Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||||
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR)
According
to Computer Business Review, SCO has figured out its problems: it's all
Groklaw's fault. "So who is Pamela Jones? [Darl] McBride would not
say. 'We're still digging to the bottom of this. I think once we have all
of the facts complete we'll be glad to do [share] that,' he said. Perhaps
the bigger question might be why SCO, a company McBride claimed is
'steadfastly focused on winning in both the court room and in the market
place' is so concerned with what a small community web site thinks about
its claims."
(Log in to post comments)
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 15, 2005 15:16 UTC (Fri) by gowen (guest, #23914) [Link] Darl McBride says: "The reality is the web site [groklaw] is full of misinformation".So, one would imagine, that when SCO launched their counter offensive, the last place they would go for the facts would be Groklaw's repository of the legal documents. Right? I mean, it's not as if their lawyers don't already have copies of all this stuff...
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 17, 2005 13:06 UTC (Sun) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] Hmm. They might still believe it is full of misinformation. Groklaw postsverbatim copies of SCO's legal filings don't they? :)
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 15, 2005 15:42 UTC (Fri) by rev (guest, #15082) [Link] Perhaps the bigger question might be why SCO, a company McBride claimed is "steadfastly focused on winning in both the court room and in the market place" is so concerned with what a small community web site thinks about its claims.That one is right on target. The reason is that SCOG does not have a case. If they had, the would go for a win in the courtroum as fast as they could, and consider GL merely a nuisance. SCOG is concerned about GL because it exposed its propaganda for what it is: a mountain of falsehoods. GL spoiled SCOG's party: generate a lot of noise on stolen material, giving the noise credebility by showing some journalists code snippets (of BSD licensed material) under a NDA and by sueing a high profile Linux contributor for billions (the bigger the lie, the better) of dollars. The idea being to keep this high profile target in the courtroom as long as possible in order to sustain the credebility of their infringement claims, while gradually shifting its legal attention to large Linux end users. The market, filled with fear of being in SCOG's legal cross-hair, would then be eager to separate itself from its money in favour of SCOG. Voila, millions of dollars would flow into SCOG's bank account. In addtion, the market would run shy of using Linux, thus eliminating the travesty of capitalism that is Linux from the market place. GL ruined SCOG's criminal business model, that's why they despise GL. (No original thougt is present in the above, I know, it's just that I am in a reflective mood, today :) )
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 15, 2005 22:23 UTC (Fri) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link] >> Perhaps the bigger question might be why SCO, a company McBride claimed is "steadfastly focused on winning in both the court room and in the market place" is so concerned with what a small community web site thinks about its claims.
>That one is right on target. The reason is that SCOG does not have a case. If they had, the would go for a win in the courtroum as fast as they could, and consider GL merely a nuisance.
It's an open question though at what point they themselves realized that they didn't have a case. My guess is that this occurred somewhere late in the game. So there is a tendency for them to rationalize that there must be some super force behind this incredible Groklaw that was telling them they were up a creek without even a boat long before they realized it themselves. This psychologically saves them from the reality of recognizing their own true managerial incompetence.
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 15, 2005 15:48 UTC (Fri) by tcabot (subscriber, #6656) [Link] Billy Bragg sings:Here comes the future and you can't run from it, If you've got a blacklist I want to be on itSeems apropos.
1500 Threatening Letters, Do You Suppose? Posted Apr 15, 2005 15:57 UTC (Fri) by huffd (guest, #10382) [Link] Let's not forget history here folks. In the upgrade life cycle, don't you think that that their customers might, just maybe shy away from them?
Microsoft told paid them to take the poison a long time ago, and they did. They're just trying to take everyone with them that they can.
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 15, 2005 15:59 UTC (Fri) by forthy (guest, #1525) [Link] Darl says [about Pamela Jones]: "I think once we have all of the factscomplete we'll be glad to do [share] that" I know this would come. They have no facts together, and therefore can only tell that they will have something to share, but they claim that it's going to be nasty stuff. On the other hand, SCO is completely right: Groklaw is the reason why their FUD did not have any effect. It shows that the Internet is a media where everyone can be heard, and therefore, the truth turns up sooner or later. And this is a case where everyone involved can and does use the Internet.
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 15, 2005 16:07 UTC (Fri) by allesfresser (subscriber, #216) [Link] > Darl says [about Pamela Jones]: "I think once we have all of the factscomplete we'll be glad to do [share] that"
Of course, with their record of delaying discovery, we won't have to worry about them having all of the facts complete in our lifetimes...
Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Posted Apr 15, 2005 16:05 UTC (Fri) by b7j0c (subscriber, #27559) [Link] Darl, you are starting to sound like a nut. Rubber room time.
Singling out Posted Apr 15, 2005 16:45 UTC (Fri) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link] Interesting that he should mention only Groklaw, even though there are several other very critical websites: The Yahoo SCOX (now SCOXE) board, http://scofacts.org/, http://www.ip-wars.net/, the sites of ESR and Perens, etc. Of course Groklaw has usually been the fastest to get the legal documents on the net, and accompanied with readable analysis. But one wonders if McBride also feels especially offended having his schemes dissected by a woman... and maybe he thinks he could scare her off-the-air with talk about investigations?
Singling out Posted Apr 15, 2005 18:20 UTC (Fri) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link] Facts are just that... facts. Gender is irrelevant.
Singling out Posted Apr 15, 2005 22:29 UTC (Fri) by tomsi (subscriber, #2306) [Link] You are probably right.
But I have seen that people who are stubborn, short-sighted, and so on...
What is clear though is that they tried to pull a fast one. And they failed miserably.
Singling out Posted Apr 16, 2005 1:20 UTC (Sat) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] You know that. I know that. Every sane person on the Internet knows that.
CEOs from the Boy's Club of American corporate culture, where it's not what you know, it's what
Singling out Posted Apr 15, 2005 19:55 UTC (Fri) by jd (guest, #26381) [Link] Possible. Threats from perceived equals are generally treated differently than threats from perceived inferiors. The latter is much more likely to stir up massive levels of vitriol and hatred, partly because it so blatently challenges the prejudices involved and partly because people with a superiority complex are likely to use fear and intimidation to maintain that air of superiority.
SCO's got nuttin' Posted Apr 15, 2005 16:51 UTC (Fri) by wilreichert (subscriber, #17680) [Link] "cause ya know, if Groklaw was the brothel of misinformation they were claiming, they could just actually argue against their claims rationally instead of just blathering to the press about conspiracies. Me thinks they running out of people to blame for their own crappy business practices. But what do I know, I'm not even a paralegal.
SCO's got nuttin' Posted Apr 18, 2005 7:28 UTC (Mon) by ekj (guest, #1524) [Link] Sure. It's just the same old thing they've been doing for what feels like a decade: Wild claims, no evidence, no examples, nothing concrete whatsoever.There are "massive" copyrigth-infringements in the Linux kernel, tens of thousands of lines. No, we're not going to give an example, not even a single lines. Not even after being ordered by the judge to do so. Now, years later the game is the same: There's tons of misinformation and inaccuracies on Groklaw. No, we're not going to give even a *single* example of something that Groklaw writes that is inaccurate or misinforming. Not now, and not in the next few years. We will however, continue our campaign of *claiming* that Groklaw is misinforming and inaccurate.
The real question is what happenned to those german traders Posted Apr 15, 2005 19:48 UTC (Fri) by error27 (subscriber, #8346) [Link] Most of SCO's problems are caused by Germans trading SCOXE stock and stolen watches in the dark alleys of Berlin.
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 15, 2005 22:34 UTC (Fri) by s_cargo (guest, #10473) [Link] "All is not what it appears in Groklaw-land, and clearly there is a lot of spinning and hype over there,"The spinning and hype is going on in your head, McBride, and coming out of your mouth. "Some of the things that are happening around that web site are having a dampening effect on SCOsource," he said, adding that companies offering indemnification against SCO's legal claims were also to blame for poor SCOsource performance.As to where to assign the most blame, Darl, look in the mirror.
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 16, 2005 1:22 UTC (Sat) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] There IS a lot of spinning and hype over at Groklaw, actually. Lots and lots of it. Copiousamounts of it.
It's in quotation marks, or block quotes, taken from SCO press releases and court documents. It
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 16, 2005 8:19 UTC (Sat) by freddyh (subscriber, #21133) [Link] Nicely on spot! :)
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 16, 2005 16:59 UTC (Sat) by sphealey (guest, #1028) [Link] First, I apologize in advance, because I truely do not want to reignite Grokwars. But the evil RMS-inspired spirit in me compels me to offer the following observation: there is in fact a lot of groupthink and spinning at Groklaw. Perhaps 80% in the comments, but a fair amount in the articles as well. Is Groklaw closer to the platonic ideal of truth than TSG? I personally would say, yes. But that isn't to say that Groklaw is without problems/issues, because it is not.
sPh
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 17, 2005 2:57 UTC (Sun) by mark (guest, #1921) [Link] I definitely agree with you there. I stopped reading Groklaw when PJ posted an article saying, thatanyone who says something along the lines of "Groklaw used to be good, but now..." was clearly a SCO shill and should not be trusted.
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 17, 2005 13:47 UTC (Sun) by rev (guest, #15082) [Link] Please give an example of spin in a Groklaw spin, please?
"Probably?" you say, that seems to be a "probably" in the in AdTI sense of the word. I see irony and suggestive wording in GL's articles, but I don't see the equivalent of "We own all UNIX intelectual property", "The Linux DNA is ours", "millions of lines of our code have been copied verbatim into Linux", "we are steadfastly dedicated to winning our law-suits" and similar SCOG howlers.
"Probably", my @ss.. may I suggest you apply for a job at AdTI? You have talent...
The view you present seems a bit naive to me, or may just be testimony of a lack of recognition of the importance of effective communicative skills.
Remember that Groklaw is dedicated to countering the anti FLOSS FUD. This FUD is directed at the mainstream press and corporate dicision makers. What do you think on how effective GL's anti-FUD would be if it stuck with the bare facts, presenting and analysing these devoid of any emotion, devoid of any irony? Exactly.. nothing.. the mainstream press and all kind of CXO's would be completely unable to parse the resulting material.
Feel free to start your own blog that meets your Plationan standards and witness it fail to make a dent.
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 17, 2005 15:37 UTC (Sun) by hppnq (guest, #14462) [Link] Nowe *this* is exactly why I stopped reading the comments at Groklaw a long time ago.
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 17, 2005 18:45 UTC (Sun) by sphealey (guest, #1028) [Link] Agreed - perfect example of the genre.
sPh
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 18, 2005 12:44 UTC (Mon) by rev (guest, #15082) [Link] I see, the irony police is very active.
Please counter the validity of my post with arguments... and I allow you to use irony and humour (I'm not that bad a guy)
I also have not yet seen an example of GL spin.
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 18, 2005 19:07 UTC (Mon) by hppnq (guest, #14462) [Link] Now *this* is exactly why I stopped replying to Groklaw comments a long time ago.
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 18, 2005 20:51 UTC (Mon) by rev (guest, #15082) [Link] You still have not given an example of GL spin.
"This is why I stopped rewading GL" doesn't strike me as a particular solid argument countering my position.
You can do better.
groklaw spin Posted Apr 17, 2005 21:40 UTC (Sun) by vblum (guest, #1151) [Link] PJ's review which IBM got for its most recent software patent initiative was remarkably positive ... although IBM said very clearly that they wanted patent protection for their IP, they just didn't like the way the patent system is run presently. I had also read IBM's original statements, and they were anything but reassuring to me
Not to criticize PJ too much, she does an excellent job overall, even if I don't agree with every last single word of hers ... but yes, there is sometimes a bit of a rosy undertone when she reports about, e.g., IBM's activities, in court or otherwise. [I, too, wish that IBM may be right, and think they are on a reasonable track, both in that SCO case, and in general.]
SCO blames Groklaw for IP licensing disappointment (CBR) Posted Apr 25, 2005 21:04 UTC (Mon) by jschrod (subscriber, #1646) [Link] An example? PJ's Sun coverage. It's completely one-sided -- while she gives other companies like IBM the benefit of the doubt, almost everything that Sun does is bad from the outset.
It's clear that Schwarz doesn't like GPL, but that is true for a lot of Open Source contributors and it's also clear that Sun as a company did and does a lot for Open Source. In fact, they did this already when nobody else was sponsoring our work -- it's no coincidence that the major Linux distributed sites were called "sunsite" for a long time.
Please note: I'm not related to Sun in any way. I'm active in development of the stuff that's called Open Source Software nowadays since 1982.
Joachim
PJ is a role model for us all Posted Apr 16, 2005 1:35 UTC (Sat) by jamienk (guest, #1144) [Link] One of the most striking things about PJ is her strange and refreshing brand of Christianity. Today, many Christians who wear their beliefs on their sleeve are either pushing a repressive political agenda or saying strange things that people outside of their community can't even begin to understand (I'm thinking of the blogs on planet.mozilla, for example). PJ, on the other hand, to my mind, gives Christians a good name. She sticks up for what she thinks in right and is clearly not doing it for petty self-interest; she urges herself and her readers to be empathetic to other people's feelings; she always tries to understand things deeply and let any dogmas she may have be subjected to testing; she confesses her own shortcomings and praises other people's achievements, even small ones. She has really stood out for me as a role model for the spirit of Free Software in a different style than the usual geeky (RMS), academic (Eben Moglen), libertarian, economic people. I actually almost cried when she resigned from OSRM to halt any possibility of slander. She put her money where her mouth is. That was an amazingly rare, upright act, done with tremendous grace. SCO should really beware attacking her. People don't like it when anyone attacks a good, hard-working, kind, intelligent, and brave person.
PJ is a role model for us all Posted Apr 19, 2005 15:29 UTC (Tue) by jonabbey (subscriber, #2736) [Link] Why is her religion of any relevance here?
PJ is a role model for us all Posted Apr 19, 2005 16:02 UTC (Tue) by jamienk (guest, #1144) [Link] I was just sharing my observations and reactions with you. PJ often (not all the time by any means) quotes scripture and puts things into the context of her Christian beliefs. Usually, this sort of thing is off-putting to me. In her case, it comes off as honest, empathetic, and a bit quirky. Very original woman.
Groklaw site is down Posted Apr 16, 2005 23:54 UTC (Sat) by unaiur (guest, #3563) [Link] Curiously, now www.groklaw.net is down, at least from my ISP.Maybe a chance?
|
|||||||||||||