|
Clarifying the Record on Blocking Comments on LBW & SCO Grabbing Docs Update |
|
Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 12:23 PM EST
|
I have gotten some email about something posted on LinuxBusinessWeek, which reads as follows: We have been removing certain feedback entries and disabling feedback sections of LBW stories from time to time to honor Ms. Pamela Jones' direct requests to LBW editorial department. We will be more than happy to display all feedback on all stories which are currently disabled.
- LinuxBusinessWeek.com Off Hours Site Editor
Let me be clear. I never asked them to disable feedback sections. Never. There have been three occasions in the last few months when I have asked that one particular slanderous remark about me be removed. On the third occasion, I mentioned that I believed it was the same individual each time, and I suggested they block that particular individual or whoever they determined was responsible for the slander. I have never asked that all feedback to all the articles -- or to any of the articles -- be disabled. I wonder how many times I have had to correct the facts for these people? Too bad there is no equivalent to airline frequent flyer miles, but for fact corrections instead. I could fly to Paris. No, Australia. Additionally, on the third occasion, someone left a comment mentioning that I had been asked by Sys-con to do a streaming video segment and that I had refused. While it is true that I declined the offer, as I decline all such offers, I never mentioned to a soul that I had been asked to do the interview. I therefore wrote to their editor, Jeremy Geelan, and asked how this person attacking me would know that I had been invited by Sys-con to do such an interview and had declined, since I had never mentioned the matter to anyone. Did they know this individual? Had they mentioned it to him? Mr. Geelan never answered my email. You are free to draw your own conclusions, as I have mine. SCO Grabbing Our Documents Update By the way, SCO has now acknowledged to Stephen Shankland that in fact they did take documents from Groklaw and Tuxrocks to build their new legal webpage, just as we said they had. They might like to bring their DaimlerChrysler materials up to date. Here is where I have it all, and they can also just go to the court's docket sheet, where anyone and his momma can download all the documents filed in that case.
|
|
Authored by: dmscvc123 on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 12:41 PM EST |
Geelan spams message boards with links to SYS-CON articles. He's been using the
MONTVALE1269 nym. Geelan is awfully pathetic for a "Group Publisher"
resorting to message board spamvertising, which hopefully SYS-CON's advertisers
will catch on that the hits generated are low quality hits and aren't worth
paying for, so they'll take their business elsewhere.
---
All of my comments on Groklaw are released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Rann on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 12:45 PM EST |
Please be specific... [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: so23 on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 12:58 PM EST |
It is clear that what they are trying to do here is to shift blame and create a
diversion by sparking another round of Grokwars. I rather hope that all of us,
on all sides of that rather pointless and unfortunate squabble, are intelligent
enough to see this tactic for what it is, and mature enough to avoid being
manipulated in this way by our mutuual enemies.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 12:59 PM EST |
Just have a look on the sys-con web-page... There's a big banner advertising the
"Mareen O'Gara Show", entitled, "Do bloggers have the same
rights?" Quite frankly laughable. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: overshoot on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 01:19 PM EST |
Of course, making <a
href="http://www.example.com">links</a> clickable is always a
good thing.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Taking spammers to court - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 01:48 PM EST
- Light at the end of the tunnel? Or even lines of code? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 02:55 PM EST
- IBM says SCO's proposed Amended Complaint 3 belongs in NY - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 03:44 PM EST
- SCOXE - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 05:12 PM EST
- What to do with MOG? - Authored by: cmc on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 05:22 PM EST
- What a tangled web we weave... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 05:25 PM EST
- "eBay wins first round in patent re-exam" - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 08:58 PM EST
- Microsoft beaten by school. - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 09:10 PM EST
- OT Grokster case - another thought - Authored by: dchdrake on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 10:10 PM EST
- Apple Trade Secrets Suits - Authored by: JScarry on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 10:21 PM EST
- AZ case closed? - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 10:23 PM EST
- MGM vs Grokster: Detailed summary - Authored by: RedBarchetta on Wednesday, March 30 2005 @ 12:12 AM EST
|
Authored by: belzecue on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 01:23 PM EST |
What reputable reporting site allows unmoderated comments. Washington Post?
New York Times? No? Why not, pray tell?
Exactly. With absolute anonymity, any commenter can pretend to be anyone -- an
editor of LBW, say.
MOG/LBW's comments feature is a tool, much like MOG herself is a tool (Aussie's
know what I'm talkin' about). The comments are there to 1) be provocative and
2) add noise to the signal. A great deal of noise.
So, PJ -- when are you going to return the favour and invite MOG to be
interviewed for Groklaw? ;-)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: brooker on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 01:27 PM EST |
From the article: "...the Groklaw site that frequently takes potshots at
SCO's claims."
Maybe it's just me, but the word "potshots" conjures up images of a
bunch of teenagers with guns randomely shooting holes in whatever catches their
attention (like abandoned buildings, highway markers, beer cans, etc.), just for
the sake of shooting holes in things.
On the other hand, Groklaw articles are more like well sharpened, precisely
pointed, carefully aimed arrows that fly straight to the target's bullseye every
time.
"Potshots" indeed...hmmmph![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: producer on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 02:33 PM EST |
Business as usual.
If MOG could get one third the number of hits Groklaw does in a day, she would
be Geelan's shinning star.
Keep dreaming, Mo'.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Latesigner on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 02:39 PM EST |
That LBW is not to be believed, ever, without outside corroboration.
That they can't be ignored when they spread FUD.
That they'll use any opening they can get for character assassinasion.
That there will always be people out there ( the "grokwars" people at
the Yahoo board) who, for any/some reason, are willing to believe them.
If it were me the only one they'd ever talk to would be my lawyer, and he/she
would say "no".[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: sgtrock on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 02:40 PM EST |
I apologize for the format of the following response that I got back from
SyS-Con. I'm very short for time at the moment, but thought you all would be
interested.
I wrote them a while back warning them that unless they reined in Maureen they
were going to lose a reader. This is the reply that I got. (My original email
is at the bottom)
=======================================================
Dear xxxxx,
Thank you very much for taking the time to share your opinions with us. We
publish 15 leading technology magazines, which are all independent entities. Two
of our Linux-related magazines are LinuxWorld and Linux Business Week. Ms.
O'Gara is the editor of Client Server News and also a contributor to Linux
Business Week.
The blog you are referring to in your email is not a publication or an official
media site, the operators of that blog is unknown so we can not make a comment
on that.
Ms. O'Gara is entitled to publish her opinions as well as all our LinuxWorld
writers and editors who all make their own content and opinion decisions on what
they want to say or publish. SYS-CON Media gives full freedom to all their
extremely qualified editorial teams. The company management does not impose any
restrictions or censorship on any opinion expressed in a variety of our world's
leading technology publications. Java and .NET editors work side by side. Ms.
O'Gara does not ask people who do not share her views to close their blogs. We
live in a free society, with free press and freedom of opinion. Unfortunately my
answer will be similar to what Howard Stern tells his listeners often, if you
don't like what you hear please tune out.
We did not receive one single negative comment from any of our hundreds of
advertisers who sponsor and support our magazines. Even though some of Ms.
O'Gara's opinions maybe interpreted by some as one sided, this fact remains as
the opinions of individuals. IBM is one of our top sponsors. We never heard
from IBM that they would discontinue their advertising support unless we stop
publishing a certain author.
So in conclusion we need to respect other peoples' opinions.
Thanks and again for sharing your feedback and best regards.
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxx.com
[mailto:xxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxx.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 11:52 PM
Subject: Maureen O'Gara is seriously damaging one of your magazine's reputation
To: Editorial -
xxxxxxxxxxx has sent you the following email
Sirs;
I have kept my mouth shut about this particular issue until now. However, I find
that I can no longer do so. Your magazine is very close to being dropped off my
list of "must read" publications because of Ms. O'Gara.
Why should you care? After all, I'm just one reader, right? Maybe so, but I'm a
reader that your advertisers want to reach. I am an enterprise architect for a
company with over 50,000 desktops. My position requires me to help my company
make the correct choices for projects that are budgeted in tens of millions of
dollars. If you manage to alienate me and people like me, how long before your
customers, your advertisers, give up on you?
Look, I understand that you guys make money from page hits, and having
controversial columnists help to do that by getting people to read the columns
and respond in the Feedback forum. I don't even mind that Ms. O'Gara is taking a
very unpopular pro-SCO stand in the SCO v. IBM case. Someone needs to, after
all. However, it would be nice if she would get the facts right.
Her latest column,
http://www.linuxbusinessweek.com/story/48473.htm,
reports SCO's side of the latest series of motions in this incredibly complex
case.
Again, I have no problem with that. Where she fails miserably as even an Op-Ed
columnist is that it is clear that she has made zero effort to check whether or
not SCO's latest motion had any basis in fact. Instead, she has chosen to slam
Pamela Jones, the editor of the one site which is following this case most
closely. A site which has by far the most complete set of documents and the most
insightful analysis from a variety of people.
In addition, attempting to dismiss Pamela Jones of Groklaw as 'just' a paralegal
is ludicrous. A paralegal's job description includes exhaustive analytical
research of legal topics for the attorneys that she works for. Pamela has
chosen to apply her talents to this particular case, and has done so remarkably
well.
How well? She's done such a great job that attorneys from both sides of the case
and the judges have all referenced the site in court documents. The CEO of
Novell recently complimented her efforts in a very public forum. A quick one
word search of Groklaw on Google turns up over 200,000 hits.
Meanwhile, Maureen's name turns up only 15,000. Is it possible that Ms. O'Gara
is jealous?
I would like you to consider the damage to your credibility that Ms. O'Gara
causes every time she posts another one of these inaccurate, poorly researched
columns. Actually, to suggest that these columns of hers are poorly researched
implies that she at least tried to research them. I personally haven't seen any
evidence of that.
I strongly urge you to consider whether or not keeping Ms. O'Gara on your staff
to generate a short term increase in page hits is worth the longterm damage to
your reputation.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Sys-Con thinks that PJ is the joke, not MOG - Authored by: Sneakster on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 03:15 PM EST
- IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 03:59 PM EST
- IBM - Authored by: stevem on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 05:17 PM EST
- IBM - Authored by: urzumph on Wednesday, March 30 2005 @ 03:18 AM EST
- IBM - Authored by: stevem on Wednesday, March 30 2005 @ 03:54 AM EST
- IBM - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 30 2005 @ 12:17 PM EST
- Sys-Con thinks that PJ is the joke, not MOG - Authored by: fxbushman on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 04:05 PM EST
- One way to get their attention..... - Authored by: roadfrisbee on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 04:08 PM EST
- i wonder... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 05:17 PM EST
- Sys-Con thinks that PJ is the joke, not MOG - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 05:23 PM EST
- Sys-Con thinks that PJ is the joke, not MOG - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 31 2005 @ 12:49 AM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 02:52 PM EST |
I thought that slander was a spoken defamation, and libel a written defamation.
Do different rules apply to the web?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 02:54 PM EST |
i noted the disappearing feedback first in the ibm/compuware story they ran and
commented about it here on groklaw.
after montvale1269 got outed on the yahoo
scoxe boards, i noticed that someone had suggested montval1269 had posted about
his actions in the missing feedback.
not sure of the value of this, but
fwiw...
sum.zero[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: tbogart on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 03:13 PM EST |
" You are free to draw your own conclusions, as I have mine."
Well, PJ, I have to say ' you brought this on yourself'.
If you think for a moment, I am sure you would agree.
By doing a pretty darn good job here you have found a following and now are the
subject of media as well as a providier.
If such 'yellow journalism' and some genuinely sleazy folks did not display this
type of behaviour THEN YOUR APPROACH WOULD NOT STAND OUT SO MUCH! Now, I you
aren't looking for 'notoriety', and would also guess you would agree that the
world would be a better place if such folks wither did not exist or at least
weren't so prevalent.
But can you deny the logic?
And here is a warning - keep up the good work and it will only get worse.
And I would bet reasonable money I know whether you will keep up the good work.
8-)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 03:53 PM EST |
I was one of those who emailed you after I started seeing comments posted at
LinuxBusinessWeek and also on Yahoo Finance. At first glance, it didn't sound
authentic. Seriously, who would contact a publication to have an entire
feedback section removed? Also even more glaring, what company would remove an
entire feedback section based on a request from one person? I can see
disagreeing with a comment or submitting a correction. But to remove an entire
feedback section based on what was said, just didn't make any sense.
I suspect someone was having some fun at your expense, which is sad that people
go to such lengths.
Thank you again for the clarification.
I realize it's probably a nusance having to deal with such things.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jumpman on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 04:05 PM EST |
Unfortunately PJ, you have found the dark side of fame.
People will exploit and turn every phrase you say to give it a meaning that
suits them when you are famous.
And let's face it, you are now a leading member of the Linux Community. And as
such your actions will now have policital weight. Any interview you give or
regect will garner the attention of the community. As such any magazine would
be almost foolish not to find out and to write a story about it.
(donning Tin Foil Hat)And extrapolating from that, I would imagine that anybody
that has any information concerning your actions would be willing to volunteer
it to a reporter, for a small donation of course.
Heck I am surprised there isn't anybody scrambling for a picture of you while
you were at the linux convention a couple of months ago.
Unfortunately, PJ, you are going to have to get used to misquotes and your
negotiations with other companies/people made public. And God forbid the press
ever finsd out where you live or what you look like. I don't think they will
leave you alone for a good long time.
But those that really matter, those that listen, will know the truth. And they
will trust your words and not some ratings hungry magazine/news agency.
(removing Tin Foil Hat)
In all seriousness, PJ, don't worry about low ball attacks. You are better than
that, you know it and everybody that matters knows it. Rise above the noise,
correct wrong statements when they occur, but don't let it get under your skin.
Cheers,
CMF[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: AintGotMoBody on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 04:57 PM EST |
When I perused the LBW website I saw this Maureen
article
about SCO's 5-Star Partner Rating from VARBusiness.
It is a very
brief synopsis of a SCO press release.
Okay, Ms. O'Gara quotes press releases. This is not
very original or in-depth
reporting, but it is just a "news tidbit." The title
of her article is "Well,
Somebody Out There Likes SCO" which is a sentiment,
stated incredoulously, I
could have made!
So, who is this "somebody?" From
the press release:
"We applaud vendors like SCO for their
overall channel
commitment and channel innovation," said VARBusiness Publisher
Robert C.
DeMarzo.
I don't take this as a ringing endorsement.
Does he "applaud" SCO? Or
just "vendors like SCO." This is the kind of
statement I'd expect from a
lawyer. :) (no offense to the JP's out
there.)
What did Mr DeMarzo say about SCO a few months ago, in VARBusin
ess
in Oct. 2004?
Meanwhile, SCO should spend more time
working on its Unix
products and less time in litigation. It received the
survey's lowest score for
product innovation, some 30 points lower than
Samsung, which had the
highest. Oh, I almost forgot--SCO was slapped with a sad
60 for the product
innovation subcategory. Across the board, SCO is doing
little to impress
partners. It should be ashamed it received the lowest score
in the survey for
richness of features and innovation. (If Darl McBride's
lawyer calls, tell him I'm
not in.)
What does this mean? If I
were a journalist I would interview Mr DeMarzo and
ask what a 5-Star rating
means? How did SCO get this "rating?" Have they
turned around their business
since October? Have the complaints mentioned
then been
addressed? How? Was
there a new survey? Was it a scientific process? Well,
you get the
idea. Please, Ms O'Gara - follow up and let us know what Mr
Demarzo has
learned in the last couple months so that we can "like" SCO, too. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 05:49 PM EST |
Dear PJ,
My sincere apologies. While I was able to link to the Stephen Shankland
report, when I attempted to link to the SCO IP web site, for some strange
reason, every time I placed my mouse pointer over the link, I had an
un-controllable twitch, that moved the mouse just before I was able to click.
Likewise when I attempted to place the pointer over the LinuxBusinessWeek link.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no problem with your web page, but I
have been unable to pinpoint exactly the cause of the twitch.
I realize you put a lot of effort into your web page, and it seems a shame
I can't make full use of all your work. I will continue to work on the problem,
but quite frankly I am running out of options, and don't hold much hope.
(I have even tried typing in the url in my browser, but all I get are garbled
characters. I don't have this problem with other web pages. It remains a
mystery to me.)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: etmax on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 06:50 PM EST |
Why is it called "Linux Business Weekly"??
Wouldn't "SCO FUD Weekly" be more appropriate??
Perhaps "Below The Belt Weekly"??
These people make me sick!!
I wish I had the money to mount a legal campaign against them.
---
Max - Melbourne Australia[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: splicer on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 07:02 PM EST |
Perhaps it's just me, but it looks like SCO is already starting to add a bit of
spin to their use of Groklaw and Tuxrocks documents:
Some of
the legal documents came from Groklaw and another site that details the legal
case, Tuxrocks. Stowell acknowledged that the rival sites supplied some
of the documents. [emphasis added]
Then again, since it isn't
represented as a direct quote, perhaps this particular and unfortunate phrasing
was chosen by Mr. Shankland.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: El_Heffe on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 07:07 PM EST |
What's the deal with LBW? Why would something called "Linux Business
Week" be so blatantly anti-Linux / anti-Open Source? Is the name just some
sort of scam to attract readers who think they will get real information about
Linux/Open source software?
---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it" - anonynmous[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 07:48 PM EST |
.............Jeremy Geelan joined SYS-CON Media in early 2000, and
assumed the responsibilities of editorial director later that year. Prior to
joining SYS-CON Media, Geelan spent 22 years in the international publishing and
broadcasting industries, including long spells with both BBC Radio and BBC
Television in London, followed by a 10-year association with the Greenwood
Publishing Group in Westport, CT. Most recently, he devoted himself to chairing
The 21st Century Group, a loose federation of forward-looking companies devoted
to exploring alternative social, economic, political, and educational futures.
Prior to that, he was joint managing director of The Vision Project, in London,
and editorial director of Adamantine Press, in Copenhagen. He launched his very
first magazine while still at Cambridge University, at the age of
20.
"Jeremy's breadth of experience in dealing with software professionals at
the most senior levels of the i-technology industry makes him the perfect
executive for this strategic position in our organization," said Fuat Kircaali,
founder and CEO of SYS-CON Media. "He not only understands the industry's
critical issues, but regularly represents SYS-CON at conferences and tradeshows,
speaking to technology audiences both in North America and overseas. He has been
an integral decision maker in every new launch since 2000 and each of our own
i-technology conferences and expos. We are delighted that he will now be a
torchbearer for SYS-CON's next aggressive wave of............. and more at a
Marketwire Sys-Con Press Release
..............My warm thanks go to
Jeremy Geelan who asked me to publish in this Adamantine series.......... Cached HTML version of a book his firm published in 1998
BEYOND
THE DEPENDENCY CULTURE
People, Power And Responsibility In The 2Ist
Century
James Robertson
It's impressive stuff.
Why
Sys-Con????
Money????
Brian S. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: kawabago on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 07:54 PM EST |
The trolls at SCO don't want to do the work, they just want to claim credit for
it, just like they've been claiming credit for Linux when in fact their
contribution is almost insignificant. So you do the work, then they come and
take it. That's how it works. Understand now?
---
Life is funnier from the far end.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jim Reiter on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 08:16 PM EST |
The TSG people say......
"On September 19, 1995, The Santa Cruz Operation purchased specific
intellectual property assets from Novell; specifically,
"All rights and ownership of UNIX and UnixWare, including but not
limited to all versions of UNIX and UnixWare and all copies of UNIX and UnixWare
(including revisions and updates in process), and all technical, design,
development, installation, operation and maintenance information concerning Unix
and UnixWare, including source code, source documentation, source listings and
annotations, appropriate engineering notebooks, test data and test results, as
well as all reference manuals and support materials normally distributed by
Seller to end-users and potential end-users in connection with the distribution
of UNIX and UnixWare,..."
(Schedule 1.1(a), Assets, Page 1 of 4, section I)
These documents describe that purchase and itemize the intellectual property
purchased."
What TSG leaves out is the sale of whatever by Santa Cruz Operations, Inc. to
Caldera and the significant documentation that goes with that.
This still appears to be a major weakness in TSG's case.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: inode_buddha on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 09:13 PM EST |
Actually, I had *no* idea that any of this was going on. I put LBW on my
"banned" list way back when, it had to be a couple of years ago. I
haven't looked at it since, nor given them any hits, so all the news I get about
them is second-hand.
/me stands surprised and taken aback.
---
-inode_buddha
Copyright info in bio
"When we speak of free software,
we are referring to freedom, not price"
-- Richard M. Stallman[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 09:16 PM EST |
Great! Does that mean if I call up LBW and ask them to, that they'll block all
the MOG articles, too? Can I ask LBW to remove themselves from DNS as well?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: GrueMaster on Tuesday, March 29 2005 @ 10:27 PM EST |
I wouldn't worry about her too much. I managed to crack her during one of her
live shows, by asking why she keeps slamming groklaw and you personally, PJ. My
letter was read on air, and she answered that "she has never written anything
demeaning about PJ or Groklaw". I then sent another email while the show was
live, with quotes and links to her article where she said "what do you expect
from a paralegal". There were a few choice quotes there. These were also read
live, but she was having phone trouble and lost the connection with the guy
running the show. Hmmmm.
Here's the email:
Date: Fri, 11
Mar 2005 11:25:11 -0800 (PST)
From: "GrueMaster"
Subject: Question for
Maureen
To: tv@sys-con.com
Why do you constantly berate Pamela Jones?
All she is
doing, is publishing the publicly accessable court
documents online,
and then interpreting them.
One fact that hasn't been disputed is that SCO
still
has not produced any infringing code. Even Judge
Kimball has noted it in
one of his recent rulings.
And after my question was read
aloud:
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:21:11 -0800
(PST)
From: "GrueMaster"
Subject: Re: Question for
Maureen
To: tv@sys-con.com
I asked this question and it was the first
one
answered. You stated that you don't berate PJ or
Groklaw on your
posts.
I have now caught you in a lie. In your article from
3/6/05 (SCO
Wants Court To Block Any IBM Escape
Hatches From Discovery Order), you called
Groklaw a
propaganda site, when in fact it actually fights
against propaganda.
Here is a direct quote from your
article: "Ah, well, that's the best you can
expect
from a paralegal."
Why do you keep working to jepordize your
credibility?
When will you start reporting based on
factual
information?
And, no, I am not a Groklaw zealot. I do have
some
experience interpreting legal documents, having helped
in my dad's law
office after school for several years,
and spent time in the courtroom with
him.
I also corrected them in that they incorrectly "guessed"
that I was from Ohio, when in fact I am in
Oregon.
GrueMaster --- You've entered a dark place. You are likely to
be eaten by a Grue! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 30 2005 @ 07:51 AM EST |
Pity you don't get those flyer points PJ - we'd welcome you here on the beaches
of Australia.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|