) It is clear that IBM can support Linux to
sell more Hardware and Solutions at a better Margin.
17) It is clear that the next 2 years will determine
if the new wealth generation model of Open Source
will survive.
18) It is clear that Open Source is becoming ever
more obvious as the choice for wealth creation.
To the dismay of M$ and others that depend on
software as an Asset not a service.
Software Services Models 101:
a) Drive Software solutions through aquisition (M$)
i) Buy software companies and the customers
ii) Integrate into Monolithic Software Asset
iii) Protect Asset at any cost
iv) Manage Margins to Produce Cash
v) Drawback: Increased code = High Maintenance
b) Drive Software solutions through setting free s/w
i) Promote free software and direct integration
ii) Investments into Software(S/W) as Service vs Asset
iii) Create capital market ontop of Free S/W
iv) Allow competition based on services not Assets
v) Corporations reduce risk due to Open Coding
vi) Margins are on efficiency of Service Delivery
vii) Corporations maintenance costs drop
viii) Reduced maintenance costs = Open Source capital
19) It is clear that the essense of SOFTWARE is that it
does not really exist. Not in the physical world. Even
when you use software it is flashes on a screen that
a human must interpret or another machine interpret.
20) Therefore, it is clear that this is Custer's Last Stand for the business
model that represents software as an asset.
21) Which explains why m$ is involved indirectly.
22) Which also means that the mechanism that drives
the "value" of M$ shares must change and therefore
the RISK that M$ shares could lose 1/2 their value
is the driving factor behind all the men and women
that work at M$.
23) It is clear that most of the M$ stock is held
closely by the Microsoft Employees and corporate
sponsors, with most people not able to or not
willing to deversify their wealth due to expectations
that M$ stock will always grow.
24) Therefore due to these facts the ultimate efforts
must focus and drive out the perception that Open
Source is a direct threat to wealth generation and
free market efforts. The inverse of the truth.
25) Therefore efforts to prove the Open Source efforts
add more value than closed asset drive approaches must
be provided as examples. And one example is Groklaw.
Though M$ has proven to be an important player in the
evolution of technology in the past 30 years. The old
model that promotes Monolithic aquisitions of
companies at the cost of quality and important options
will change in the next 5 years.
It is not so much that M$ cannot compete in the
market of Open Source as it is that the RISKS of
doing so is so great. That the probable outcomes
may be much less of a stock price than what the
company represents today.
And since Groklaw has now become the Public
Record for Open Source Defense. The facts that
we have laid out here mean that M$ will have to
defend to their share holders the risks and the
potential impacts to their stock price long term.
And the faster this message gets out the faster
M$ will be impacted at the Stock Price.
Because, as of today, at the end of the day
M$ is a Software Company. Not a Service Company.
And their stock price must reflect the new
realities of Open Source and it's efforts.
Groklaw is much more than just a defense of Linux.
PJ, Keep up the good work and keep moving ahead.
The facts will be flushed out and the truth will be known.
Greg[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: davcefai on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 04:04 AM EST |
I have just reread Enderele's article. It seems different and longer.
He has a link to the "donated servers" article. This Forbes saying
that IBM donated servers to ibiblio.
He states as a fact that IBM put Unix code into Linux. As a responsible journo
he does NOT present a single shred of evidence.
He also takes a high moral stance about big and nasty IBM trying to squash poor
little SCO.
I see his next job as being one of those "journalists" hounding
celebrities and shouting out questions as said celebrity is hustled from door to
car.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: a1pha on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 05:49 AM EST |
| Trech Gwlad, nac Arglwydd
Overcome the land, not the lord.
The whole ethos of
Linux is precisely that, to be part of the land, the
community rather then the privileged few....
Cheers PJ for an
excellent site - I've lurked anonymously
for too long - time to pony up ;-)
a ---
--
Trech Gwlad, nac Arglwydd [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Jude on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 05:52 AM EST |
Wouldn't it be funny if Enderle, Didio, Lyons, and the rest of SCO's cheerleader
squad were used by Red Hat to show how SCO's false claims were having widespread
impact in the media?
It would similar to the way IBM cited Darl's own claims of "millions of
lines of infringing code" to support their position that SCO's discovery
response couldn't possibly be complete: It puts the BS'ers in the position of
having to either (a) admit they are blowing wind under oath, or (b) stand behind
their statements and thereby support Red Hat's case.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: belzecue on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 06:05 AM EST |
| Darl's often-quoted
bio is pretty glowing. In all the talk of hundreds of millions of dollars
he is reckoned to have earned for IKON, Pointserve, Novell, etc., there is
little mention of his foray into content management systems: www.calixus.com. Darl is listed as one of a
handful of board members.
First thing you'll notice when visiting the site
is that it is rather bare. Next thing to note is that it looks stagnant: circa
2002 vintage. What do they do?
Calixus Networks is a
private, Utah-based software company, which develops innovative event listings
systems for online newspapers to help the papers to dramatically boost their
Entertainment traffic and to generate new revenue through their event calendars.
Calixus offers the papers complete content management and technical support
services as well as access to unparalleled value from custom development,
ongoing innovation, and product upgrades. Calixus provides very affordable event
calendars for independently-owned papers and scaleable solutions for large
newspaper holding companies.
Calixus works directly with the newspapers’
web staff to integrate the system according the paper’s specifications. After
installation, the site can immediately begin to generate revenue from local
organizations, businesses, and individuals through “enhanced” event listings and
through various event packages offerings. The newspaper keeps all revenue
generated by the calendar and simply pays a fixed monthly licensing fee to
Calixus for the use of the software.
Oh? A fixed
monthly fee? Make that
yearly and it sounds like a familiar strategy.
Anyhoo, it appears that
Calixus proved to be a bit of an emu: it didn't exactly get off the ground.
Looks like their only client was the Salt Lake Tribune’s www.utahcityguide.com.
Either that or they don't like to brag (how likely is that with Darl on the
board, hmmm?). Let's just say, I doubt Calixus will be doing an IPO anytime
soon.
So if you are curious about looking over one of Darl's 'Oops! What was
I thinking' moments, kick on over to www.calixus.com and have a browse. Given
the dearth of content, won't take you more than five minutes :-) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rsmith on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 06:14 AM EST |
This attempt at a smear is so pathetic it boggles the mind. But then again it's
on par with the SCOG's shown competence, or rather lack thereof.
What clearly connect it to other utterings by SCOG's manglement is the complete
absence of logic.
How did we ever think these guys were a threat?
---
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 06:15 AM EST |
The BBC has published a balanced and insightful article about the conflict
between FOSS and the proprietary world titled
From Code to Cold War
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3537165.stm
It is very significant that an icon of the news world like the BBC are
publishing such supportive articles.
Peter Smith
(for the moment can't log on)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 06:26 AM EST |
| "If AutoZone or DaimlerChrysler does not settle quickly, then SCO's theory of
action has a real problem because you "cannot sell licenses when you are in
litigation against firm A to prove that you own what you are trying to license;
and you are in litigation against firm B for needing a license and nobody has
settled with you and people are saying that if you don't own what you are
selling then I don't need to buy it."
Making Sense of the
SCO Suits(prev 3)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: SilverWave on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 06:48 AM EST |
If they have to resort to this kind of personal attack on you it means
you are hurting them!
/SilverWave web persona
off/
I know slander of this kind must be painful to you, but please
continue “The Groklaw Phenomena”, it is valuable and worthwhile.
Please
keep on exposing their lies and hypocrisy.
I know we all have a bit of
fun sometimes with our comments ;-) but, and this is from the heart, you have
gained an incredible amount of respect for your principled stand.
/SilverWave web persona on/
Hey PJ, this attack
means we have SCO on the run!
Don’t let the –bad people- grind
you down!
---
Oxymoron of the day is … “SCO's Ethics”
LOL!
I dare you to say it and not laugh!!!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 07:17 AM EST |
While reading all the comments something started nagging in the back of my
mind.
Beeing a techie trying to convince my management to start using open-source, you
always run into the FUD of M$ about TCO and the like: no-one can be held
accountable, no support to rely on etc.
If there is something managers will understand, because it's their trade, is the
thing called Open-Law that's developing here on Groklaw.
If a community can bring up the kind of massive legal defense that is displayed
here, i should be able to convince them that technical problems are dealt with
in the same spirit.
Oh, btw:
If everybody puts in their 2ct, the open community can beat even M$ multi
billion war budget.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: blacklight on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 07:52 AM EST |
My apologies for the poor editing of my original post. Here is my attempt to
redo history:
A day without a Baloney Sandwich from BS is
a day without sunshine. I take BS's comments as a reversal of their original
strategy of ignoring groklaw, and an acknowledgement that their original
strategy of ignoring and ducking groklaw just did not work - Anyone remembers
our answered Open Letter back in December?
Even if groklaw was
sponsored by IBM, I submit that groklaw's point of view is legitimate because it
represents a compendium of our independent opinions as readers of groklaw. Even
if groklaw was sponspored by IBM, would this change the facts, the law, and the
facts applicable to the law? I don't think so. Actually, I like the fact that
groklaw is running on iBiblio rather than volunteer servers because iBiblio is a
known, reputable, accountable, public entity. A SCO Group verbal assault on
iBiblio makes about as much sense as an assault on PBS (Public Broadcasting
Service, for you non-Americans out there): yet, the idiots had to rise up once
more to the challenge.
I will make a last point: during WWII, Great
Britain sponsored and provided support to a number of guerrilla movements in
Europe: the French Resistance, Titio's Yougoslav partisans, the Greek and
Italian guerrillas, etc. Were these guerrilla movements legitimate? Absolutely.
So, even if IBM was sponsoring groklaw ... (I sound like a broken record, don't
I?)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: minkwe on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 08:13 AM EST |
| Did I miss something, or have we neglected the 5th point of the leaked
memo?
"5) The RedHat, Acrylis examiniation, there is no
upside here is this billable seperatly. I bought a PC and loaded up RedHat and
will take that over and work through it with the Lawfirm. What do we do
here?"
Why would Andere buy a PC and load it up with RedHat
to go through it with a fine tooth comb? Are they desperately looking for a
violation of some sort?
Who/What is Acrylis?
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-11_2
-527834.html : NEW YORK--Caldera Systems has signed a deal
with Acrylis, a Linux services company, to give it features comparable to those
of the rival Red Hat Network.
http://linuxtoday.com/secu
rity/2000091202704PR : Acrylis has created a single user
edition of its flagship WhatifLinux product. WhatifLinux Personal Edition
provides users with immediate access to software updates, security alerts,
patches and the latest open source software information right from their Web
browser.
Hmm? Methinks they are trying to target Redhat's
RHN using technology from Acrylis. It doesn't seem as if this Acrylis Inc.
company still exists.
From what I find, SCO acquired the WhatifLinux
technology from Acrylis according to this SCO 10Q[PDF] from September, 2003 (see page 10 under intagible
assets).
There were no patents assigned to Acrylis that I could find maybe
some of you can do better than I.
---
Just my 0.02€ contribution to the
floccinaucinihilipilification of SCO. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: phrostie on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 08:21 AM EST |
i'm not sure if this has been suggested or not, but how about this for a
slogan:
GrokLaw,
everyone knows a little bit.
peer review applied to find the truth.
---
=====
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 | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: preadapted on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 08:25 AM EST |
<"Never before has so much quality legal work been done for
free">
It's not free as in beer because these folks have sacrificed time and resources
and have taken time away from jobs, families, and who knows what else to make
their valuable contributions here.
It's free as in freedom and that is something they recognize as worthy of
working and making sacrifices for.
<"Not only does *it* [Groklaw] provide a single place to find all of the
documents in the SCO brouhaha, it also serves as a central place for any member
of the information community to share their knowledge or comments">
*It* is an assembly point for the constitutionally protected exchange of ideas
and information. Below is a post I submitted to another board regarding this
issue:
<"As I have asserted in several posts, first amendment rights of freedom
of speech and assembly are alive and well and this community via this board,
Groklaw, and others are as fine an example of this as you'll ever see. Extortion
and lies are being soundly trumped by truth and exchange of accurate information
here.
We CAN govern ourselves with these rights regardless of who holds which public
offices from the top of the political structure to the bottom.
The net and all other telecom technologies are the tools that we use. In three
and a half decades of involvement in this industry I have NEVER been prouder.
Thanks, Yahoo SCOX msg board. I'll never forget this experience.">
I would add my thanks to Groklaw, Ms. Jones, and the posters here while adding
shills such as Enderle and fraud perpetrating corporate interests such as SCOG
to my comments above regarding self governance and public officeholders.
Peace and prosperity to all present,
Gary Gibson
Virginia Beach, VA
---
Form, Rhythm, Balance[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: DarrenR114 on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 10:16 AM EST |
In the update link, Enderle says
Communications: As a
result of joint projects with Cisco, Wi-Fi, and other related companies and
communications groups the product will more easily connect to both wired and
wireless networks securely. WAP will likely be a thing of the
past.
Last time I checked, Wi-Fi was neither a communications
group or company. There is a group called Wi-Fi Alliance, but that is not Wi-Fi.
A supposed expert like Enderle should know better. It's not very clear
writing at all.
I'd like to have a job like his, but I don't want to go
throught the obviously required lobotomy.
---
No job is too small for
dynamite ... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: RSC on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 10:45 AM EST |
A Couple of points:
1. PJ is *not* an paid shill for IBM, unlike certain people, it is quite
*obvious*.
2. Enderle obviously needs to get a clue, and possibly a new employer.
3. I really couldn't give a dingos kidney if IBM *was* connected with Groklaw.
People working for the public good have no need for secrecy in *their* dealings.
Anyone who thinks that it would be a "bad thing" for IBM to help
Groklaw out, obviously does *not* believe in the "public good".
4. PJ has nothing to be ashamed about when it comes to Groklaw. Groklaw has been
the only real channel for the truth in the entire scam. I find it amazing that
any "reputable" organisation or individual would support SCO in this
scam. What will they do when it all falls apart, go on the "well it
couldn't be predicted that SCO was scamming everyone" excuse? Sorry, you
can't use that one, Groklaw is and was there all the time, and Enderle has just
stated he reads it. No excuses mate. Your gone.
5. I have commented, volunteered and donated to groklaw, and I believe the
Groklaw community needs to be respected for what it is doing. There is no other
voice out there telling the world where SCO and MS has got it so wrong.
6. PJ, I love what you are doing, and I'm always willing to help. So keep it up
and 'Illegitimi non carborundum licet'
RSC.
---
----
An Australian who IS interested.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 10:58 AM EST |
And so what if IBM and GROKLAW work together. They have a common interest. You
must judge people about their behavour. Do we spread lies? Do we extort other
people? Do we make false claims ? Do we accuse people of things without proof?
Things we discusions, investigations,the information and research is based on
arguments. Afcourse we make false judgements and draw wrong conclutions because
we are all human and the hate for the other party, but that is normal even Darl
McBribe does that.
And Micrsoft payed license to SCO,wasn't it? Does that sugest that Microsoft is
orchestrating SCO?
I suppose Enderle is not a idiot. So he knows that his atricle is redicolous. I
just wonder why het wrote it so over the top, somewhat more subtile and more
facts would make it better propeganda. Anyway... this shows how far het goes to
please the poeple who pays him. This tells something about him. But maybe he
*is* just an idiot or a extreme zealot, but in any case, he is not someone I
would respect.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ericl on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 11:31 AM EST |
| from eWeek's own bio of Enderle: "For more than 20 years, he has worked for and
with companies like Microsoft, HP, IBM, Dell, Toshiba, Gateway, Sony,
USAA, Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Credit Suisse First Boston, GM, Ford, ROLM,
and Siemens."
Note also the Microsoft connection--according to his own
logic, does this make him a shill for MS? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:01 PM EST |
I want to make a comment concerning Rob Enderle's latest claims regarding SCO,
IBM, and the open source community. First, let me describe some of my
background. I have bachelors and masters degrees in psychology, and have
completed all work for a Ph. D. except a dissertation. I have two years of
graduate training as a psychotherapist (about half of what is needed to go into
practice), including two courses in psychological assessment and diagnosis.
Finally, I have worked as a researcher in two mental health facilities. However,
let me add that I have been out of the field for about 20 years.
In my opinion, there is a moderately strong possibility that Mr. Enderle is in
the early stages of mental illness, specifically paranoid schizophrenia. The
contents of the paragraph quoted portray a distorted view of reality, in
particular the claims that there is a hidden conspiracy behind what we see, and
also its exagerated language, both of which are characteristics of this form of
mental illness.
However, let me add that I am not certain that my diagnosis is correct. One
alternative hypothesis is that Enderle does not believe what he is saying, but
is acting at the behest of Microsoft. However, I find this rather unlikely
because Microsoft's propaganda efforts generally employ claims which, while
false, have more surface plausibility.
Another possibility is that Enderle is not mentally ill, but rather is under
some sort of high personal stress, and this is causing him to say things he
would not normally say. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Enderle - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:10 PM EST
- Enderle - Authored by: gvc on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:27 PM EST
- Enderle - Authored by: darthaggie on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 03:51 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: jeffcobb on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:42 PM EST |
It has been suggested that someone should prosecute SCO
under organized crime laws; If SCO represents organized
crim, would then that not make Groklaw organized.....law?
Kinda of a Stallone-like "You ar the disease, and I am the
cure" kind of thing?
The concept appeals to the yin and yang of things...and an
equal nuym ber of enemies.
Cheers and keep up the good work PJ. Remember, the truth
has many friends.... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: m_si_M on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 12:51 PM EST |
To give the heated debate a little cultural air:
[...]
And the masters of flattery colour the trees
They walk on the oceans, put the town under siege
The king of humanity sleeps in despair
Walking out in the morning with his hands in the air
There's zealots in anger, divine extremes
Emotional half-lives, disposable dreams
Rumours of cease-fire inherit the streets
This is the war of the pure and the meek
[...]
These days are overgrown with truth
Under the sun that's nothing new
As I draw my latest breath
Amazing things are done on earth
(RUNRIG, Amazing Things)
---
C.S.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: belzecue on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:07 PM EST |
A blast from the past...
http://www.newsforge.com/os/02/08/27/1851216.shtml?tid=23
-----
SCO: We're still a Linux company, really
Monday's GeoForum for resellers was dedicated to changing Caldera's name to The
SCO Group and re-emphasizing SCO's Unix brands, but Tuesday morning started with
SCO talking up the Linux side of its business.
...
The resellers seemed to be comfortable with SCO's level of Linux involvement.
Nearly half of the 400 resellers in the room raised their hands when asked if
they'd already implemented a Linux solution for customers.
...
What tech recession? SCO gave the press and analysts first-class treatment in
Las Vegas. The guests stayed at the swanky MGM Grand hotel (albeit at off-season
rates), and SCO took the press and analysts out to dinner at a fancy restaurant
Monday night. SCO even had a box of chocolates and other sweets delivered to the
reporters' and analysts' rooms. My girlfriend's reaction: "Can they afford
it?"
The junket seems to have brought SCO some benefits. Its stock price went from
1.98 at last Friday's closing to over 2.50 Monday, and the company received a
ton of press from its captive audience this week. For a company looking to raise
its profile, maybe this royal treatment was the right strategy, even if the
press wasn't all positive.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: legal insanity on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:15 PM EST |
PJ, you rock on:
I don't personally know PJ, but I do know the truth when I see it! And thats
what the opposing side cannot seem to understand, Not everyone expects cash or
beads, as they do. Not EVERYONE can be bought. It takes MORALS to make the stand
PJ has choosen to take. Bullies don't have morals, and the SCOGoons can't have
our lunch money. Now they are telling the whole school they are taking our lunch
money, but that is coming to a halt, at 3:30 when we meet on the school yard,
then the whole school is going to know the truth, as the numbers of truth
seekers continues to grow, and grow with each passing day.
A lot of us may not have the legal skills, or the tech skills as some of the
people who help with this site. But just to write a reply on any news site you
disagree with, because you know their version of the news and facts are
incorrect, is valuable to this effort. What has happened, is they never
understood Pandora's Box, they opened it, and now they want to put us back in
it. Which isn't going to happen,
We the people (remember that?) can read and type (the net has taken the pen to
new levels). And with just words, have caused all their best made plans to go
wrong, without MONEY,as they have suggested. Which should tell all, we are
Winners, and will prevail in this noble cause.
Every piece of paper they show or file, everytime they open their mouths, it a
matter of hours, they are proven wrong. And yet they can't understand why we
will not listen to the piper, we are not lab rats, we are humans, with the
knowledge to choose right from wrong based on the facts. They seem to think we
are nothing more than machines, which they can program. And as long as they wish
to think that way, they are in for some rough roads.
It's just too bad for them, you can't plead insanity in a civil matter.
---
Insanity Pleadings is the only Sensible Defense[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 01:33 PM EST |
| Given all the sound and fury being directed against PJ and Groklaw, it seems
that another, even more forceful SCO critic has not popped up on SCO's
radar.
Perhaps only because of the fact that it does not offer any sounding
board for other people's opinions, it's still surprising that http://www.lamlaw.com is not getting more
attention from the SCO FUD machine.
BTW, the author of lamlaw.com
IAL...
Here's a snippet from what's up as of March 6, 2004 - Saturday 3:00
AM PST:
"...So why is SCO suing AutoZone for violations it does not
want to charge IBM or Red Hat with?
Several answers are
possible.
1) SCO does not have any evidence that SCO copyrights (if they
are valid) have been violated or they think they can not prove such violations
in a court of law, so they avoid that law suit
2) SCO thinks that IBM and
RedHat would contest the violations charge and SCO does not want to have to go
to the trouble of putting on the evidence
3) SCO only wants to collect
extortion money that will surely result once the nuisance factor of their suing
end users is felt by innocent customers
4) SCO thinks that proving your
IP claims are not necessary in order to collect license fees
5) SCO knows
that it does not have valid claims to the work contributed by IBM to Linux and
others and therefore has to avoid being forced to prove such
6) SCO knows
that end users are not capable of knowing or not knowing whether any such
copyright violations may or may not have occurred - in other words, end users
can not disprove any SCO claim whether it is valid or not
None of these
answers shed any particular respect upon SCO and simply make it look like a pure
extortionist, more than willing to simply collect the protection money or
insurance premiums rather than prove they have any legitimate rights at
all.
And, what is perfectly clear here is that SCO is avoiding any
contest of the charges with those parties who are primarily responsible for any
violations (if they had occurred at all) and are simply out to extort money by
way of public accusations with no intent of ever proving the validity of their
claims. In fact, if they know they do not have valid claims, this is the
only approach they can take..."
(Emphasis
mine...)
www.lamlaw.com is a site that every reader of Groklaw should be
following, as well...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: zcat on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 02:23 PM EST |
I must say, I am proud to be a part of this 'vast conspiracy' against SCO. Just
one question; my payoff chequeue hasn't arrived yet, who do I contact at IBM
about that?
:-)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 02:36 PM EST |
Paul O'Nell was successfully discredited by the bush administration, and the
press in a similar manner even though there is documentary evidence that speaks
on its own backing him up:
check out the original documents yourself:
the bush
files
here's one interesting example:
scripted distortion
The media has barely focused attention on
these - instead they focused on wiping out Paul O'Neil's credibility and moved
on. These are scary times. Groklaw, is a sign of hope - a rare example of some
truths trumping PR lies.
thank you Pamela - for searching for the
truth!
n[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: zjimward on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 03:31 PM EST |
I don't like passing on gossip either, but I was very unimpressed by one
responder on Linux Today that made the statement that PJ was censoring comments
posted on Groklaw as well. I do remember one or two people here making
complaints of that nature, but they were also posting very inflammatory and off
topic comments as well.
As far as I'm concerned there have been many comments and posting here that have
stated known facts. This is very opposite to SCO's approach with relies on us
just trusting every thing which comes from Lindon Utah as the truth, without any
real evidience. No where have I seen the open source community using the media
as a PR engine to make them look like a victim. Groklaw has and still remains a
forum for publishing the facts and letting every one voice their side.
Keep up the good work PJ.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 04:06 PM EST |
Thank you very much PJ!
First, you write us one important thing for life:
"Money is fine, but integrity is everything." (quote from PJ´s article
'Letter to the Editor: No IBM-Groklaw connection' on zdnet'). Cause this thank
you very much!! IMHO,this is an important way to do the live.You are an example
for a lot of people, no matter what SCOundrels say about you and your beliefs
and this place, you tell the truth, they are always against it. This kind of
lier tactics are well known activities from the SCOundrels for a year ago, the
grokers here know it. PJ, you must feel proud for the SCOundrels attack, this is
the prove you are on right way and they are in the wrong way. Their attacks
prove you are by far better person than Sontag, McB and the gang. There are a
lot of good people here who backup your ideas on this site. So, come on!. The
truth and integrity will prevail! Groklaw is the window to the world for the
truth about Open Source Community. You are doing great job!
On the other hand you wrote: "Groklaw is a labor of love. SCO seems to find
it hard to believe that I would do this as a volunteer. But I do." (quote
from PJ´s article 'Letter to the Editor: No IBM-Groklaw connection' on zdnet')
Thank you again! Love is one of the most scarse things in the world today.
Furthermore you give us 'love' through your work on Groklaw. There are a lot of
people who contribute and give their comments and effort here in groklaw, with a
lot of emotion too. In some way, the grokers are in 'communion' with you PJ.
BTW, I think you are a great person!! Thank you for integrity, love, Groklaw and
thank you Grokers every where!.
PD: Forgive my english write, I am from Venezuela, my mother language is
Spanish.
Rafael.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 04:30 PM EST |
It's like the grasshoppers and ants in A Bug's Life. They know we outnumber
them and the odds are against them once we realize that.
Keep up the great work, PJ!!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: garbage on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 05:01 PM EST |
Until now they have made claims that are disputed about
companies.
By making a personal attack on you PJ with claims that are
indisputably false, SCOX have confirmed in many peoples
minds that are desparate liars.
Thank you PJ for handling this in a professional manner,
and thanks to ZDNET for setting the record straight.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: ravenII on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 05:10 PM EST |
PJ thank you for standing up to them.
Well some of the collegues here might think that PJ is
dictator running her own show. Yes she does run her own show
but dictatorial, not to me.
Groklow is a hive, wehere Mother bee is the center of everything and who brings
harmony and order in to chaos. And I respect and congradulate on her relentless
work and personality.
People,
think back,
when sometimes things does not go according to YOUR own way,
to the times where you were a kid. Sometimes your mother corrected you
eventhough you thoght she was wrong. But you had to listen and see where you are
today.
I never thought and never will think my mother is a dictator. And boy did she
have some rules! and guide lines.
So PJ do what you do, lamers can jump up and down, lame repoters may feed their
kids with fud money.
But at the end they will see the value you have brought in,
to the entire Linux community. Idio and end rail may think linux is IBM. But if
they were not idiots, our job would be harder
---
"Snowflakes are one of nature's most fragile things,
but just look what they can do when they stick together."[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Tim Ransom on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 05:27 PM EST |
I dug up some gushing testimonials from various people impressed with Rant for
Rent Rob's brilliant work:
Rob fan
1
Linux can require costly technical staff, said Rob Enderle, an
analyst with Giga Information Group.
``You lose the ability to buy
something and plug it in,'' he said. ``It takes you more time to do it. If the
(Linux expert) leaves, you could be left with something that's
unsupportable.''
I have submitted quotes to reporters and seen things
in print that never came out of my mouth. Nevertheless, either the reporter is
incredibly biased for Microsoft or Mr. Enderle is a shill. Here's a newsflash
for you, Rob -- technical personnel, be they Windows, Linux, Solaris, Cisco or
IBM experts, are expensive! And if an IT person is just "plugging in" a Windows
server they should be fired and replaced with someone who is competent. I admit
that my perspective is from a small business of 100 users. I certainly expect
that if I'm cross-training in my organization then enterprise IT departments are
as well, which makes this line, um, unsupportable.
Rob fan
2
If Linux is immature, puts the customer too much in the hands
of developers, and speaks the wrong language, as Enderle says
(http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/21764.html), what is a user to make of
alternatives Enderle may have in mind? Systems that have to roll and evolve to
the tune of their developer's stagnating cash flow, ever more plagued with undue
complexities, planned obsolescences and lock-in proprietary traps, thus ever
more bugged and flawed, all held with impunity through censorship and threats
imposed by martial-like kafkian laws such as DMCA, UCITA and the like, lobbied
by these same developers?
Rob fan
3
There have been dozens of MS shills over the years, they not a
new phenomenon. Robin Raskin at PC Magazine during the Windows/OS2 operating
system wars, Fred Moody at ABCNews, occasionally the NY Times, and of course
John Carroll at ZDNet.com.com. But the most overt of the covert crowd these
days, the one with the bluest ribbon, loudest voice, and most impossible to miss
carnival-barker cum snake-oil salesman to slither along Microsoft Way is Rob
Enderle.
R
ob fan 4
Finally, the real reason that Enderle is blowing smoke
is that the IT industry is not deflating because of open source. In fact, it is
quite the opposite. With the tools to build infrastructure becoming available to
smaller and smaller operations, the chances of true innovation occuring increase
dramatically.
Rob fan
5
So what spawned this rant?
"But Rob Enderle, a
research fellow at Giga Information Group, argued AOL will unwisely open itself
up to risk from security problems by making Netscape 7.0 core to the America
Online client."
(http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/020830/1424000477_1.html)
Thank you, Rob
Enderle, for your flash of brilliance. Have you seen the stats? Internet
Explorer has more security holes than we have users. This falls into category 1
-- braindead.
Rob fan
6
Speaking of jackasses, how about technology industry “analyst”
Rob Enderle? Enderle is both:
Frequently quoted in major mainstream
media
Nearly always completely wrong (at least regarding
Apple)
Rob fan
7
From time to time, we are confronted with a piece of reasoning
that so challenges our view of reality that we spend the rest of the day
wondering if all our brain circuits are still functioning, or if we should be
taking those two daily glasses of medicinal red wine in a dramatically smaller
glass.
A case in point sprang from a website called EWeek, where some
IT "analyst" called Rob Enderle claims that the reason some firms experience
failure rates exceeding 30 per cent for notebooks is that "people simply were
abusing their machines".
Rob fan
8
Rob Enderle -- Loser
Nobody likes a shill, especially
a shill that bets on the loser. I notice that GigaWeb has a prominent notice
that he no longer works there. Have they been getting DOS attacks, or are they
just really glad to see him go?
Rob fan
9
Proving how worthless his grasp on the technology market is,
idiot author Rob Enderle comes up with a quote smearing another set of
companies, but have no fear folks he still manages to take a swing at Mac &
Linux owners too.
Rob fan
10
As for the rest of Mr. Enderle's comments, they are merely a
rehash of statements issued earlier this year. We offered extensive commentary
at that time showing all of the ignorance, absurdity, and lunacy in his thoughts
at that time. We would have hoped that he would have taken the opportunity to
learn from that mistake, but it would appear otherwise.
Ro
b fan 11
Lately it seems that a week doesn't go by without
several people writing me about some new stupid thing Rob Enderle has said. Last
week, for instance, he wrote a bunch of nonsense about neither Linux nor Mac OS
X being better platforms than Windows, supported by half-baked rationalizations.
I didn't give that piece any ink, simply because Enderle-bashing seems all but
pointless any more, but when he lets ring a Death Knell, duty demands a bit of
deconstruction.
Rob fan 12
In case you still don't get the picture, let me put
it this way: If a meteor hit Redmond and turned the states of Washington, Oregon
and a big chunk of Canada into smoldering cinders -- right in the middle of a
worldwide meeting of Microsoft top executives at the campus in Redmond, no less
-- Rob Enderle is the analyst you would call to get a quote about what a big win
this is for Microsoft because Java's market share has dropped to near zero in
the northwest.
Rob
fan 13
Got a couple of emails from Enderle, unfortunately he
doesn't want them on the Web. They were long. I would love to publish them. See
how the mind of a quote mill works. 1300 quotes per year. I guess he counts.
Anyway, he's not that interesting.
Rob fan
14
I will not bother to take Mr. Enderle on in a point-by-point
tit-for-tat argument, for it is pointless. There are many other voices that are
already rising to that challenge, and I don't care to be strung along allowing
Mr. Enderle to set the tone of a debate or battle.
As you can see,
many people are feeling the same warmth towards Ol' Rant for Rent Rob as I feel.
If anyone can find more declarations of love for this list, then we can create a
proper shrine for him in the twilight of his celebrated
career!
---
Thanks again,
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 06:20 PM EST |
Ever wonder how and why OSS generates the massive diversity and quantity of
great software. Figure its just inspired developers doing some magic at the
keyboard? Thats part of it. A small part of it.
Well, the key is community. OSS invites interested people, both developers and
users to join a project to make a great piece of software. The give and take of
community members and focus on the end results really brings things together.
That is the true magic. The longer the community is around and active the more
effective it becomes. Look at any of the long term projects and see this in
action.
The basic ideas work in a lot of endevers, not just software. Groklaw is a great
example. PJ started a project to research the SCO vs IBM case and provide that
research. This is the project. A lot of people have come together to form a
community. There is a core group that works closely with PJ and a lot of
additional people providing links, experiences and comments. There is life and
excitement about Groklaw. As the Groklaw community comes together, the overall
results improve. Think Groklaw is great now? Just wait 6 months or a year. The
difference will be amazing.
A community focused on a goal is a powerful force. SCO/Microsoft is finally
beginning to grasp just what it is attacking. Its not a bunch of freelance
coders. Its a collection of communities. Groklaw is one of them.
Anyone that wants to challenge OSS would do well to understand the power of
community, for example, Groklaw, to guage the difficulty ahead. Think long and
hard before becomming the next SCO.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: jbn on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 06:24 PM EST |
The Halperin article credits the GNU General Public License (GPL) as an
"open-source license" even though
- The GPL was written well before
the open source movement existed.
- The GPL was written by nobody who
built the open source movement (you would think this follows naturally from the
first statement, but since none of these points are clear to many reading the
article or this Groklaw thread, I thought I'd make that clear).
- The
GPL's text makes no reference to "open source" and contains language that the
open source movement does not want to talk about (namely, anything to do with
software freedom).
- All of the above are true for every version of the
GPL that has ever been used. When the GPL v3 is released, it will be the first
version that came out since the open source movement was started.
- All
the Open Source Initiative did was place the GPL on a list of approved licenses.
This is trivial compared to writing the GPL and starting the free software
community.
Like Linus Torvalds who never corrects anyone who calls
"Linux" an operating system, the open source movement's proponents are
apparently keen to propagate the myth that the GPL is properly credited as an
open source license, or perhaps these proponents are simply ignorant of what has
happened in the past 20 years to get the free software community to where we are
today. The open source movement is only trivially connected with the GPL.
While I'm grateful for bringing people to use and develop more free software, the open
source movement was built to eschew software freedom and it is shameful that
that the open source movement continues to lie about the origin of the GPL by
omission. The Free Software Foundation and the free software movement have done
so much for this community. It is right and proper that they get full credit
for what they've done and we should stop letting people come away with
misunderstandings. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 07:22 PM EST |
There's been a lot of discussion recently about the whole
epic, with some people claiming that the way IBM has
handled the decision of offer AIX code readily as somehow
wrong...
My take is this... (warning: Personal opinion follows.)
You have two sides to the story - when faced with
questions one side evades the issue, tries redirection and
sleight-of-hand to avoid the straight answer.
The other... quietly and confidently offers whats
required. More then that, they are keen to be seen as
offering more then required. In a spirit of co-operation
as well.....
Which do you trust more.. I know one thing, my estimation
of IBM has gone way up recently. Their handling of this
whole sorry saga is exemplary and speaks volumes of IBM's
confidence that they will win through this whole joke of a
problem and that the FLOSS paradigm will emerge stronger
and more focussed because of it. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 06 2004 @ 10:05 PM EST |
"O frabjous day, calloo, callay, we chortled in our joy!"
Your "vorpal blade went snicker-snack." 'tis but a matter
of time to slay this jabberwock.(To misquote Lewis
Carroll's immortal work ;-)
Groklaw's sting is being felt---right where it should be.
Well done, PJ, very well done! :-) I admire and applaud
your efforts, and those of your able assistants.
I am a New Zealand reader who has been following Groklaw
(daily) since the middle of last year. It's been a
pleasure; it is a delight and it promises to be great fun
for a while yet.:-)
I am neither a lawyer, nor legally trained. However,
I think that under New Zealand's law,those statements
against you and Groklaw, as uttered by the SCO officers,
would be actionable. It would literally be Lawyers at 20
paces (name your seconds, please!) within minutes of the
words having been published.
I do not know North American law----what does it take
to defend one's reputation in the USA?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, March 07 2004 @ 09:29 AM EST |
"Call me crazy," adds Stowell
Ok, Stowell, you're crazy.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, March 07 2004 @ 10:11 AM EST |
...hey guys...
Now it looks like we're trying to kill poor McBride.
"Darl McBride, chief executive of SCO Group, says he sometimes carries a
gun because his enemies are out to kill him. He checks into hotels under assumed
names. An armed bodyguard protected him at Harvard Law School when he gave a
speech last month."
I hope he doesn't end up shooting somebody and then claim the guy was a Linux
user. McBride is just pathetic.
Anyway, here's the link:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/2436494
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, March 07 2004 @ 11:25 AM EST |
I am sure if the LinuxInsider contacted PJ she would be more than happy to give
you something to write about. When they let PJ get kicked around by SCO in their
article and don't give her the opportunity respond, they are in fact protecting
SCO as the only truth they want to tell us.
Luis
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, March 07 2004 @ 11:28 AM EST |
First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you
win.
-- M.Gandhi
Keep going on. Thanks.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, March 07 2004 @ 02:44 PM EST |
| Is PJ our Gandalf, except she doesn't need to worry about any balrogs? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, March 07 2004 @ 04:29 PM EST |
I guess according to Darl this site is unconstitutional
since it is an open and colaberative site. Why What is PJ
thinking letting us all gather here and contribute to
something we believe in.
Thank you PJ for your time and effort. It goes to show
that open collaberation works not only for software, but
for news sites as well and legal research.
Don't take offense to them smearing your work. The work
that you and everyone has done is rock solid and is always
under constant scrutiny by our peers. Their jsut pissed
that they can't discredit your work.
Hold the Fort! The truth will prevail! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: EdisonRex on Sunday, March 07 2004 @ 06:45 PM EST |
I worked in the plant that built the Comet (it was built in Burlington, Vermont,
and it was marketed as the 11/750). I never ever heard it referred as the
VAX-10. Ever.I was in that facility for many years too. Nobody I knew ever
uttered the words"VAX-10" to refer to the Comet.
Let's just assume that the writer was being artistic with the original post.
Maybe the writer was thinking of the Robin, although that was a proto PC thing.
---
The chief cause of problems is solutions - Eric Sevareid[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: edumarest on Sunday, March 07 2004 @ 09:40 PM EST |
Following a link in Groklaw I went to this site:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=14556 where this article was posted: SCO
media circus turns into a mad carnival.
I sent an email to Egan Orion, the author, thanking him for an excellent
article. Here is his response to my email:
"You're welcome, Alan. It's hard to keep up with the pace of SCO's spin and
Groklaw's posting of legal documents and insightful analyses, but we would be
remiss not to try now and then, at least when there's big news.
I might have got some minor details wrong but I hope it's close overall.
Thanks for reading,
Egan"
I put "theinquirer.net" in my favorites--it is obviously not
associated with the tabloid of a similar name.
---
...if you cannot measure it then you cannot troubleshoot it, you can only
guess...
SuSE 9.0 on hp pavilion ze 4560us[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Chameleon on Monday, March 08 2004 @ 12:21 AM EST |
I have just had an epiphany, I now understand what these people mean by the GPL
(and Groklaw by their definition of "Open") being Viral, it's because
it's catching 8) Keep up the good work PJ.
---
Amateurs built the arc whilst professionals built the Titanic. Charles Faulkner[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Clay on Monday, March 08 2004 @ 12:18 PM EST |
When I read this I just had to think: "its amazing, they have a tinfoil hat
brigade too!". It really made me laugh when I first heard Blake Stowell
first claim that GROKLAW was supported by IBM, because I have a little (and I
mean little) history with this awesome web site.
When PJ was still on radio she was looking for a home that could host a real
collaborative application for her logs, she wanted to create a community because
she saw so many people coming to her little blog that radio really wouldn't help
her with when the site got swamped.
She had met this marvelous dutch admin by the name of Peter, who we all know and
love as Mathfox, who had volunteered to help her find a new application and
administer the website for free. This is really shoestring here people.
I just happened across her because I liked what she was doing, and sent her an
email, but she was responsive, and nice to me so we started talking about the
whole case. Well to say the least I believed the case had merits, and I just so
happened to have an RedHat instance with a fat pipe that could run apache and
PHP and mysql, so I said "why don't you try hosting GROKLAW at
newobjectivity.com?"
Let me tell you, in a sense you have me to thank somewhat for the fact that she
is now hosted by ibiblio, because within two weeks the growth rate of GROKLAW
went *insane*. There was no way I could handel the traffic, and Mathfox
valiantly battled the hordes of new readership who slashdotted the system
daily.
I was of little help, I just couldn't give the care, love and feeding that Pam
and Peter did. I loved the cause but I lacked there dedication and commitment.
In a fateful letter I advised that they look for a home *somewhere else*. So let
the flames begin, I kindof deserve it.
The reason I bring up this history, besides being proud to be involved in these
(and all of yours) dedication on GROKLAW, I find it insanely laughable these new
claims. Its so incredible that they would claim it because I know how we
struggled both monetarily and with personal involvement. I bet that Pam and
Peter are still struggling too.
I would like to thank PJ, but clearly the thanks aren't what drives her (I bet
they help though). What is driving her in my belief is a sincere dedication to
fighting what she sees is wrong in the world with unbridled passion and
commitment. Would Blake Stowell be hawking his ridiculous conspiracies about IBM
and GROKLAW if he wasn't being paid to do it? The reason they can't understand
why someone like Pam exists without being paid is a big part of the reason they
are doomed.
Clay
---
---------------------------
newObjectivity, Inc. supports the destruction
of all software patents.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
