Hacker News Reader

Comment by jasonlotito | Hacker News Reader

> but I'm not above thinking that groklaw is controlled/funded by a much larger power.

Proof? Anything? This line has been used since the early days of SCO. I've never seen anything resembling proof.

Indeed, Groklaw has earned the trust I give them. Do not mistake ignorance for insightfulness.

I really like the blog and its my go to site for legal software news and I don't think there is some kind of higher power backing it but I'm still very careful with everything I read there. I haven't seen any evidence of corporate backing, but there is no attempt to hide bias. Its definitely far from an objective news source.

> Its definitely far from an objective news source.

Let me know when you find one.

What bias? You may be confusing bias with opinion. "Equal time" is not unbiased reporting, and having a clear opinion is not bias, unless your opinion turns out to be consistently wrong.

The editorializing gets tiresome when I just want to find out what happened during the trial. It feels like reading the Daily Mail; you can get actual news from there, but you have to be constantly on your guard against osmosing their opinions.

PJ is suspiciously silent when it is IBM using patents to threaten open source projects, or when it is IBM writing in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court that:

   Patent protection has promoted the free sharing
   of source code on a patentee’s terms---which has
   fueled the explosive growth of open source software
   development

[citation needed]

The IBM quote is from their Bilski brief.

By "suspiciously silent" you mean "Groklaw covered it", right?

http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20090926131450...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com