Resumen: Información sobre Altitud Capital Partners (troll de patentes), Intellectual Ventures, Microsoft y Apple (que financian Intelectual Ventures para lanzar ataques legales usando a los trolls de patentes pequeñas)
A principios de año (el mes pasado para ser más precisos) que fuímos contactados por un caballero amable que había interactuado con Bill Gates y su compañero Nathan, el más grande troll de patentes del mundo[http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Intellectual_Ventures]. Nos proporcionó información. Puestos anteriores[http://techrights.org/2011/04/27/bill-gates-is-trolling/] sobre ello contenían sólo la esencia. Hoy vamos a elaborar en ella.
Todo comenzó cuando un puesto de Rick el Troll Tracker de Patentes llamó la atención de alguien que había sido contactado por el mencionado troll. “No tengo ninguna información acerca de” Altitude Capital Partners “esté vinculado a Microsoft”, explicó, “es por eso que le escribí para preguntarle si usted lo hizo. Altitud se me acercó en las últimas dos semanas pidiendo que me represente, porque mi cartera de patentes de tecnologías básicas cubiertas. Sin embargo, no tengo ni idea de cómo se enteraron de mí, .”
Sin duda, sería útil tener a alguien que nos ayude a entender lo Altitud Capital Partners está haciendo en realidad debido a que su página web[http://www.altitudecp.com/] dice muy poco. Esto es fascinante como mucho de lo que dice el señor ayuda a exponer un comportamiento contrario a la competencia que hemos estado investigando durante años, por ejemplo, sobre Intellectual Ventures, que al parecer utiliza más de 1.000 empresas de satélites para realizar su manipulación de Nathan y Bill, financieros clave de la empresa.
Volviendo al troll menor en cuestión, es difícil determinar exactamente lo que realmente hace y si sirve a otro. Este sitio se mantiene un mínimo, dice un poco más de los sitios de los trolls de patentes, que generalmente son sociedades de responsabilidad limitada registrada en algunas patentes para librar guerras en nombre de otras empresas. Rick el TrollTracker de Patentes, que solía trabajar para Cisco, era consciente de lo que Altitud Capital Partners estaba haciendo, pero fué silenciado por aquellos a quienes expuso, mediante la acción de tipo SLAPP[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLAPP] y una recompensa de miedo del padre de los Trolls de Patentes. Cisco ha estado bajo el asedio de los trolls de patentes, incluyendo Intelectual Ventures. A pesar de Intellectual Ventures, finalmente presentó una demanda el año pasado, por lo general utiliza otras empresas para poner en marcha acciones legales contra aquellos que no están dispuestos a pagar a Nathan y Bill. Una empresa del tamaño de Cisco normalmente tiene que pagar cientos de millones de dólares para mantener a raya a Intellectual Ventures (de lo contrario, pasa cerca de las patentes para alimentar las batallas de patentes). Una patente amplia sería una ventaja para ello. Afecta a muchas empresas. Cisco acaba de publicar nueva información sobre su próxima tableta Linux potencia. La lacra de Gates y otros probablemente traten de imponerle más impuestos si es que no lo han hecho ya.
Hay que añadir que el interés de este sitio (Techrights) en esta área está motivada por las muchas demandas que Microsoft ha lanzado contra el propio GNU/Linux (y Android, que es Linux-powered). Estos también incluyen las empresas o los trolls de patentes a los que Microsoft parece estar incentivando a hacer lo que hacen. El caso de SCO es un ejemplo anterior de como los derechos de autor se utilizan para librar batallas similares. Esta batalla es más amplia de lo que la mayoría de gente se da cuenta, porque Microsoft está perdiendo la batalla en factores de forma más recientes. las ventas de Windows se están reduciendo, ya que Apple y Android están creciendo como hongos en el nuevo espacio de los teléfonos inteligentes, sub-portátiles y tabletas. El mes pasado, Barnes and Noble (B & N), expuso documentos[http://techrights.org/2011/04/27/bn-and-changing-the-patent-system/] que muestran cómo Microsoft utiliza las patentes para distorsionar el mercado y obstaculizar la competencia en los e-lectores y otros dispositivos similares, que son básicamente de muy poca potencia para ejecutar Windows de Microsoft.
Nuestra fuente indica que Microsoft ha estado buscando este tipo de estrategia desde hace bastante tiempo, como “entre 1998-2001, Bill Gates se interesó en las cosas me las patentes”, explicó a nosotros. “Yo quería que las utilizan, en realidad. Excepto que él -Gates- no quizó reconocer mi trabajo, y no quería pagarme ni un centavo. Y no se trataba de dinero, era claramente de engañar a la gente que creaba cosas que él le gustaba … en otras palabras, era un ego rabioso “cosa”. ”
La típica megalomanía Gates y la auto-promoción descarada[http://techrights.org/wiki/index.php/Gates_Foundation_Critique].
El “Surface” es un ejemplo de un producto del que Microsoft quería deshacerse de antes de su llegada, pero, según informes, el ego de Gates se los impedió. Se convirtió en una fuga de dinero. En general, Gates se fascinó con las patentes mucho tiempo después de haberlas criticado y hasta la fecha que está haciendo mucho trabajo de promoción de ellas y proceder a su cosecha como trofeos. Su buen amigo Nathan está presionando al gobierno y tratando de deformar la industria del software.
“La Propiedad Intelectual es el Futuro Software”, dijo Nathan Myhrvold no hace mucho tiempo[http://www.newsweek.com/id/55777/page/2]. Esta es su visión.
“Bill Gates contrató a mis abogados”, explicó nuestra fuente, “Weil Gotshal & Manges, que luego me puso a “probar tabletas” para Microsoft. Puedes hacer google de la búsqueda y confirmar que Weil Gotshal estaba haciendo eso alrededor de 2001 o así. La cosa en la que Gates estaba tan interesado, las tabletas, era su ver los diseños de lo que hoy es el IPAD y el iPhone … de nuevo en 1998-2001!”
Por el momento, Microsoft parece estar explorando maneras de hacer dinero con los productos de otras personas. Cada vez que se ve como una empresa de concesión de licencias, ya que no pueden crear algo lo suficientemente convincente. Perdieron el tren. Al deshacerse de Courier, además de los informes sobre las patentes relacionadas con la superficie, sólo podemos imaginar que habrá más historias como las de Barnes & Noble.
“Yo estaba aturdido y confundido por lo sucedido y fuí en busca de ayuda de algún tipo”, recuerda nuestra fuente. “Yo en última instancia, corrí a Larry Ellison y su amigo Steve Jobs con la esperanza de que … siendo enemigos de Gates, me invitaran a unirse a ellos en la creación de un dispositivo de tableta … porque yo creía que Microsoft iba a robarse todo el asunto. En cambio, lo que sucedió fue Steve Jobs se lo robó, todo por el ego Bill Gates “… sentía que sólo él podía hacer algo que vale hacerlo … Microsoft terminó estancado … hasta hacer tabletas con stylus y que fueron computadoras portátiles en forma de tableta . Incluso en fecha tan tardía como 2010, Steve Ballmer estaba diciendo a la gente en la Escuela de Economía de Londres que la gente quiere comprimidos con stylus y teclados -. Que a pesar de la forma en que el iPhone ya había demostrado la voluntad de la gente a utilizar sus dedos”
Esta insistencia de Microsoft era una tontería, ya que mantuvo todo pesado y caro. Tampoco hubo algo de la misma promoción en el momento, por no hablar de hardware adecuado para los efectos de 3-D y ligereza. Pero como ha señalado acertadamente, Larry Ellison, y Steve Jobs tienen este juego de ego con Gates y recientemente Ellison decidió ir tras Android con una demanda indignante sobre Dalvik. Más recientemente hemos visto que Microsoft, Apple y Oracle crearon y entraron en un consorcio de patentes para ir tras las patentes de Novell (Novell se vendío esencialmente el último mes). Lo llamaron CPTLN y fue diseñado por Microsoft para ayudar a excluir o coaccionar hasta que el Departamento de Justicia de EE.UU. y la Oficina Alemana de Lucha Contra los Cárteles se involucren Todas estas empresas utilizan cada vez más patentes para garantizar que se mantengan en el poder y mientras más pueden acumular, mejor para ellos. De hecho, Oracle una vez habló en contra de las patentes de software, pero las cosas han cambiado desde entonces.
Nuestra conjetura es que a los ojos de tales empresasas las patentes, tales como las relativas a los factores de forma de tableta se están convirtiendo en una tarjeta de negociación que pueden ayudar a limitar la funcionalidad del producto de un competidor. No es raro para una compañía tratar de apoderarse de las patentes de un tercero. La OIN hizo que el año pasado. Y en realidad, B & N ha dicho que Microsoft trató de usar las patentes de sus productos simplemente para limitar/excluir la competencia. ¿Cómo que promueven la innovación? Esto es aún más evidencia que apoya la afirmación de que el sistema de patentes excluye a los jugadores pequeños -ME ESCUCHAN países Tercermundistas-, más poder a aquellos que puede acumular muchas más patentes, junto con los trolls de patentes. Si una pequeña empresa demanda a un grande, es golpeado por una artillería de otras patentes. Es un juego desequilibrado.
La fuente de la noticia no era tratar de ayudar a las grandes empresas, que simplemente se le acercó. “En el principio hasta fui a organizaciones sin fines de lucro como Mozilla y el EFF (Fundación Electrónica de la Frontera)y la búsqueda del W3C para donar mis patentes a ellos”, recuerda, “pero todos me trataron como basura.”
A Mozilla, el EFF y el W3C no les gusta las patentes. Mozilla abiertamente las denuncia, el EFF cuenta con un proyecto de revienta-patentes , y Tim Berners-Lee me dijo personalmente que él se mantiene firme en su planteamiento de que la Web no debe tener patentes en su funcionamiento. Yo creo que la OIN Invención de Red Abierta(Invención de Red Abierta) habría sido mejor enfoque.
“El Compadre de Bill Gates, Nathan Myhrvold estaba tratando de comprar mis patentes durante años, pero más tarde se decidió a pagar a cualquier abogado a los que asistí, a fingir que quería ayudarme, cuando en realidad no eran más que ganar tiempo, y tratando de evitar de que demande a nadie”, nos dijo. “Nokia se interesó en la adquisición de los derechos de mí en agosto de 2010, y Nokia fue muy agradable y amable … pero luego Gates “instaló” a su hombre: Stephen Elop como presidente ejecutivo de Nokia y Nokia hizo un acuerdo por valor de miles de millones (según las noticias), y Nokia repente no quería tener nada que ver conmigo. ¿Y quiénes son los abogados de Nokia? “Convenientemente” amigos de los abogados que presentaron mis patentes por mí en la década de 1990, que Apple copió para crear el iPhone, y que representan Apple, MSFT y Nokia, y Nathan Myhrvold.”
Nokia fué apropiado básicamente por Microsoft mediante un acto de entrismo. Recientemente, un alto funcionario de Nokia, dijo: “Este acuerdo no es entre Nokia y Microsoft, se trata de una conquista de Microsoft.”
Nokia ya ha expresado su intención de utilizar las patentes como una herramienta que más afectan al mercado y con Elop a cargo sólo podemos imaginar (con preocupación) lo que podría hacer a continuación. Elop ha señalado (en Twitter) sobre la adquisición de Skype. Al leer su tweet daría la impresión de que todavía está trabajando para Microsoft. █
Summary: More evidence that the USPTO as it stands is helping the wrong types of players, like dying monopolies, patent trolls, and various other parasites
THE worse the patent situation gets and the more depressing the media makes it appear, the more likely we are to see a real reform and with it a belated abolition of software patents.
Here is some interesting news about a preliminary ruling that can help ban hype* products from Apple:
An International Trade Commission judge has sided with Eastman Kodak in the company’s ongoing patent battle with Apple.
Judge Robert Rogers yesterday rejected Apple’s claims that two of its patents on digital photography were being violated by Kodak. In a statement to CNET today, Kodak said that it was “pleased by this ruling.”
Make no mistake. Apple is not a victim and in fact it’s quite the offender too. Apple still collects patents [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and later uses them to attack Linux-based devices from HTC and Samsung. We wrote all about it before, especially after Apple had needlessly sued HTC and sought to embargo Android devices. Apple is far from a friend of Free software; it contributes to it neither when it comes to code nor to policy. That too is a subject we wrote about many times before.
The policies pushed for by the likes of Apple and Microsoft are destroying everyone who is not part of their colossal cartel as “patent trolls start going for the little devs … not very kind,” says Glyn Moody regarding this piece of news:
Yesterday, we received word from Rob Gloess of Computer LogicX, the company behind the Mix & Mash and Mix & Mash LITE applications for iOS, that he had received legal documents threatening a patent lawsuit over the use of an “upgrade” button in the lite version of his application linking users to the App Store where they could purchase the full version.
Microsoft Florian already spins is against Android (he is focused on making Android look dangerous, still). Talk about diversion. His posts ends with: “Once we have a similar situation with little guys being attacked over their Android apps, it will be interesting to see what Google does. Google doesn’t even indemnify its device makers, so it’s unlikely to offer too much protection to its app developers.” He also says to FFII people that “At least 2 of the threatened app developers are European”; He has been trying for a while to insinuate that software patents are legal in Europe. Florian still discredis the FFII and gets challenged for it by Jan Wildeboer. But that’s another story altogether.
SAP AG (SAP), the world’s largest maker of business-applications software, was told by a jury to pay $345 million for infringing a Versata Software Inc. patent.
The federal jury in Marshall, Texas, said today that closely held Versata was owed compensation for sales of certain SAP enterprise and customer relationship-management software sold prior to May 2010. The jury awarded $260 million for lost profits and $85 million as a reasonable royalty.
The damages are more than the $138.6 million Walldorf, Germany-based SAP was ordered to pay Versata in a 2009 verdict that was thrown out. U.S. Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham had ordered a new trial because of rulings by an appeals court specializing in patent law that set new rules on how financial penalties should be calculated.
That’s an amazing sum for some single crummy patent — essentially a piece of paper, akin to a note from your mother which you hand over to the school’s headmaster/principal.
Brian Proffitt writes about the impact of software patents on Linux, citing the latest from Bedrock, an annoying patent troll. Brian points out that “[t]he court docket indicates that on April 29, Bedrock settled its claims against MySpace and AOL and then on May 9, just one day before the Yahoo! verdict came through, also settled its claims against Amazon.com and SoftLayer Technologies. Match.com had already settled with Bedrock on March 28. By my score card, then, that leaves just PayPal, CME, and CitiWare still defending against Bedrock’s claims.”
The bottom line is, all real companies seem to be negatively affected by patents. Non-practicing companies (or hardly practicing companies like Kodak) win while companies like SAP and Apple (which used to like software patents) get penalised, along with small businesses and software which is developed by volunteers in order to be shared with the commons. Time for a change in law, right? To actually promote innovation, not kill it. █
Summary: Tim and Roy have a loaded discussion about Skypocalypse, rogue PR agencies, and a variety of other topics regarding the growth of GNU/Linux and beyond
THIS show covers the Skype acquisition, Google’s GNU/Linux products, confirmed cases of AstroTurfing, and common FUD that resurfaces.
Feedback on the show can be posted in comments, in Identi.ca, and in the TechrightsIRC channels (among other means of communication).
Today’s tracks are “El Camino” by No te va gustar, “Future Eyes” by Ear Pwr, and “Tokki no Rassha ” by Dolly (I made a mistake by introducing the song as “Dolly”, not the artist). We will try to include more music in the future as well, mainly from SXSW 2010 Showcasing Artists (get the torrents legally here). We hope you will join us for future shows and consider subscribing to the show via the RSS feed. You can also visit our archives for past shows. If you have an Identi.ca account, consider subscribing to TechBytes in order to keep up to date. █
Summary: Patterns of FUD that has mostly died are returning to the corporate news, so we quickly rebut again
THE NUMBER of attack vectors is increasing when it comes to Microsoft Windows. There is no point denying the fact that a lot of the security problems we have today are caused by Windows. What remains for pundits to debate is whether market share is a factor.
There is that old comparison of platforms based on security criteria and this is a jar of worms that has not been opened in a while. GNU/Linux market share flamewars, even the GNU/Linux versus Windows security debate, have not made many headlines for months if not years. With The Register making some spurious remarks and some other sites following suit, the boring discussion is being reopened, so we’ll address it very quickly (without repeating points we covered before, hopefully).
Microsoft is downplaying the threat posed by one of the three bugs the company patched today, said security researchers.
The update in question, MS11-035, patches a single vulnerability in WINS (Windows Internet Name Service), a component in every supported edition of Windows Server, including Server 2003, 2008 and the newest, Server 2008 R2.
Attackers could exploit the WINS bug by crafting a malicious data packet, then shooting it at a vulnerable Windows Server box.
This is yet more evidence of Microsoft negligence [1, 2, 3].
When a company does not address known flaws, then it deserves no respect and no business. Microsoft also lies about the number of flaws because this helps the company game the numbers and make it look as though Red Hat, for example, makes a less secure operating system.
There is this new article with a tease headline that poses an allegation as a question. But it does quote some valid messengers, e.g.:
“Linux has been more widely deployed, which has certainly made it a bigger target to hackers in general,” said Charlie Belmer founder and CEO of security vendor Golem Technologies. “But in terms of overall security it is still far superior to Windows.”
Mr. Belmer has a point, unlike Mr. Ballmer.
Tony Bradley, who has been defending Microsoft for years in IDG, is upset by an article from his colleague, Katherine, who likes GNU/Linux. She wrote about issues relating to allegations of NSA back doors a few days ago and the Microsoft booster is of course upset. He admits that Vista 7 is not so secure. It is even less secure than its predecessors. He then defends his poorly-structured contention by pointing fingers elsewhere and spreading the “1% market share” slur about GNU/Linux. Towards the end he becomes the “But” troll to seem fair. How shallow and transparent!
This actually leads us to addressing the next piece of FUD which has returned. Some numbers that are presented in this new article confirm what we have said for years:
This chart reflects the relative popularity of Linux as a desktop OS in each country. It doesn’t mean that these countries have the most Linux users overall (which is more difficult to estimate correctly).
Statcounter measures things like referrals or sites that hand over logs, leading to statistical bias. Privacy correlates with GNU/Linux use. But anyway, the more important observation to make is that the English-speaking world is nowhere in sight. Tell this to all the English-centric ‘market share’ companies.
GNU/Linux does not have a 1% market share on the desktop. This might be true in the United States, whose population only accounts for about 5% of the whole world. Statistics-backed lies are not so uncommon and IDG pushes a lot of this lie, being a US-based company.
As some people will rightly show this month, there is a sharp GNU/Linux usage increase (relative) in Wikipedia recently (it is still English-centric). There is clearly something going on. Meanwhile, Google claims that only 20% of its employees use Windows and the company’s founder has harsh words for Microsoft. Google banned Windows for security reasons and its founder said that Windows is “torturing” users. Well played. As Mr. Pogson put it:
Sergey Brin of Google was quoted as stating that other OS and even GNU/Linux tortures users. I would take GNU/Linux any day because if you don’t want to manage it the darned thing just keeps running. I have set up machines that ran years without an update. Others have reported that forgotten machines kept running for many years.
There is already some damage control from Microsoft boosters like Gralla, who denies the truth. People do not choose Windows, they just buy a computer. Many are brought into a torture of malware and unreliability.
Speaking for myself, I have used the very same KDE session since March (no login screen since then). That’s how reliable GNU/Linux is today. KDE4 has become absolutely fantastic.
One of the best sites around, Dedoimedo (it is criminally under-subscribed to), has this new Great Linux World Map, which rather than name distributions (which mostly assemble parts) shows just what makes up the free operating systems. As the author put it:
Of course, I could not plaster every single distribution or Linux-related item onto the map, as it would clutter this precious work of art. You get old distributions and you get new distributions, you get big ones and small ones, popular and obscure, but not all of them. If you feel your Linux distribution has been neglected, it’s not out of malice, it’s just pure aesthetics. Finally, naturally, since this is a bold expedition unto humor, you should not take anything seriously, neither names, nor terms, nor shapes, nor phrases used. It’s all jolly good fun.
GNU/Linux is still poised to win on the desktop if only we have patience. Google is making some interesting moves right now with subsidies. Well, using Skype, Microsoft will probably make life harder for GNU/Linux users and Linux-powered phones (and just about any other user of the proprietary software). As Groklaw put it, “this means Skype gets less pleasant for users and Microsoft gets to track us? Thanks, but no thanks.”
In another context, argued Groklaw, “When that happens to you often enough, you stop using proprietary software.”
The front page of the official Ubuntu Web site still sports Skype. They will hopefully amend that soon as advertising proprietary software was never a bright idea. █
Summary: Why those who compare Free software proponents to conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones are totally missing the boat
Poisonous people try to discourage free thought by alleging that nothing goes amiss in the industry. It’s a convenient illusion to be immersed in, as the reality involves many lobbyists who run the show. Those who speak about it are not the problem; the lobbyists and their funders are.
Over the past couple of years we have seen many Microsoft apologists who tried tried to paint Groklaw a “conspiracy theorist”, even well before the site dealt with anything resembling it. And now, upon the site's departure, we are seeing more of the same smears. It is similar to the smears that were used against Boycott Novell and Techrights, so it is worth tackling this as a general phenomenon.
Back around 2007 and 2008 we wrote a handful of posts explaining how labels such as “hater” and “theorist” are being used to distract from real issues. Even now that we discover Facebook hired lobbyists after investments from Microsoft there are those who will call it a far-fetched leap of faith. Well, first of all, Facebook finally admits that it did this. Groklaw remarks on this admission as follows: “So, should I point out that Facebook and Microsoft are partners and Microsoft has invested in Facebook? Did I not tell you this was all a smear campaign, in my opinion?”
Groklaw also quotes this report where Facebook daeminises Google more directly, somehow exempting Microsoft. How shallow. Regarding this congress hearing, Groklaw has something to say as well. To quote the report:
But overall, Senators at the hearing seemed to want to harp on a broad range of grievances with Apple and Google—only some of which related to smartphones or privacy at all.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) went ahead and hammered Google over its accidental collection of private WiFi data, a privacy scandal that’s now more than two years old. He actually pulled out a Google patent application and seemed to be saying that it demonstrated Google intended to pull the private “payload” data as part of its plan to build better mapping services. Davidson was put on the spot because, no surprise, he hadn’t seen the patent application before, since Google files hundreds of patents each year. He emphasized that the company wasn’t ever going to use the data it had accidentally collected. “We intend to dispose of it in whatever form regulators tell us to,” he said. Ashkani and another independent privacy researcher both testified that the payload data wouldn’t be useful in map-building.
Update: A Google spokesman contacted me shortly after this post was published, offering this statement: “The technology in that patent has nothing to do with the collection and storage of payload data and is entirely unrelated to the software code used to collect WiFi information with Street View cars.”
“These are the guys who write patent law,” writes Groklaw. “And could someone check and see who Microsoft gives money to in Congress? There is something very odd about this, considering Microsoft’s privacy policies. Why only Apple and Google called on the carpet? Seriously. It feels like a smear campaign to me. And do you see why Groklaw matters? Folks making important decisions about tech don’t understand tech either, let alone patents. It’s scary.”
In relation to this other article about federal involvement, Groklaw remarks by quoting this:
In a quarterly report to the SEC, Google retroactively lowered its first-quarter earnings by $500 million in anticipation of a settlement with the Department of Justice, the Associated Press reports.
“I think that may be overstating matters,” argues Groklaw, “I’d rather say that this is the outside limit of what it might cost Google, what they are setting aside just in case. They might owe nothing, after all. It’s not even an official investigation yet. Here’s what Google writes in the 10-Q: “In May 2011, in connection with a potential resolution of an investigation by the United States Department of Justice into the use of Google advertising by certain advertisers, we accrued $500 million for the three month period ended March 31, 2011. Although we cannot predict the ultimate outcome of this matter, we believe it will not have a material adverse effect on our business, consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.” Now when you read all the FUD flying around, at least you’ll know better.”
“Now when you read all the FUD flying around, at least you’ll know better.” –Pamela Jones, GroklawGroklaw is not alone when it comes to defending Google, which by no means is totally innocent either. It’s just that a lot of it is acting, a lot of it is staged by lobbyists and maybe even radio show hosts like Alex Jones. It turned out that not so long ago when Fox/Glenn Beck ran a smear campaign against Google Rupert Murdoch was actually in bed with Microsoft. Here is what Pamela quotes GigaOM as saying, “this is a pretty obvious case of the pot calling the kettle black. While Facebook’s PR pitch tries to paint Google as the company that has been besieged by privacy critics and regulators, the reality is, Facebook has been far more exposed to government criticism and sanctions — and potential regulation — as a result of its approach to privacy and its handling of personal data. The social network may have been trying to shift the attention of the press and regulators away from itself and onto Google, but all this campaign has really done is make Facebook look incompetent and desperate, and scared.” We need to have more sites like Groklaw to tackle these issues. █
Posted in Site News at 6:26 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Cordial regards to Pamela Jones and her site Groklaw, which retires after this weekend
BACK in 2006, Shane and I were discussing this site via E-mail, seeking to find out how much each of us would be able to commit in terms of time. I was finishing my thesis draft at the time, which meant that I had a lot of spare time (I had finished my first draft months before the site was even created). It occurred to us that both of us were major followers of Groklaw. As for myself, I had sent News Picks suggestions on a daily since the beginning of 2006, so I felt like there was also a personal relationship. Pamela was always polite, insightful, and grateful. She had charisma, she had the diligence of a superwoman, and she inspired many of us who were fighting for software freedom. To many of us, Groklaw became a routine, it became something we do several times per day (commenting and/or reading for the most part).
About 2 years ago Groklaw lost some eagerness to carry on, but despite demoralisation and legal risk it carried on heroically, leading ahead the hordes of GNU/Linux proponents, who rarely happen to be lawyers. Groklaw‘s era is not over and the site’s impact will have a place in our hearts for many decades to come. It’s not just a site, it is also a community and a role model. On behalf of Techrights I wish to express my immeasurable gratitude to Groklaw. If it were not for Groklaw, it is possible that Techrights would never have existed.
Back in the days when my personal site was ranked around 17,000th in Alexa I decided to transition more towards full-time GNU/Linux advocacy and later on, when Novell signed the patent deal with Microsoft, I realised that patents were a more urgent issue to address. It was killing software development. So ,I focused almost only on this site. We have wrestled with this issue for almost 5 years now and Novell finally caved a couple of weeks ago. In a way, we won, but the battle has not ended. Groklaw is now describing Novell as a company that sold the community out and it focuses on patent issues more than ever — an issue which we have been focused on for years. We hope the tackle this issue for many years to come. As I am still in my 20s without many strings attached, I can certainly afford to participate as editor and with me I have great contributors such as Gordon, Edwardo, Will, and others whom I probably cannot name as they prefer anonymity. It is safe to say that all of us are grateful to Groklaw and we will defend that site’s reputation in the face of its detractors, who have already begun revisionist propaganda against it, as we showed last month.
Ya en 2006, Shane y yo estábamos discutiendo este sitio a través del correo electrónico, búscando averiguar cuánto cada uno de nosotros sería capaz de comprometerse en términos de tiempo. Yo estaba terminando mi proyecto de tesis en el tiempo, lo que significa que tenía un montón de tiempo libre (ya había terminado mi primer borrador meses antes que el sitio fuese creado). Ocurrió que ambos fuímos mayores seguidores de Groklaw. En cuanto a mí, personalmente había enviado sugerencias de Noticias Selectas casi díariamente desde el comienzo de 2006, así que me sentí como si hubiera también una relación personal. Pamela fue siempre amable, perspicaz, y agradecida. Tenía carisma, tuvo la diligencia de una supermujer, e inspiró a muchos de nosotros que estabamos luchando por la libertad del software. Para muchos de nosotros, Groklaw se convirtió en una rutina, se convirtió en algo que hacemos varias veces por día (comentando y/o leyendo en su mayor parte).
Hace unos dos años Groklaw perdido el afán de seguir adelante, de continuar pero a pesar de desmoralización y el riesgo legal continuó heroicamente, llevando por delante las hordas de GNU/Linux proponentes, que rara vez sucede que sean abogados. La era Groklaw no ha terminado y el impacto del sitio tendrá un lugar en nuestros corazones durante muchas décadas por venir. No es sólo un sitio, también es una comunidad y un modelo para seguir. En nombre de Techrights deseo expresar mi gratitud inconmensurable para Groklaw. Si no fuera por Groklaw, es posible que Techrights nunca hubiera existido.
En los días en que mi sitio personal fue clasificado/ubicado alrededor del 17.000, en Alexa decidí hacer la transición hacia tiempo completo más a la promociónGNU/Linux y más tarde, cuando Novell firmó el acuerdo de patentes con Microsoft, me dí cuenta de que las patentes fueron un problema más urgente de abordar. Estaban matando el desarrollo de software. Por lo tanto, me he centrado casi exclusivamente en este sitio. Nosotros hemos luchado con este problema desde hace casi 5 años y Novell finalmente se derrumbó hace un par de semanas. En cierto modo, hemos ganado, pero la batalla no se terminó. Groklaw está describiendo Novell como una empresa que vendió a la comunidad y que ahora se centra en asuntos relacionados con patentes, más que nunca — un problema que en el que nos hemos centrado desde hace años. Esperamos en abordar este tema durante muchos años por venir. Como todavía estoy en mis veintes años sin muchas cadenas adjuntas, que sin duda puedo darse el lujo de participar en calidad de editor y tengo conmigo grandes colaboradores como Gordon, Eduardo, Will, y muchos otros a los que probablemente no puedo nombrar ya que prefieren el anonimato. Es seguro decir que todos nosotros estamos muy agradecidos a Groklaw y defenderemos a la reputación de ese sitio en la cara de sus cobardes detractores, que ya han comenzado la propaganda revisionista en su contra, como lo mostramos el mes pasado.
