3 ms·

If you think Techrights/BoycottNovell and Groklaw are not very slanted coverage then you're within the bubble and cannot see outside it. Also, one can be very s

If you think Techrights/BoycottNovell and Groklaw are not very slanted coverage then you're within the bubble and cannot see outside it. Also, one can be very slanted and biased without getting paid (rather no one can prove or disprove they got paid no one even knows the identify of the person(s) behind Groklaw).

gpm 5y ago
Groklaw certainly had a variety of sincerely held opinions (so does everyone), and advocated for them. That's different from being paid to take a position that you don't believe in or making bad faith arguments. The identity of who wrote Groklaw is known (Pamela Jones), and the accusations that they were a paid was disproven in court in the Oracle case. Edit: And when I said advocated for them, I mean it in the legal sense as well as blogging about them: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/patents/law/comments/sw-e_groklaw_topic2corrected_20130315.pdf https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/patents/law/commen...
- belltaco 5y ago
  Ironically, this was the reason they gave the reason for hiding their identity under PJ and then later expanding it to a generic Pamela Jones since there are a lot of people under that name: >In other words, I was hoping people could assume whatever they wanted and just focus on what I said, rather than on who was saying it. For that reason, I chose PJ, because it could be anyone, either sex, any nationality, anyone and no one in particular. Maybe we should follow PJ's advice while reading the posted article. Anyway, we are rehashing a discussion from the past. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7090812 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7090812
- gpm 5y ago
  In the interst of continuing to provide actual facts to this conversation: Here is an article by Pamela Jones (ironically not on groklaw) discussing the lack of compensation for running groklaw: https://www.zdnet.com/article/letter-to-the-editor-no-ibm-groklaw-connection/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/letter-to-the-editor-no-ibm-gr... Here is the court filing by IBM in which they deny that they paid groklaw (page 10): http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/IBM-621-E19.pdf http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/IBM-621-E19.pdf
  - belltaco 5y ago
    Not like IBM would ever lie in court. https://www.theregister.com/2019/01/18/ibm_government_lying_claims/ https://www.theregister.com/2019/01/18/ibm_government_lying_... And the other link is an assertion by an anonymous person that they're totally on the up and up. What would you expect if they were not, a confession? Would Florian Muller make a confession if he were anonymously posting as FM (Frank Matthew) while getting paid as a consultant? No one would ever know he was getting paid if we didn't know his real identity.
    - gpm 5y ago
      What's more likely? IBM lied to the court for no good reason (paying for shills is not illegal, just strange), the author of groklaw made up a name and later in life violated federal law by filing comments to UPTSO under it, other named lawyers worked with her on that. Or she really is named what she claims to be named? You're inventing wild conspiracies that don't even have a good reason to exist.
      - belltaco 5y ago
        >later in life violated federal law by filing comments to UPTSO under it That "violation" means nothing. https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/06/80-of-the-22-million-comments-on-net-neutrality-rollback-were-fake-investigation-finds/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/06/80-of-the-22-million-comme...
        gpm 5y ago
        > The wholesale undermining of the processes of government earned fines of $3.7 million, $550,000 and $150,000 for Fluent Inc., React2Media and Opt-Intelligence, respectively. There are also “comprehensive reforms” imposed on them, though it may be best not to expect much from those. I would suggest that just about no individual is interested in millions of dollars of fines... If I read this properly, it also doesn't prohibit the possibility of criminal charges in that case either. That case also didn't exist at the time, so didn't exist as precedent for believe that you might get off "lightly".

gpm 5y ago

Groklaw certainly had a variety of sincerely held opinions (so does everyone), and advocated for them. That's different from being paid to take a position that you don't believe in or making bad faith arguments. The identity of who wrote Groklaw is known (Pamela Jones), and the accusations that they were a paid was disproven in court in the Oracle case. Edit: And when I said advocated for them, I mean it in the legal sense as well as blogging about them: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/patents/law/comments/sw-e_groklaw_topic2corrected_20130315.pdf https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/patents/law/commen...

belltaco 5y ago
Ironically, this was the reason they gave the reason for hiding their identity under PJ and then later expanding it to a generic Pamela Jones since there are a lot of people under that name: >In other words, I was hoping people could assume whatever they wanted and just focus on what I said, rather than on who was saying it. For that reason, I chose PJ, because it could be anyone, either sex, any nationality, anyone and no one in particular. Maybe we should follow PJ's advice while reading the posted article. Anyway, we are rehashing a discussion from the past. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7090812 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7090812
gpm 5y ago
In the interst of continuing to provide actual facts to this conversation: Here is an article by Pamela Jones (ironically not on groklaw) discussing the lack of compensation for running groklaw: https://www.zdnet.com/article/letter-to-the-editor-no-ibm-groklaw-connection/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/letter-to-the-editor-no-ibm-gr... Here is the court filing by IBM in which they deny that they paid groklaw (page 10): http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/IBM-621-E19.pdf http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/IBM-621-E19.pdf
- belltaco 5y ago
  Not like IBM would ever lie in court. https://www.theregister.com/2019/01/18/ibm_government_lying_claims/ https://www.theregister.com/2019/01/18/ibm_government_lying_... And the other link is an assertion by an anonymous person that they're totally on the up and up. What would you expect if they were not, a confession? Would Florian Muller make a confession if he were anonymously posting as FM (Frank Matthew) while getting paid as a consultant? No one would ever know he was getting paid if we didn't know his real identity.
  - gpm 5y ago
    What's more likely? IBM lied to the court for no good reason (paying for shills is not illegal, just strange), the author of groklaw made up a name and later in life violated federal law by filing comments to UPTSO under it, other named lawyers worked with her on that. Or she really is named what she claims to be named? You're inventing wild conspiracies that don't even have a good reason to exist.
    - belltaco 5y ago
      >later in life violated federal law by filing comments to UPTSO under it That "violation" means nothing. https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/06/80-of-the-22-million-comments-on-net-neutrality-rollback-were-fake-investigation-finds/ https://techcrunch.com/2021/05/06/80-of-the-22-million-comme...
      - gpm 5y ago
        > The wholesale undermining of the processes of government earned fines of $3.7 million, $550,000 and $150,000 for Fluent Inc., React2Media and Opt-Intelligence, respectively. There are also “comprehensive reforms” imposed on them, though it may be best not to expect much from those. I would suggest that just about no individual is interested in millions of dollars of fines... If I read this properly, it also doesn't prohibit the possibility of criminal charges in that case either. That case also didn't exist at the time, so didn't exist as precedent for believe that you might get off "lightly".