Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 23rd Jul 2007 12:49 UTC, submitted by Captain Pirate
Legal "We can read the Linspire-Microsoft patent agreement now, or more precisely Microsoft's 'Covenant to Customers', and I thought it would be worthwhile to give it a close, line-by-line reading. I'll explain it as best I can, but ask your lawyer if it matters to you in a real-world sense. For our purposes here, let's just have fun with the worst deal I've seen yet in this category."
Thread beginning with comment 257548
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Groklaw?
by Marcellus on Mon 23rd Jul 2007 19:14 UTC
Marcellus
Member since:
2005-08-26

Since for some reason, it's not possible to reply to Almafeta's first post in this thread, I'm putting my comment (and quote) here:

Why is there a link to Groklaw? That site's just a large number of opinion pieces, filled with the Ann Coulters and Rush Limbaughs of the software industry. A page coming from there is only 'news' in the sense that it's about as well researched as the Weekly World News.

C'mon, it can't be that slow of a news day...


Can't agree more about that.

What's worse is that the site is "excused" with all that BS because the so-called PJ never denied being biased.

Reply Score: 1

Groklaw should be linked to more often
by b3timmons on Mon 23rd Jul 2007 21:07 in reply to "RE: Groklaw?"
b3timmons Member since:
2006-08-26

You and Almafeta are wrong. Let's look at the facts:

1. Linspire and Microsoft are on topic for this website.
2. Linspire's agreement with Microsoft is an important example of how Microsoft is trying to interact with its competition.
3. Groklaw offers a legal analysis of the agreement.
4. Thus, linking to the Groklaw article is appropriate for OS News.

The analysis may contain errors, but apparently no one on OS News can find any, so instead the best critics can do is attack the messenger instead of the message.

Not only is the link appropriate, but OS News would be much better off linking more often to Groklaw when Groklaw comments on the major issues of software that matter to a significant part of the OS News readership. Indeed, free software use is growing in the OS market, Groklaw has played a unique role over the years in explaining some of the issues affecting much of free software, and so it is foolish not to make use of Groklaw.

Reply Parent Score: 5

sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Legal analysis? What makes it a legal analysis? She makes no reference to any laws or cases whatsoever. It's purely an opinion piece with a line-by-line rebuttal of the covenant.

Just because it happens to be written by a paralegal on a site called groklaw, does not make it a legal analysis.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Groklaw?
by ubit on Mon 23rd Jul 2007 22:42 in reply to "RE: Groklaw?"
ubit Member since:
2006-09-08

Why don't you three post your concerns (politely, with actual substance and proof-- of which you, Alfafeta and Sappy yet to show so far-- and without trolling) at Groklaw instead of going all ad hominem on everyone and PJ herself?

It says something about a person that attacks someone as not being real (from your post: <<because the so-called PJ >>) and yet then tries to speak about bias at a site. For example, I could say that you three are employed by Microsoft or their business partners, from reading your comments here, but that would not be productive.

Here's a read of the Groklaw comment policy and mission statement. Seems very unbiased to me but I've just been reading there since the start of this year. When attacks on _SCO_ aren't allowed, you know there's something special about a place.

http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2004030120301285 Comment Policy

http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20040923045054130 Mission statement

Edited 2007-07-23 22:46

Reply Parent Score: 3