talks_to_birds's Journal: Interesting, interesting...

hmm..

What *really* got Pamela pissed off at me was my suggestion/question about whether OSRM was taking the information produced by the posters to Groklaw and incorporating that information into their "product".

That question generated several angry emails from her, and really (OK: IMHO..) was the cause of the famous Pamela-shaming:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040804221510383

• "I'm also ashamed of some of you. Next time, I suggest you get all the facts before you speak..."

OK, OK, so I *won't* go into the question as to just how the hell it is that Pamela has the guts to be shaming anyone, but any way time (a week?) passes...

And then we have:

http://www.groklaw.net/comment.php?mode=display&sid=20040810153722301&title=The%20worst%20isn't%20over%20yet...&type=article&order=ASC&hideanonymous=0&pid=182424#c182460

• "In the OSRM paper, it mentions the plan. We are preparing some educational materials to teach anyone who wishes to learn how to do a search for prior art, from a legal perspective, and we will then go hunting..."

To which I replied:

http://www.groklaw.net/comment.php?mode=display&sid=20040810153722301&title=The%20worst%20isn't%20over%20yet...&type=article&order=ASC&hideanonymous=0&pid=182460#c182818

• Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 11 2004 @ 01:16 AM EDT

  >>> We are preparing some educational materials to teach anyone who wishes to learn how to do a search for prior art, from a legal perspective, and we will then go hunting. <<<

  will the people who are doing OSRM's research be paid?

  or will they be expected to volunteer their labor toward the "Good of the Cause"?

At the moment (Wed Aug 11 13:17:31 PDT 2004) that post has not been answered.

Of course, it hasn't been deleted, either, so we're making progress!

t_t_b

Logic flaw

[Kalak]

You imply that work done to find prior art on patents in linux is not in PJ's best interest, and so she will therefore try to sweep it under the rug. The opposite is true however. Patent issues have been identified. If groklaw, or the EFF, or Patent Busters or anyone else finds admissable prior art, that is one less reason for anyone to buy insurance. Sing with me: "287 patents on the wall, 287 pattens on the wall. If one of those pattents should happen to fall 286 patents on the wall..."

If the researc

Re:Logic flaw

[talks_to_birds]

My issue with Pamela, OSRM, and the (potential) incorporation of work done by Groklaw posters is really one of full disclosure, or, at the moment, the lack of full disclosure.

Pamela controls a web site where 99.9% of the information is developed and posted by other people.

She is also the "Director of Litigation Risk Research" at OSRM.

I'm sorry -- no, I'm not: What overlap is there between the accumulation of research by individuals at Groklaw, relative to Pamela's role as a Director of Research at OSR

Re:Logic flaw

[Kalak]

From the linked post, "anyone who wishes to learn" is who they want to train. Now I read that as a resource I could use, but I don't have to contribute back.

For example, I've seen a patent "make an agreement with us" letter on my boss' desk. Which would be better? Wait for the trials in progress (not involving us) to finish, waiting "in fear" (ok, syspense is more like it, our buisness doesn't hings on this. but not everyone has that position)? Or to actually do some patent research and come up with prio