|
| Authored by: feldegast on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 08:09 AM EDT |
So they can be fixed
---
IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2012 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: feldegast on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 08:10 AM EDT |
Please make links clickable
---
IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2012 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: feldegast on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 08:11 AM EDT |
Please make links clickable
---
IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2012 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: feldegast on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 08:12 AM EDT |
thank you for your support
---
IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2012 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 08:24 AM EDT |
"Analysts sell out. It's their business model"
James Plamondon, Technical Evangelist at Microsoft
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 08:24 AM EDT |
| I read his stuff now and then for a laugh, or cry. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: kuroshima on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 08:25 AM EDT |
Hehe, it seems that your spider sense is well tuned, pj.
Also, if he posts information not on the public docket, I'm sure that here at GL
we will notice it quickly. Anyway, given his average so far, that he is
declaring a SCOracle win doesn't make it almost certain that Google will win?
P.S.: as a Spaniard I read many Spanish Android blogs, and I've notified them on
Florian's status as a paid shill each time they quote him, often managing to get
them to dig alternate sources for their articles. We should all do what we can
to defuse the FUD.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 08:35 AM EDT |
Which is quite true.
But he conveniently ignores the fact that one is not
required.
I propose a series of articles detailing the flagrant
infringement shown by Oracle not applying for a licence to
write software.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 08:38 AM EDT |
"There are other great reports from the third trial day, but
I picked the three above because of what they say about
Page's evasiveness"[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: coolmos on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 08:52 AM EDT |
Florian Mueller is just a paid writer. Sadly his writings
aren't that good.
I think it was telling that he disabled comments on his
writing a long time ago. There is only one way to deal with
him. Discredit him wherever he's quoted as an expert.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 09:28 AM EDT |
He apparently played a little Hardball with O, by not
reporting anything for quite a long time on this case. Lots
of people noticed this.
So what happened is: more Journalists started quoting
Groklaw, obviously this is not the PR O wants, so they had
to action it. Now we see the result (which is not good, as
he is obviously very biased).
IMO Google needs to counter this move and equally invest
more in PR about this case to more effectively convey their
spin on what the case is all about. The
public opinion is really important, not sure if Google
actually realizes it.
In Europe for example the Pirate Party is really building up
steam, in germany they are growing into a terrific political
force (and its about changing copyright law... ). Google
should leverage this situation, amongst other things, to
their advantage.
Also it is an election year in the U.S. and Obama is very
worried about his reelection campaign. Again, I don't
know if Google realizes it, but IP issues are extremely high
on the hidden agendas of politicians. This stuff matters,
Google needs to take action here, with much more aggresive
action.
Just my 2 cents...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 09:34 AM EDT |
| Any news from day 3 of the trial? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 10:15 AM EDT |
Any interest I had in Meuller's dribble disappeared when he
blocked me on his public G+ account (I softly mentioned a
possible bias in one of his posts), that's about the silliest
thing anyone could do, if I don't log into my G account I can
still see all of his posts, not that I want to.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 10:37 AM EDT |
The Secrete Service has gotten itself into big time trouble over using
prostitutes as convenient while on the road on duty. Apparently there was a
dispute over pay rate and payment but not quality of services. Of course that's
an off point observation, wholly unrelated to this post, one for which I
apologize. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 10:56 AM EDT |
Where, if anywhere, does Google's client side Dart language and its Dartium
version of the Chromium browser fit into things related to this litigation?
Android with a Dart? I confess ignorance. Any insight? Dart was released in
November 2011, which seems fairly recently, at least after initial pleadings
were filed.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 12:45 PM EDT |
He apparently doesn't realize how transparent he already is.
Wonder if he will ever find out?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Poor Florian! - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 04:46 PM EDT
- It's not his fault - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 06:51 PM EDT
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 02:30 PM EDT |
Each time Florian writes he has to write a statement along the
lines that he is impartial which implies that he probably does
not believe it himself ,let alone his readers.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 02:32 PM EDT |
Most main stream media journalists raise their hands.
Tufty
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: mschmitz on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 05:22 PM EDT |
PJ, I just love how you phrased that. Right on the money.
He's been looking more and more like a paid shill.
Unfortunately, he has been quoted in formerly reputable news media in relation
to this case over the past weeks. I've asked one of these outlets whether they
could mention the 'recent' business relationship between Mueller and Oracle in
one of their next news bites. Let's see ...
-- mschmitz
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: sproggit on Thursday, April 19 2012 @ 05:50 PM EDT |
PJ writes:-
"I'll tell you that his first article about the
trial says that Google is doomed, so you don't need to bother to read
it."
I humbly offer a different view. If you're a tekkie,
or work with tekkies, or talk to tekkies who may be interested in the Oracle vs.
Google case, then I do think it can do no harm to read it. You see, a case this
important is going to get all sorts of unexpected coverage. The pro-FRAND,
pro-software-patent lobby wants to put a spin on this story and ensure that it
is played - with the right message - to anyone who makes technology or
purchasing decisions.
On that basis I think it might be a good idea to
be aware of what Mr Mueller is writing, just in case we have an opportunity to
debunk the more obvious mis-direction. If you have read his articles, you will
note that they are carefully written to not be too extreme, but instead to "play
up" anything that appears to - in this case - be going against Google. Some of
his recent article discussed Mr Page's testimony and talked about how he looked
uncomfortable being harassed by Mr Boies. Mr Boies is a successful courtroom
lawyer. He has developed the harassment of witnesses to an art form. We should
not be surprised that Mr Page did not fare so well. But it's so very easy to
take something like this and spin it into the insinuation of guilt.
For this reason I think there can sometimes be value in being aware of
what Mr Mueller writes, just in case we overhear versions of it in conversations
at the office. During the SCO vs. IBM case there were two occasions where I
overheard senior technology managers discussing a "Darl proclamation" and was
able to politely join the conversation and give a counterpoint. Funnily enough,
in both cases the managers commented that they liked to see someone take an
interest in something that could impact the business.
Mr Mueller
writes eloquently; the subtlety of the way that he can re-portray something to
shift it's meaning ever-so-slightly in a different direction is clever.
Actually, sometimes it's more blatant than subtle, but he writes in a langage
that execs can understand, and he writes in a way that can easily be quoted in
marketing slides.
One example that relates to his recent post [where he
announces a commercial relationship to Google] is in the nature of that
relationship. Of his relationship with Oracle (among other things), Mr Mueller
writes:-
“Oracle has very recently become a consulting
client of mine. We intend to work together for the long haul on mostly
competition-related topics including, for one example, FRAND licensing
terms.”
and
“When Oracle and I started talking about
areas in which I could provide analysis, we thought that the Google litigation
was going to be over by the time we would work
together.”
Well, hang on there, Mr Mueller. If you
have "only just started working for Oracle" [your words, not mine], how
could you possibly have done so at a point where you thought, "that the
Google litigation was going to be over by the time we would work together"?
I am pretty sure that the timeline of this case has been known,
well in advance, for a while now. So for you to have expected it to be concluded
by April 19th, 2012, you would have had to start your discussions with Oracle
quite some little time ago, right? So which way round is it?
Now,
knowing that Mr Mueller has made both of these statements on his FOSSPatents
blog, and knowing that the article may well be re-quoted by the pro-FRAND and
pro-FOSS-patent lobby, it's useful to be able to respond to discussions of his
article with a chuckle and to take the opportunity to point out the above,
easily verified facts.
Carefully, patiently and politely point that
out, and you debunk the argument very effectively indeed.
While we on
the subject of debunking... I'm curious to know what Mr Mueller can know about
FRAND licensing terms [given that licenses tend to get to court as legal
documents] that Oracle would not want to discuss with their lawyers. When we've
seen that they need a real IP specialist, they hire in a specialist lawyer.
So what do we suppose that Mr Mueller may know about FRAND and FOSS
licensing terms that Oracle's legal experts don't. Just asking, is all. Maybe he
brings other skills to the table? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Friday, April 20 2012 @ 01:03 PM EDT |
It occured to me that Mr. Mueller seems to pick his opinion not only on who is
paying him but on who might pay him. He therefore always backs large well heeled
companies. To an extent his opinions are marketing for himself.
---
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 | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: gibus on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 11:43 AM EDT |
Maybe it is because I'm not a native English speaker (I'm French), maybe it is
some nuance in the vocabulary between both sides of the Atlantic, but I'm quite
reluctant to call Florian an "analyst".
Actually, I've worked with Florian some years ago. This was in 2004/2005. At
this time, I was vice-president of the FFII, which was the non-for-profit
organization leading th fight against software patents in Europe. Florian came
into the game by founding the "NoSoftwarePatent.com" campaign, and
I've translated Florian's website in French and take part to many email/irc/irl
discussions with Florian. This to say that I know the guy quite well, and I know
how he works.
While the work against software patents in Europe was done by the FFII, mostly
on a voluntary basis, or founded by individual or foundations (like Soros' Ooen
Society Institute), Florian came from nowhere, claiming he has found some
sponsors to build up a campaign. He has never told who his sponsors were until
the official kick-off of his NoSoftwarePatents.com campaign, then revealing he
was financed by MySQL, RedHat and 1&1 (German ISP). This was very different
from the work done at FFII, but I have to say that working with Florian was
quite pleasant. His campaign was even really efficient, it had some quite good
media coverage and had done a good work to educate people to the problematic of
software patents.
Nevertheless, Florian has stopped its campaign when his financing was
exhausting. This was just a few weeks before the European Parliament was
supposed to finally vote on a directive aiming at legalizing software patents in
Europe. This vote was all we have worked for for many years, and the very reason
for building up a campaign such as NoSoftwarePatents.com. FFII has of course go
on with the battle, until a final victory with the rejection of the directive by
the European Parliament. But this was without Florian having any role in this
battle anymore.
What I want to show, is that the way Florian is working is very different from
what I call an "analyst"'s work. At FFII, we had a lot of
"analysts" that were "analyzing" legal texts, draft
directive, amendments, statements by politicians or CEOs, etc. I'm considering
myself as an analyst. I've done this work for FFII, I've done it for La
Quadrature du Net (http://www.laquadrature.net) and I'm doing it now for April
(French Free Software Organization) against the proposal for a European Unitary
Patent (https://www.unitary-patent.eu). We are not doing a journalist's job, we
are not reporting objective facts. We are analyzing objective facts with a
subjective purpose: fighting against software patents, promoting free softwares,
keeping a free Internet, etc. Actually, I find that it is also the job done by
Groklaw.
Mueller is a lobbyist. He's working for money (he's also seeking for media
coverage on his own name, but that's another story). His purpose is just the
goal decided by people who give him founds. After he left the software patent
battle, he has worked on a book, precisely telling the story of the software
patent battle in Europe, or more correctly the story of Florian Mueller
involvement in this battle. The book was named "A lobbyist as such"
(this was actually a pun, based on the legal exclusion in Europe from
patentability of software "as such"). The book has been finished, some
copies have been exchanged, but, although it was planned to be published with a
Creative Commons License, Florian hasn't found a publisher and he has abandonned
the distribution of the book. At FFII we have always been cautious to treat
Florian for what he was (a lobbyist), and there has been a clash with Florian
once we have refused to give him access to our 200k supporter's mails for the
promotion of his book. Then Florian has done some lobbying in the European
Parliament about soccer. And finally came back with his FLOSS Patent blog.
Therefore, never trust him when he's presenting himself as an analyst. He's not.
His way of work can lead him to "analyze" something and later give the
very opposite "analysis" about the same thing. His point of view
depends on who has hired him. Nevertheless, actual analysts are not bad people.
As said, I define my (voluntary) "hacktivist"'s work as being an
analyst, and IMHO Groklaw is also fitting the definition.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, April 21 2012 @ 01:31 PM EDT |
Who is Sergey Hazarov and why is he posting uninformed
smear-comments in the New York times?! Not unlike Florian
Mueller, but this time this bloke seems hitched to M$.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/21/oracle-vs-google-
week-one/[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
