5 ms·

On a sidenote: I think most people should be much more questionable about groklaw. I am big open source and FSF advocate, but I'm not above thinking that grokl

On a sidenote: I think most people should be much more questionable about groklaw. I am big open source and FSF advocate, but I'm not above thinking that groklaw is controlled/funded by a much larger power. I hope it's just a conspiracy theory. But I do think that anonymity works both ways; it can imply that you want to say the truth unencumbered, but it also can imply astroturfing. Just because the wind blows this way doesn't mean it always will.

jasonlotito 14y ago
> but I'm not above thinking that groklaw is controlled/funded by a much larger power. Proof? Anything? This line has been used since the early days of SCO. I've never seen anything resembling proof. Indeed, Groklaw has earned the trust I give them. Do not mistake ignorance for insightfulness.
- ssmall 14y ago
  I really like the blog and its my go to site for legal software news and I don't think there is some kind of higher power backing it but I'm still very careful with everything I read there. I haven't seen any evidence of corporate backing, but there is no attempt to hide bias. Its definitely far from an objective news source.
  - nknight 14y ago
    > Its definitely far from an objective news source. Let me know when you find one.
  - wtallis 14y ago
    What bias? You may be confusing bias with opinion. "Equal time" is not unbiased reporting, and having a clear opinion is not bias, unless your opinion turns out to be consistently wrong.
    - lmm 14y ago
      The editorializing gets tiresome when I just want to find out what happened during the trial. It feels like reading the Daily Mail; you can get actual news from there, but you have to be constantly on your guard against osmosing their opinions.
- tzs 14y ago
  PJ is suspiciously silent when it is IBM using patents to threaten open source projects, or when it is IBM writing in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court that: Patent protection has promoted the free sharing of source code on a patentee’s terms---which has fueled the explosive growth of open source software development
  - raverbashing 14y ago
    [citation needed]
    - tzs 14y ago
      The IBM quote is from their Bilski brief.
  - nknight 14y ago
    By "suspiciously silent" you mean "Groklaw covered it", right? http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20090926131450794 http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20090926131450...
nknight 14y ago
Perhaps you should know exactly who you're accusing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Webbink http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Webbink
mythz 14y ago
Is that because they were the only site to go against the collective media's "$6 billion damages" estimates?
- taligent 14y ago
  a) There is no such as thing as "collective media". b) That estimate was exactly that. An estimate. I never read any mainstream media site that took a strong position that Google was going to win.
  - fpgeek 14y ago
    On (b), given events in the case to date, what does that tell you about the quality of the legal analysis (about this case) done/disseminated by the mainstream media?
cooldeal 14y ago
Sorry you got downvoted to oblivion, but it is to be expected. It's taboo around these parts to question if PJ gets paid for her efforts. However, it's totally acceptable and in fact expected to probe deep into sources of funding for people who dare to argue on the other side of the fence. (In fact, PJ does that in this very article.) All this while we don't even know for sure if PJ is a real person and not a pen name used by the Google/IBM legal teams.
- jrockway 14y ago
  What difference does it make? She's not the judge or jury, so she can be as biased as she wants. It's a blog. Who cares who is paying for it?
  - cooldeal 14y ago
    It makes a lot of difference, see how Florian gets treated by the crowd around here(not to mention the jabs at him in the article linked), in spite of coming clean about his affiliations with Oracle. There's a big perception by many here that PJ is impartial and independent, and a disclosure by PJ will show whether that's justified or not.
    - Karunamon 14y ago
      >There's a big perception by many here that PJ is impartial and independent, and a disclosure by PJ will show whether that's justified or not. And? Either his data is correct and forthright or incorrect and misleading. It's quite possible to be biased as fuck and still report objective fact. Until such time as the data skews, I don't particularly care what flag he flies.
      - cooldeal 14y ago
        Then why is the article and people here making such a big deal about Florian then?
        14y ago
sad_panda 14y ago
"I think most people should be much more questionable about groklaw. I am big open source and FSF advocate, but I'm not above thinking that groklaw is controlled/funded by a much larger power." I've heard this before, and it is usually the shills that spout that line.

jasonlotito 14y ago

> but I'm not above thinking that groklaw is controlled/funded by a much larger power. Proof? Anything? This line has been used since the early days of SCO. I've never seen anything resembling proof. Indeed, Groklaw has earned the trust I give them. Do not mistake ignorance for insightfulness.

ssmall 14y ago
I really like the blog and its my go to site for legal software news and I don't think there is some kind of higher power backing it but I'm still very careful with everything I read there. I haven't seen any evidence of corporate backing, but there is no attempt to hide bias. Its definitely far from an objective news source.
- nknight 14y ago
  > Its definitely far from an objective news source. Let me know when you find one.
- wtallis 14y ago
  What bias? You may be confusing bias with opinion. "Equal time" is not unbiased reporting, and having a clear opinion is not bias, unless your opinion turns out to be consistently wrong.
  - lmm 14y ago
    The editorializing gets tiresome when I just want to find out what happened during the trial. It feels like reading the Daily Mail; you can get actual news from there, but you have to be constantly on your guard against osmosing their opinions.
tzs 14y ago
PJ is suspiciously silent when it is IBM using patents to threaten open source projects, or when it is IBM writing in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court that: Patent protection has promoted the free sharing of source code on a patentee’s terms---which has fueled the explosive growth of open source software development
- raverbashing 14y ago
  [citation needed]
  - tzs 14y ago
    The IBM quote is from their Bilski brief.
- nknight 14y ago
  By "suspiciously silent" you mean "Groklaw covered it", right? http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20090926131450794 http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20090926131450...

nknight 14y ago

Perhaps you should know exactly who you're accusing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Webbink http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Webbink

mythz 14y ago

Is that because they were the only site to go against the collective media's "$6 billion damages" estimates?

taligent 14y ago
a) There is no such as thing as "collective media". b) That estimate was exactly that. An estimate. I never read any mainstream media site that took a strong position that Google was going to win.
- fpgeek 14y ago
  On (b), given events in the case to date, what does that tell you about the quality of the legal analysis (about this case) done/disseminated by the mainstream media?

cooldeal 14y ago

Sorry you got downvoted to oblivion, but it is to be expected. It's taboo around these parts to question if PJ gets paid for her efforts. However, it's totally acceptable and in fact expected to probe deep into sources of funding for people who dare to argue on the other side of the fence. (In fact, PJ does that in this very article.) All this while we don't even know for sure if PJ is a real person and not a pen name used by the Google/IBM legal teams.

jrockway 14y ago
What difference does it make? She's not the judge or jury, so she can be as biased as she wants. It's a blog. Who cares who is paying for it?
- cooldeal 14y ago
  It makes a lot of difference, see how Florian gets treated by the crowd around here(not to mention the jabs at him in the article linked), in spite of coming clean about his affiliations with Oracle. There's a big perception by many here that PJ is impartial and independent, and a disclosure by PJ will show whether that's justified or not.
  - Karunamon 14y ago
    >There's a big perception by many here that PJ is impartial and independent, and a disclosure by PJ will show whether that's justified or not. And? Either his data is correct and forthright or incorrect and misleading. It's quite possible to be biased as fuck and still report objective fact. Until such time as the data skews, I don't particularly care what flag he flies.
    - cooldeal 14y ago
      Then why is the article and people here making such a big deal about Florian then?
      - 14y ago

sad_panda 14y ago

"I think most people should be much more questionable about groklaw. I am big open source and FSF advocate, but I'm not above thinking that groklaw is controlled/funded by a much larger power." I've heard this before, and it is usually the shills that spout that line.