Pamela Jones' Identity of Groklaw Unveiled?

Anonymous-Insider

March 26, 2009

The document found at http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/05/22.html leads to believe Pamela Jones of Groklaw is the same Pamela Jones of Medabiliti Software Inc as shown in a press release found at http://www.exintl.com/web-archive/documents/2003-04-14.htm .

Unless someone in this board can indicate the opposite, Pamela Jones' identity of Groklaw has been unveiled.

PJ can now explain the 2003 2004 Groklaw - Medabiliti Software Inc - XM Network - Exemplar International (known today as Examinetics) connection.

If she doesn't remember, here is some help: http://www.exintl.com/web-archive/documents/index.html

Cheers!

1:21:45 PM

Re: Pamela Jones' Identity of Groklaw Unveiled?

gjleger

March 26, 2009

And these 2 Pamela Jones are the same? They could not be one of the other 106 others in New York state?

What about the rest of the US?

What proof connects them?

2:06:28 PM

Re: Pamela Jones' Identity of Groklaw Unveiled? What proof connects them?

Anonymous-Insider

March 26, 2009

Pamela Jones of Groklaw began her blog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/ .

A few days after she began writing at Weblogs, PJ wrote "Speaking of HIPAA, Do MS's EULAs Violate It?" That article is found in its original address at http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/05/22.html . There are copies of the same document in the Web Archive at http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/05/22.html .

Why is "Speaking of HIPAA, Do MS's EULAs Violate It?" important?

The last paragraph for the article reads "Meanwhile, back on Planet Reality, you can learn about what HIPAA all means here...".

Look for the link on the word 'here' (the first one). The link is pointing to http://www.medabiliti.com/hipaa.html .

This is the proof that connects Pamela Jones of Groklaw to Pamela Jones of Medabiliti Software Inc.

2:40:56 PM

Re: Pamela Jones' Identity of Groklaw Unveiled? What proof connects them?

Tim Ransom

March 26, 2009

<<This is the proof that connects Pamela Jones of Groklaw to Pamela Jones of Medabiliti Software Inc.>>

So what you're saying is that hyperlinking to the web site of a company where someone has the same name as you instantly makes you that person?

Fascinating.

So, if I want to be my namesake Hollywood actor, all I need to do is link to his page on the imdb? Awesome!

Also curious as to why you chose to post here as "Anonymous-Insider" when we all know that you're Kenneth Saborio?

Maybe it was because this Saborio character is widely known to have no credibility. I know I wouldn't want anyone thinking I was him either!

Still, the whole "Insider" angle is a bit dishonest don't you think? I mean, the only thing you appear to be "Inside" of are the underoos of a retard. What? That's what you were referring to?

Nevermind.

Anyhow, keep us posted on those Elvis sightings or whatever, Ken!

3:01:07 PM

Re: Pamela Jones' Identity of Groklaw Unveiled? A link, a product and a motive

Anonymous-Insider

March 26, 2009

The link at http://radio.weblogs.com/0120124/2003/05/22.html is indeed the connection.

Then, XM Network based on open source software and written for Exemplar International Inc is the motive for the 2003 writings at Groklaw.

Medabiliti Software Inc needed some 'credible' documentation to convince Exemplar International XM Network wasn't a risk due to SCO's suit against IBM. The documentation available at Slashdot at the time of the suit and weeks after didn't help Medabiliti at all.

Why has Pamela Jones kept her identity a secret? A conflict of interest with her pro OSS writings.

XM Network was written with open source software and it ended up as a proprietary application. None of the XM Network code was shared back to the community.

In conclusion, in 2003 and 2004 Pamela Jones of Groklaw was funded by Medabiliti Software Inc. When XM Network was finally secure in the hands of Exemplar International Inc (known today as Examinetics) , Medabiliti ceased operations.

Who funded Groklaw in late 2004 through 2009? The research is open for anyone who wants to take the job.

3:19:59 PM

Re: Pamela Jones' Identity of Groklaw Unveiled? A link, a product and a motive

El Corton

March 26, 2009

Medabiliti Software Inc needed some 'credible' documentation to convince Exemplar International XM Network wasn't a risk due to SCO's suit against IBM. The documentation available at Slashdot at the time of the suit and weeks after didn't help Medabiliti at all.

This is actually pretty decent stuff. Easily better than the usual fare on this board. Why the calls here for you to be ignored -- so there will be more room for debates about politics and religion?

It's possible, for all I know, that PJ of Groklaw is also PJ of Medabiliti. I agree with your implication that, if they are the same person, she should have disclosed the relationship when she linked to Medabiliti from Groklaw. Maybe there was even a real conflict of interest, as opposed to the mere appearance of one.

A couple of questions then arise. First, why does a Costa Rican time-share salesman with good English care about any of this? Is it perhaps for the same reason that an even more obscure Belgian with mediocre English cares -- because he lost money investing in something related to SCO or Linux -- or because he stands to gain something by discrediting Groklaw, or Linux? And should he be disclosing that interest on his own web pages?

The other question is why anyone else should care. SCO has always tried to personify the public opposition to its cause in PJ, as if discrediting her would somehow prove its case. The success of Groklaw has encouraged that tendency. PJ's following consists mostly of people who don't think for themselves, but take her legal conclusions as implicit truth. Compared to Groklaw, the rest of the public opposition to SCO has been insignificant. IBM has been completely silent outside the courtroom, and Novell largely so. Most of the few journalists who have covered the litigation, and are unfriendly to SCO, do little besides repeating what they read on Groklaw, and that not very accurately.

Investors, on the other hand, don't rely on the legal analysis of a layman (which PJ is.) Either they do their own research, and draw their own conclusions, or they pay someone to do it for them. And this is where you go completely off the rails.

I assume you're the same "Anonymous-Insider" who commented on this artilce:

Rob Enderle: Sun + IBM: Economics Making the Impossible Possible [ http://www.itbusinessedge.com/cm/blogs/enderle/sun-ibm-economics-making-the-impossible-possible/?cs=31193 ]

IBM might want to acquire Sun Microsystems for protection if...

... a significant amount of source code and procedures from Solaris 8 were used to enhance Linux scalability features.

... a jury in the near future validates the Novell SCO Amendment to Asset Purchase Agreement from October 16 1996 in a way it benefits SCO in regard to Unix copyrights and patents.

Then IBM loses the right to distribute AIX.

You think that if a jury "validates" Amendment 2 to the APA, then IBM will lose the right to distribute AIX. This is a non-sequitur. First of all, Amendment 2 has nothing to do with patents. Second, patents have nothing to do with SCO's purported revocation of IBM's UNIX license. And finally, SCO's title to the UNIX copyrights has nothing to do with the revocation either. The license was purportedly revoked because IBM breached it by contributing its own original code -- not SCO's code -- to Linux. Novell waived the alleged breach, and the court upheld that waiver. That's what the appellate court would have to reverse, and a jury to decide the other way, in order for IBM possibly to lose its right to distribute AIX. That you're ignorant of even these basic facts of the case means that no one is going to take your analysis seriously, regardless of who PJ is.

5:11:29 PM

Source: Investor Village SCOX [ http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=1911, https://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=1911&mn=82968&pt=msg&mid=6948402 ]

Copyright 2009