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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


To read comments to this article, go here
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.


  View Printable Version


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 )