decoration decoration
Stories

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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

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

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
Monday, June 27 2005 @ 08:07 PM EDT

Daniel Wallace has asked the court to let him supplement his info in a filing he entitles a "Motion for Leave to Submit Supplemental Declaration of Plaintiff Daniel Wallace", or freely translated: "Mommy, mommy! Help! I made a mistake fatal to my quest in my prior filings and I need to try to fix it quick."

It seems he wasn't a physicist so much after all as he was kind of involved in computers all his life. Check out the weasel wording of paragraph 2. And lo and behold, he tells us that since 2002, he's been investing in research and development of "computer programs in order to prepare a compact computer operating system for test marketing" of a "command line system" intended "for use with computational physics programs and numerical analysis involving scientific modeling." Right.

He just forgot to mention that until he read on Groklaw he lacked standing. How that refreshed his memory.

And the GPL must be a real danger to the market for such a command-line specialty item, don't ya think? Besides, he says in paragraphs 4 and 7, he reads a lot, so he sees what the GPL is doing to the market. Why, it worries him greatly that Microsoft is being endangered, enough at least that he mentions it. However did Microsoft enter this picture?

He must read Groklaw too, so I won't tell you what I think of his latest burst of creativity [PDF]. If I did, he'd probably ask to file another correction. And then my mom would have to wash out my mouth with soap.


  


Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story | 308 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
Authored by: Peter H. Salus on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 08:37 PM EDT

Wallace could earn a lot writing
fantasy and science fiction.

---
Peter H. Salus

[ Reply to This | # ]

Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
Authored by: Steve Martin on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 08:38 PM EDT

And lo and behold, he tells us that since 2002, he's been investing in research and development of "computer programs in order to prepare a compact computer operating system for test marketing" of a "command line system" intended "for use with computational physics programs and numerical analysis involving scientific modeling."

So what? My wife "invested" in Intel at one time, didn't make her a chip manufacturer.

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

[ Reply to This | # ]

Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
Authored by: heretic on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 08:41 PM EDT

I think disclosure of the code for this Wallace-OS would be a nice point to ask for :)

heretic

[ Reply to This | # ]

Correction
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 08:48 PM EDT
Para 2 line 1 s/weasle/weasel/

[ Reply to This | # ]

Discovery will be Interesting
Authored by: argee on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 08:54 PM EDT
Wait until FSF gets to do Discovery on Wallace. All his
finances, records, employment history, tax returns, and the
fabulous program code he has written in the last 3 years will
come to light.

My suggestion to Wallace is to write his Numerical Analysis
program for Windows (tm), then he won't have to bother with
pesky GPL or Linux.

---
--
argee

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections Thread
Authored by: snorpus on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 09:00 PM EDT
As always, a title such as misteak-->mistake will do for the easy ones.

Don't forget to preview, and use the HTML Formatted mode if you include any of those pesky things in angle brackets.

---
73/88 de KQ3T ---
Montani Semper Liberi
Comments Licensed: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/

[ Reply to This | # ]

I disagree
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 09:02 PM EDT
You should definitely tell us your analysis of his latest filing and post any
other relevant analyses. Or at least your reason for not telling us should be
different.

Groklaw is about telling the truth, and providing information to those of us
that are interested. If this goal helps our opponents so be it, the greater
good of making the legal system more transparent, and more understandable
should win out.

A good argument for not posting would be that it is not worth the time or
effort. Or even that you just don't have the time to spend.

Andrew

[ Reply to This | # ]

Wallace doesn't need any evidence
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 09:03 PM EDT

Like the SCO cases, he'll get unlimited discovery,
with no time limit.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Conspiracy Theories?
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 09:10 PM EDT
I think this tends to disprove the conspiracy theories that Wallace is somehow a
proxy for someone else.

I think it's much more likely that Wallace merely monitors the Internet and
parrots what he finds there.

I'm not sure that investing in proprietary software is that much better than
where he was before.

---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.

"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk

[ Reply to This | # ]

Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
Authored by: kawabago on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 09:18 PM EDT
The caliber of nitwit Microsoft is able to hire is definitely declining!

---
TTFN

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic
Authored by: DBLR on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 09:25 PM EDT
Place you links here

Charles

---

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is
a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
Benjamin Franklin.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Isn't he perjuring himself?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 09:31 PM EDT
He states under penalty of perjury:
6. I have witnessed the F.S.F. distribute the GNU/LINUX operating system under the GPL license to the public in return for monetary contributions.
Have I missed something here, but since when have the FSF engaged in distribution of GNU/LINUX? A quick look at their web site http://www.fsf.org doesn't provide anywhere from which it could be said that they distribute GNU/LINUX with or without monetary contributions, or is he perchance getting confused with the situations where software authors have assigned their copyright to FSF.

Sure, FSF does solicit donations, but that is in no way tied to distribution of software.

Howard

[ Reply to This | # ]

Somebody help me out here
Authored by: Jude on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 09:47 PM EDT
I can't figure out why Wallace would think there's a market for a new OS for use
with computational physics programs and numerical analysis involving scientific
modeling.

I thought that scientific/engineering calculations were one of the most
OS-agnostic computing tasks of all. All of the scientists and engineers I've
ever met like portability so they can run their stuff on whatever box is handy
at the time. They'd hate the idea of having to pass up a shot at time on a Blue
Gene because their program only runs on WALLOS (or whatever he calls it).

[ Reply to This | # ]

Why would one write a new OS?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 09:54 PM EDT
There is a range of operating systems to chose from. Plain old DOS, MS Windows,
Linux, etc. Given the need for driver support and support for all sorts of
standards( FAT file system, networking, data interchange, etc.) it would seem to
me that writing on OS would be a major waste of time. The real value would be
the applications that run on the OS. There is a market for good applications.

If the applications that will run on this new operating system already exist and
already run on a currently existing OS, then his new OS must also support the
same API as the other existing OS. Therefore, what does this new OS bring to the
market? Was there ever a market for the new OS?

Also, if most new applications are "quickly emulated" as free
software, then either there are a lot of folks sitting around with nothing to do
just waiting for an application to 'emulate', or not much time went into the
original application.

craigm

[ Reply to This | # ]

Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
Authored by: xtifr on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 09:59 PM EDT
True irony: he complains about the lack of a real market for new OSes, and then
speaks in support of Microsoft, who, more than anyone else, is responsible for
the lack of a real market for new OSes!

---
Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for it makes them soggy and hard to
light.

[ Reply to This | # ]

    Microsoft losing sales? (I.e. Rapid decrease in free market oportunity)
    Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 10:02 PM EDT
    http://www.itjungle.com/two/two050405-story02.html
    http://www.itjungle.com/two/two020205-story01.html
    http://news.com.com/2100-1001-944934.html

    Microsoft is reporting increased sales, in programs that FOSS directly competes
    with.

    Its the XBox market that, despite increased sales, they are losing money (2003)

    So, Mr Wallace reads a lot, but not enough it seems.

    MS has been increasing their sales force since 2000. Cause or effect? Dunno

    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1818623,00.asp

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
    Authored by: sk43 on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 10:10 PM EDT
    1. Yessiree, let's file this declaration 4 days before the FSF response is due. They have plenty of time to read and reply.

    2. As a poster has already noted, the FSF does not distribute GNU/Linux. That makes it kind of tough to be a horizontal competitor to Red Hat and Novell.

    3. Wallace is full of statistics about the growth of free software, but is mighty vague about the purported decline of proprietary software. Can we have some genuine statisics there as well?

    4. Microsoft distributes FSF copyrighted software under the GPL and thus is part of this evil conspiracy as well, so why is Wallace defending them?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Wallace Would Like to Use The Judiciary Branch to Spread FUD (eom)
    Authored by: Matt C on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 10:25 PM EDT
    /

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
    Authored by: Steve Martin on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 11:24 PM EDT

    So he is asking if he may file a "Supplemental Declaration of Plaintiff Daniel Wallace". Now, I'm certainly not a lawyer, but just looking at this filing, didn't he in fact already file his supplemental declaration just by including it in this filing? Or am I just confused (which is getting more likely by the hour)?

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

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Truth telling & Timing
    Authored by: tce on Monday, June 27 2005 @ 11:36 PM EDT
    One of my favorite fortune cookies, aquired with good timing, says:

    "Tell it like it is, but be careful how you tell it,
    and to whom."

    And we would all add, "...and be careful when".

    Thanks PJ, for the careful telling.
    Tom

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Wallace Gets All Shirty Because Nobody Wants WALLYBASIC
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 02:43 AM EDT
    ...invested in the research and development of computer programs in order to prepare a compact computer operating system for test marketing. The command line operating system is intended for use with computational physics programs and numerical analysis involving scientific modeling.

    Sounds like Wallace has written a standalone high-precision BASIC interpreter for the IBM PC. My daughter did that in high school. It's a fun project for a beginner.

    Don't laugh. Bill Gates started out the same way.

    -Wang-Lo.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Danny-boy at his best!
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 02:50 AM EDT
    Wow, the man has no shame. If I were FSF, I would point out to the judge that
    Daniel has been a card carrying (and proud of it) member of FSF for a while now
    (if memory serves me well, his membership number is 1550). So, it would seem
    that Daniel himself, by financing the FSF, has been perpetuating the very price
    fixing that seems to be afecting his imaginary software making business now.

    What is that called? Unclean hands?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    The name for Wallaces OS
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 03:12 AM EDT
    I propose: Wallace's Acme Network Kernel OS.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
    Authored by: IharFilipau on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 03:21 AM EDT
    I do not understand why people are so turned on this case. To me it looks like
    plain legal academic exercise. Nothing more. Aparently, there is no damages.

    I think if this case will be resolved properly, it would be one more case in
    support of GPL/etc. As development goes, I think, GPL will only gain by having
    strong case record.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    How many buggy whip manufacturers sued Ford?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 03:53 AM EDT
    Frankly, his argument seems to boil down to "Something new has come along
    and is threatening the viability of something old."

    And I'm not quite sure how legal action can stop that (or indeed that you'd want
    it to).

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 04:40 AM EDT
    Writing an OS in 2002? Surely he must have been aware of Linux as an option.

    Still, if you are here Dr Wallace, I'd like to see a copy (at a sensible
    single-user trial price). How much do you charge?

    I have some history in Fluid Dynamics. I need to develop on commodity hardware,
    and run on a (custom) time-sliced supercomputer. I assume you can supply the
    appropriate compilation tools?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Does he really mean an OS?
    Authored by: DaveJakeman on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 07:03 AM EDT
    If he really means OS, the judge can associate the great works of Linus Torvalds
    et al with this man of great all-round technical ability. An OS that he forgot
    to mention earlier. Or does he just mean a command line utility - some program
    or other that runs under an OS that someone else developed?

    If he is genuinely marketing an OS, then the attempt to associate with Microsoft
    runs counter to his argument. Doesn't Microsoft provide, perhaps, just a little
    bit of competition in the OS arena? Wouldn't the presence of Microsoft tend to
    make marketing his OS rather more difficult? Is Microsoft's presence in any way
    related to Wallace's lack of sales?

    He needs to make it clear what his case is about. Is he personally suffering
    damages from his inability to market his software (for whatever reason), or is
    he out to defend Microsoft? It seems that by trying to give himself
    "standing", he has detracted from and distracted from his original
    argument. Which is it?

    Or is this case simply what it appears to be: a nuisance?


    ---
    Should one hear an accusation, first look to see how it might be levelled at the
    accuser.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    "Open Source" software and OSes in Physics
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 08:21 AM EDT
    So I've read Wallace's PDF, and for a start, he's not specific enough about his "command line operating system" to really work out how to respond, but here's a couple of talking points.

    I am a particle physicist, and have been for over 10 years. The whole field operates on open source and uses GNU/Linux in particular to great effect. In the Beginning there was PAW/HBOOK, part of the CERN Program Library. This computational and graphing framework has been in existence for almost thirty years, I believe (predating the GPL by several years). Then came ROOT (I know, bad name for a U**X application) as its descendent. Along the way, we have various so-called "Monte Carlo" simulation generators and frameworks, like GEANT, GEANT4, PYTHIA/JETSET and HERWIG.

    Oh, and did I mention Scientific Linux?

    My point: particle physics is just a small branch of physics, but pretty much *exists* on open source (and several codes are now GPL in particular). We've never had enough funding to have contractors write this stuff (and our needs are often too specific to buy off the shelf), so a lot of what we need gets written "within the community" (cue apologetic grin directed at those people who might have followed links above and actually seen some of the code :-/). I would be surprised if this situation weren't reflected across other branches of the sciences in general and physics especially.

    Notiwithstanding, proprietary codes like Mathematica and MATLAB appear to have been doing just fine thank you very much despite the existence of the likes of PAW and ROOT. As far as I can tell, Wallace would pretty much like to create a market for himself from scratch by invalidating everything that has been put together over decades by experts in the field; and then what? Take the latest versions, tweak them a bit and sell them? The mind boggles.

    Chris Green (long time Groklaw reader, first time poster).

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    PJ, that was nasty.
    Authored by: Anthem on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 10:39 AM EDT
    Look, we know how you feel about the case. We feel the same way. But don't you
    think that was a little more editorializing than normal? I agree the guy
    deserved mocking, but it's historically not been your style to do it this way.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Wallace Would Like to Amplify His Story
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 10:49 AM EDT
    "However did Microsoft enter this picture?"

    Heh - that should be obvious.

    Microsoft must by now be using a significant portion of its billions in cash
    paying off people to attack OSS. How many FUD merchants are there? I'm just
    surprised they haven't given the Carlyle Group several billions just to have
    George H.W. Bush's son declare all OSS developers "terrorists" and
    ship them all to Gitmo.

    OTOH, most of these people are probably bought cheap, so maybe Microsoft isn't
    hurting yet after all.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    My theory
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 01:04 PM EDT
    I tell you what I first thought. He specifically mentions GNU/linux, he talks about a command-line OS, and he's attacking 2b in the GPL. Plus, he's going for an presumably exotic high-margin end of the scientific market, if he can get his foot in the door.

    To me, it sounds like he's running a modified linux kernel on some piece of high-end hardware (no biggie there, just port OS to new hardware, happens all the time). To keep his market edge, however, he doesn't want to contribute his changes back (and help any competitors to compete).

    Rather than just pretend it isn't linux, he decided to sue the FSF and crank up the profit margin as part of the pretense.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    In the same vein.
    Authored by: bb5ch39t on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 05:12 PM EDT
    I'm considering the possibility of being a carpenter. I might someday want to
    construct houses for a living. I think that I will launch a preemptory strike
    against the "Habitat for Humanity" people along with all the
    volunteers who have, through their anti-American, anti-competative work have
    likely decreased my possible future earnings by there "give it away
    free" attitude!

    Volunteerism just be eliminated for the good of the country!

    Note that the above is supposed to be sarcasm. But if this suit prospers, who
    knows?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Keep on digging mate, but get a bigger shovel
    Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 28 2005 @ 08:38 PM EDT
    Some people accidentally dig themselves into a hole but, being otherwise
    rational individuals, quickly realise their mistake and climb back out.

    While the majority of us sensible people realise from the start that we're not
    cut out to be miners and so leave any hole digging to the professionals.

    But there's always those few, whose main function in life is to entertain us,
    that cling to the hope that if they keep digging long enough they'll finally
    come out in Australia!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    authoring...
    Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 01 2005 @ 07:47 AM EDT
    I began authoring... whoever uses such bad style should not be trusted.

    [ 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 )     		Site layout based on Woodlands theme by Bryan Bell.
    Groklaw logo by John Crowley.
    News Picks logo by Ted Thompson.
    Powered By GeekLog
    Created this page in 0.05 seconds