There's been a lot of talk in the last couple days about the fact that SCO is trying to subpoena Pamela Jones of Groklaw. For years, SCO has claimed that Pamela Jones is really a front for a group of IBM lawyers, and this latest move has started that discussion going again. However, in all the "does she or does she not exist?" questioning, an important point is missed: what does it matter? Groklaw has remained an excellent source of information about the SCO lawsuit, consistently pointing out accurate information about how far off-base SCO has been with the lawsuit. Whether it comes from some random paralegal or the entire legal team at IBM, the quality of the site has been consistent. If SCO is really so concerned about Jones and Groklaw, there's a really simple solution. They can just respond to the critics on the site. The problem is that, so far, they haven't been able to do so credibly. Every time SCO tries to respond, they just end up digging themselves into a deeper hole. Instead of worrying about who Pamela Jones is (or is not), why don't they put some effort into saving their troubled company?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Feds Insist It Must Be Kept Secret Whether Or Not Plaintiff In No Fly List Trial Is Actually On The No Fly List
- Documents Show LA Sheriff's Department Hired Thieves, Statutory Rapists And Bad Cops
- Unarmed Man Charged With Assault Because NYC Police Shot At Him And Hit Random Pedestrians
- Judge In No Fly Case Explains To DOJ That It Can't Claim Publicly Released Info Is Secret
- German Court Says CEO Of Open Source Company Liable For 'Illegal' Functions Submitted By Community