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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Same Slime, Different Day - updated 4Xs
Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:00 PM EDT

More unpleasant insinuations, as you may have noticed by Paul McDougall on Information Week with the unbiased (ha ha) title, "IBM Helps Fund Web Hosting For Anti-SCO Site Groklaw." Yessir. No point of view there. What a stretching of facts to suit a purpose!

May I please be the first to say out loud what you are all thinking? --

So what?

It isn't news that IBM contributes to ibiblio and has done so for years, long before Groklaw was born. They didn't stop when Groklaw moved to ibiblio. That's the extent of the accusation. That's all there is to the story. Dan Lyons started sliming Groklaw with this ibiblio story in 2003, so it's not worthy of a headline now. SCO has been pushing this innuendo since at least 2004. Blake Stowell carried the same baton, remember?

"It may be that kind of intransigence that leads SCO's Blake Stowell to hint at darker motives. 'Doesn't anyone find it the least bit ironic,' he asks, 'that Pamela Jones lives ... less than 10 miles from IBM's worldwide headquarters, and that Groklaw is hosted, free, by a nonprofit outfit called iBiblio, which runs on $250,000 worth of Linux-based computers donated by IBM and a $2 million donation from a foundation set up by Robert Young, founder of Red Hat?'

"'Call me crazy,' adds Stowell, 'but I somehow think that Pamela Jones isn't just a paralegal with nothing better to do with her life than host a Web site called Groklaw that is dedicated to bashing SCO. I think there is a lot more to her background and intentions than she is willing to reveal publicly. I believe that Big Blue looms large behind Pamela Jones.'"

Well, the joke is on them. I am a paralegal with nothing better to do than Groklaw, and there is no Big Blue looming behind me. ibiblio hosts literally thousands of websites. IBM had nothing to do with Groklaw getting started, and we were already a force before we moved to ibiblio, and IBM had nothing to do with ibiblio accepting Groklaw. We were accepted because we qualified. Just because ibiblio hosts Groklaw doesn't mean I work for IBM. I don't. And I'd like to say thank you to ibiblio for hosting us. I'm deeply grateful that they don't allow the nonstop slime to cloud their vision.

Remember when SCO implied that Andrew Morton was an IBM supporter because he worked for OSDL at one time, and IBM contributed to OSDL? That's the peculiar way SCO connects dots. Morton and Linus chose to work for OSDL because it was vendor-neutral, with some 70 entities contributing to it. But to SCO, it's all IBM, everywhere they look. That is the level of stupid that these folks are peddling. ibiblio receives and accepts contributions from a lot of entities.

The article claims that I didn't answer the reporter's email prior to publication, but from the timestamp on the email, it appears he didn't email me until after publication. I did answer him. Here's what I said:

Hi Paul,

SCO has weird fantasies about conspiracies, and they're mean as snakes, in my view, and now desperate, so they libel me and now, I gather, ibiblio. They really should be ashamed of themselves. There isn't any connection between me and IBM. They just say that to try to make people think less of Groklaw.

ibiblio is a nonprofit that a lot of folks contribute to because it's a national treasure. See this page.

IBM had nothing to do with me being accepted there. ibiblio hosts thousands of valuable websites that otherwise probably couldn't afford to be on the Internet, with a stress on historical collections and open source and Linux and much, much more. Groklaw is a natural fit. Project Gutenberg is hosted by ibiblio, for example, and so is Eric Raymond's site, last I looked. Groklaw is a history project, as we are attempting to chronicle in full detail this significant litigation, and it's an innovative use of technology, because we were the first to try to apply open source principles to legal research. That's all.

But take a look at our coverage, Paul, for yourself. See anything we predicted that isn't coming true in the litigation?

How did we know so long ago? Not because I'm a committee of IBM lawyers, and not because I am secretly Eric Raymond's wife whispering in his ear what to write -- just two of the fantasies that SCO has viciously floated to the press based on no facts whatsoever. It's because Groklaw is a group work, and the world's FOSS folks came there to help do research. Between us all (Groklaw has just under 11,000 members now and many more readers), we knew the history of Unix and Linux, we understood the tech, and we understood the GPL and how it works, and we understood the legal process, and we knew Linus wouldn't steal anything from anyone.

That's really all there is to Groklaw. I have a background as a paralegal, and so I knew that part, and I'm geeky so I understand enough of that part of the story to at least coordinate what others researched and found.

If I may say so, SCO could have saved itself a lot of trouble and effort if it had just paid attention to what I was writing. I tried to warn them multiple times that they were seriously off base about the GPL and that it would be their Achilles' heel, but they plowed ahead anyway. Now they are in it up to their eyeballs, but it didn't have to be this way.

Here's Groklaw's mission statement.

Best,

PJ

Why does the mainstream press consistently push SCO's slime? I have my theories, but unlike Mr. McDougall and SCO, I keep them to myself, until I have clear evidence to stand on, not these gossamer threads that they weave into conspiracies.

Groklaw stood alone in the media in the beginnning, saying that SCO didn't have the facts on its side. The mainstream media swallowed SCO's bilge whole hog. Who got the story right? That's right. We did. No one who understood the technology, the GPL, and the legal issues could come to any other conclusion than Groklaw did very early on. That isn't bias; it's expertise.

Here's how McDougall covered SCO's bogo claim about spoliation, by the way, the accusation the court ruled was not true. Here's part of Groklaw's. Which is more accurate, in light of the eventual court ruling? The problem with a lot of mainstream media people in covering this story is that they have no legal knowledge, so they have no way to measure whether what SCO feeds them is true or distorted. But I do. And I wrote that their motion was not likely to be successful. It wasn't. That isn't antiSCO. It's just accurate. My background and training give me an added insight.

I asked McDougall for an explanation about what seems to me a pretense at giving me an opportunity to comment. There was no immediate response to my inquiry sent to him seeking comment for this story.

Update: An anonymous comment is so funny, I just have to add it here. He or she sets out to apply SCO logic to prove that ibiblio is IBM:

"ibiblio" is actually IBM, and this is quite simple to prove. Just look at the name "ibiblio". The first two letters are "ib", just like the first two letters in "IBM". IBM has obfuscated the match by spelling "ibiblio" in lower case, while "IBM" is in upper case. However, expert testimony has shown that the two are functionally equivalent. This is a clear cut case of non-literal copying.

But what about the "M" vesus "iblio"? Well, sophisticated spectral analysis shows that these too are equivalent. I realise that this may be hard for you to understand, so I will try to keep the explanation fairly simple.

# If you take the ordinal values of the ASCII characters "iblio" and add them together, you get 527 (105 + 98 + 108 + 105 + 111 = 527).

# Now the ASCII character set is stored in an 8 bit byte, which means we can have at most 256 ASCII characters. This means the result will have "wrapped around" a few times (rather like an odometer in an automobile). So this means we need to correct the result by dividing by 256 which gives us 2, with a remainder of 15 (527 / 256 = 2, remainder of 15).

# Now, this remainder of 15 is very significant. Since we are talking about the 3rd character in "IBM", we need to first subtract 2 (programmers count from "0", not from "1"). So, 15 - 2 = 13. Now, what is the 13th letter in the alphabet? It's "M" of course! It has simply been hidden by obfuscation.

So, the first two letters from "ibiblio" resolve into the first two letters of "IBM" through a simple process of non-literal copying. The remaining letters resolve into "M" when the obfuscation has been stripped away by spectral analysis.

So what about the so called "Pamela Jones"? This pseudonym also falls before our relentless logic, and we discover that Pamela Jones = Sam Palmisario! How does this work?

# Pamela Jones / Sam Palmisario. Notice the correlations here. "Pamela" is obviously a slightly rearranged "Pamila", with the "i" changed to "e" for further obfuscation.

# "Jones" is so obviously phony, we can discard that without further consideration.

# What about the remaining letters from "Sam Palmisario"? Well remove "Pamila" and you are left with "Ssamrio". Even the most cursory Google search shows a close match between "Ssamrio" and "Sanrio" (yet more obfuscation and non-literal copying)., "Sanrio" of course, are known for having deep, deep intellectual property rights in "Hello Kitty".

So ladies and gentlemen, I'm not asking you to believe me. No, I'm asking you to believe the evidence before your very eyes. Groklaw is a conspiracy perpetrated by IBM and "Hello Kitty". They can deny it as loudly as they wish, but the evidence I have shown above can't be refuted.

I hope the above has cleared the air on this issue. Thank you for your time, your patience, and of course for your $699.

Irrefutable logic, ladies and gentlemen, as I live and breathe. Of course, as a friend points out, IBM's boss is Samuel J. Palmisano, not "Palmisario."

Which is actually MUCH more damning, because "Samuel J. Palmisano" is easily rearranged to "Pamela 'Simula' Jones" (with an extra "e" added in an obvious attempt at obfuscation).

"Then again," he says, "Anonymous's logic IS much more SCOvian..."

Update 2: I heard from McDougall. He says the time stamp on his email is wrong. He sent the email, he says, at 10:30 AM and the story was published at noon.

Update 3: Roblimo says it better than I did, on Linux.com, in a brief article titled "ChangeLog: Groklaw is hosted by an IBM-supported Web site -- and this means absolutely nothing" -- a taste:

ibiblio.org hosts a wide variety of sites, including The Poetry Project. And Videobloggers.org. And North American Slave Narratives. I'm looking at the ibiblio.org main page. Right up top, in the masthead, it says, "the public's library and digital archive."

A library can and should host all kinds of material. For instance, ibiblio has downloadable binaries of Caldera Linux in its collection. Since Caldera is what SCO used to be called, does this mean (gasp) that IBM is sponsoring SCO?

I suppose I could write an inflammatory headline that said so, although I'd rather write one about how IBM "sponsors" the ibiblio-hosted Tibetan Center for Conflict Resolution, a group whose services SCO CEO Darl McBride could certainly use.

Update: IBM has now issued a statement, which InformationWeek has published:

"IBM has no connection to the editorial content posted on Groklaw.

Groklaw's website, and hundreds of others, are hosted on a website at the University of North Carolina (UNC), called ibliblio. This site is described by UNC as a public library. ibiblio runs on IBM System x servers which were funded through an IBM Shared University Award Grant awarded to UNC -- a grant that predates Groklaw ever being hosted on ibiblio. Anyone can host a site there and IBM does not sponsor, nor endorse, the content of those sites.

IBM is proud to sponsor many universities around the world in various ways, including helping them host websites like the one at UNC."

I think it's more than hundreds of web sites. I think it's thousands. Here's the index page, and you'll be amazed at the scope of the categories alone. Here's their Linux Archive, over 171 gigabytes of Linux programs and documentation freely available for download, and their collection of Linux distributions, and while you're there, you can download Knoppix, so you can fix your stupid Microsoft software when it goes belly up. It will, you know. Or grab Fedora or Debian and go the whole hog. ibiblio also hosts the Linux Documentation Project, if you need some help. Here's an intriguing recent addition to the collection, Chaotic Maps. There is such a depth and breadth of interesting material on ibiblio. Tell your PHB to donate to ibiblio, by all means, and please tell them Groklaw inspired the gift.

: )


  


Same Slime, Different Day - updated 4Xs | 444 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections here
Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:02 PM EDT
As if any exist..

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off topic here
Authored by: lordshipmayhem on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:04 PM EDT
Please make links clickable!

Don't forget to change the page to HTML from Plain Old Text, and remember,
Preview is your friend.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Same Slime, Different Day
Authored by: JamesK on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:09 PM EDT
Slime??? I think my comment about spoliation is closer to the mark. ;-)


---
Junk is stuff you throw away. Stuff is junk you keep.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Same Slime, Different Day
Authored by: kattemann on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:11 PM EDT
There's a proverb in my language - don't know if it's also
in English - translated it's like this: "A thief believes
that everyone steals".

I think that's a good summary of SCO's view of the world,
including IBM, Groklaw, its own customers etc. etc. with
the possible exception of the PIPE fairy.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Same Slime, Different Day
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:13 PM EDT
I wouldn't have used the word Slime...



<tick tick tick>

[ Reply to This | # ]

Slime and Spoliation
Authored by: webster on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:26 PM EDT
..
When you are down to 326 lines of dubiously protectible code, SCO is wise to
concentrate on their strengths.

---
webster

[ Reply to This | # ]

Paul McDougall -- Oh, Look! He's Trying To Think!
Authored by: TheBlueSkyRanger on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:27 PM EDT
Hey, everybody!

Rather than simply complaining about this, I would like to take this opportunity
to introduce SCO and company to a fun game called, "Yeah? So?"

The rules are simple--you let someone start a rant of some kind, political,
religious, or, in this case, about the SCO lawsuits. And you prod them to
explain their point, often simply saying, "Yeah? So?"

Groklaw is hosted by ibilio.

Yeah? So?

IBM has given money to ibilio.

Yeah? So?

Groklaw is supported by IBM!

Yeah? So?

Let's go nuts here. Let's say that Groklaw is supported by SCO enemies. Aw,
heck, let's make it a block party, and say it's also powered by M$ enemies and
Sony enemies. So you have everyone from IBM and Lockheed Martin to Joe Pillow
And His Dancing Fools (the Official Obscure Amiga Joke Of The Week has been
brought to you by Penzoil) funding a site that is reporting facts.

Irrelevant.

Means nothing.

Doesn't matter who the truth is coming from, the fact is, it's the truth. It
could come from their worst enemy or the most upstanding person in the world, it
doesn't change that it's the truth, the delivery system doesn't matter. And
aaaaaaaaaaaall SCO has to do to make everyone side with them and stop taking
cheap shots is come clean. Instead of doing everything possible to make it seem
like they are trying to scam everyone, they should simply own up to their
claims. They've only had four years.

You know, I enjoy the irony that readers have to consider Groklaw's possible
connections but not SCO's.

Dobre utka,
The Blue Sky Ranger

"Could you feel your whole world fall apart and fade away?"
--Steely Dan
"Kid Charlamange"

[ Reply to This | # ]

Re: Same Slime, Different Day
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:28 PM EDT

And on going to the Info site, I find his article followed by a large IBM add. What does that make Information Week?

All-in-all the article has greatly diminished my confidence in the publication. (And I have read it for years)

Similar to my loss of respect for Forbes.

Duratkin (not logged in)

All good penguins love free stuff.

[ Reply to This | # ]

love the "no response"
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:28 PM EDT
It seems people use it. Hey I, sent the email. didn't get an immediate response.
Oh well I tried. Too bad if the guy was in the bathroom or at lunch. Is it
really fair to publish it without saying, Article published after 10 minutes of
waiting for a response. Hey I tried.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Mainstream press
Authored by: Yossarian on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:31 PM EDT
>Why does the mainstream press consistently push SCO's slime?

IMO the story is much larger than SCO; what we see is the
beginning of the end of mainstream press as a trust worthy
news source. Take a good look at yourself PJ, you beat most
of the mainstream press with the SCO story. Think why.

With all due respect, and I have plenty, you are not that
smarter than top journalists. The difference is that you are
not "for sell". You don't have share holders to keep happy,
a stream of ads that can go dry if you say the wrong word,
etc. You don't have much expenses, and your readers will
support you as long as you tell the truth.

Yes, you don't have the research budget of CBS news, but had
you put a story like Dan Rather did, with the fake Word
documents, then some reader would pick it up within the hour.

This is the real power of the bloggers, and the mainstream
press has no answer to that. The people who keep the top
blogs *HONEST*, for free, are more trustworthy than
journalists who are paid millions. The readers who
refuse to read a blog that published lies are better guards
than the consumers with the the TV clickers in their hands.

Welcome to the 21'th century.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yeah So
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:45 PM EDT
OK IBM is one of many many groups that funds IBIBLIO which hosts many many many
different websites.

Now lets contrast.

And SCO is directly funded by millions of dollars from Microsoft under the guise
of an "Intellectual Property Licence." Nobody can explain exactly what
that licence is for, or why it was needed, or why SCO should get the money for
"UNIX intellectual property" and not Novell when the contract says all
contract money goes to Novell and 5% goes back to SCO for being their agent....
hmmmm.

Yeesh. You want to find worms start turning over the right rocks.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Paul McDougall on McBride/Yarro Payroll
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 06:56 PM EDT
It works like this:

- SCO advertises in Information Week.
- Information week uses ad revenue to pay salaries.
- Paul McDougall's salary paid by Information Week.

Ergo, Paul McDougall is in the pay of Darl McBride and Ralph Yarro.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Same Slime, Different Day
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 07:04 PM EDT
I really do not care what other folks may think of groklaw or PJ.
I have said before, and i will say it again here:
I do not give a damn who PJ works for, or is paid by, (and i don't believe she
is paid by anyone for this work)
What makes me follow groklaw and this story is the sheer quality of the
journalism.
At first it was just the story, and i was looking for somewhere to read about
it. That is how it always starts with me, however, unlike a newspaper, or the to
numerous, allegedly professional news sites, groklaw kept me coming back for one
simple reason.

With every article PJ writes comes links to verifiable information that you can
check for yourself, if your not to lazy of course, and just want hits for your
advertisers.
On top of that, we get the long discussions, and picking apart at each article,
where people are encouraged to link to information that may relevant.
I suspect the more mainstream press tries to smear groklaw, the stronger it
will get, and so called professional sites most likely do it out of jelousy
because they can not be bothered to write properly informative items that people
actually want to read, and follow up on.

Thanks to all the contributors here that have written articles, and posts with
explanations and links, they have helped many people all over the world
understand what is actually going on here :)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Same Slime, Different Day
Authored by: John Hasler on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 07:04 PM EDT
> Paul McDougall on Information Week with the unbiased (ha ha)
> title, "IBM Helps Fund Web Hosting For Anti-SCO Site
> Groklaw."

Doesn't Information Week accept ads from Microsoft? If so, "Microsoft
helps fund Paul McDougall".

---
IOANAL. Licensed under the GNU General Public License

[ Reply to This | # ]

McDougall is so WRONG
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 07:36 PM EDT
Paul McDougall wrote: "Groklaw, a widely read Web site that has sided with IBM in its legal battle with The SCO Group..."

SCO has sided with biased smearing, unfounded insinuations, false accusations, conspiracy theories and slime... not to mention a complete lack facts to substantiate their public screeds.

GrokLaw has sided with Truth, the GPL & FOSS.

[ Reply to This | # ]

never alone
Authored by: seanlynch on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 07:45 PM EDT
Groklaw was never alone.

Besides the many people who have helped here for many years there are other
sites dedicated to fud-busting.

Tuxrocks and Lamlaw come to mind.

This has been a community effort from the start.

All of us are motivated and brought together by SCO's vicious attacks on our
rights and property.

SCO's theories threaten the basis of ownership of copyrighted works. If they
win, the impact across many industries in the USA will be profound.

I amazed at how many people are willing to put short term greed above long term
economic stability.

If there is anyone to blame for the explosion of groklaw from a simple blog into
an information sharing powerhouse, it is SCO. If they had not started their
attacks, there would not have been a reason for PJ to turn her sites in their
direction.

[ Reply to This | # ]

ESR's wife?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 08:22 PM EDT
Did SCO really insinuate that PJ is ESR's wife? That's
hilarious... anyone have a URL?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Research is hard, paraphrasing press releases is easy
Authored by: kawabago on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 08:23 PM EDT
It would seem that most journalists these days take the easy route. They also
have to write stuff that will entice people to read it, so they will
sensationalize in order to entice readers. Once I witnessed an accident, I told
a reporter exactly what happened. He took note, he had it all on tape. The
next day the story came out with a quote from me, words I never spoke. A
dramatic description of the accident. Unfortunately it wasn't what happened, I
guess the truth was just too dull. I cancelled my subscription to that
newspaper.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Same Slime, Different Day
Authored by: belzecue on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 08:26 PM EDT
First thing to do, when you've read enough of a journalist's work to know, is
decide if the author writes to bring attention to themself or to their stories.
The more an author desires the former, the less significant to the subject the
author become. The anti-PJ/SCO press club contributes zero significance and a
lot of spectacle. They remind me of a bunch of court jesters who mistakenly
believe they are the King's most trusted adviser.

[ Reply to This | # ]

A Letter To PJ.
Authored by: sonicfrog on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 08:28 PM EDT
Dear PJ: I was very distraught to learn that, on your website "Groklaw", you used the word "slime" to describe certain actions relating to the lawsuit software company SCO. I find the association of the term slime with SCO very unfair and damaging to my reputation. Please reconsider your actions, and refrain from using the term slime when discussing SCO in the future. If this slander continues, I may have to consult with my attorneys, Boies Schiller & Flexner, and pursue legal recourse. Thank you for your time. Signed: Slime.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Slime ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 07:36 AM EDT
    • Slime ... - Authored by: AndyC on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 07:49 AM EDT
  • Truer than you think (OT) - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 08:21 AM EDT
Apropos ibiblio
Authored by: joef on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 08:40 PM EDT
If my memory serves, the site started out as "sunsite", then morphed
inro "meta"-something, then became "ibiblio". It's
affiliated with the U of North Carolina, it hosts a lot of folk arts projects,
and has a tremendous archive of Linux distributions. see ibiblio.org

It also hosts my favorite radio station, WCPE (wcpe.org in several streaming
formats, including ogg). It's 24/7 classical music, if that's to your liking.

[ Reply to This | # ]

It's like an open invitation - I wonder who FUNDS InformationWeek
Authored by: Brian S. on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 08:42 PM EDT

InformationWeek


I see it's part of Techweb Business Technology Network which, at the time of writing has the offending slime as it's story of the day.

I assume that means that the rest of the Techweb Network will also be covered in slime.

In it's turn, I see the Techweb Network is part of CMP


Headquartered in Manhasset, NY, CMP Technology is part of United Business Media (www.unitedbusinessmedia.com), a leading global provider of news distribution and specialist information services for the professional and enthusiast markets, actively bringing buyers and sellers together across targeted media channels—publications, events and online.

On what a tangled web they weave.

I know that Groklaw is PJ's creation hosted on Ibiblio but just who are United Business Media?

I note that they are a PLC which means they're British and I recognise the names of their businesses:

PR Newswire
CMP
Commonwealth Business Media




The almost anonymous Brian S. who posts on Groklaw.

[ Reply to This | # ]

ibiblio is IBM - Irrefutable Proof
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 08:44 PM EDT
"ibiblio" is actually IBM, and this is quite simple to prove. Just look at the name "ibiblio". The first two letters are "ib", just like the first two letters in "IBM". IBM has obfuscated the match by spelling "ibiblio" in lower case, while "IBM" is in upper case. However, expert testimony has shown that the two are functionally equivalent. This is a clear cut case of non-literal copying.

But what about the "M" vesus "iblio"? Well, sophisticated spectral analysis shows that these too are equivalent. I realise that this may be hard for you to understand, so I will try to keep the explanation fairly simple.

  • If you take the ordinal values of the ASCII characters "iblio" and add them together, you get 527 (105 + 98 + 108 + 105 + 111 = 527).
  • Now the ASCII character set is stored in an 8 bit byte, which means we can have at most 256 ASCII characters. This means the result will have "wrapped around" a few times (rather like an odometer in an automobile). So this means we need to correct the result by dividing by 256 which gives us 2, with a remainder of 15 (527 / 256 = 2, remainder of 15).
  • Now, this remainder of 15 is very significant. Since we are talking about the 3rd character in "IBM", we need to first subtract 2 (programmers count from "0", not from "1"). So, 15 - 2 = 13. Now, what is the 13th letter in the alphabet? It's "M" of course! It has simply been hidden by obfuscation.
  • So, the first two letters from "ibiblio" resolve into the first two letters of "IBM" through a simple process of non-literal copying. The remaining letters resolve into "M" when the obfuscation has been stripped away by spectral analysis.

    So what about the so called "Pamela Jones"? This pseudonym also falls before our relentless logic, and we discover that Pamela Jones = Sam Palmisario! How does this work?

  • Pamela Jones / Sam Palmisario. Notice the correlations here. "Pamela" is obviously a slightly rearranged "Pamila", with the "i" changed to "e" for further obfuscation.
  • "Jones" is so obviously phony, we can discard that without further consideration.
  • What about the remaining letters from "Sam Palmisario"? Well remove "Pamila" and you are left with "Ssamrio". Even the most cursory Google search shows a close match between "Ssamrio" and "Sanrio" (yet more obfuscation and non-literal copying)., "Sanrio" of course, are known for having deep, deep intellectual property rights in "Hello Kitty".
  • So ladies and gentlemen, I'm not asking you to believe me. No, I'm asking you to believe the evidence before your very eyes. Groklaw is a conspiracy perpetrated by IBM and "Hello Kitty". They can deny it as loudly as they wish, but the evidence I have shown above can't be refuted.

    I hope the above has cleared the air on this issue. Thank you for your time, your patience, and of course for your $699.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Mark Twain on this...
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 08:44 PM EDT
    “It’s better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool rather than open it
    and remove all doubt.” - Mark Twain

    Anon46

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Classic
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 08:58 PM EDT
    > I asked McDougall for an explanation about what seems to me a pretense at
    giving me an opportunity to comment. There was no immediate response to my
    inquiry sent to him seeking comment for this story.

    I just loved that part :-)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Go, PJ!
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 08:59 PM EDT
    Smack! That sound was PJ's sharp wit eviscerating the jelly belly of a lazy and
    biased journalist. Give it up, guys, you can't go one round in the ring with
    this lady.

    This is why I love groklaw.


    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Stock support
    Authored by: grouch on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 09:01 PM EDT
    We've had the 10Q, the Prentenderle report, a flurry of filings and now a newly renewed conspiracy report. To me, this adds up to life support for SCOX -- they need some publicity to create a credible reason for an infusion of cash. I wonder if the stock price will rise sometime in the next month and some insider stock will be sold.

    ---
    -- grouch

    http://edge-op.org/links1.html

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    I happen to agree with Blake Stowell
    Authored by: Crocodile_Dundee on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 09:03 PM EDT
    he says (in part)

    "[B]ut I somehow think that Pamela Jones isn't just a paralegal with
    nothing better to do with her life than host a Web site called Groklaw that is
    dedicated to bashing SCO. I think there is a lot more to her background and
    intentions than she is willing to reveal publicly."

    I think that's quite reasonable.

    1) I'm sure PJ has a life to lead, just like the rest of us.
    2) PJ has (by her actions) shown that she feels her health is more important
    than Groklaw *claps*
    3) Groklaw is certainly more than a site which bashes SCO. Groklaw doesn't bash
    SCO, the facts do.
    4) I'm sure there is much to PJ's background than she is willing to admit
    publicly. There is no reason to want to live your life in the public eye.
    *claps*

    Where Blake gets it wrong is to assume IBM is behind PJ. As far as I can tell,
    both SCO and IBM are in front of her, and she has her steely gaze directed at
    both of them and what they do.

    ---
    ---
    That's not a law suit. *THIS* is a law suit!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    file under...
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 09:20 PM EDT
    Paul McDougall can now officially be filed in the same bucket where lights like BobE and MaureenO' reside.
    Birds of a feather....

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • file under... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 03:59 AM EDT
    • file under... - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 10:38 AM EDT
    Harder tone - still PJ though :)
    Authored by: SilverWave on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 09:31 PM EDT
    I remember the lighter/warmer tone of pj's early posts from before the site was
    moved to ibiblio - I think groklaw was growing very fast at the time,
    radiouserland then somewhere else and then ibiblio.

    It was at first a very personal informal conversation, it almost seemed a
    conversation between friends...

    pj was a paralegal which was interesting and she brought great insights into the
    SCO case...

    pj's tone has gotten a little harder as the personal attacks and quite cruel
    insinuations keep coming, I don't think that is surprising in the least.

    But its nice to have you back pj - don't let them get you down - they really are
    not worth it.

    Truth will out, as sco now know to their determent.






    ---
    Ubuntu is like a breath of fresh air after the smog.
    Free yourself
    Y1 Use foss apps as replacements ff tb ooo
    Y2 Ubuntu dual boot
    Ubuntu user as of 181206

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Who PJ *really* works for...
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 09:33 PM EDT
    Hey, everyone, SCO here.

    It just dawned on us that since the FLOSS community can be bought by a simple
    3rd party donation to a random institution that supports FLOSS, etc, that the
    quickest way through this mess is to make a donation.

    So, we just donated, like, $20 bucks in the Paypal tip jar.

    Therefore, you guys all work for us now, mmmKay?

    So, I'd like to see all of you community leaders in on our Community Refresh
    & Revamp Project Kick-off conference call, 2pm Mountain time -- call in to
    555-234-2313, conference number 256334 -- please be on time. We'll start with a
    bringing you up to speed on talking points for pushing our latest rev of
    OpenServer (now including USB 2.0 support!), and our latest successes in court.

    Once again, welcome to the Team eveyone! ::zingzing!::

    Keep on rocking in SCO world,
    Peace OUt,
    D-man.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    "That isn't bias, it's expertise..."
    Authored by: rjh on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 10:27 PM EDT
    ...and that is why I've been hooked and reading Groklaw almost daily for several
    years now. Its not a matter of bias here, its about the application of scrutiny,
    knowledge and reason to facts.

    Whenever anyone attempts to attack or impugn Groklaw, any credibility the
    attacker may have had with me is lost.





    ---
    "Well, they weren't engaged in anti-competitive behavior," he added. "Except
    when they were."

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    'I asked McDougall for an explanation ...'
    Authored by: hardcode57 on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 10:44 PM EDT
    I think that he's the wrong person to contact. If a journalist behaves in a way
    that appears unethical, the correct person to contact is his/her editor or other
    management, just as you would contact the manager of anyone else who appeared to
    misbehave in the course of their employment. In this case, to their credit,
    Information Week have published for-real contact info, including phone numbers,
    rather than the usual web form that is read by who-knows-who. The link is at the
    bottom of their pages.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Stowell may have recanted
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 10:51 PM EDT
    Stowell left SCOX for the up and coming Utah web analytics company Omniture this spring.

    Almost immediately after leaving SCOX, Stowell establish business network contacts with Linux friendly journalists he had first cultivated in Lineo days.

    Stowell is also communicating with an SCO vetran who left early in the McBride epoch and now works as enterprise sales at Red Hat.

    I think it is safe to assume that Stowell wants to put his SCOX past behind him, and no longer drinks the moon rocket kool-aide. Whether we will see an honest repudiation, or just forgetful slinking away from all the falsehoods remains to be observed.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    not much of a story
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 10:55 PM EDT

    1) the story of controversy wasn't much of a story and
    2) the controversy doesn't seem like much of a story either


    But, maybe I'd feel different if they were saying pitifully stupid stuff about
    me.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    All Your Open Source Base Are Belong to Bill
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 11:01 PM EDT
    Why they imagine that anyone would give even a moment's credence to a periodical
    that uses an editorial taxonomy that reduces Open Source stories to a subset of
    their Windows section, I can't possibly fathom.

    Could it be because the staff there are so indebted to Microsoft for their
    livelihoods that they genuinely believe that All Our Base Really Does Belong To
    Bill Gates?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Darn you, Paul McDougal!
    Authored by: Rudisaurus on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 11:37 PM EDT
    Now look what you made me do!
    I am a paralegal with nothing better to do than Groklaw, and there is no Big Blue looming behind me. ibiblio hosts literally thousands of websites. IBM had nothing to do with Groklaw getting started, and we were already a force before we moved to ibiblio, and IBM had nothing to do with ibiblio accepting Groklaw. We were accepted because we qualified. Just because ibiblio hosts Groklaw doesn't mean I work for IBM. I don't. And I'd like to say thank you to ibiblio for hosting us.
    This just plucks at my heartstrings -- to the extent that I immediately felt compelled to go and make a donation to Groklaw. So I did. And I blame you, Paul McDougal! And I recommend all other reasonably well-heeled Groklaw adherents to do exactly the same, every time one of these scurrilous scribblers scrapes up another semantic silliness.

    Thanks a lot, Paul!

    (And welcome back, PJ -- we missed you!)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    IBM also funds SCOG...
    Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 21 2007 @ 11:57 PM EDT

    Wonder what BS and company would say about that. Let's connect the dots the same way SCOG does.

    Here we find the Board of Directors for Royal Bank of Canada. Notice one Douglas T. Elix on the BOD since 2000 if I'm reading that page correctly.

    As we see here, RBC invested $30 million in SCOG in 2003. Later, RBC pulled away from the deal.

    Standard SCOG supposition:

    1. RBC invested $30 million in SCOG
    2. RBC later pulled out taking what appeared to be a significant financial loss ($30 million in exchange for shares dropping quickly in value) as well as passing a portion of that loss back to Baystar.
    3. Conclusion: RBC simply handed SCOG $30 million in cash while recovering a much smaller amount of that from third parties.
    4. Conclusion: Since a member of IBM sits on the BOD at RBC, IBM was responsible for ensuring a cash infusion into SCOG.
    Heh, it's fun to connect things the way SCOG does in la-la land. Well... back to reality ;)

    RAS

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    I stand right beside PJ
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 12:44 AM EDT
    I am a volunteer at Project Gutenberg. PG is hosted by ibiblio and was hit by
    the same RAID failures as Groklaw.
    Conclusion: i am a paid IBM shill smearing SCO.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated
    Authored by: Zarkov on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 12:49 AM EDT
    SCo's problem, and their lapdogs problem is the same as Microsofts problem..

    They cannot see the wood for the trees!

    In order to attack Groklaw, they think they can attack PJ. they have not yet
    grasped the fact that Groklaw is like a child which while respepectful and still
    very much dependent on its parent, is now quite capable of standing on its own
    two feet. Harming the parent is only likely to lead to increasing the anger of
    the child.

    Their aim at FOSS and the GPL is similarly blinded by their own preconceptions.
    The think they can suppress all opposition by frontal assaults on individuals.
    That just wont work in the internet age...

    In military terms it would be like fighting a conventional war against guerilla
    armies... as the US discovered in Vietnam and Russia discovered in Afganistan
    that kind of thinking is doomed to failure since the target wont sit still long
    enough for your bombs to fall...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    IBM is behind PJ. Revealed here to the world for the first time
    Authored by: SirHumphrey on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 01:00 AM EDT
    If you take the ASCII value of the uppercase letters for IBM, you get 73, 66 and
    77, totalling 216. Now adding those digits gives 9.

    Repeat for PJ, and you get 80 and 74 totalling 154. Adding those digits gives
    10. So you get to IBM, then PJ, so therefore IBM is behind PJ. Total proof.

    But wait there's more, much more.
    SCO is 83, 67, 69, totalling 229, and that gives 13, so PJ is actually behind
    SCO. Imagine that!!! SCO is actually a front for PJ!!!!!.

    Now for the clincher. MS is 77 and 83 = 160, giving 7. Even better, M$ is 77+36
    = 113, giving 5.

    So MS/M$ is behind this whole thing.

    So SCO are fronting for PJ, who is fronting for IBM, who are fronting for
    MS/M$.

    Case CLOSED.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Pointless article.
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 03:43 AM EDT
    It was not inaccurate, but it did not seem to have a point.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Did McDougall actually read some of the stuff?
    Authored by: hagge on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 05:25 AM EDT
    PJ, just ask this so-called journalist, if he ever took the time to actually
    read at least a few of the motions, responses and transcripts currently coming
    in. Just to build a more educated base of information, *before* making his
    "conclusions".

    Because I'm sure whoever really reads all the stuff, can't be seriously thinking
    that SCO has any real argument on their side. Some things are just plain silly.

    I read Groklaw on a regular basis because currently it is more fun to read than
    the traditional humorous sites. Just to see how SCO tries to delay another few
    days, how they try to get the judges to reconsider for the third, fourth time,
    that's just hilarious. And all this with the pleasent anticipation for the big
    bang when SCO gets the bill. Fiction can never beat real life stories like
    this.

    Hagge

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 06:49 AM EDT
    I love these kind of articles.

    Familiar handwriting ? Here we go:

    1. IBM funds ibiblio among many others. But that is not relevant, IBM is the
    crucial part and ibiblio would not work without IBM (sounds like the 326 lines
    and STREAMS argument).

    2. Groklaw is hosted on ibiblio. No matter what the historical process was to
    get Groklaw on ibiblio, the fact is Groklaw is now on ibiblio is the only thing
    that matters (sound familiar with the SYVRX contract history).

    3. Groklaw is hosted on ibiblio, ibiblio is funded by IBM, conclusion is Groklaw
    is funded by IBM (guilt by association contract theory).

    You see we have all the elements of SCO vs. IBM summed up in one short article.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    A better headline, SCO funds anti SCO actions
    Authored by: globularity on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 07:12 AM EDT
    You can't get more anti SCO than Darl Mcbride, A person whose main business
    strategy is an ill concieved scam, I really can't believe their board sat back
    and watched this happen, there again management and the board often put their
    own interests before the companies as long as they get their
    "performance" bonuses.

    Mark

    ---
    Windows vista, a marriage between operating system and trojan horse.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Suggestion to PJ
    Authored by: Anonymous Coward on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 07:45 AM EDT
    If you still have your old articles of when you started Groklaw place those back
    on the site seeing that you had several posts already before you wrote the SCO
    falls down the stairs post.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Nah, they all work for iApple
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 07:45 AM EDT

    Everyone knows Apple has a patent on names that begin with " i " --
    including the pronoun itself. So, Apple owns everyone!

    So, ibiblio and iBM are Apple subsidiaries. What's so complicated about that?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Most of Groklaw written by IBM lawyers....
    Authored by: ka1axy on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 07:54 AM EDT
    ...actually, it's almost true -- there's a good deal of legal paperwork
    published on Groklaw, and tSCOg seems to want to file theirs mostly under seal,
    so the stuff written by IBM's lawyers is all we get to see!

    Seriously, the article is almost sad in its transparency. You'd think the
    author would have made a bit more of an effort, instead of just printing tSCOg's
    rant verbatim. Like, oh, I don't know, actually holding an email conversation
    with PJ? Or asking her to call him on the phone? Or mentioning that tSCOg's
    claims are a bit of a reach? Or that they are known for claiming that Linux
    users need to buy a license from them?

    The reason I read Groklaw, is not for the opinions (though they are
    interesting), but for a glimpse into the legal process and how tSCOg's claims
    are rebutted by IBM. Because while I don't *know* for a fact that Linux didn't
    steal tSCOg's valuable intellectual property, I have deep suspicions that this
    has been a scam from the start, and I'd like to see the "litigious
    boys" get their come-uppance.

    I think the best quote was from the guy at ibiblio, wo said that they have
    requirements for hosting, and Groklaw meets the requirements. And if ibiblio is
    the former sunsite, that's where I downloaded my early distributions of Linux,
    so good for them!

    Peter
    (trying to be "fair and balanced")

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Homeopathic IP
    Authored by: seantellis on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 08:06 AM EDT
    Like Appendix E, this is another example of a fact diluted beyond any kind of
    significance, being used to shore up a shoddy hypothesis.

    Ergo, Homeopathic IP.

    ---
    Sean Ellis (groklaw@moteprime.remove-this.org)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    IBM fund the CIA
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 08:08 AM EDT
    Well, they pay their taxes don't they...

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Amo Pamela Jones
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 08:12 AM EDT
    Amo Pamela Jones. Simul es ac
    Samuel James Palmisano (CEO).

    The first line is an anagram of the second. The Latin
    phrase means "I love Pamela Jones. You are at
    the same time also Samuel James Palmisano (CEO)."

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated
    Authored by: fresont on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:36 AM EDT
    I can't help but think that if the tables were turned, PJ would not be so
    dismissive. If SCO was using a web hosting service that was indirectly
    supported by MS, we would hear all kinds of accusations and inuendo about MS
    funding SCO's campaign. The whole bit about KPMG a while back comes to mind.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    MSDN front organization trashes Groklaw ..
    Authored by: emacsuser on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:45 AM EDT
    'Early last year, Microsoft agreed it would pay SCO an eyebrow-raising sum, as much as $16 million .. Later, Microsoft executives brought SCO to the attention of a venture fund, BayStar Capital, which ended up putting together investments in SCO totaling $50 million'

    'BusinessWeek has learned that Microsoft (MSFT ) did not put up the money, but did play matchmaker for SCO Group (SCOX ) and BayStar Capital, a San Francisco hedge fund which made a $50 million investment in SCO last October'

    informationweek.com .. Companion Publications .. Information week is part of the TechWeb business technology network. Information Week is published by CMP .. Headquartered in Manhasset, NY, CMP Technology is part of United Business Media (www.unitedbusinessmedia.com)

    'United Business Media acquisition of leading websites for Microsoft developers'

    '04 April 2005'

    'United Business Media's CM P Media division today announced that it had acquired DotNetJunkies.com and SqlJunkies.com, leading independent online communities for developers using the Microsoft.NET Framework and those building solutions using Microsoft SQL Server respectively.'

    'CMP Media and Microsoft Corporation launched MSDN Magazine, to software developers in the Asia-Pacific region.'

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    MSM will not die for a long time.
    Authored by: hamstring on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 10:11 AM EDT
    While I agree with what was said, we know that MSM will not die for a long time.
    This is mostly due to the fact that the majority of people in the world today
    are ignorant, and are very content to stay that way.

    This is a socialogical fact, and a very sad one. Ask yourself though, who gets
    more attention? An educated well mannered person who can hold a conversation and
    portray rational thoughts? Or a blathering idiot?
    All you have to do is look at TV ratings to know the answer. Put Rosie O. and
    Opra's ratings against any show with educational value (even the reality type
    shows on an educational channel) and look who wins by a landslide.
    Martha Steward did not have a large viewer base until she became a criminal.
    Rachael Ray was unknown until the MSM's reported on her boyfriends sexual
    habits.

    Anna Nichole Smith was plagued by media until the day she died, daily photos of
    her in all her idiocy were visible in numerous magazines, TV shows, etc...

    When is the last time you saw a photo of a Nobel prize winner? When is the last
    time you heard a person 15-20 years old compliment a band member by "wow,
    that guy really plays a mean guitar". When is the last time you heard
    someone say "I like to listen to that person, they are very smart"?

    Until society demands better we will continue to see read and hear what the
    majority wants to hear. To many of us, it's garbage.. but we are the minority
    in society.

    ---
    * Necessity is the mother of invention. Microsoft is
    * result of greed

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SD Times's Zeichick details SCOX marketing pressure on journalists
    Authored by: stats_for_all on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 10:32 AM EDT
    March Blog Post details SCOX pressure on journalists

    Alan Zeichick of SD Times issued a plain, simple and direct appeal to fire Darl McBride in 2006.

    Blake Stowell replied by bringing pressure on a SD Advertising sales representative.

    "....when SD Times puts out an article like this at the very time that we are looking to possibly do something to market to the developers that subscribe to your publication, it seems EXTREMELY counter-intuitive for us to do ANYTHING at all with SD Times. Any campaign we might do with your readership would fall on deaf ears and be a complete waste of our money after an editorial like this one."

    The SD ad sales rep had the intestinal fortitude to tell Stowell to forget such a ill advised threat.

    The next communication was from another SCOX employee....(from the Zeichick blog post)

    The follow-up came from another person with SCO. This person is not named because he's still at SCO; Blake left a few months ago:
    "My challenge as director of SCO Marketing is that I’m ready to launch a significant campaign and had the SD Times at the top of our list for an integrated campaign. While the previous coverage is appreciated, what is seared in minds here is the latest message from your magazine and it has made it a VERY hard sell for me to convince executive management to let me use SD Times, even though it is probably the best vehicle for me to use. To have a magazine call for the removal of our CEO makes my job a whole lot harder internally and externally. At this point, I’ve been told to look at several other alternatives.""

    Zeichik is much too circumspect about naming names....it is an very easy google search to demonstrate that the name Craig Bushman is associated with "director of SCO [Product] Marketing". We should assume that it is Bushman who wrote the second message threatening a ad pull unless editorial toed the SCOX line.

    Not surprisingly, Bushman is deputy to the notorious Erik Hughes ( treycc for the Y-initiate].

    Hughes gushes over his clumsy deputy blackmailer:

    Craig has tremendous experience and knowledge of the product marketing process that enables him to launch products quickly and efficiently. Craig also has a keen sense of priority and leads his team well in addressing areas that are most needed by the business. A very smart and driven employee, I highly recommend. November 2, 2004

    Of course, Craig returns the love to his boss:

    Erik is a tremendous asset of The SCO Group. He's keen sense of business direction and technical ability has made him an invaluable resource to executive management and respected in both the technical and marketing sides of the business. I highly recommend Erik as a strong asset to any organization. November 2, 2004

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 10:49 AM EDT
    http://www.bravegnuworld.org

    And it was long there before the Obarak-clone... ;-)

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated
    Authored by: twenex on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 12:23 PM EDT
    Hi Pamela, nice to see you back. Love the site!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    SCO, I'm Pamela "Ula" Jones.
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 12:56 PM EDT
    Samuel J. Palmisano, CEO -> SCO, I'm Pamela "Ula" Jones.

    Notice that even the period and comma remain intact. Is your middle name
    "Ula", PJ? ;-)

    --PJE

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Good grief, is it April already?
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 12:57 PM EDT
    Or is somebody just getting an early start?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated
    Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 01:28 PM EDT
    I was wondering if SCO or any of it's predicessors have ever funded ibiblio or
    any of it's predicessors?

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated
    Authored by: tknarr on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 01:59 PM EDT

    On the timestamp, given the way e-mail works it's entirely possible that he may have sent it at 10:30am but it didn't arrive in your mailbox until several hours later. The Received headers will tell the tale, whether the delay was in his outgoing system, your ISP or the normal delay waiting for the next time your client pulls mail down.

    I will say that an hour and a half is in no way sufficient time when it comes to e-mail delivery. With all the virus scanning and filtering and then just the normal delays due to server loads, anything from near-instantaneous to 24 hours is "normal" for e-mail. If you need better than same-day service, IM or the telephone will get it but e-mail won't. Giving 90 minutes on e-mail is like phoning someone, giving it only one ring before hanging up and then saying "We called them to get their response, but they didn't answer.".

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated
    Authored by: Michelle Readman on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 02:32 PM EDT
    Society of professional journalists code of conduct

    I can't find a code of conduct for asking for comments, but I am certain that one has to exist, and he must have broken it. PJ was given a paltry 90 minutes window for reply on a request sent via a medium with no proof of receipt or guarentee on deliverly time.

    That's like phoning someone for comments and hanging up after two rings. It's not even bothering to give people a fair chance.

    Heck, enough FUD has been flung at PJ that I'm hoping that some legal recourse exists for her.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Post the Headers, PJ
    Authored by: rjamestaylor on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 02:34 PM EDT
    There are all kinds of timestamps from various servers in the full headers of
    any
    given email. Post them, PJ, and we'll tell you when he sent the email.



    ---
    SCO delenda est! Salt their fields!

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 02:58 PM EDT
    >I heard from McDougall. He says the time stamp on his email is wrong. He
    sent the email, he says, at 10:30 AM and the story was published at noon.

    Funny, how the clocks across the whole internet seems to be two hours off. Oh,
    well, blame it on DST and Microsoft. It couldn't be someone lying through forked
    tongue.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    IBM attacking GrokLaw!!
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 03:00 PM EDT
    It's obvious!

    IBM pays for ads in Information Week. Paul McDougall attacks GrokLaw and PJ in
    the articles he writes for IW.

    Ergo, IBM is attacking PJ.


    Remember, PJ, "Illegitimi non carborundum" which, roughly paraphrased,
    means "Noli nothis permittere te terere."

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated
    Authored by: spectrum on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 03:19 PM EDT
    Update 2: I heard from McDougall. He says the time stamp on his email is wrong. He sent the email, he says, at 10:30 AM and the story was published at noon.
    But, what do your "Received:" headers say? Every server the message passes through will stamp the time on it.

    Just playing the devil's advocate.. :)

    ---
    dave.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Oh! He gave you a whole ninety minutes to respond?
    Authored by: billyskank on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 03:48 PM EDT
    Well, that's alright then.

    ---
    It's not the software that's free; it's you.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Update 2: Take E-mail Time Stamps with a Grain of Salt.
    Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 04:05 PM EDT
    Update 2: I heard from McDougall. He says the time stamp on his email is wrong. He sent the email, he says, at 10:30 AM and the story was published at noon.
    Assuming the times are correct, an hour and a half for delivery of an e-mail is not very long. If it is being sent from an office, It could easily sit in their server that long before being pushed out (some e-mail systems work that way). Likely, the "request for comment" was just a formality; he had a publishable story without your reply.

    Secondly and more significantly, the story was "published" at noon. However, when was it put in the story queue? 10:31am? He had a story deadline to meet. The last thing he needs is for you to come back with a reply when he already has enough material.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Time stamps
    Authored by: gvc on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 04:29 PM EDT
    PJ,

    I assume you use something like Thunderbird to read mail. If you go to
    view->message-source you can find when the message arrived at various mail
    servers. The top one will be you ISP and I presume you can trust its timestamp.


    As you read down you will see the dates that it was delivered en route to your
    machine. Of course those dates could be wrong but more than likely they'll all
    be consistent and show the delivery path (with times) of your mail.

    The 'Date' field in the message itself says not much at all -- just what the
    sender's PC's clock was set to.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • Time stamps - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 05:50 PM EDT
      • Time stamps - Authored by: PJ on Friday, March 23 2007 @ 03:58 AM EDT
    • Email fun with Paul - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 06:54 PM EDT
    • Time stamps - Authored by: Wardo on Friday, March 23 2007 @ 12:04 PM EDT
    It's magic
    Authored by: sleadley on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 05:42 PM EDT
    The assertion that PJ works for IBM is irrational, predictable and powerful.

    It's irrational because it depends on the same principle of sympathetic magic as the charge that JFS contains SCO IP. By the law of contagion, IBM touched System V, which belongs to SCO, then IBM touched JFS ... therefore SCO owns JFS. Again, IBM contributed to ibiblio, then ibiblio hosted Groklaw, which is PJ's blog, ... therefore IBM owns PJ.

    It's predictable because magical thinking keeps cropping up again and again in SCO's filings and public utterances.

    SCO's pet gossips go along with it because guilt-by-association rumors are juicy, truth (or even its journalist shadow, fact checking) be damned.

    ---
    Scott Leadley

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    • It's magic empire - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 06:56 PM EDT
    IBM Comments
    Authored by: BobinAlaska on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 06:49 PM EDT
    IBM has issued a comment on the story: Clicky Sorry if this has been posted before.

    ---
    Bob Helm, Juneau, Alaska

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Great Headlines
    Authored by: Observer on Thursday, March 22 2007 @ 09:46 PM EDT
    Ah, but a line like, "IBM Sponsorship of UNC Site Predates Groklaw" doesn't make for snappy headlines, or sell advertising clicks!

    ---
    The Observer

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated 4Xs
    Authored by: gjleger on Friday, March 23 2007 @ 07:58 PM EDT
    Update 2: I heard from McDougall. He says the time stamp on his email is wrong.
    He sent the email, he says, at 10:30 AM and the story was published at noon.

    ROFLMAO ! He gave you a whole hour and a half to answer.... If he is telling
    the truth of course...

    Wow... I was in a meeting from 2 PM to 4 PM ... good thing he was not emailing
    me.

    /sarcasm
    He sure gave you LOTS of time to answer something important like that. I mean
    you should to be able to answer any email with at least 30 minute notice.
    /end sarcasm

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated 4Xs
    Authored by: dinotrac on Saturday, March 24 2007 @ 09:45 AM EDT
    Lady Pamela -

    The attack is completely fair, even if it is idiotic.

    We do much the same thing when we sneer at TCO reports, etc
    that are funded by Microsoft.

    Fair and advisable, however, are two different things.

    As you point out, the claim of bias doesn't hold up under
    scrutiny. The tie, in fact, is so weak as to paint the
    writer as (choose one):

    a: Moronic
    b: Paid for
    c: Desperately in search of clicks
    d: All of the above.

    Keep up the good work. And, forget ye not, accusations so
    demonstrably stupid are more effectively raised with sharp
    humor than raised dander. Kudos to your posters for
    ibiblio = IBM.

    ---
    The truth sucks, but it beats the alternatives

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    FWLIW - going in to bat for Groklaw
    Authored by: Wesley_Parish on Monday, March 26 2007 @ 11:38 PM EDT

    I wrote the editor of Information Week an email, giving the Groklaw history as I had experienced it. Also pointing out that the one thing you don't do, PJ, is come across as a corporate persona. (I have met IBM and Microsoft people, and there is a definite corporate persona - you can see it in blog entries, some things not discussed, some things mentioned in passing, some things focused on; but things have improved from the early nineties, when one IBMer I heard talking about OS/2 completely missed the point, that talking about it and saying it was good was all very well, but we wanted some action. Eg, don't count on past successes.)

    Again, for what little it's worth, I also mentioned how IBM seems to be Microsoft's bugbear on the ODF versus the MS OO XML front; they seem quite paranoid about IBM, while ignoring Sun entirely. I mentioned having joked on a blog somewhere or other about not having received any payments from IBM for be vocal in my support of the ODF file format. Again, FWLIW, I had added, after moaning about not receiving my drone payments from IBM, those dread words:

    /* You are not expected to understand this. */
    the point being that people that paranoid generally no longer have a sense of humour.

    I wonder if Microsoft are now going to complain to IBM that I haven't been paid? ;) They're not all that stupid, but the corporate drones are there in force, just as they were in IBM way back when.

    ---
    finagement: The Vampire's veins and Pacific torturers stretching back through his own season. Well, cutting like a child on one of these states of view, I duck

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    Same Slime, Different Day - updated 4Xs
    Authored by: grundy on Tuesday, March 27 2007 @ 05:12 AM EDT

    I just now read the "same slime" and noted that he seems to have two side targets:
    IBM for underhanded support and the blog for bias. Which would implicate
    M$ => IBM and magazines => blogs as supporting the SCO => PJ.

    Microsoft is on a tear badmouthing IBM.

    [ Reply to This | # ]

    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 )