|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:15 PM EST |
PJ,
It's sad that you've had to do this, but I understand and congratulate you on
standing up for your principles.
Cheers
Mike[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OSRM - Authored by: mikeprotts on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:21 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:32 PM EST
- And I suppose. - Authored by: Brian S. on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:37 PM EST
- The principle - Authored by: nb on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:14 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: jaydee on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:15 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Andrew BC on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 11:54 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: minkwe on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 02:21 AM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Blakdelvi on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 05:55 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: MathFox on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:43 PM EST
- Donations button on the left hand side bar - Authored by: PolR on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:58 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 03:12 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 09:36 PM EST
- Godwins Law returns - Authored by: sjgibbs on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 01:14 PM EST
- A solution, well maybe not but its better than the current lot. - Authored by: Ninthwave on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 05:56 PM EST
- Babylon - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 05:07 PM EST
- PJ proves to be journalist with great integrity. - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 08:31 PM EST
- I'm very impressed - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 09:34 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: ine on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 11:18 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Rudisaurus on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 02:32 AM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: tbogart on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 06:37 AM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Pater Phil on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 06:51 AM EST
- ICA and FOSS - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 11:26 AM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 12:51 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 04:23 AM EST
- Is OSRM rated by A.M. Best? All "real" insurance companies are RATED by watchdog groups! - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 10:13 AM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: fxbushman on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 12:52 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 03:17 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 04:25 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 05:49 AM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: AdamBaker on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 07:44 AM EST
- PJ, stop helping SCO, PLEASE!!! - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 12:23 PM EST
- I don't think leaving made sense - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 25 2004 @ 02:12 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: DBLR on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:15 PM EST |
Place all corrections in this thread
---
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve
neither liberty or security. Benjamin Franklin[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Corrections Here - Authored by: dht on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:42 PM EST
- Corrections Here - Authored by: desertrat on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:55 PM EST
- UK? - Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:23 PM EST
- UK? - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 03:37 PM EST
- UK? - Authored by: desertrat on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 03:56 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Nick_UK on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:16 PM EST |
News to me... definately no promotion news here in
Portsmouth, and I have seen no adverts in UK news sites at
all.
Also the FUD, alas. It is a strange thing people listen
(and believe*) to FUD rather than really what is going on.
But seeing as people are brought up on the members of
Government that belong to the industry of profession
liars, then who can be surprised.
Nick
* I had an argument at work with a user a few weeks ago.
He was convinced MSWord documents are a 'Internet
standard' that everybody has... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: DBLR on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:17 PM EST |
Place OT stuff here
---
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve
neither liberty or security. Benjamin Franklin[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:19 PM EST |
Congratulations, PJ, on standing up for your principles. I am sorry that some
people have twisted things to the point where you needed to make this kind of
sacrifice.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OSRM - Authored by: Electric Dragon on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:32 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:49 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: archonix on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:51 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 07:26 AM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 23 2004 @ 03:39 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: skip on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:20 PM EST |
it's a shame you had to lose the money from osrm, hopefuly it won't effect your
fiscal situation too drasticaly. I never thought they influenced you.
If only the people who get so uptight about groklaw could show as much integrity
as you do.
---
The above post is released under the Creative Commons license
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0.
P.J. has permission for commercial use[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: robert on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:21 PM EST |
PJ,
your personal honesty and integrity shine out like a beacon for all to see.
The contrast elsewhere is absolutely staggering.
Signs of desperation by certain parties are clear. Attacking individuals by
twisting facts falls firmly into that category.
It is terrible that you have felt the need to make such a decision, but I
understand how you felt. Your principles remain intact, and that is good.
Robert[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Groklaw Lurker on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:35 PM EST |
"... So, I have resigned..."
As always, you lead by example PJ, guided by the illuminating beacon of your
principles. My hat would be off for you but alas, I removed it for you long
ago... :)
---
(GL) Groklaw Lurker
End the tyranny, abolish software patents.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:38 PM EST |
I vote for them to leave they are not welcome here and their presence makes me
feel vaguely unclean.
rgds[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:41 PM EST |
...when you were made. This world needs more people with the kind of integrity
and principle that you demonstrated in making a difficult decision. I am
certain that you have gained the respect of even your enemies, and that they
cannot deny it in their heart of hearts. May God's blessings be on you and the
people you care about.
Thank you.
John[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:42 PM EST |
I wouldn't have resigned. There's an expression "being holier than the
pope"
and I believe it applies here. If SCO can spin its yarn like it does, I don't
think
you should feel your integrity is in doubt. They've lied about everything, so
now they've lied about you. Does that give them credibility?
Anyway, maybe if they keep singing this song, you can sue them for slander?
Good luck!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OSRM - Authored by: meshuggeneh on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:44 PM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Philip Stephens on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:53 PM EST
- Raise the bar - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:12 PM EST
- slander - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 09:37 PM EST
- EU and slander - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 10:01 AM EST
- EU and slander - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 07:23 PM EST
- Slander - Authored by: MarkusQ on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 10:56 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:43 PM EST |
| [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Darkelve on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:43 PM EST |
It is bad they can do this, to exploit these situations. This stoops so low this
behaviour is an embarassment for the human race.
It is good that you show you believe in your principles and do not take any bull
from anyone, even when you had to show it in such a drastic way.
One word of warning: do not thing for a moment, however, they will not spin your
resignation in other ways.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: greg_T_hill on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:48 PM EST |
My hat is off to PJ for doing the right thing. Best of luck in finding other
gainful employment. Hopefully this will put a stop to the endless bickering and
backbiting going on elsewhere.
crunchie812[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:48 PM EST |
A true example integrity and reliability, on hopefully in the near future you
will be awarded for it!
The fact that someone like you runs the groklaw site, makes me feel very
confident and assuring for both the content provided, as well as the outcome of
legal issues of open source.
Honestly and intelligence will overcome and triumph in the end.
Patrick[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: tgf on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 01:56 PM EST |
"They claim that Linux infringes over 280 patents ..."
That's odd, I hadn't realised there would be that many UK software
patents already.
So, just like Ballmer in Singapore, using this sort of talk in
Europe is not exactly the best way to make friends and influence
people.
Tim
---
Oxymoron of the day:
Microsoft innovation[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: ravenII on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:00 PM EST |
Dear PJ,
Microsoft to SCO, using OSRM work as a FUD gate. I think you have done something
most people would not do this day and age. It is good to know that there are
people who stand by their priciples.
I hope they would not bring up another yarn about you leaving OSRM!
Thank you for all you and groklawers work.
RavenII
---
"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: elcorton on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:03 PM EST |
PJ's resignation from OSRM would have been unnecessary if the rollout of
the
patent indemnity product had been handled correctly. I speak as a neutral
observer with no stake in Linux.
OSRM never said that Linux infringed any
patent. Anyone who claims
otherwise is a liar, like Ballmer. But the right way
to market the product would
have to been to say, "We've researched the risk of
patent liability in Linux,
including the risk of meritless claims, and we're
prepared to quote a rate for
indemnification to match what proprietary software
vendors offer their
volume customers." This shouldn't have raised anyone's
hackles, and it would
have met a legitimate need. FUD potential would have been
nonzero but
small.
It's unfortunate that PJ has to pay the price for
someone else's mistake. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: RPN on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:06 PM EST |
As a long time visitor and occasional contributor I have no doubt the comments
made were nonsense and a deliberate/ignorant twisting of the truth to dirty your
reputation. I find this all to common and extremely sad. I'm sorry you feel
impelled to make the move you have but certainly understand it and in the
circumstances it is the right move.
I hope things work out well in filling the gap created.
Richard[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: bmcmahon on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:10 PM EST |
In the spirit of the threads reserved for corrections and for official SCO Group
comments, this heading is set aside for the folks who have made such wild
claims about PJ and her relationship with OSRM. Anyone want to admit they
were wrong?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Jonathan Bryce on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:19 PM EST |
I don't think you need to worry too much about SCO's impact on free software.
The only person I know who has actually heard of SCO outside geek circles has
switched their business away from SCO to Red Hat because they were concerned
that the way SCO were behaving, they weren't likely to stay in business for much
longer.
The fact that if Red Hat were to go down for any reason, they could always
switch to SuSE or Mandrake or whatever without any problems was considered a
good thing.
In other words, Darl McBride is actually helping the growth of free software.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Linegod on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:28 PM EST |
A lot of people talk of honesty, honour and integrity.
It's nice to see someone actually act honestly, honourably and with integrity.
Keep it up P.J.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Seconded! - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:37 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:28 PM EST |
P.J.
Please accept my condolences. I hope that there is a lawyer out there who will
be willing to take your case on a contingency basis, and that you will go after
these bullys. Whatever you can take from them will put them out of business that
much faster. I would find it quite amusing if you could use some of their money
to help you continue the amazing work you are constantly doing. If you need
money for filing fees or something, post about it and I will make a donation.
I love groklaw. Keep up the good work.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: hsjones on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:33 PM EST |
PJ, I would actually go back and remove the mention of "integrity" in your
article. It's not an issue of integrity, just a matter of removing any
appearance of a COI - Conflict Of Interest. Even the SCO weenie didn't impugn
your integrity; he just called out what appears to be a
contradiction.
You did the right thing. It was absolutely necessary
and probably should have happened months ago. Unfortunately, it's the sort of
thing people have to do, just as lawyers have to exclude or remove themselves
from certain cases to avoid appearances of a COI. No one in business (or law)
can afford to give the enemy free ammunition.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: The_Pirate on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:37 PM EST |
PJ, this is going too far.
I think the only ones that question / fear your personal integrity is the SCO/M$
side.
I think it's wrong of you to throw in the towel and quit your job. Well, it may
be too late now. But if somebody believes FUD, they'll believe anything, no
matter what you do.
IMHO you should have dug your heels in and sued the (explicit unwanted by PJ
here) FUDster back down under the bridge where it belongs. I hardly have any
cash, but i'll be glad to donate a bit to that.
It doesent pay to cave in to FUDsters. I had to live with it for a few years (my
glorious Greenpeace past), and you either ignore it, or counterattack it. Never
let it under your skin.
One of the most grotesque cases then, was one of our campaigners releasing
pollution data on a certain chemical plant. The plant's operators came up with
"This man has failed his Wasserman test. How can he have any credibillity
talking about pollution?" Heaven knows where they got the test results...
I strongly feel you should withdraw your resignation. Period.
(Yes, i _AM_ mad...! Not at PJ, though.)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:39 PM EST |
| It is a sad fact that FUD is effective.
You can't ignore it just because
it isn't true.
It does affect decisions.
It does cost people their jobs.
It
is doubly sad that, since FUD is (evil) marketing, it is not rational, and
therefore it takes more to counter the incoming FUD than simply getting the
truth out. The sad fact is that the people most susceptible to FUD don't read
Groklaw and we've seen how effective the mainstream press is at getting accurate
stories out. They need headlines that sell advertising -- period.
We need an
anti-Ballmer. Someone with some clout in the business, who can present some
facts, to let people know that Steve's toothless IP-dog won't hunt.
I don't
know who that might be; and respected, passionate, principled advocates like PJ
do help get the word out,
but ISTM that IBM really needs to step up to the plate
on this issue.
I know that's not their style, and the pending litigation makes
it more tricky, but just to say clearly that
OSS is a core strategy
for our business and we wouldn't make OSS a core strategy for our
business if we thought there were valid claims against the IP in
Linux.
And, unlike some companies, when we feel someone brings a false claim
against us, we fight it, because we believe that truth should, and will,
prevail.
Ok, that last part's a bit over the top (but
fun).
How about it Sam? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:40 PM EST |
You should not have resigned. On their next stop SCO will have "proof"
that they were right... :([ Reply to This | # ]
|
- SCOG are finished. - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 03:00 PM EST
- Scoundrels - Authored by: ak on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 03:14 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:43 PM EST |
PJ,
I am always somewhat saddened when people of integrity find it necessary to
sacrifice legitimate opportunities for their principles.
While I do not necessarily agree with OSRM's business model, I never saw any
inherent conflict in your working with them.
I both support and applaud your decision to put you integrity first above short
term gain. I'm sure in the end everything will work out for the best. I wish you
success in your future endeavors.
Long Live Groklaw.
---
Rsteinmetz
"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:44 PM EST |
Congratulations PJ and thank you.
Your work in Groklaw is invaluable.
---
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:47 PM EST |
>>SCO has been having a road show in England. As it
happens, a Groklaw reader attended, and this individual
reported to me that one of the speakers, in a talk about
intellectual property risks in Linux and how you shouldn't
use it in business as a result, mentioned me by name, and
twisted my relationship with OSRM to say that it proved
that I believe there are substantial IP risks in Linux.<<
Microsoft must be behind SCO's actions. If SCO really were
litigating against IBM (and potentially against Linux)
because they thought they were going to win the case, they
would not be trying to stop people using Linux. If SCO
wins the lawsuit, they stand to make much more money, the
more people infringe. Why should a loss-making company
rapidly running out of money spend it's last reserves on
this type of road show? It is not to try to annoy IBM so
IBM will buy it out - IBM has not shown any interest in
this, in fact from IBM's point of view, it is important
that SCO loses the case rather than settles in order for
IBM to clear it's name and Linux's name so that this type
of FUD exercise cannot be repeated in future by someone
else. I don't expect Darl McBride to drop the case - he
would be immediately sued by SCO shareholders for wiping
out millions of dollars of SCO's money if he did that. I
would not expect him to squander the little money the
company has left in this way though.
There is one and only one plausible explanation for SCO's
behaviour - that Microsoft is directly involved up to the
hilt and is funding and colluding with SCO in the whole
bogus lawsuit exercise. If Microsoft and SCO are involved
in such an exercise, this raises issues of criminal
behaviour, and piercing the corporate veil by both SCO and
Microsoft executives.
I wonder, are there any SCO, Canopy or Microsoft employees
out there who know something and might like to leak some
information that can be pursued? You would be doing
mankind a great service.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: chiark on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 02:57 PM EST |
PJ,
I wanted to post to say how utterly amazed I am that you've done this.
It's a selfless act for "the greater good", but it's also putting your
money (literally) where your mouth is to show exactly how much you value your
principles, integrity and reputation.
hearty congratulations on the move: it's a shame it was thought necessary, but I
really hope people who have thought that you're doing Groklaw for the wrong
reasons finally shut up.
Cheers,
nick.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: cherrycoke on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 03:09 PM EST |
Hey, PJ --
Just sent a small donation your way, through the Amazon link. HEY! EVERYONE!
Click that link.
Yeah, yeah, I know that the donations go toward Groklaw's hosting and
adminstrative costs, but heck. If you're like me -- or, if you want me to like
you ;) -- send a few bucks to Pamela Jones.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: elcorton on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 03:10 PM EST |
No matter what the "others" have claimed OSRM stands for,
your
suggestion for how it should have marketed its offer is actually just how
it's
done that - I guess you're a victim of the other side's spin - or FUD, as
it
were.
I don't think so. Without rehashing well-known facts,
OSRM went out of
its way to drum up demand for patent indemnification. That was
superfluous
and damaging to PJ's position. There are plenty of deep corporate
pockets
with a policy of not using any software without indemnity. They are
OSRM's
market, and they don't need to be told there is a potential risk. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- facts? - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 04:26 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 03:11 PM EST |
Thank you PJ for leaving OSRM. I was always uncomfortable with their public
declarations as I felt that they had the potential to damage Linux when mis-used
by the anti-Linux forces.
To show my support for PJ, I am going to contribute to PJ via Paypal. I suggest
that other people who find her Groklaw work valuable do the same.
-Anonymous[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: geoff lane on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 03:30 PM EST |
| Sometimes the good guys (and gals) have to stand up and be counted.
The
fact that a ship of fools can harm someone, interfere with a life, just with a
vindictive sentence is sad. We all hope that some good will come of this in the
end.
If it's any use, it's a lot easier to sue for slander in the UK than in
the US - there is no need to prove that the accused knew that what they were
saying was incorrect :-)
---
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: cheros on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 04:09 PM EST |
| Isn't such a statement (when made in public) legally actionable? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 04:09 PM EST |
| We should all work to speed up this process of pounding SCOx's complaints deep
under the earth where they belong so we all can move on to some other topic.
And PJ can either make Groklaw into a life supporting enterprise or be free
to seek gainful employment that will still allow a significant amount of time to
be devoted to keeping Groklaw on the straight and narrow. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: PM on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 04:21 PM EST |
Seeing PJ hounded out of OSRM in order to protect her intergrity is just so
un-American. It goes right against the First Amendment principles of free
speech.
There are two groups responsible:
1. Those who want to see OSRM and PJ discredited for their own selfish
commercial ends. OSRM was formed directly in response to indemnity needs but is
being condemned for daring to market its indemnity wares.
2. Idealists who are concerned at PJ and Groklaw losing integrity because of
her former OSRM association. They are also the ones who take exception to PJ's
necessary ruthless moderation of Groklaw. The kindest connotation I can place
on this is that they are tending to be manipulated by unscrupulous commercial
interests.
It is indeed a pity in an allegedly free country that PJ has to be a shadowy
inaccessible figure - no photo, no phone number, etc. She very wisely put this
sort of security in place right from the start. I would not be at all surprised
if various private investigators have not been hired to get the goods on her.
This seems to be par for the course in Corporate USA, I remember that GM tried
that stunt on Ralph Nader and got caught out, or MacDonalds being unlawfully
supplied with information about protestors from the London Metropolitan Police
(the Police incidentally settled this out of court for 20,000 pounds).
Interestingly the protestors found this out through discovery and questioning
witnesses when MacDonalds sued them for defamation.
The other sad thing is the improper attempt to deny PJ her First Amendment
rights by forcing her out of legitimate paid employment. Even if one can
criticise the purpose and functioning of OSRM, it would be very difficult to
distinguish it from many other corporate activities in USA which would generally
be regarded as quite legitimate.
All in all, a sad day in USA history, and one that the Founding Fathers would
not have envisaged.
I do hope when the immediate Open Source crisis blows over as indeed it would,
that PJ is able to be renumerated in accordance with her considerable talents.
I have no doubt that this will happen.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: billmason on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 04:23 PM EST |
Disclaimer: this is not a troll, I really do want constructive answers to this.
I've always had mixed feelings about OSRM. On the one hand, I believe they're
well-intentioned, and are providing a much-needed service in enterprise:
insurance against risk. When a business makes a decision, it must account for
the amount of risk that is involved, by insuring it, hedging it, or bearing it.
Even if this risk is only perceived, and possibly even blown way out of
proportion.
The part I always felt uncomfortable with was, what risks exactly? Whenever
Microsoft and SCO FUD about the risks of using open source software, we all do
an excellent job of debunking them. Groklaw is one of the best at this.
Certainly, there are risks with every software decision. Viruses, security
holes, legal troubles, licensing issues, etc. Linux certainly has some risk.
The point is that it is not at greater risk than proprietary software, and in
many ways is at even less risk.
OSRM focuses on the legal risk, which Groklaw also focuses on debunking. What
risks are there, exactly? The only risk I can see is that you'll use this
software, and then some litigation-happy failure will come along and sue you for
it. It hasn't happened yet, but SCO tries very hard to paint their Autozone and
DaimlerChrysler suits in this way. There are many reasons to believe that, even
if Linux had some infringing code, an end user suit would probably not be
attempted, and if attempted, would probably flop.
So where exactly is OSRM's business model? What are they protecting people
from, exactly? If there is so little risk as to not warrant any
indemnification, then what exactly is the use of OSRM? If OSRM is to succeed,
there must be some perceived risk. In other words, FUD. After all, any
insurance is designed to profit from fear, uncertainty, and doubt in its various
forms. Thus, either there are some really hefty IP risks in Linux (which I
doubt highly), or OSRM profits from FUD. Thus it would have it in their best
interests to proliferate this FUD. Am I missing something here?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: iceworm on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 04:29 PM EST |
| Chief Iceworm [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: cjames on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 04:48 PM EST |
I understand your reasoning, but would have chosen differently.
I learned the hard way that the enemy will twist good deeds into bad, and
besmirch your reputation even when you are 100% honest. But if you respond,
they are getting exactly what they wanted. They win.
You are letting THEM make the important decisions in your life. OSRM has lost
an important advocate, and SCO's hyenas are probably laughing at the trick they
pulled off.
I prefer to run my own life. In my humble opinion, the right thing to do is
hold your head high, respond plainly and honestly to the allegations, and keep
living your life honestly, and keep doing the good work.
The people who matter know the difference between FUD and truth.
Craig[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 04:56 PM EST |
PJ,
I think you did not need to quit, but your decision is a nobel one.
Their FUDing makes me so angry I better refrain from commenting on it.
the proof of the fudding is in the vomit.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 04:56 PM EST |
I was an employee of EDS a few years ago when they had to correct some financial
guidance that they'd provided. Their stock went into free-fall, losing about
seventy-five percent of its value overnight. Dick Brown, the CEO, held a
world-wide teleconference in which he said that he and the Board of Directors
accepted full responsibility for the problem. But instead of doing the honorable
thing and resigning, they rolled up their sleeves and started swinging the axe,
laying off employees.
PJ, on the other hand, sees some unethical cretins and convicted monopolists
using her employment to damage open source, and she resigns.
I'm sorry that she felt it was necessary, but I applaud her. If only Steve
Ballmer had such integrity.
DGF[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: shayne on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 04:59 PM EST |
Wow. Just wow. Thats some principled stuff right there PJ.
Resigning a job is never easy, perhaps more so when its not about the job being
crap (I assume it was a good one), but to protect the community you so obviously
care about.
PJ, keep in mind this is a community of computer engineers and legal types. And
by my reckoning they can probably count a fair few bucks of spare change lying
around the place. If things get tough, dont be afraid to ask the community to
give a little back what you have given us. Ie, my suspicion is if you hada
"Feed pamela!" paypal link, it'd just possibly help take the edge of
any not-got-a-job hassles you have.
Cos I doubt Groklaw is payin the bills right now :(
---
--
“Two things fill me with wonder, the starry sky above and the moral law within.”
- Immanual Kant.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: PSaltyDS on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 05:00 PM EST |
Do we know anything about who this was, where, when, and to who he was speaking?
A SCO FUD-fest somewhere in Europe is kind of hard to respond to. I would
realy like to know exactly who to direct my letters, email, rebuttals, etc.
against.
I would rather PJ had refused to be pushed out of her
position, but greatly admire her willingness to take a hit for her principles.
PJ rocks. SCOX sucks. Not much has really changed, I
guess...
---
"Any technology distinguishable from magic is insuficiently advanced." - Geek's
Corrolary to Clarke's Law
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 05:15 PM EST |
I'm betting you'll get at least 10 serious job offers within a week.
20 if this hits another major news outlet or blog.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 05:23 PM EST |
As Kierkegaard put it, "purity of heart is to will one thing." But
how few like you there are. What a wonderful example![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: chaz_paw on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 05:32 PM EST |
PJ, your resignation has left me with very mixed feelings. I think that you, and
me, and others here, could foresee this happening at some point. Perhaps a vague
feeling that something is not quite right, but you can't put your finger on it.
I had/have no problem with what your job was with OSRM. As I understand it, you
did what you do best- legal research. I do know, from posts here of course, that
some did have an issue with it. But what I think, or they think should not
matter. I don't think anyone visiting here would like a stranger telling them
how and where they could earn a living.
The most sickening thing of all this is that it comes at the hands of TSCOG.
PJ, you are honest as the day is long, and as hard working as anyone I have ever
seen. Your output here is proof of that. I admire you greatly. With your skills
and talents, you will prosper.
Life is not a fairy tale, but we all know and believe good always overcomes
evil.
---
Proud SuSE 9.1 user since 07/26/04
Charles[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- PJ and OSRM - Authored by: ine on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 01:02 AM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Thomas An. on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 05:34 PM EST |
Not sure if this has already been implemented, (it is possible that I do not
follow every bit of news)
My suggestion (for what it is worth; as a nobody that I am)
--
The OSRM would have to send their list of the 283 "potential" threats
to Linus. Linus would need to evaluate and disperse the list to the appropriate
developers. Those developers will have to make anything in their power to remove
any code that "may" allow potential for threat; without breaking
functionality.
If any of the alleged patents are *trivialities* such as the "IS NOT"
operator (or anything equivalent as merely common sense functions such as
-metaphorically- breathing air) then PubPat needs to be notified and have the
USPTO re-examine.
The action will have to be swift and someone will have to issue a press report
that OSS takes issues seriously, our processes are more transparent than any and
our code being visible means we do not operate by hidding in proprietary
**shadows**, NDA veils, whispers, dark corners, after-hour crypts and
catacommbs. Microsoft, SCO and other proponents of the "Shadow and
secrecy" movement (S&S) are urged to TOP (or match) the OSS
"transparency", examine their own code, and voluntarily prove to the
world *THEIR* non infringements, otherwise they are complicit of deliberate
cultivation of "twilight", ghostly, conspirator-type conditions
against the public interest.
Software is not a trivial issue. Industrialized societies are growing dependency
on machines; and computers act akin to a "nervous" system. They who
control this nervous system will be in power to control peoples lives in the
future (if not already). We can't allow such depency on a system controlled by
shadows...
--
P.S. Put on the "Naivete hat" before you disagree.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: sleepless.knight on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 05:39 PM EST |
Chin up PJ, there are plenty of employers out there for whom such a
demonstration of principles put into practice, courage, and upright character -
are just what they are looking for. You are who you are, and you did not deny
your nature, that is why we trust you.
---
- C.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: SilverWave on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 05:40 PM EST |
Brave decision!
You have my support as always.
Painful and
unjust as it is, I think you made the right decision.
Lots of
respect.
Best Regards.
---
Linux used ideas from MINIX
MINIX|UNIX
UNIX|MULTICS
MULTICS|CTSS
CTSS|FMS
In science, all work is based on what came before it.
Andy Tanenbaum, 6June04 [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 05:49 PM EST |
I always had a uneasy feeling about your involvment with OSRM and i guess SCO
knew that others felt the same way, therefore they did what they did. And that
was only the start, i guess you figured out yourself that they would have
increased the pressure over time.
Now you are in a better position to continue your fight against FUD and false
claims. For one thing you have more time to work on Groklaw until you find a new
job, second you can not be attacked anymore and third your new job may even help
you to enhance Groklaw while getting money (i am thinking about investigative
freelance journalism, or maybe part-time work for a higher salary).
So, heads up, i am sure your career will continue upwards, maybe even faster
now. I think it is the Chinese that have the same word for "risk" and
"opportunity"...
Linux_Inside[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:02 PM EST |
I don't know which it would fall under, but if they are telling lies, wouldn't
that fall under libel or slander?
As for damages, having to leave an income stream in order to maintain the
perceived impartiality and credibility of groklaw would seem to be qualify.
Groklaw is technically owned by PJ isn't it? Therefore, the half-truths, lies,
and/or inuendos (sp?) was a direct, intentional effort to harm groklaw and/or
PJ's reputation.
I know PJ may not want to take such action, but my question is if it is
actionable or not?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: songfellow on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:13 PM EST |
PJ,
Too many people pretend to have courage by speaking words. Your courage is
proven by actions. Society is rarely conscious of the debt it owes to people
like yourself.
Thank You.
Songfellow[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:14 PM EST |
| Thanks PJ, for making this decision.
I'm a person who respects
integrity.
I trusted your integrity to be strong enough to not be biased by
working for OSDM, but by not working for them you have shown you won't even
tolerate the suspicion that you may be biased.
That is truely a
respectable thing, and a higher moral standard than most people live by.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: ssavitzky on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:19 PM EST |
I hope things work out, and you manage to find a source of income that allows
you to keep writing Groklaw as your main focus. (You might try looking at
nonprofits and news sites.)
... or you could publish Book I of the SCO Trilogy!
---
The SCO method: open mouth, insert foot, pull trigger.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:35 PM EST |
Distancing yourself from OSRM was a wise choice.
To a large extent, the FUD battle is being fought in the head lines. This is
something Microsoft and others under stands well. There is also the notion that
if you don't like the message discredit the messenger.
Something that we in the open source movement also need to struggle against is
the notion of good vs. evil. It is easy to say we and good and they are evil.
Therefore, we can do no wrong while they can do no right.
In this instance, we have to admit to ourselves that the OSRM press release of a
few months ago was an oops -- a really big oops. The 'enemy' has done a really
good job of spinning that release.
Of my non-geek friends, a disturbing number who don't follow SCO et. al. v. OSS
have read the headline
~200 patent violation found by Linux in Linux"
As a significant face in the legal and press side of FOSS, distancing yourself
from the source of the above headline was correct.
Hopefully, OSRM can get their public act together and you can go back.
-dtf[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Philip Stephens on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:44 PM EST |
You're going to get your comment deleted for posting such trollish remarks (I
don't care if this post goes with it, because I'm just posting to vent my anger
at the amazing stupidity of trolls).
As you undoubtable know because you're a troll who simply wants to get a rise
out of people like me, PJ has been deleting comments and accounts in order to
get rid of people like you who have nothing helpful to say.
And by the way, the reason why comments belonging to deleted accounts revert to
"anonymous" is because that's the way Geeklog works (guess what--I'm
one of the people who is involved in fixing that problem with Geeklog, so I
happen to know what I'm talking about, unlike yourself).[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- too right - Authored by: PJ on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:54 PM EST
- too right - Authored by: Philip Stephens on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:04 PM EST
- too right - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 08:29 PM EST
- some guesses - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 02:49 AM EST
- sorry you feel that way - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 08:38 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: entre on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:44 PM EST |
Principles first!
I agree with you PJ. Even though no one had a legimate issue to complain about
you took even their weak footing away. You have an absolute focus now on GL and
its legacy.
here here!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:47 PM EST |
Groklaw does a great work, selfless hard work everyday, to provide an open and
fair forum to all. Information from Groklaw would be very hard to come by, with
the detail and completeness, on one's own, myself included for sure. It is a
shame that in these times of change, attacks on those doing the most good for
the greatest number happen.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: mossc on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 06:50 PM EST |
two words,
"Pay" and "Pal"
Thanks PJ
Chuck
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:22 PM EST |
Yes,
Could someone setup a paypal account for PJ so we can all donate a small amount
and show her how we feel about the site.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:26 PM EST |
Thanks, can't believe that I missed that this last year. Here is that $50.00
matched offer
Dave[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: bbaston on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:30 PM EST |
But methinks Amazon is quite busy handling PJ donations. This error message
appeared there on Amazon.com for me, and I've seen it before, intermittently:
"Recipient Unable to Receive Payments
We are not able to continue with this transaction because the recipient is
unable to receive payments through the Amazon Honor System at this time.
"Please try again at a later time."
... which I most certainly will.
Here's hoping enough donate and do so often enough that PJ becomes the FOSS
community's 100% "employee", or at least that our donations enable her
to dedicate 100% to Groklaw whenever she wishes! Of course, her 100% is close to
my 300%.
Integrity==Pamela
---
Ben
-------------
IMBW, IANAL2, IMHO, IAVO,
imaybewrong, iamnotalawyertoo, inmyhumbleopinion, iamveryold, hairysmileyface,[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: arch_dude on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:35 PM EST |
When PJ first joined QSRM I was somewhat worried about the potential conflicts.
As it happens, there is no conflict. PJ has apprarently resigned to avoid even
the appearance of conflict.
There is no true conflict. OSRM is in the insurance business. As with any
insuror, they sell insurance to people who think they have an insurable risk.
OSRM thinks there is a pool of potential customers that believe they are at
risk. OSRM does not need to advertize the risk: SCOG and other ethically
challenged companies are doing this without any help from OSRM.
Like other insurors, OSRM tries to mitigate risks for their customers. Just as
HMOs and health care insurors try to drive down costs by encouraging preventaive
medicine, and all insurors try to drive down costs by fighting insurance fraud,
OSRM is trying to drive down its actual claims exposure by making anti-Linux
litigation as unattractive as possible. OSRM wins when the actual exposure to
litigation is less than the perceived risk of litigation. An unscrupulous
insuror will work to increase the perceived risk. A scrupulous insuror will act
to decrease the actual risk. In my opinion, OSRM hired PJ to decrease the actual
risk, not to increase the perceived risk.
There is a time element here are well. In 2003, the actual risk of litigation
was higher than it is now, so customers were willing to buy insurance from OSRM
at a particular rate. If Groklaw did not exist, The insuror would still be at a
higher risk. Groklaw's existance reduces the actual risk, so the insuror wins.
In what way is this unethical? It is a clear benefit to all parties except the
unethical litigants.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: blacklight on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:36 PM EST |
"If my working for OSRM is doing harm by creating FUD possibilities, I need
to remove that issue" PJ
I'd be very careful about letting others be the arbiters of your integrity,
especially the hypocrites, the holier-than-thou types, and those moral cowards
who don't mind sacrifices made in the name of integrity so long as the
sacrifices are made by others such as yourself. I never doubted your integrity,
otherwise I wouldn't be a regular on groklaw.
Do try to distinguish between those whose respect matter to you and those who
don't, because you'll find that satisfying everyone is impossible, unnecessary
and futile. I hope that you keep some kind of line of communication with OSRM
open even though you are no longer paid by them: they are probably trying to
render a valuable service by taking on the potential sw patent infringement
issue head on, even though they need to explain themselves with far greater
clarity and their lack of clarity has been close to disastrous.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: andredl on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:36 PM EST |
| I only wish I had 1/2 the integrity you have shown in resigning. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:40 PM EST |
Well, I was going to make a small donation to PJ using the donate button on the
left, but after having completed all the crap one would have to do to complete
the payment, the last screen says the recipient cannot be paid thru their
service.
IMO, this is the ultimate slap in the face, that OSRM should goto the trouble of
blocking that avenue of support so quickly for someone who obviously has more
than enough integrity to poison the average board of directors meeting.
It wasn't much, I'm an old fart of 70 on SS these days, but you *could* have had
dinner with a friend at the average bistro.
Sorry it didn't work PJ, my heart was in the right place, and more sorry now
that the payment site has all of my credit card information to do with as they
will.
In the long run, it appears to have been a very well thought out phishing scam,
and I fell for it. No Thanks OSRM.
But whomever now winds up with that data should rest assured that my CC billings
are compared very carefully to what I've used it for, and that any such
attempted usage will be charged back immediately. AND that our states attorney
general grabs stuff like that as if he was a pit bull. It makes great publicity
come re-election time.
Back to PJ and her situation. Its is my fervent wish that GrokLaw be maintained
and that contributions from you aren't now denied on some dweeby technical
grounds.
Its an equally fervent wish that some other legal firm who recognises integrity
when they see it, offers an even more lucrative position. Seriously, the law
today requires someone doing the digging as diligently as you have done, and the
reporting of the findings of the digging made public, good or bad.
As another poster said about hats, mine has been off to you for quite some time,
you are a true believer in truth and honesty. Good luck girl.
Cheers PJ, from a reader named Gene.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:52 PM EST |
"Well, one organisation claims that there is. That is Open Source Risk
Management. They claim that Linux infringes over 280 patents including some from
Microsoft. And they've done an indemnity service to allow you to indemnify
yourself from the use of Linux from lawsuits for having to pay licence fees that
sort of thing."
What rubbish is this? This guy's claim is demonstrably false. OSRM reported
that Linux *potentially* infringes over 280 *untested* patents.
NOT ONE of those patents has been tested in court. NOT ONE of the patent
holders has tried to get an injunction against Linux, so there is no ruling one
way or the other. Most of the patents are too vague to determine with any
certainty (short of litigating them in court) whether Linux infringes them or
not. For the same reason, many of those patents are likely invalid--almost half
of all software patents that go to court end up being invalidated.
By this guy's logic, MS Windows is *infringing* thousands of patents. Why
anyone would use this *infringing* piece of software is beyond me!
News flash: EVERY NON-TRIVIAL SOFTWARE PROGRAM INFRINGES DOZENS,
HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF PATENTS. Literally. Most of those things should not
be patentable. Because of the nature of software, software patents cause much
more harm than good--ideally, there would be no software patents at all.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 07:56 PM EST |
"When people who are even anti-SCO view the Linux IP position as shaky,
you've got to factor the cost of that risk into the cost you're looking at over
some time period."
Actually, he has it wrong--we view the *UNITED STATES* IP position as shaky.
And Europe is trying half-heartedly to get themselves into the same mess.
The "IP position" of Linux (whatever that is) is much more solid than
that of most other software, especially any proprietary software.
Anyone considering *not* using Linux should factor in the risks of not using
Linux, as they are severe--you might be sued by angry patent holders (Eolas),
and if you use inferior, buggy software (such as Microsoft's offerings) you
might put the livelihood of your entire business at risk. All it takes is one
unscrupulous hacker breaking into one of your swiss-cheese Windows boxes and
stealing your customer's financial info, to damage or ruin your business.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: blacklight on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 08:05 PM EST |
PJ:
The one good thing that comes out of your resignation from OSRM is that the SCOG
roadshow in the UK is now cut off at the knees.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- maybe - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 02:45 AM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 08:09 PM EST |
Two things :
OSRM is to serve OSS legal needs, not legal needs relating to Linux. OSS is much
more than Linux, you better get that message through. A small OSS provider may
run legal risks that are unrelated both to Linux and even unrelated to both
factual and potential infringements.
Second, a bookie will take a 1000 to 1 bet against Elvis Presley singing on the
BBC in 2007, but that does not mean that the bookie consider the chance to be 1
in 1000, or even a one in a million!
This is not about ethics PJ, this is about PR.
Rather than sacking yourself you should get OSRM a
legally savvy PR specialist ....[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- well put - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 09:38 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 08:20 PM EST |
Maybe OSDL will offer her a job. As I recall they have a program to offer legal
aid to users that get sued over oss. She could be right back at work doing the
same sort of research she was doing at OSRM.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: webster on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 08:51 PM EST |
I haven't had time to read much of the above so forgive any repetition.
For more reasons that PJ agrees with, she made a right decision in resigning
from OSRM. They are an organization that benefits from threats, perceived or
real, to OS. Indeed they benefit from FUD and are easily drawn into it as the
SCO Road Show in Brittian indicates.
So the resignation undercuts their FUD and bolsters PJ's credibility if that is
possible. So until the SCOfolk are vanquished with a resounding Linux victory
in Court, PJ seeks to maintain the strongest platform from which to report,
analyze, criticize and bash them when appropriate.
When they are vanquished, let us hope that there are many OS entities that will
be eager to have such a force on their board.
This is a little setback. I'm sure PJ can go back to working for lawyers. She
could stop spending so much time on her Blog..No! Wait!........Click on the
'Paypal" or "Click to Give" icons to the left and keep her
working here alone.
---
webster[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 08:52 PM EST |
Quote from SCO employee:
"even if you don't think that SCO has a chance"
SCO admits its own customers don't have any faith in their legal battles!
What a headline! We need to spread this headline far and wide.
PJ did the honorable thing when pressed with FUD.
Will SCO do the honorable thing and give up their meritless claims????
</sarcasm>
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: publius_REX on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 08:57 PM EST |
Many others have pointed out the appropriate ways to show
our support
for PJ's remarkable sacrifice. Note also,
that ibiblio has
stepped into the breach in
this time of
need. I don't know the technical hosting arrangements,
but it appears that PJ has them covered. Please, also
consider
supporting these folks
if you, or your organization,
can.
PayPal
seems to be working right now (hint,
hint). [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: AllParadox on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 09:05 PM EST |
Main posts in this thread may only be made by senior managers or attorneys for
"The SCO Group". Main posts must use the name and position of the
poster at "The SCO Group". Main posters must post in their official
capacity at "The SCO Group".
Sub-posts will also be allowed from non-"The SCO Group" employees or
attorneys. Sub-posts from persons not connected with "The SCO Group"
must be very polite, address other posters and the main poster with the
honorific "Mr." or "Mrs." or "Ms.", as
appropriate, use correct surnames, not call names or suggest or imply unethical
or illegal conduct by "The SCO Group" or its employees or attorneys.
This thread requires an extremely high standard of conduct and even slightly
marginal posts will be deleted.
P.J. says you must be on your very best behavior.
If you want to comment on this thread, please post under "O/T"
---
All is paradox: I no longer practice law, so this is just another layman's
opinion. For a Real Legal Opinion, buy one from a licensed Attorney[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: belzecue on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 09:08 PM EST |
Very little that is meaningful in life comes at no sacrifice.
For example...
NewSCO's management sacrificed their dignity, their integrity, their
credibility, and their respect to get their hands on a 5 to 50 billion dollar
lottery ticket. But that's okay, because if they win they win big and if they
lose, hey, they'll all just start a new company with somebody else's investment
bankroll.
compared with...
PJ sacrificed her financial stability, which also might just make it a lot
harder to take care of her sick mother (I hope not), so that newSCO have one
less FUD arrow in their very depleted quiver. Her decision impacts her directly
and immediately and what does she get in return?
Dignity. Integrity. Credibility. Respect.
I take no position of the PJ-OSRM relationship, but I do take a very strong
position on PJ's personal sacrifice.
She walks the walk and talks the talk. Any by god, doesn't she put the rest of
us to shame.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 09:16 PM EST |
| Just this example alone is worth a thousand words. Thank you for that! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 09:20 PM EST |
Dear PJ,
You have demonstrated what love and freedom is all about; however, it is
unfortunate that you were forced to resign from you job because of the FUD from
those who hate freedom loving people.
All of these evil and foolish people are only digging their own graves because
they are being tried by the court of public opinion and they have all been found
guilty of fighting against love and freedom. It is not possible for them to
win.
If you are ever in need of money you can always let us know because I am sure
that all of us who use GrokLaw will be more than glad to help in every way
possible.
In the end the bully always lose and history is replete with examples where
greed and hate destroyed many kingdoms and empires. Most of us should be quite
aware of the demise of the Roman Empire.
These are actually the same mindset that we are up against; however, in the end
love and freedom always win because the greatest quest for and of all of us is
to live in love and happiness.
Eventually the masses will rebel against all evil empires. It only takes a
small Axe to cut down and destroy the biggest of trees. It just takes time and
sooner or later the tree will fall.
Keep up the good work! We love you just as much as you love us. I only live
for freedom and Love.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: jkondis on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 09:28 PM EST |
Congrats, PJ, not necessarily for resigning your position, but for raising the
hairs on the necks of Microsoft. I'm sorry you had to (or felt you had to)
resign your OSRM position, but I'm sure things will work out for you anyway.
The latest high-level (particularly from M$ and SCOG) attacks on you, your blog,
and the company you formerly worked for are evidence that you are deemed a
threat to the enemies of Linux. This is a sign of success, a level of which few
ever realize. Many, many people would love to chafe the hides of the corporate
monopolists the way you have and do.
Your cause is just, your motives genuine, and your progress unmistakable. Many
people believe in you and your efforts. Keep it up.
---
Don't steal. Microsoft hates competition.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 10:17 PM EST |
PJ, I applaud your decision. I doubt I would make the same one. It is a bolder
move than the ones I am inclined to make. But I could only hope to improve my
judgement through osmosis by careful observation of your works. I would be too
quick to rationalize that quiting would be handing over a victory to twisted
logic.
I have great faith in your ability to get hooked up to another income stream.
The PJ brand never looked better. The trick will be finding one that lets you
continue with Groklaw, uses your public recognition as an asset, and doesn't
provide anything but laughable opportunities for FUDsters to use against the
movement you treasure. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: jbb on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 10:30 PM EST |
... you are likely to get slimed.
SCO should just keep their fat mouths shut and let people think they
are the scum of the earth instead of saying things like the above and
removing all doubt.
Brava to you PJ for putting your integrity first. You're my hero. I sure
hope you will soon be able to go back and work on what interests you
without fear of FUD lies. This is yet another reason for a big party
once the SGOg is wiped off the face of the earth.
---
SCO cannot violate the covenants that led to and underlie Linux without
forfeiting the benefits those covenants confer.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 10:37 PM EST |
I admire your integrity, PJ.
I'm a long-time lurker on this site, and have always been impressed by (and
grateful for) your work here, but this is something else again.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 10:39 PM EST |
1) SCO says, "They claim that Linux infringes over 280 patents including
some from Microsoft."
2) SCO claims the Linux is their property as it contains millions of lines of
their (SCO) code.
3) Therefore, SCO is in violation of patents held by M$ and will someday be
taken to task for those violations.
wb[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: xenomane on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 11:24 PM EST |
"..talk about intellectual property risks in Linux and how you shouldn't
use it in business as a result.."
So this is their new tack!
.. smart move PJ
Sylvain, Québec. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 20 2004 @ 11:54 PM EST |
I congratule you on your stand. Not to many of us would have the courage of
our convictions, I would suggest. It is a pity that some in big business do
not look at themselves in the mirror and see that they are infact the same as
everyone else, some with opportunities others do not have. Perhaps if they did
there would not been so much greed, the world would be a more peaceful place and
we would have the freedom to choose the OS of our choice and not be lumbered
with threats all the time or have someone trying to force us to use a particular
product. Lets have products on merit!!!!! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: blacklight on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 12:23 AM EST |
The comments from that SCOG speaker are hysterical, considering that IBM is
countersuing SCOG for three software patent violations, that SCOG stands a
pretty good chance of being convicted under the Lantham Act, and that no one is
seriously doubting that SCOG is in irreversible decline. Never mind that SCOG
has proven itself to be a rather treacherous, self-serving business partner who
can't read business contracts. SCOG itself has put a figure on the risk of doing
business with SCOG: SCOG is suing IBM for a minimum of $5 bils and a maximum of
$50 bils.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: brooker on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 12:30 AM EST |
Well, as usual I'm a little slow to post. It's late at night here, and there's
little to hear but the crickets chirping outside my window...but, if I listen
really hard tonight, I think I might be hearing the sound of PJ's kid gloves
coming off.
Maybe resigning from OSRM will allow her to speak even more directly and
pointedly to those who tell lies about her.
Maybe?
The truth is that personal decisions that take time and thought to make,and that
are made for sincere, heartfelt reasons, are never, ever wrong.
Maybe this is the perfect time to begin the book writing. I'll donate a cover
design. That's what I do for a living, been doing it for 30 years. I would
consider it an honor.
For now, my $$ donations will continue as usual, as often as I can.
I know we have to be careful what sort of words we use here, but sometimes even
grandmothers have to say: "Kick butt, and take names, PJ!!"
(*Maybe way down here at the bottom of the posts, nobody will notice a butt or
two, so I won't get yelled at)
:o)
...brooker
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OSRM - Authored by: PJ on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 01:27 AM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: brooker on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 02:35 AM EST
- OSRM - Authored by: Groklaw Lurker on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 01:43 AM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 01:42 AM EST |
| I'm stunned. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Groklaw Lurker on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 01:50 AM EST |
It says Microsoft warns Asian governments they will sue over Linux...
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/biztech/11/19/tech.microsoft.linux3.reut/index.html
I think CNN may be just a little behind the eightball on this one...
---
(GL) Groklaw Lurker
End the tyranny, abolish software patents.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 02:07 AM EST |
I'm very sorry to see you have become a victim of SCOFUD. But I want to express
my deepest respect that you stand firm to our principles. Hope someone is able
to offer you job where you can take advantage of your dedication.
---
Just a little sw-engineer from plain old Europe fascinated by Groklaw.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 02:08 AM EST |
Thank you PJ.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: StLawrence on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 02:10 AM EST |
There they go again, directing their audience to Groklaw.
Prepare for another uptick in web hits!
And a warm welcome to our new Groklaw readers on the other
side of the pond. You'll like it here -- we're trying to
learn to be courteous.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: BelgianWaffle on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 02:59 AM EST |
Depriving people of their income is an old tactic of silencing them.
As such, PJ resigning from OSRM is a victory for the "dark side", to
me. If they can cut off all her/his sources of income (and unless she/he has
sufficient funds of her/his own), then at somepoint PJ will have to give in.
My point is that we (or rather PJ) have to be carefull about who controls
his/her income. Obviously some sort of community effort would be the most
welcome (has this been done before - "open source" income support - ie
not many eyeballs, but many wallets supporting a common cause).
So some word of comfort from PJ that she is OK and will not be begging on the
streets anytime soon would bring happyness to my heart.
As Brecht has said it "Erst das Fressen, dann die Moral".
I do not know how much Paypal/Amazon brings in, but I doubt that it pays the
rent. And maybe PJ has a family to support.
Again, click that Paypal/Amazon button. Atleast it will keep the cold out...
BelgianWaffle
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: JerryM on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 03:08 AM EST |
Kudos to you for putting your integrity first. Its so rare and so refreshing to
see that. Not something seen in business very often. So few things in life live
up to expectations. You are in that small minority.
I noticed that, in addition to using your employment as FUD, SCOG
mischaracterizes the report. I don't believe OSRM actually said there are any
infringements. Only that there are possible infringements. The article I read
said there are exactly zero (0) infringements in Linux that have survived
reviews in court.
Of course we all know SCOG never let the truth or the facts stand in the way of
their FUD show. What they hope to accomplish by taking their road show overseas
is really moot. Once they lose their action against IBM they will be virtually
bankrupt and incapable of supporting any customer base. Then, after IBM
slaughters them with their patent counterclaims the doors of SCOG will be nailed
shut by US Marshals while the few remaining assets are sold at public auction to
satisfy the judgement IBM holds. The only possible outcome is SCOG cheating a
few more of their customers out of a few more dollars.
They put up a front but I cannot possibly believe SCOG has any real intention of
continuing their software business. It just does not make sense. At least not to
anyone with a reasonable facility for rational thought.
Good luck with your future prospects. I doubt you will have any difficulty
securing suitable employment.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 05:30 AM EST |
Has anyone thought that possibly this was done
deliberately to get rid of PJ? They know the type of
person that she is, and the morals that she stands by and
what her reaction would highly likely be.
Those spreading the fud may feel that it's easy to shut PJ
up by taking away income from her. Disgraceful really.
As to patents in Europe - i'd say that with strong
opposition from several countries and several major
companies like Novell & IBM it'll never happen. I still
hope that maybe IBM will declare patent war on Microsoft
just to show how stupid the whole software patent things
is. It's the only way that people will realise how messy
and bad it all is...
Dave [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: PeteS on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 05:43 AM EST |
| Seems to me you had a Hobson's
Choice.
I am certain you will find work, but I want to restate what I
said a while ago on the subject of OSRM for the benefit of those who are
somewhat zealous on FOSS. (Note that I am a strong supporter of FOSS).
OSRM
provides a product that fits with a business decision. Whether it is 'right' is
not the crux of the matter to a large corporation; it is a matter of risk
assessment and mitigation.
Even though we here believe FOSS (including, but
not limited to Linux) has no IP issues (including patents), it is the legal
fiduciary duty of a company to ensure it has taken measures to protect
itself.
If there is any doubt at all whether they may be sued for IP
violations, they would be failing in their duty to mitigate and control the risk
if they do not insure themselves (or justify self insuring, based on their
perceived risk).
Note that this is not a philosophical decision, but a
business decision. All sorts of insurance are sold for different
risks - OSRM simply provides a version that provides coverage in the unlikely
event of being sued for IP violations in FOSS.
PJ - remember that we're all
here to help with the added load of following the Novell - Microsoft suit, and
the inevitable ancillary subjects it creates (Microsoft's motives, for example).
Remember to ask for transcription volunteers
:)
PeteS
---
Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural
Stupidity [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 05:55 AM EST |
Well, SCO must be in the possession of an infinite improbability engine or they
could easily build one using the speaker who is able to warp facts so much.
Putting together two half truths is getting a whole lie.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Tsela on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 06:26 AM EST |
I don't often post here, feeling I don't have anything interesting to add to the
discussions going on, but I just have to show my support here. Being currently
unemployed myself, I know how difficult this decision must have been to take. I
admire you, PJ.
Now I'm wondering what the people who used PJ's relationship to OSRM to throw
FUD about her integrity in various forums are going to do with that piece of
news. They'll probably find a way to turn it against her unfortunately:
prejudice needs no reason. But maybe less people will believe them now...
PJ, I wish you all the courage in the world, although I'm not that worried about
your finding a job. Groklaw has made you famous as a person with a strong
integrity, honesty and high qualification. I wouldn't be surprised if your
announcement will be followed by various job proposals from everywhere.
Once again, chapeau bas, Pamela Jones! You are an example of integrity and I
admire you greatly.
---
Christophe Grandsire[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 08:47 AM EST |
Ralph Waldo Emerson once stated: Whatever games are played with us, we must play
no games with ourselves.
It is clear that TSG is and has played games without regard for others. On the
other hand, it has always been clear that you have never played games PJ.
Integrity, like freedom, has its price. I am honored that you are willing to
make such a stand.
If only the opponents had the integrity to acknowledge yours![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: a_dreamer on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 08:59 AM EST |
. . . that you had to do this. Others may have simply tried to "weather the
storm," but the level of integrity and ethics that you have consistently
displayed would make this decision quite predictable. (That's just how it is
with people who change the world.) You are a remarkable individual and, as
always, are in my prayers.
Craig[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: waltish on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 09:03 AM EST |
Thats a real shame that it has come to affect your working life.
I admire your integrity and comitment.
All the best to you and yours.
......Walter.....
---
To speak the truth plainly and without fear,Is powerfull.
PS: Beware the Gestank of SCO.
PPS: SCO's argument does not withstand analysis.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: phrostie on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 09:03 AM EST |
I'm Sorry that you've had to take these steps, but you should have seen this
coming.
they have spun everything else out there.
they were running out of matterial.
they seem to feed on the pain and lies they can inflict.
we all should have seen this coming.
Good luck with what ever endevers you pursue, and we look fwd to the day you
return to OSRM.
---
=====
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: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 09:13 AM EST |
PJ
I do not understand your actions. The SCO person in the UK misquouted and
redirected various comments, the old weapons of FUD slingers, you know how to
deal with them. You have done an eloquent job of dismantling FUD on numerous
occasions, just do the same this time. Do not let them win by removing the
ability to pay your rent / mortgage ! I do not understand those who are sending
you their congratualations. You do not need to make your self unemployed to
display your integrity, OSRM should sue for slander (or whatever IANAL), and
many posters have made the point that they see no Conflict of Interests in
running your own personal blog and doing research for OSRM.
Don't do it, speak to your boses and get your job back !
Jed (UK)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: trekkypj on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 09:23 AM EST |
Having just heard about the vile, disgraceful behaviour of SCO at their London
'roadshow' in their childish efforts to direct yet more FUD at yourself, and at
the good people at OSRM, and your decision to resign as a consequence, I'd like
to express my sympathy for you having to do this.
It sucks big time, when a company like SCO singles individuals out for slurs and
taunts using their entire PR arsenal. However, I am certain that you will very
quickly find another position; a person of your immense talent won't be out of
work very long; the very existence of Groklaw is testimony to this.
Think of it like this: You currently have the good-will of millions of people
worldwide who applaud your efforts against SCO. SCO are a bunch of 'pirates' who
can never enjoy that level of goodwill, ever, through it's systemic abuse of the
legal system to try and 'plunder' the open source community, and to make money
off other people's ideas. SCO are not a software company any more, they're a
bunch of gangsters running a 'protection' racket!
So, don't let it get you down, PJ. You have more respect then SCO, a
corporation. How cool is that!
---
"I am free of all prejudices. I hate everyone equally."
WC Fields.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: depoteet on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 09:47 AM EST |
PJ, Of course you didn't have to do this but you have done the right thing.
This is why I read Groklaw daily.
Yes, "the heart is deceitful above all things", but we don't have to
give into our hearts.
Thanks for showing that right and truth are the same thing.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Chris Lingard on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 10:12 AM EST |
Just checked company records; SCO do not exist in
the United Kingdom as a registered company; though
they have an office with a telephone down in Hatfield,
a small town in the south of England.
Software is not patentable under currect UK law. If
you quoted American laws to an English judge you would
not last long.
There were no adverts for this meeting, these rooms are
quite cheap to rent; so they have had a private show at
a football club/golf club and a brewery. BTW, the football
club has hit hard times, and needs all the money it can get.
This is like those "As seen on TV" spam letters. The normal
sources of information like the computer press and web pages
have been totally silent about these meetings.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: akoma on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 10:27 AM EST |
I hope you will be hable to support yourself during this time of crisis.
I will do my part. I will provide you with this small amount each month.
It is my way of thanking you for your hard work.
I hope other will do the same and apply the OSS way to this endeaver. What is 2
beers, against the well behind of a great OSS supporter?
Maybe then you will be financialy independant. And you will be hable to
concentrate on your passion: OSS.
Regards.
---
I have no insightfull things to say in my sign..[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: darkonc on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 11:12 AM EST |
You're not a problem because they're spreading FUD about you. They're spreading
FUD about you because you're a problem -- for them. I have a signature on
one of my SlashDot accounts:
If you're not on somebody's shit list,
you're not doing anything worthwhile
You're on a lot of people's
shit=lists, and I hope you stay there for a long, long time.
You've seen
SCO's twisted logic. They'll twist whatever you do to be proof of their
auguments. If you stay with OSRM, they'll make hay with that. If you leave,
it'll prove something else. If you go on to more OS related work, they'll use
that against you, and if you go to a non-OS company, they'll come up with
something on that. If you end up begging living off of donations then it'll be
proof positive that there's no money to be made in Open Source.
The only way
to stop their attacks would be to shut down Groklaw and change your profession
-- and that'd have a lot of programmers shorting out their keyboards with
copious tears.
As far as I can tell, working with OSRM gives you some
freedom that most other jobs wouldn't. It's a synergy that makes you more
effective -- far more effective than his warped logic (and the relative handfull
of people he gets to talk to).
Kerry made the same mistake. Bush only had
two messages to ake to voters .. One went to the religious right, and the other
was the terrorist message: "Vote for me and I'll win the war on terror". For
his second message, Kerrey's track record as a combat officer provided a very
pertinent threat, so Bush and friends attacked that record... trying to generate
questions about just how much of a war heroe Kerrey was.
Kerrey,
unfortunately, folded to Bush's bluff (That's N purple hearts and M
Congressional medals, versus, uhm, yanked wings???) I'm pretty sure that Kerrey
shutting down on his war record. cost him a lot of votes.
While you
obviously don't want to give the enemy any unnecessary avenues of attack, just
about any effective attack requires that you increase your exposure to
attacs.
That they're paying you so much attention is actually an indirectly
good indicator. It means that you're still in the game, and doing them a
lot of damage. -- probably far more than what they're expending to (try
and) keep you at bay.
Clearly, it's your decision to make, but if yuu
reconsider your decision (and I think you should), don't take your own thots on
your relative effectiveness as a measure of whether your job at OSRM is doing
more or less damage than SCO and Microsoft's FUD. Talk to other people about it
and take their views to heart. If you're anything like most people chances are
that you greviously underestimate the value of what you do and the multiplier
affect that it provides to the community. (Darl and friends are freaks in that
respect). Remember your notes on the hits on O'gara's site vs Groklaw.
If
you stay at OSRM, SCO will use that as a FUD opportunity. If you leave, they'll
use that as a FUD opportunity. If you go to another OS institute,
they'll use that as a cause to spread fud, and if you go to non-OS work
then that will be an obvious opportunity for yet more fud. -- and
even if you revert to living off of donations, then they'll spin that as
proof positive that there's no real money to be made off of open source.
With their warped logic, they can use anything you do as proof of
whatever they want. Don't try dodging that phantom bullet. Just continue to
expose the truth, and trust that, overall, the truth shall
prevail. ---
Powerful, committed communication. Touching the jewel within
each person and bringing it to life.. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Welsh_Jon on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 12:23 PM EST |
The point that I'm left wondering about is why would SCO see fit to make this
statement in the UK?
It's obviously a deliberate strategy, so why?
Why wouldn't they already have made this point a long time ago stateside?
Perhaps they've been doing some digging, but surely this isn't information that
they've just stumbled across within the last few days.
So, once again, why now and why in the UK?
It's an odd strategy, unless there's something about the British laws of lible
that they're assuming aren't going to be exploited.
Well done by the way on follwoing through on such an obviously difficult choice
PJ.
Personally, my answer to the questions why now and why abroad would be that sco
are following a previously determined strategy, something like a following a
script. Whether you follow their narrative or whether you disrupt it and follow
yr own is a different question.
Take care,
Jon
---
Be Reasonable - Demand the Impossible![ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Strategy? - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 02:33 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 01:10 PM EST |
A few days ago, it was difficult to express honest skepticism about OSRM on
Groklaw without the likelihood that you would be ridiculed and hooted down as a
"Troll." This despite OSRM's highly debatable impact upon the Linux
community - which should have invited reasoned and civil debate. The ad hominem
attacks against skeptics of the OSRM were unseemly, and reflected poorly on
Groklaw.
With PJ's resignation from OSRM - numerous thoughtful posts skeptical of OSRM
have been surfaced on Groklaw in this very thread without the usual reflexive
Groklaw attacks against the integrity of the posters.
The atmosphere of Groklaw has already changed for the better.
This is a good thing.
I hope that this atmosphere can spread to other areas concerning Linux where
reasonable people can disagree.
Perhaps people will stop labeling others who disagree with them as
"Trolls" - but will actually be willing to openly consider other
points of view as possibly having some legitimacy.
Perhaps PJ would consider taking the lead in this in PJ's moderation of
Groklaw.
It would be nice of the ad hominem attacks typical of Groklaw would cease.
But that depends on the leadership of Groklaw.
All the best for civil discourse - and even polite and thoughtful disagreement -
without the ad hominem attacks -
Epaminondas[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: GuyCLO on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 01:37 PM EST |
One word comes to my mind: RESPECT.
PJ you are in my prayers.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 03:50 PM EST |
PJ, I applaud your concern for integrity. On the other hand it has been my
experience that there is nothing that is not grist for the FUD mill. Anything
one does or says will be twisted, distorted, made to seem the opposite of what
it is. One cannot live one's life by what they will say about it; according to
one statement widely quoted, there is nothing they will not say.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: grouch on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 04:49 PM EST |
PJ's resignation will not eliminate the FUD. The FUDsters will simply spin
it a bit differently, possibly incorporating her resignation in the FUD to get a
little more mileage out of it.
PJ's resignation will not eliminate the
patent lawsuits nor software patents. Those who stand to lose billions will
continue to fund or create new patent lawsuit sharks to send after their
targets.
PJ's resignation will deprive PJ of some just compensation for
work performed. It may deprive OSRM of some ability to use her work. It will
deprive OSRM of the use of her stature and name.
Microsoft's
FUD, whether direct or sponsored, has an impact in corporate executive
offices:
Peerstone found two main barriers to widespread
adoption of Linux: concerns of a higher total cost of ownership because of the
high cost of Linux administrators; and fears raised by SCO's attempted "legal
assault on Linux intellectual property".
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: cxd on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 07:03 PM EST |
I am amazed at your love, your integrety, and your life.
May God find reason to pour down the blessings of heaven upon you and your
family.
Or in secular language.
Wow you are amazing.
cxd[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 07:51 PM EST |
Laughing at the words of the SCOGGIEs. They could twist the words of Joseph
Smith in ways to condone drugs, pornography, licentiousness, and heavy
drinking.
PJ you are amazing: your honesty and integrity are a beacon.
Too bad liars at SCOG can't emulate someome like you instead of fudsters and
liars from Redmond. Their shame, I suppose, and a black eye on their religion
(which permeates the work place in Lindon, but doesn't seem to give anybody
there the moral anchor they so obivously need). When folks like that claim to
be pillars of society, you want to believe them, but that is clearly not the
case.
ROI / TCO? The Baystar connection, falling like a rock, accelerating to the
abyss. Oct 2003, the pipe is worth $20 million, today well under 7 million.
That's a 2/3 drop in less than one year. Even Enron execs took longer than
that. Butt kissing RBC isn't going to fix it either. Butt kissers from SEC
though probably don't care and won't act.
Which brings me to ROTF again. The liars, botched chance for redemption, more
lies, fudsters and crooks propping them up, and all losing their shirts. Enough
to make us laugh. It is keystone koppers all over again in Utah.
But with shirts already off, the denizens of Dante's Hell won't have to remove
them before ripping the flesh from their bones. Even Nazgul don't eat for
eternity.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 08:04 PM EST |
PJ,
While I've always had a tremendous amount of respect for the work you've done,
and your almost supernatural ability to write the right article -- we've had our
differences.
I have to say that quitting OSRM to prevent even the most indirect taint on the
honor of Groklaw is truly the honorable thing to do. Kudos to you.
Thad Beier[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OSRM - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 08:41 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: JeffFromOhio on Sunday, November 21 2004 @ 10:16 PM EST |
Ok, I suspect I'm going to be a lonely voice in the crowd here. I don't normally
post. Mostly I lurk. Occasionally I pop into the unofficial groklaw channel on
irc.fdfnet.net.
People are going to create FUD. Even if they don't mention your name in the
future, because you are no longer part of OSRM, they are going to use OSRM as a
FUD argument. OSRM's mere existence is an argument that maybe there *might* be
some patent issues in Linux that could be a problem.
I dunno, it's a tough issue, and I wish you the best of luck wherever you end
up. But, it seems to me to be letting other people control your destiny, *too
much*, to quit a job just because of FUD. People will keep writing FUD about
you, you can count on that, no matter where you end up. Are you going to quit
the next job and the next?
I dunno, it's truely your decision, and as I said, I wish you luck. I very much
appreciate all you've done, and I'm sure will continue to do with Groklaw. It
just seems *wrong* that you should need to quit a reasonable job because of
something some idiot says. =([ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Don't do it PJ! - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 12:55 AM EST
- Don't do it PJ! - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 12:56 AM EST
|
|
| Authored by: kmashraf on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 02:45 AM EST |
Well it is nice to know that there are still some people who value integrity
more than money. SCO don't seem to have such qualms. When they were Caldera they
were very much a Free Software company and touted the GPL. But once it kinda
changed hands then all the old stuff was jettisoned including the aforesaid
integrity that is inherent in, as I believe, in being a Free Software company .
That they once were as above and are actually misusing that episode in their
history to wring filthy lucre (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=lucre)
from innocents.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: TiddlyPom on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 04:49 AM EST |
PJ
I don't know what your decision has cost you (personally) but I
expect it's a lot. What a selfless person you are and what an amazing
phenomenon Groklaw is.
When I started up in the software industry (in
the UK) in 1989, I was using Unices for most of my work: mainly SunOS (precursor
to Solaris) and HPUX but also a little SCO (when it was the original SCO not
Caldera-SCO and a less litigious company to deal with).
After a short
time I 'discovered' Windows and marvelled how it empowered users and became
entranced with it (sigh!) and how mere mortals could write applications for it
in next to no time. I built my career on M$ operating systems (although I
have constantly had to use my Unix/Linux skills as well) and became pleased when
NT *almost* became a real operating system and the silly memory models
disappeared.
Windows seemed to offer real choice and you really did
have a choice of office suites, development environments, databases and
utilities.
Now that has all changed.
(IMHO) Microsoft have
effectively removed that choice from end users and seem to want to stamp on any
software house that dares to offer any competition (with the exception of some
of the utility programs). With the proliferation of worms, viruses, DRM,
activation and everything else, Windows is a mess and usually gets in the way of
what I want to do.
Linux is now the operating system that empowers
users and offers a choice of applications to use. Whereas in the old days, a
user could buy a Borland or Microsoft C/C++ compiler for a reasonable price now
M$ want to charge the cost of a 2nd hand car for Visual Studio or SQL
Server. On Linux I can get equivilent applications for free! As an example,
look at Gambas for an amazingly
easy way for newcomers to write Linux applications
I am now actively
seeking employment in an organization that uses Linux as the primary development
platform (which alas is not easy in the UK) and trying to spread the word to
collegues and local schools etc that there is an alternative that allows users
to do what they want - as they once did with Windows.
End users need
Linux so that they can use their own PC for what they want to do (and not what
proprietory software forces you to do) and hence we need to defend this freedem
in any way we can.
So thank you Groklaw for keeping the dream of 'user
empowerment' alive. No wonder Microsoft is starting to fear
Linux!
---
"There is no spoon?"
"Then you will see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself." [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: eugen on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 05:26 AM EST |
Hi PJ,
I already knew you were an integer person whom I thoroughly respect. I know even
better now where this impression stems from.
One suggestion I have (you'll be better than anyone else clearing any legal
issues):
Make an eBook or even printed book out of a current Groklaw snapshot and sell it
for $20. And reserve 10 copies for me to give to people I love. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: AlanGriffiths on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 06:42 AM EST |
PJ,
I see no conflict between working for OSRM which offers to insure the business
risk (of being sued) and Groklaw which argues one side of related lawsuits (and
incidentally reduces the risk). Nor do I ever remember OSRM saying that any
patents were infringed (surely that is for the courts to decide).
Sadly, facts are not the only factor in the public arena. It is obvious that
your energy and message would be diluted by trying to address FUD on two issues
- especially when one is personal (and susceptable to ad hominem arguments).
It is unfortunate and unjust that you should have had to take this action.
"They" are out to get you - I trust that you will not come to feel
that you've made the wrong choice of battleground.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 08:08 AM EST |
I think resigning is a bit much. No matter what you do, SCO and the like will
find something to FUD about. They have lost nothing in your leaving OSRM, you
have.
Just my two cents.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: joef on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 10:03 AM EST |
I hereby nominate Pamela Jones for a MacArthur Fellows grant, because of the
social value of her work. See www.macfdn.org/programs/fel/fel_overview.htm
It states:
The MacArthur Fellows Program awards unrestricted fellowships to talented
individuals who have shown extraordinary originality and dedication in their
creative pursuits and a marked capacity for self-direction. There are three
criteria for selection of Fellows: exceptional creativity, promise for important
future advances based on a track record of significant accomplishment, and
potential for the fellowship to facilitate subsequent creative work.
This sounds like an apt description of her work.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Sgt_Jake on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 10:26 AM EST |
If only we could get Rob Enderle, Laura DiDo and the rest of the them to swear
of Microsoft money for the same reason. (I suspect they'd starve...)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: jtison on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 10:54 AM EST |
PJ,
How awful. You're in my thoughts and prayers.
If there's
one thing I've learned in my five decades roaming this Earth, it's that
happiness only presents itself when you do the "next right thing". Don't worry
about the day-to-day pressures of keeping a roof over your head and food in your
stomach. If you maintain your faith, these things will take care of
themselves.
Your integrity is worth more than anything material, even if,
God forbid, you should suffer for it.
As to SCOX, M$, their shills,
and the rest of the low-lives out there on the wrong side of this issue; they
sold themselves out a long time ago. Now they're just a legal "ham sandwich" --
an entity, to be sure, but one without any scruples whatever. They will
lose their "lottery ticket", as some earlier poster put it.
You
will keep your integrity, and you will benefit from your actions
in the long run.
May your mind be at peace. You've certainly earned the
right.
Everybody else: get over to PayPal if you can afford it.
Let's keep PJ in groceries this week :-)
Pax,
--Jim-- ---
"If
dogs don't go to heaven, then when I die, I wanna go where they do." --Will
Rogers [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 22 2004 @ 03:57 PM EST |
I was right. No matter what was Pamela's work at OSRM, her involvement hurt
Groklaw. It doesn't matter what's in your heart, what matters is what's in
people's minds.
Right decision. Anyways, OSRM had done nothing good for OSS.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 30 2004 @ 12:41 AM EST |
I'm sorry you had to quit your job. We appreciate that you are willing to stand
up for integrity. Not many people out there today would be willing to do it.
Good luck in your future endevours .. I know if I could hire you I would.
Unfortunately the executives at SCO probably think it's funny and "good
riddance". I guess it's just something they're going to have to deal with.
I cant wait until the criminal prosecutions of unscrupulous SCO executives start
.. it'll be funny watching those cockroaches scramble as they try to eat each
other up.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
