Pamela Jones is the chief source of material at Groklaw relating to the SCO vs IBM case claiming that Linux contains Intellectual Property belonging to SCO. She publishes articles detailing her interpretations of nearly every event of note in the case. The service has provided many a geek a lot of insight into what the legal briefs and court statements are actually saying.
SCO has recently tried to subpoena her, only to find her apartment empty and a statement in her blog saying she is going on hiatus for health reasons. There is some scuttlebutt that she may be a paid shill for IBM.
Maybe PJ would have been worthy of a post! It seems it might have generated some interesting discussion ...
Shy person who shuns interviews and avoids reporters, or not a real person at all ... no good article, but this has come up before.
I'm without a strong opinion either way, myself.
PJ responds to e-mails, with a potent sense of ethics (chastises people for pulling petty stunts for their own ends). On the other hand, reporters have had a heck of a time trying to get interviews.
Best guess? Shy paralegal-trained person with ethics? Probably.
It'll be interesting to see if SCO can find her to serve her with a subpoena, but I hope they don't. I've been dealing with a different tech court case for a year now in which I have to give depositions about once every three months, and it is annoying as all hell.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2007-02-15 09:02 pm (UTC)SCO has recently tried to subpoena her, only to find her apartment empty and a statement in her blog saying she is going on hiatus for health reasons. There is some scuttlebutt that she may be a paid shill for IBM.
PJ
Date: 2007-02-15 10:26 pm (UTC)Re: PJ
Date: 2007-02-16 12:51 pm (UTC)Shy person who shuns interviews and avoids reporters, or not a real person at all ... no good article, but this has come up before.
I'm without a strong opinion either way, myself.
PJ responds to e-mails, with a potent sense of ethics (chastises people for pulling petty stunts for their own ends). On the other hand, reporters have had a heck of a time trying to get interviews.
Best guess? Shy paralegal-trained person with ethics? Probably.
It'll be interesting to see if SCO can find her to serve her with a subpoena, but I hope they don't. I've been dealing with a different tech court case for a year now in which I have to give depositions about once every three months, and it is annoying as all hell.