decoration decoration

When you want to know more...
For layout only
Site Map
About Groklaw
Legal Research
ApplevSamsung p.2
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Gordon v MS
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
MS Litigations
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
OOXML Appeals
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v Novell
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Unix Books


Groklaw Gear

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

You won't find me on Facebook


Donate Paypal

No Legal Advice

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

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 10:45 AM EDT

Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Magazine Announce Resignations

MONTVALE, New Jersey, May 14 th, 2005 --- The entire senior editorial staff of LinuxWorld Magazine has today announced that they will be leaving the magazine, effective immediately.

The following statement was released by the group. “We regret that Sys-Con Media has been unable to apply a standard of journalistic ethics that we can comfortably operate under. We feel that recent articles published with the consent of Sys-Con Media fail to meet minimum generally accepted journalistic codes, and because the management of Sys-Con Media has failed to acknowledge that the articles are by all informed judgment ethically unsupportable, we have decided we must find other avenues for our work.”

turner at

Dee-Ann LeBlanc
dee at
(604) 898-8433


Note from PJ: For background, see the following:

Resignations: title=linuxworld_resignation&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Interview with publisher:

I think the reason the SCO saga is so compelling to so many is because it is, among other things, a story about morals.


A bit more from James Turner here

And A Publisher's Ethics by Dana Blankenhorn, and with a picture of Fuat Kircaali


Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns | 626 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Not surprising...
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 10:51 AM EDT

... given the statements made by the publisher in an online interview. He didn't see a single thing wrong with the content of Maureen O'Gara's "investigative reporting" article.

$DIETY help us if that's what's going to pass as ethical journalism in the future.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 10:52 AM EDT

Let's not discuss this too much. It is off-topic for Groklaw IMVHO. Let's discuss law and legal issues, instead of starting a slashdot-like forum to flame unethical journalists who do not matter anyway one SCO goes down, or to praise the ones who have the courage to take a stance.

I'm much more curious about when there will be a ruling on the 3rd amended compliant motions and all the other pending motions... *taps impatiently on keyboard*

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hooray for them!
Authored by: ssavitzky on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 10:54 AM EDT
Let's give a cheer for courage and integrity in journalism, and hope they all
find a new home that <em>honors</em> courage and integrity.

The SCO method: open mouth, insert foot, pull trigger.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: shareme on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 10:55 AM EDT
PJ in support of Lw editors I removed my content from group led Eclipse article
being prepared for JDJ, a syscon property, at the wiki eclipsepowered..

I know you probably will not directly lkink the SSYSCON CEOP interview here as
it was quite bad both in lack of accountability and other issues..

This is not the first time SYScon has refused to follow journalistic standards,
there were flare ups before MOG was invited to be an editor at SysCon..

On the subject of DDso agaisnt SYscon sites .. the site was damn slow before
this due to the design implemented before MOG even came on board..

I did nto onitce any differenc ein speed of the syscon site during the alledge
DDOs attakcs the CEO of syscon is referring to or the information given to the
ediors of LW conerncing this issue..

Sharing and thinking is only a crime in those societies where freedom doesn't

[ Reply to This | # ]

P.J. Interview
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 10:56 AM EDT
P.J., first of all I support what you are doing and share your views. Why don't
you do an interview with a real jouralist? You've made yourself a public
figure. I think the public is entitled to an interview describing your

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: dtidrow on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 10:58 AM EDT
To find out why, go here

Basically the SYS-CON publisher says, "We did nothing wrong, ethically or legally"

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • tinyurl 'plaint - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 05:36 PM EDT
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:01 AM EDT
This is quoted from the top center of the Linux Business News website:

"To Our Valued Readers: (May 13, 2005) - Our syndication arrangement with
LinuxGram has recently ended after ethical questions raised by our readers in
one of the articles published in last week's issue. I agree with their view on
this matter and we pulled the article shortly after it was published.
I apologize to our readers, to the open source community, our LinuxWorld
editors, and Ms. Pamela Jones for publishing the article.
Fuat Kircaali Publisher, SYS-CON Media"

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:04 AM EDT
Just an idea for PJ. How about asking James and Dee-Ann to be the journalistic
ethics contributing editors here at Groklaw.


[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: belzecue on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:06 AM EDT
Who else is upping stumps other than James and Dee-Ann? Is Mark R. Hinkle
(editor in chief) leaving?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: WillRobinson on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:08 AM EDT
Im glad their takeing a good integrity stance on this. We need to stay the
course too. Now lets get back to the fish fry!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Essay Test
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:14 AM EDT
Choose one of the two following questions to answer,:

1-Assumming this weren't Sys-Con, what if this were CBS, Time Magazine, NBC, the
New York Times, CNN or some other media stalwart. If one of their reporters had
"ETHICALLY" reported a story and if they had gotten the equivalent of
the kind of denial of service attack that Sys-Con says they did, what possible
responses would their respective management have had?

2-Assumming this weren't Sys-Con, what if this were CBS, Time Magazine, NBC, the
New York Times, CNN or some other media stalwart. If one of their reporters had
"NOT ETHICALLY" reported a story and if they had gotten the equivalent
of the kind of denial of service attack that Sys-Con says they did, what
possible responses would their respective management have had?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: Bas Burger on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:16 AM EDT
I am glad that some people take resposibility for their own actions and
believes, If I were in the same situation I probably would have made the same
choice. Because whatever job you do, you always have the resposibility to act in
a conscience way. People that hide behind their duty or job are cowards mostly.

Like you I read the interview, at some point it turned my stomach in a horible
way, what some people do or don't do for money is sickning.

Thanks for showing your integrity and I sure hope that other media has a good
place for you to carry on with your job.

Bas Burger.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: TerryL on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:18 AM EDT
Oh dear, I thought we had put this nasty incident behind us, but it seems not.

I've just looked at LinuxBusinessNews to see if they'd put more up but what I saw at the top of the front page (if in small print) was a statement that I thought people had been calling for, (and I quote)...

To Our Valued Readers: (May 13, 2005) - Our syndication arrangement with LinuxGram has recently ended after ethical questions raised by our readers in one of the articles published in last week's issue. I agree with their view on this matter and we pulled the article shortly after it was published.

I apologize to our readers, to the open source community, our LinuxWorld editors, and Ms. Pamela Jones for publishing the article.

Fuat Kircaali Publisher, SYS-CON Media

Now, does ANYONE have a simple explanation for what the [very warm place where bad people end up] is happening?

I do hope some legal events happen soon, so we can get back to the important business of the SCO v IBM v SCO law suit and all the little law suits that have sprung up in it's wake.


PS. I do hope the staff who have shown moral courage find good alternative outlets. I'm not familiar with their output but I shall be watching for their by-lines. They seem to deserve some support.

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

[ Reply to This | # ]

Links bloating screen real estate
Authored by: belzecue on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:18 AM EDT
PJ -- any chance you can shorten those links you added at article bottom? they
are blowing out my 800x600 screen. How about shortening the description to the
domain name only??

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:32 AM EDT
Do we know how many have resigned and if they plan on starting up a magzine of their own? I would not have bet on this happening but I am very happy to see it happen.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Burning reputations
Authored by: Stumbles on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:35 AM EDT
So at a guess, it seems to me the biggest fallout from all this and
the SCOG saga will be the large number of people and
companies who will be discredited and demoted reputations. But
then that's probably obvious.

I am glad there are those in the media who have the courage to
call a spade a spade and take moral actions to heart.

You can tune a piano but you can't tune a fish.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Fuat Kircaali Responds
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:41 AM EDT
And the next pass is here: From the Publisher of Linux Business Week

Where in, Mr Kircaali says -

    We stand by all the stories we have published, including the breaking news stories of Ms. Maureen O'Gara. We have been proudly bringing her investigative reporting and news to our readers since December 13, 2002 and we will continue to do so.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

ON TOPIC: Note to trolls
Authored by: ssavitzky on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:49 AM EDT
Personally, I'm tired of seeing anonymous posts that say "let's get back to
talking about SCO". There are two things these people are ignoring --
probably deliberately:

1. Metadiscussions about Groklaw, PJ, and what other journalists are saying
about them are perfectly on-topic. If nothing else, it's a simple matter of
fairness: if other people are discussing PJ on their own turf, PJ has a perfect
right to respond on hers.

2. Groklaw is *PJ's personal blog*. She controls what's going on here, the rest
of us are just along for the ride. PJ puts less of herself into Groklaw than
many bloggers who mainly cover political or legal subjects; if she suddenly
decides to take us into her confidence over her pet cat, her family, or a
beautiful sunset, I for one am not going to complain.

Summary: the "Back" button is your friend. If you don't like the
topic, or it's not interesting, feel free to use it.

The SCO method: open mouth, insert foot, pull trigger.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Ethics, American-style
Authored by: Jude on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:56 AM EDT
We're not in jail and we're making money.
What else is there to talk about?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: heretic on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 11:57 AM EDT
Some real information about the "DDOS attack" on sys-con.

[ Reply to This | # ]

It's the message not the messenger!
Authored by: kawabago on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 12:12 PM EDT
When will people figure that out? Of course, maybe they already know they can't
fight the truth so they fight those who speak it.


[ Reply to This | # ]

One Possible Unbfortunate Outcome
Authored by: bobn on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 12:31 PM EDT
While I approve the former-senior-editors's show of integrity, Sys-Con has now had the last ounce of restraint removed.

There is no telling what kind of junk will now appear under mastheads containing "Linux" in the name (, etc.)

IRC: irc://
the groklaw channels in IRC are not affiliated with, and not endorsed by, either or PJ.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: dopple on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 12:40 PM EDT
I gave the interview a pass when it first came out.. I didn't expect anything interesting to come from it. Now, after reading it, I'm reeling from the number of unflattering interpretations about his business he managed to pack into a few short statements. I mean, we've got:
  • They don't find anything wrong with publishing someone's personal information without verification or consent.
    And this one's lost them some good, free labor who obviously cared about the company's direction..
  • They will pull articles that become controversial, even if they don't think there's anything wrong with the article.
    Any potential authors will love that, I'm sure
  • They will buckle under pressure of an (alleged) DoS, to the point of dumping a paid author even while they defend the article.
    More food for thought for potential authors..
  • They will openly attack people who voice displeasure to their advertisers.
    I'm sure the marketers will love having their feedback mechanism attacked..

What is it about the SCO saga that seems to paint targets on people's footwear?

Never play chicken with Nazgul. It only gets you wounds
that never heal and an annoyed judge.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OK, someone explain something to me...
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 12:42 PM EDT
In Kercaali's interview, he claims to have fact checked MOG's article himself and says it is accurate (otherwise he would not have published it or so he says). But I got the distinct impression based on PJ's postings that MOG, while looking for PJ, found PJ's mother instead. In which case the information published would be inaccurate as well as invasive; is this not correct? Or is Kercaali just talking through his hat?

[ Reply to This | # ]

As for DDoS
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 01:02 PM EDT
I've seen several mentions that it's likely only the /. effect and not a true DDoS. What I haven't seen is anyone point out the obvious logical fallacy in the whole DDoS argument anyway.

There is an automatic assumption by SYS-CON that any DDoS *must* come from Linux/Groklaw/PJ supporters. Why? Would a well-timed DDoS not benefit SCOX, MOG, et. al., even more than anyone who supports Groklaw? A DDoS against SCOX, SYS-CON, Marine Iguana, etc. serves no purpose other than to make their enemies appear to have unclean hands. And *that* plays directly into the hands of SCOX supporters.

I automatically assume every time there is a statement about a DDoS happening that it *must* have originated with SCOX supporters. There is more evidence of their willingness to play dirty than the other way round. And there's more evidence of their lack of ethics. Which makes it quite logical to figure they are likely to launch a DDoS attack on themselves just so they can claim their enemies are unethical, have unclean hands, and just generally make their enemies look bad.

I would absolutely love to see actual proof of who is responsible for the alleged DDoS attacks. If it *is* someone who supports Groklaw, PJ, Linux, and/or FOSS, we could reprimand them and see they are punished by law...hopefully making it clear such behavior is reprehensible and does more damage to their own cause than it does good...thereby curtailing such activity.

But if it were proven to be controlled/launched by SCOX supporters, they could be outed, reprimanded, punished by the law, etc. And they'd lose one more FUD tactic. Which is why I'm betting no such evidence will ever see the light of day.

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT: Please place all off topic comments here
Authored by: NastyGuns on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 01:17 PM EDT
Please put all OT comments here.

Please create links in HTML format as follows:
<a href="">Link Name Here</a>

Please make sure your post mode is HTML format.

To start things off, has stats_for_all or anyone else found any further
information on the tSCOg & Vista deal?

"If I'm not here, I've gone out to find myself. If I return before I get back,
please keep me here." Unknown.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Wonder is Ms O'Gara will still try to publish Part 2
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 01:42 PM EDT

Remember the original article was, allegedly, Part 1 of her "expose"
with Part 2 to come soon.

Perhaps she'll try to destroy her own G2News/Linuxgram publications now she's
decimated LinuxWorld.

Part of me hopes she does (so long as there isn't any more stuff like phone nos
etc in it that truly endanger PJs privacy) - just more general ravings.

It'll be interesting to see which wins out: her ego or her instinct for
professional self preservation!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Message to Steve, James, Dee-ann, et. al.....
Authored by: NastyGuns on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 01:43 PM EDT

Dear Steve, James, Dee-ann, and all the other former Linux-World editors:

The ethics, integrity, and professional standards all of you have displayed during this incident have shown you to be responsible reporters. Therefore, if you have missed the other suggestions above in this article, let me state that if all of you were to start your own magazine, newletter, or whatever else, I'll do whatever is in my means to help support your endeavors. Just so long as you continue to display the aforementioned traits, even when being critical of FOSS projects.


"If I'm not here, I've gone out to find myself. If I return before I get back, please keep me here." Unknown.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Missing Link?
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 01:54 PM EDT
Just wondering if anyone knows who it is that stands between MoG and Fuat
Kircaali -- presumably the chief editor of LBN? Kircaali is the CEO guy and --
thought he <i>should</i> know something about journalistic ethics,
he might not. The actual editor who looked at MoG's piece and said "run
it" definitely knew what heshe was doing.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Consumer Blacklist
Authored by: Hyrion on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 02:01 PM EDT

I don't log in often. There appears to be a problem somewhere in the cookies that are used by Groklaw and Konqueror (numerous versions, currently 3.2.3) that mean I have to set the cookie security as: accept all cookies. I felt this situation to be important enough to log in.

This morning I finally actually read Mr. Kircaali's interview. I finally got a real taste of what his point of view was. I'm not sure how to describe it. I did make an immediate decision.

It takes a lot for a company to get on my blacklist. In this case, the blacklist is a list of all individuals/companies that I will NOT do business with for any cost. Previously there was only two companies. Now Mr. Kircaali has been added. Along with himself will be any business he ever has controlling ownership or controlling management over.

On the other hand, the three individuals who have been listed as resigning have just joined PJ on a very small "Highly respected writers" list. I'll be giving their future articles as much effort to read as I do PJ's.

On a side-note, I still think O'Gara and company has gone far enough that PJ should, at the very least, press charges if possible.

In the event this seems to be the act of an extreme individual, the decision is within my legal rights as a consumer.

Addition to my normal sig: The strong must stand up for what's right, otherwise the weak have no protection.

There are many kinds of dreams. All can be reached if a person chooses. - RS

[ Reply to This | # ]

What Fuat doesn't seem to understand.
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 02:54 PM EDT

A bit of history.

Buyers and users of computing were well upset over what they perceived as a rip-off over M$ change of licensing practices rapidly followed by Y2K issues which they well understood when talking about some software dating from the 70's or 80's but found it harder to justify when talking about Office97.

They looked at their coffers and didn't appreciate what was happening and for the first time in years they began listening to their techies instead of reading DRM's promotional rubbish.

UK's Education ministry thinks it can save 50% on my tax contribution by using open source software. You won't change their minds: Just what do you think the minister could say to the public when he is interviewed on the National TV news?

Some companies saw this coming, just like some people have called Intel's Itanium chip (I have nothing against Intel, they are on the right side, they'll catch up, they just made a mistake.) the Itanic since around the same time.

Fuat your customers are just like you, they want to see competition amongst their suppliers, not legalised cartels.

Most DRM outfits adjusted their stance since Groklaw and others started deFUDing a couple of years ago. They responded to their readers email's. They listened to their market. SYS-CON have not.

Brian S.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Old Quote, Paraphrased
Authored by: tredman on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 03:12 PM EDT
"Hell hath no fury like a community scorned..."

(apologies to William Congreve)

"I drank what?" - Socrates, 399 BCE

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections Here, Please
Authored by: J.F. on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 03:36 PM EDT
Apparently, someone forgot to add this.

Please change the turner link to ""

I imagine the dee link will change as well.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Society of Professional Journalists, Ethics Commitee, comments
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 04:12 PM EDT

James Turner, former senior editor of LinuxWorld wrote Fred Brown of the Society
of Professional Journalists Ethics Commitee. Here is what Fred Brown wrote:


I agree with you. That piece by O'Gara definitely is outside the norms of good
journalism. It's bullying, insulting and harassing, and I, for one, really don't
get the point of it. That's not to say that other journalists are sometimes
guilty of those sins, but that still doesn't make it
good journalism.

So I don't think you did the wrong thing in using you First Amendment rights to
call for O'Gara's ouster or reprimand or whatever. The SPJ Code of Ethics says
ethical journalists should "expose unethical practices of journalists and
the news media" and "abide by the same high standards to which they
hold others."

Fred Brown

Co-chair, SPJ Ethics Committee

[ Reply to This | # ]

What I don't get is this
Authored by: Anonymous Coward on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 05:05 PM EDT
PJ has already explained a few times that she is not needed to run the site.
So what is her role in all this?
She is an icon for the people reading Groklaw.
And that is what I don't get. Why in the world did MOG attack an icon? At least
in this way.

People rally around icons if they (the icons) are attacked. An icon attacked in
the wrong way will only inspire a desire to defend it. The only way to attack an
icon is using the truth not with the personal attack that MOG launched.
So why did MOG do it this way?

[ Reply to This | # ]

What does ethics have anything to do with professional reporting and journalism?
Authored by: SilverWave on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 05:14 PM EDT

Pills Interview with Fuat Kircaali, CEO of Sys-Con:

Fuat Kircaali: "What does ethics have anything to do with professional reporting and journalism?"

That quote says it all :O

Oh and if you read the interview you see that speaking to his advertisers is a *VERY* affective strategy, that hit him where it

PS I think this "we've been DoS'd thing" he is bleating about is getting old! (He’s never heard of Slashdot?)


"They [each] put in one hour of work,
but because they share the end results
they get nine hours... for free"

Firstmonday 98 interview with Linus Torvalds

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 06:29 PM EDT

I don't think this is over, folks.

The former Senior Editor at LinuxWorld, Turner, says on his blog that he was
called by a Forbes (or was it Fortune - don't have the blog page in front of me)
writer named Lyons (IIRC) who asked a LOT of really weird questions about PJ
that were clearly biased against PJ and for MoG.

Turner's take is that this guy will be writing a Forbes piece and Turner wanted
to put his responses online first so any quotes the guy takes out of context
will be obvious.

It's beginning to look to me that a lot of this - SCO gets investments on
Microsoft's advice, Darl attacks PJ, MoG attacks PJ, Fuat attacks OSS people for
a DDoS, now some bozo at Forbes attacks PJ - may well be an orchestrated attack
on PJ and, more importantly, by extension OSS.

And we know only two companies who are at the forefront of anti-OSS propaganda.

Stay tuned.

[ Reply to This | # ]

somewhere, RMS is smiling...
Authored by: DWitt_nyc on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 06:31 PM EDT
Ever more and more, I appreciate the genius of the GPL, and the FOSS concept--in a world where corporations have more rights than people do, and can buy, bribe or steal pretty much whatever they want, the appearance of the Open Source movement is like the ultimate uncorruptable judge.

At it's core, this isn't about Linux zealots, journalistic ethics and DDOS attacks, it's about the irresistable force of capitalism being slammed by an immovable object--Sys- CON, G2, SCO, et al are all operating on the Microsoft business model of cronyism and kleptocracy that's up against something that they can't buy out, co-opt, litigate to death, or drown in FUD.

Business needs Linux more than Linux needs business. At this point and beyond, if businesses want to tap into the massive resources of Linux and FOSS, they have to play by the rules of the GPL, and learn to coexist with the culture of the Open Source community. Some get it, some don't, and those who are just pretending to get it will eventually be outed for what they really are--and some, like Fuat Kirccali, simply have their brains explode from failed hubris and massive cognitive dissonance...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: Nonad on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 07:03 PM EDT
Without further comment, an e-mail I just sent to Fuat...


Fuat, you and I have swapped e-mails in the past, and even then your actions
spoke louder than the words you said.

Your apology to your readers, staff, editors, Ms Jones, and whomever else
finally made you uncomfortable enough to finally put that tiny print blurb on
one of your pages, is certainly "too little, too late."

The lack of ethical grounding shown by not only your recent actions, but by your
historical actions do not sit well.

You have the final say, control, and responsibility - you set the tone - for
everything published under the Sys-Con banner.

Sadly, I doubt this little flap will seriously affect your enterprises, but we
can always hope that it shows up in your bottom line and that you REMEMBER WHY.

Ethics, Fuat, ethics.

Take care,


This is not the first and certainly not the only time that Fuat has, at least at
first, refused to take any responsibility for what happens at his companies.

Maybe this time there will be enough of a kerfuffle for him to take notice and

[ Reply to This | # ]

OT here please.
Authored by: kh on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 07:15 PM EDT
You can post links as <a
HTML</a> and previewing your post is usually a good idea.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Important News - Ethics Committee of the Society of Professional Journalists - comments on O'Gar
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 07:33 PM EDT
See copy of letter in the article at

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: El_Heffe on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 07:45 PM EDT
Yes it's true .... MOG is an unethical low-life and the publisher of LinuxWorld
isn't much better. No argument there.

So a bunch of "Senior Editors" ... who in reality are nothing more
than unpaid volunteers ... have quit. Any this proves exactly what ... ?

Yes sir .. they really showed 'em!! Quitting a job that you do for free really
takes a lot of guts!!

SysCon will have no problem finding replacements for the departed "Senior
Editors" as well as a FUD slinging replacement for MOG.

"When I say something, I put my name next to it" - anonynmous

[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 08:47 PM EDT
For a moment there, I thought maybe the entire editorial staff of
LinuxBusinessWeek were the ones that resigned, but then I realized you were
talking about Linux World. Guess I read the article too fast and confused the

Anyway, why would the editors of Linux World leave their positions? What
connection does Linux World have with Sys-con?

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Why? - Authored by: iMeowbot on Saturday, May 14 2005 @ 09:21 PM EDT
"LinuxWorld editorial staff quits over ethics -Try explaining that to the advertisers"
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 12:42 AM EDT

FOLLOWING THE LITTLE TIFF between Groklaw and Maureen O'Gara here and here, it seems that the editor in chief at Sys-Con has decided to give an interview about it here. The long and the short of the interview seems to be an unrepentant Fuat wondering what all the fuss is about.

I have emailed Fuat with questions about the interview, but so far, no reply............... The Inq.

Brian S.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Wasn't the O'gara Article Illegal?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 02:01 AM EDT
Have we gotten to the state where we have no privacy at all. People can hire a
PI, and get all your personal information, and that of your children and parents
too, and then just publish it in a nationally syndicated article? Is there a
law against that? Can they be sued for Millions? I suppose if anything bad
happens to any of the people because of that published information, there is at
least recovery of damages, and perhaps treble damages because it might be proved
there was malice in publishing this stuff. It looks malicious to me. I would
think that the controlling people would think this went a little too far and has
now subjected them to possible legal and maybe even criminal action. Somebody
wasn't thinking or watching. Either that or this is not the reaction they
expected. Why did they do this? It looks like a big mistake.

If this is legal to do, I would like to know all about Darl's family, and their
addresses and phone numbers, not to mention pictures of them and their houses.
At least I would like to know about MOG's family and house, and her number, and
Fuat's also. If this is legal to do, let's find out all the interesting details
about all these people. They could find it out about us. Maybe MOG is not who
she says she is. Maybe Darl either. I bet there would be some pretty
interesting stuff. I wonder what some of his distant relatives would say about
him, or former landlords, college buddies, or high-school classmates. Might be
some interesting stuff.

And a DoS is a really weak claim verses putting people's info out, making it
easier for people to do them wrong. I haven't seen this done before. Not that
it hasn't been done before, but it is not very common.

What were they thinking? It is just amazing. Well, I hope they keep coming out
with this type stuff and keep revealing their true motives and character.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Was LinuxWorld that good?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 03:14 AM EDT
Please do not take this as a slam against the editors who had the integrity to
do the right thing.

I am not a reader of LinuxWorld. I may have purchased a magazine or two at a
newstand, but I don't remember for sure. What I do remember is my
impression of LinuxWorld. I remember thinking these magazines were not up
to the level of the other choices available. Typically, I looked for mid-level
advanced topics, and I got those from other journals, whereas LW seemed
targetted to the more novice. Nothing wrong with that, it's just not what I was

looking for, so I didn't spend my money on it.

Now, I keep hearing about how much of a "powerhouse" SysCon is
to be, and how important and widely-read LinuxWorld was, and I'm left
confused, and wondering if they really had some meat and potatoes in there,
or if they were able to attract a larger readership by getting them while they
were novices, and "growing up" with them, so to speak.

Is SysCon really that much of a big deal? Is LinuxWorld really as big as he (the

publisher) and others seem to be making it out to be? Was my impression of
the magazine that far off-base? Or is it really the "entry-level"
magazine for
the masses?

If it weren't for the current events, I might have been persuaded to look a
little deeper to see for myself. Now, however, I will not let my hard-earned
money (or time or page views) go to support them.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What does fame define, for PJ?
Authored by: rezende on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 05:19 AM EDT
In the wake of this MOG-SYS-CON shakedown, following a stalking attack on PJ's identity, someone called on PJ: "You've made yourself a public figure. I think the public is entitled to an interview describing your background". Another one (parent), implying such entitlement, quotes entries for "public figure" from dictionaries to beg an anwser: "what other words can better describe PJ's stature"? Indeed, "public figure" is a good description of PJ's stature.

But what is PJ? Note: my rethorical question is not "who", but "what". My question is framed to explore how being a public figure can relate to the public being entitled to a background on who is behind "PJ". According to the quoted dictionary of Law, a public figure is a personage. According to Merriam-Webster, as a noun a public figure is an estimation, an acclaim. Stature, personage, estimation, acclaim, can we find a common root to such categorizations of the PJ thing? ("thing" here is meant to be syntactical, not offensive)

Persona, or personal identity. Ultimately, identity.

Identity is a byproduct of identification. Identification can be best described here as in computer security: the bundling of relations involving an entity (entity: from the latin word for "being"). Thus, a bundle of relations yelds an id-entity (id: "this" in latin). If an identity describes, defines or fits a social role, it can be tagged by what professor Roger Clark (from Australian National University) calls a "nym".

A nym common to several identities (in the sense of social roles performable by one and the same entity) is a common name. My civil name (the one in my driver's license) is a common name. My civil name serves to bundle various identities I am led to, or choose do engage, in my social life. My civil name commonly tags my professor, father and brazilian citizen identities, as well as others which my self performs. But not all nyms are meant to serve as common names.

That is to say, not all identity tags are meant to further bundle other social roles performed by the same entity. For example, a pseudonym. If the nature of a social role allows, one can create a nym to tag only it. However, whether this nym will be effective as pseudonym, able to insulate its tagging fuction to its designated role, depends not only on the role's nature, but also on the relations bundled into, and on how the entity plays it. A username for an account at, such as "PJ", is an example of such a nym.

A pseudonym is good for estabishing an identity for some role, by and under the control of its performing entity, but difficult to be so kept as the role grows in importance and complexity. Which ammounts to saying: as it becomes worthy of pseudonymity. This is because the more a role bundles relations, the greater the chance of leakage into other roles played by its entity; and the more social value this bundling builds, around an otherwise misterious entity, the more watchful other related entities become, for such leaks.

Carelessness, indiscretion, social engineering, spying and stalking can render a nym innefective as pseudonym. If a relation leaks across social roles, allowing distinct identities of a common entity to be linked, the knowledge of this can bundle roles, rendering their identities' nyms semiologically equivalent. That is, they become syno-nyms, with the pseudonym innefective as such if the other nym is a common name. Having gone so far as to reach semiology, we can now wrap it up with a view on privacy, the right "to be left alone". Privacy is, also, one's control over the possibilities of one's social roles being commonly bundled and tagged.

Where valued, privacy is not cheaply reached through pseudonymity, as argued. Thus, in societies where privacy is valuable, some social acts are allowed by law to be performed anonymously. Someone wishing to act while avoiding identification of the act's origin, even as part of a role played by an entity unknown for any other role, will act anonymously. If an entity acting anonymously is named, it would be either by someone else, or inconsistently through the role defined by such wish (for anonymity). Either way, this will not effectively tag an identity, in the sense given here. The "name" would be an ano-nym. (a non-name, as "Anonymous" in GL posts)

We are now ready to analyse the MOG-SYS-CON episode. The main questions now seem to be: Why was MOG so determined to write that piece? Why was SYS-CON publisher so insensitive to its controversial nature, unable to fathom the likely consequences of publishing it? Why was he so slow to grasp the ethical dimention of the controversy, first blaming what happened on zealotry from the FOSS community? Why such an explosive reaction from some corners of the community, at least in the eyes of some outsiders, like SYS-CON publisher and a Forbes reporter?

The values at stake in a social role played by an entity seem to depend on values grounded at other roles the same entity plays along. Does it? To what extent? It depends, of course, on the nature of the role, and on values held by stakeholders to evaluate their stakes in that role. A stakeholder's perception of an entity's motivation for playing that role, is a good example of value at stake. Trials, investigative and legal strategies, or investment and trading strategies, are examples of roles where such things matter. These are ultimately trust issues.

Like it or not, knowing or not, PJ set herself to build a social role with, at and for groklaw, which groklaw diehards regard as historically unique. GL's social role is unprecedented, in its challenge to neutrilize an unparalleled attack on rules designed for striking judicial fairness. The values at stake are enormous, and of two different types: economic and moral. They were so put at risk by a suicidal gambling strategy, from known and not-so-known stakeholders, bound to despise and downplay one of those value types, grounding the motivation for PJ to set up and breed GL's role, through which such despising and downplaying are countered. A breed, again, unprecedented, this one in its colaborative prowess.

On evaluating the risks drawn upon herself by setting up and running groklaw, she decided to prioritize her privacy. She made the name "Pamela Jones" (of which "PJ" is an acro-nym) function as a pseudonym for her identity as groklaw author and manager. She did so by being vague on whether that was her "real" (civil) name, by being careful not to reveal relations in GL which could leak her GL identity into her common identity, and counting on the fact that, if "Pamela Jones" was indeed her common name, it would put hurdles into bundling her common identity with her GL identity, for that is a 'popular' civil name. Which is to say, a likely homo-nym.

In some sense, I think this was a smart move. She could tender her privacy while being indirect about running GL from a pseudonym. Regular and careful readers learned to value GL for its solid-rock consistency, cohesiveness and fact-finding and fact-based orientations and moral values, regarless of nym status. FUD-busting at its purest. And among those, the ones who care more about the moral values at stake at some suicidal gambling adventure that brought us here, found PJ's motivations for setting up and running GL to be self-evident. No need to anchor its perception on other roles the person behind the PJ acronym may play in life.

Those, can respect PJ's risk evaluation, prizing her privacy over her fame. Those, can figure why a background knowledge of her other roles in common life is not as important as her life itself. At this point, the fame can be good at most to satisfy unconsciously motivated curiosities, and count page hits, or push to other levels of sophistry the FUD from those who care more for gambler's money at stake, insinuating that pseudonymity has to do with morally objectionalble facts to be hidden. The public figure stature can, though, remain with PJ's GL's identity. It does not have to percolate to its entity. For the sake of its privacy and flesh-and-bone safety. These are, again, ultimately trust issues.

But if Pamela Jones is PJ's real common name, the pseudonymization move was risky. PJ's GL's pseudonym and common name being homonyms, the stalking of PJ's GL identity can be masked for the clueless, sold as investigative reporting "about a mere blogger". As MOG did to SYS-CON. Those who believe that the two deaths at the SCO camp so far were "mere suicides", and that money talks lauder than morals, can not understand what all this fuss from the FOSS camp is about. They can't fathom the gravity of this stalking on PJ's privacy and those deaths. Some here can.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: blacklight on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 06:14 AM EDT
Fuad Kircaali has put out such a stream of contradictory statements that I
almost suspect him of being afflicted with multiple personalities disorder. I
almost tempted to scream: "will the REAl Fuad Kirkaali stand up?"
However, I already know that we are the dealing with the only and only Fuad
Kirkcaali, who will say and do anything to make a buck or get himself off the
hook including apologizing to Pamela Jones.

I would say that sending an email to sys-con's advertisers with MOG's article
and the transcript of the Fuad Kircaali interview as attachments should bring
home to these advertisers the point that sys-con is a counter-productive
advertising venue. It should also bring home just why so many in the Open Source
community are avoiding sys-con, and these people who are avoiding sys-con may
very well be the very people these advertisers are trying to reach.

I am afraid that Fuad Kirkaali is one cowboy who supplied his own rope and horse
for his own hanging.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Faut does not play will with others.
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 08:03 AM EDT

Time to take away his toys and give him a time-out.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Towards the Groklaw Journal (PJ, Senior Editor)
Authored by: rdc3 on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 09:43 AM EDT

If Groklaw continues as "merely" PJ's personal blog, then I think that problems such as the MOG saga are bound to continue.

I think there may be considerable merit to institutionalizing Groklaw as the "Groklaw Journal" complete with an editorial board and an editorial policy. This would not only help protect PJ, it would recognize the value of Groklaw as a concept worth preserving and growing.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Support for those who resigned
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 09:50 AM EDT
Subject of course to their desire for privacy, I suggest we try to find out
where each one went and try to drive business to their new firm(s), and away
from the SYS-CON family of publications and their advertisers.

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ is actually William Shakespeare
Authored by: lisch on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 10:39 AM EDT
I finally understand. O'Gara was absolutely correct: PJ is NOT who she claims to
be. PJ is actually the author of the works of William Shakespeare. Doubtless,
O'Gara will reveal this in the second part of her exposé.

[ Reply to This | # ]

In the interest of fair play
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 01:50 PM EDT
In the interest of fair play I'm wondering if Fuat and MOG would have any
problem with a "Journalist" putting pictures of their house and all
their personal information on the web? The "public" should have the
same "right" to know more about them.
Don't get me wrong, I don't support this kind of behavior at all but whatever
happened to the phrase-----Do un to others as you would have them do un to
Maby they never heard that one?

[ Reply to This | # ]

We live in 'interesting times'.
Authored by: mtew on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 03:20 PM EDT

First an apology. I am going to ramble and touch a number of different topics. At least some of those topics will be political and will offend people with a point of view different from my own. Never the less, I believe what I will say has a bearing on this issue.

A review to establish the context

PJ has been collecting and disseminating information on legal issues associated with Open Source Software. This is a topic that concerns many people from several points of view. It has an impact on our quality of life because it gives a handle on the risks associated with software. It has an impact on our financial well being because it determines how the resources needed to produce software are distributed. It has an impact on our social status because it determines who has control of how the software is produced, who produces it, who can use it and who can look at how it works. Not surprisingly all these different impacts also have political consequences.

PJ is not the only person doing this. An entire industry has grown up because of the importance of this topic. What makes PJ important is the quality of what she does. In many ways what she does is very ordinary. It is what people would like to expect to be done. What is extra ordinary is that she does this in spite of considerable pressure to meet the expectation of powerful and influential people who would manipulate the situation to their advantage personally, economically, socially and politically. I think she believes that ordinary people have an interest in this and as an ordinary person herself, she needs to provide the best information she can to ordinary people.

While I have not dug deeply into the history of Groklaw, I have followed it for long enough to understand how it works. That is why I said what I said in the previous paragraph. I have seen where PJ's honesty has discommoded a number of people. The fact that she, as a person with an ordinary point of view but extraordinary diligence and integrity, has reached conclusion unfavorable to these people has consequence. There are a fairly large number of these people. Some of them are aided as well as discomforted by what she has done. These people will probably leave her to do her work. Others will have severe problems with what she has done and will take action to oppose her.

The opposition to PJ has taken a number of forms and originates from a number of sources. Some of those forms are personally threatening and some of those sources will not be constrained by moral or ethical considerations. One of the ways to deal with personal threats is to try to be inconspicuous. This is difficult for PJ because she has some extra ordinary qualities. None the less she can and should try to keep her personal life out of public view. The fact that people who are associated with the events she is reporting have died under questionable circumstances is ample justification for this desire.

Recent events

This sets the background for the actions of 'MOG'. She is quite a different person from PJ. Where PJ's opinions are apparently based on a rational evaluation of what is happening to a large group of people, MOG's opinions seem to be primarily emotional, personal and based on what is best for MOG and the people who can do things for MOG.

I find it disturbing that people are allowing MOG to get away with most of what she is doing. I did look at what she had written about PJ and noticed that it failed to correlate with information from other sources about PJ. MOG admitted that she might have her facts wrong. She published her trash anyway. The fact that some people wanted to believe that trash and are not willing to take responsibility for the results of their actions in supporting MOG says some very bad things about those people and the state of our society. Given that, no wonder those people resigned! What is even worse is that many of the people who object to what is going on are blaming the wrong people for the problem.


I am particularly bothered by people blaming a problem on the people who bring the problem to our attention. For example the Enron scandal is being blamed on the current administration. In a sense the current administration IS responsible for the scandal. They refused to cover it up. The did NOT allow 'business as usual'. I have many issues with the guy in charge, but when he shrugged and refused to provide political cover the perpetrators at Enron, he in fact did the right thing. Figuratively, he has pulled the cover off the corporate financial cess pool and is in the process of cleaning up the mess, much the same way PJ has pulled the cover off the Intellectual Property cess pool. The fact that there is action being taken on both these levels provides some small hope that the situation will improve. (The fact that the guy at the top has such a narrow view on other issues limits that hope.)


[ Reply to This | # ]

advice to Kirgaali
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 03:23 PM EDT
Since Kirgaali is obviously a slimy fellow, my guess is that he will be tempted
to wait a few months until he thinks the storm has blown over, and then hire
another sleazy journalist to replace MOG.

That would be a foolish idea. People complained about MOG's article for a year.
Then a few days ago they went into action contacting advertisers, and MOG was
gone in a day.

Now sys-con is on everyone's radar. One sleazy story on oss and we will contact
advertisers immediately. And since this would be the second offense, the
advertiser's punishment would no doubt be worse.

My advice to Kirgaali would be to fight all his natural tendencies and stick to
the straight and narrow, at least as far as oss goes.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Business Ethincs
Authored by: star-dot-h on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 06:24 PM EDT
First, let me just add a note of support to PJ through this most sordid of
episodes. Many thanks for the work you do from a member of the community you are
supporting. This resource is becoming invaluable.

I do have some beef with Dana's article. I have read up to the end of the first
paragraph. I quote:

"While a journalist's ethics, like that of any other claimed profession,
may hold them well short of what's illegal, businessmen must go right up to the
legal line, even risk crossing it, to stay ahead of the competition. Businessmen
who don't think that way are easily crushed by those who do."

As a businessperson with a reasonably successful and frowing software company I
take exception. In one sentence he is excusing the actions of unethical and
illegal behaviour. "Do it this way or you will fail".

What rubbish. In our environment such behaviour is rewarded with lost staff,
lost contracts, lost customers and lost businesses, as Sys-Con are finding out
to their cost. He is also, excusing O'Gara's practises for which, frankly, there
is no excuse.


Free software on every PC on every desk

[ Reply to This | # ]

Steve Suehring comments on the DDOS attack to SYS-CON
Authored by: dmarker on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 06:55 PM EDT

Steve has written the below at his blog. He says that it was his opinion that there was a DDOS underway at SYS-CON.

Steve Suehring & SYS-CON DDOS

Jamaes Turner also made this comment which is worth repeating here ...

### James Turner ###

I've commented in passing, but I felt it would be good to say it explicitly:

  1. Denial of Service attacks are illegal, unethical and immoral. I've spent far too many years administering web sites to approve of that kind of thuggish behavior.
  2. Comments that approve of, threaten or celebrate denial of service attacks represent an immaturely developed ethical system on the part of the poster.
  3. Anyone with direct knowledge of the perpetrator of a DOS attack should immediate report it to the appropriate authorities.

You win the moral battles through ethical behavior, not property damage (and yes, a DOS is property damage).


Doug Marker

[ Reply to This | # ]

Confusing labels with actions
Authored by: dmarker on Sunday, May 15 2005 @ 10:38 PM EDT

Hypothetical case ...

1) I say I am a journalist.
As a journalist I write articles and either sell them or present them to
publishers. I may even set up my own publishing business (such as on the
Internet) and 'state clearly that this is what it is' and publish my own
articles. Any reaction to these articles should be handled by me in my capacity
as a journalist.

2) I am also a private citizen with certain rights such as what bank I use,
religion I decide to belong to and what church I pray at. What school I send my
children to. These activities are unrelated to my job as a journalist.

3)I also say I am a part-time consultant.
I can perfom consulting engagements in my capacity as a part-time consultant and
these can be totally unrelated to 1 and 2 above.

4) I also say I am a blogger.
On my blog I state clearly that I will publish original law articles from the
courts and comment on them. This can be totally independant of 1, 2 and 3.

So how does saying I am a journalist suddenly make all other parts of my life
(blog included) subject to any rules of journalism ?.

Doug Marker

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 16 2005 @ 01:45 AM EDT
hello, first time here.

nice blog, Pamela.

I don't read that stupid "enterprise Linux businesses"-geared
magazine. I got there to see the apologize in the front-page. No Linux
magazine which has a menu "LINUX LINKS YOU MUST CLICK ON !" with
"Microsoft Windows costs less & outperforms Linux" as on of its
items will ever get my respect. Not to say that seems contracditory.

i hope Linuxmag just die together with the publisher's respectability (none).

[ Reply to This | # ]

A fair comment ... one point re PJ & Pamela Jones ...
Authored by: dmarker on Monday, May 16 2005 @ 02:41 AM EDT

In your item you imply that PJ made both PJ and the name Pamela Jones public at
the same time.

In reading PJ's early comments re an Internet handle, I interpreted her as
meaning that by choosing just PJ (rather than Pamela, or Jones, or Pamela Jones)
she wanted a handle that did not imply anything including a gender.

No doubt PJ had some inkling of the audience that would follow what was to come
in Groklaw (but I believe PJ had no idea of the explosion of interest and the
levels in terms of just who, took interest - such as people on Capitol Hill).

By choosing PJ, Pamela wanted to avoid the obvious ...
e.g. Pamela implies female. Jones implies a family name. Both together appear
to identify a person.

When PJ started Groklaw, I don't believe anyone knew any more than here was
someone with a net handle of PJ. That was all we knew, but as time passed, it
slipped out that Pamela Jones was her actual name and that identified her as a
'her' and gave away more than she wanted to. In time her name appeared at the
head of the Groklaw web site.

I have never read anywhere that PJ invented 'Pamela Jones' as part of a handle,
only 'PJ". From all I have read & seen I take it as a given that Pamela
Jones is PJ's real name (I qualify this comment by saying that at a personal
level I am happy to accept what ever name PJ wants to provide as in balance it
is irrelevant to the published law documents).


Doug Marker

[ Reply to This | # ]

A reminder to us of how PJ got started
Authored by: dmarker on Monday, May 16 2005 @ 06:11 AM EDT

This link is a good reminder ...

Linux Online Interview with Pamela Jones

Enjoy ... (some additional comments added at bottom) ...


1st part of the interview ...

Michael J. Jordan, Linux Online Staff

July 31, 2003

Linux Online is pleased to present our visitors with an interview with Pamela Jones who is responsible for a weblog, Groklaw, which deals with the SCO case. Her site is an excellent resource for those looking for a well-maintained and comprehensive guide to what's going on day-to-day surrounding the SCO controversy.

Linux Online: First, I'd like to congratulate you on your excellent weblog dedicated to the SCO mess. "Mess" is probably the best word to use. I mean, I would say SCO "case", but it's pretty clear, at least from our side of it, that they haven't really got one. What motivated you to get started with your weblog. Were you a Linux advocate first?

Pamela Jones: Thank you. I was an advocate only in the sense that I tend to give Windows people I really like Knoppix CDs. I did try to find a way to contribute in the past, but I am not a programmer and I could never find my niche or a place I felt comfortable to be in.

I started my blog just before the SCO case was filed. Originally, my purpose was just trying to learn how to blog, because an attorney and I were discussing the possibility of me doing some telecommuting work for him, including work on his blog. I had no knowledge of blogging, so I quickly got Radio, because he used it , and I put up one article to practice, which I never thought anyone in the world would ever see (ironically, about the Grokster decision and how I admired David Boies' Napster legal documents). I was just writing to the air.

My thought then was to try to explain legal news stories as they came along. I was forever reading /. [Slashdot] comments about legal news and most of the comments would be way off, and I realized that there is a hunger for someone to explain what it all means, what the process is, how things play out, to people who aren't in the legal field. I didn't have a slashdot account, and any time I tried to comment, it mostly ended up moderated a zero, meaning nobody read it, including probably the moderators, so I gave up on that. : ) I also wanted to play with graphic/text interaction, just for some creative fun.

When SCO filed its lawsuit, at first I didn't take it too seriously. An early post was titled, "SCO Falls Downstairs, Hitting Its Head on Every Stair". But it made me so angry that they would even try something like this. I started to write about it more seriously. And then events kept happening so fast, I stuck to this one story.

I reasoned like this originally: I am not a lawyer. I am not a programmer. I have no influence. I have few friends in high places. I am not a political person. I belong to no organizations. What can * I* do?

By that question, I don't mean I gave up. I mean I seriously thought about what could I do. I wanted to do something. I love GNU/Linux software. It taught me how much fun computers can be. I love seeing into the process. I love the ideals behind free software, specifically, caring about other people and not just yourself, and cooperation, and being able to look at the code and even change it and share it freely. I've written about how it makes me feel in an article called, "It's Free As in Freedom, Stupid". Yes, I was mad that night. I'd probably call it something else now. But I had in my mind the "It's the Economy, Stupid" signs, and I was playing on that. I don't usually call people stupid.

I started out on computers with Windows, first 95 and then a 98SE box, and at the time, I was the only person in the small law firm where I then worked who was willing to learn enough about computers to set the office up and keep the boxes more or less running. We had no sys admin, no tech dept. Just me. So I had to learn, hands on, in real time. They were always getting viruses and other malware, and eventually I learned why and how and what to do (not that they cooperated much), and one day I realized, "I really love this stuff." When I discovered dual booting or a Knoppix CD meant you could see what went wrong on the Windows side, it changed my life. Eventually, I couldn't enjoy Windows any more, partly because I saw finally there really was no way to secure a Windows 98 box no matter what you do, and partly because upgrading beyond Windows 2000 meant licenses to choke on, a lot because of privacy concerns, and also because I started resenting typing in numbers to prove I had paid for the software and feeling like I was being treated like I was criminally-inclined. The difference in how I felt using the two OSs was striking.

One day, I realized that this difference was "It". Proprietary software and all the laws that back it up are designed to enforce restrictions on users. And that's just what it felt like. For personal pleasure, I always turned to GNU/Linux, which felt like breathing clean air. No restrictions. (I use Mandrake, out of loyalty, because they made it possible for me to step into the pool, and I especially love Knoppix. My next project is to do a permanent install of Knoppix, when I get sometime. It's Exhibit A demonstrating the wonderful things that can happen when you don't tie code up in proprietary chains.) I do sometimes in a work environment use Windows, but I don't volunteer to use it in other contexts.

So when the attack from SCO began, I definitely wanted to help. I honor the work of all the people who wrote this software. And it just felt natural to want to do something to help them for giving me so much pleasure, but how? I thought about David and Goliath. Everyone in the army of Israel was afraid of Goliath, and they refused to go out to fight, but one young boy said he was willing to go, and that with God's help, he knew he could win. They gave him a suit of armor and a sword, but he couldn't even walk in the armor, and he knew nothing about swords. What he knew how to use was stones, a slingshot. He'd been a shepherd and he'd killed bears and lions before with the slingshot, so why not Goliath?

All right, I said to myself, what can I do well? The answer was, I can research and I can write.Those are the two things attorneys and companies hire me to do for them. I decided, I will just do what I do best, and I'll throw it out there, like a message in a bottle. I didn't think too many people would ever read it, except I thought maybe IBM might find my research and it'd help them. Or someone out there would read it and realize he or she had meaningful evidence and would contact IBM or FSF. I know material I have put up can help them, if they didn't already know about it. Because of my training, I recognize what matters as far as this case is concerned. Companies like IBM typically hire folks to comb the Internet for them and find anything that mentions the company, so I assumed they'd notice me. That's all I was expecting. By saying all, I don't mean to diminish it as a contribution. I just wasn't expecting thousands of readers everyday. I was more thinking of the many-eyeballs power in this new context.


(click the link for more ...)

The questions any of us can ask ourselves is does this person who so clearly emerges in the above article, fit the warped image portrayed by tSCOg's Darl McBride or is McBride characteristically full of deceit, dishonesty and just plain hot air in what he wants us to believe about PJ (about tSCOg).

Does the above fit the profile of the person MoG would have us believe ?. I think not (but to be honest, what on earth did MoG ever really state factually about PJ ?, I'm not sure I know let alone MoG :-).

So someone has to be so far off the planet over who PJ is, that they have zero credibility and deserve no respect.


Doug Marker

[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: bventer on Monday, May 16 2005 @ 07:18 AM EDT
I suggest dropping IDG World Expo a line about all of this, seems like the LinuxWorld name is theirs and that SYS-CON is using it under some agreement...

I for one will not be attending LinuxWorld Conference... The local one here in South Africa have a Local Microsoft Director speaking and only business people may attend. Not worth my money...

Really sad, there's only about 2 people I wanted to listen to in the entire programme.

Take a look at LinuxWorld SA


[ Reply to This | # ]

Entire Senior Editorial Staff of LinuxWorld Resigns
Authored by: heretic on Monday, May 16 2005 @ 01:03 PM EDT

Another resignation

[ Reply to This | # ]

No comparisons with Darl yet?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 16 2005 @ 02:22 PM EDT
I shouldn't be surprised, given that Darl and Fuat are both hot shot
businessmen, that their outlooks should agree so well. While reading the Fuat
article I could have sworn it was Darl doing his night job. You know, "my
company is the leading supplier of blah, blah, blah," and "I'm right,
I can't possibly be wrong and soon you will all come to realize that."

[ Reply to This | # ]

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

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