Facts in Groklaw's "Ethics" story
By Al Petrofsky
May 14, 2005
I guess I should start with my overall take on O'Gara's story:
I don't see anything wrong with O'Gara including the publicly-listed groklaw.com registration address and phone number in her story. I also don't have a problem with her pointing out the registrant's prior business connections with Medabiliti. I also think it's reasonable for O'Gara to wonder if there is an IBM-Groklaw connection and to investigate that possibility. I think such an investigation could reasonably include tracking down Jones's current location (which was apparently Connecticut at some point recently).
Had O'Gara found an IBM connection, or something else relevant, I would have wanted to know the details of the path that led to the conclusion. However, because she found nothing, it was pointless and intrusive to publish the Connecticut address, and I agree with the majority that that was a serious breach of ethics.
In PJ's "Intimidation" article on Monday, she declined to confirm or deny any of the facts asserted in O'Gara's article, and I can respect that.
In yesterday's "Ethics" article, however, she makes statements that, as best I can determine, are false and known to her to be false, including false accusations directed at SCO and Dan Lyons, made in the same breath as complaints about false accusations against her.
Specifically, she repeats an old accusation that Lyons told the world that she lived in White Plains, but she's never provided any evidence of that. He once called her a "White Plains, NY paralegal" [ http://forbes.com/2003/12/16/cx_dl_1216linux.html ], but he never said where she lived.
She also says that Lyons "had his facts wrong", but she's never specifically denied working as a paralegal in White Plains. Groklaw's listed address is less than a mile from the state and federal courthouses in White Plains. There are no courts in the unincorporated area known as Hartsdale.
She then accuses SCO of "repeating the false information from Dan Lyons that I supposedly lived in White Plains". I don't believe Groklaw has ever given any evidence that SCO said she lived in White Plains.
Blake Stowell was once reported to have said "Pamela Jones lives ... less than 10 miles from IBM's worldwide headquarters" [ http://linuxinsider.com/story/32990.html ]. The address listed as Pamela Jones's address on the groklaw.com registration is within 10 miles of IBM's headquarters in Armonk.
Lastly, the Pamela Jones who writes groklaw articles makes the strange assertion that the Pamela Jones who registered the groklaw.com domain does not "have anything to do with running Groklaw".
At the start of this article on ethics, she wrote:
[O'Gara] never contacted me before running the story to ask if her facts were true or false. That is a very basic requirement.
Accordingly, I did send the email below to groklaw before posting this comment, but I did not receive any response.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 15:09:03 -0700 From: Al Petrofsky <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Pamela Jones <email@example.com> Subject: Questions about facts in your "Ethics" story I see you wrote at http://groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050512132312302 that Dan Lyons "told the world I lived in White Plains" and that "I didn't live in White Plains, so he had his facts wrong". Could you tell me where and when Lyons told the world this? I know he described you in the article at http://forbes.com/2003/12/16/cx_dl_1216linux.html as "a White Plains, NY paralegal". Are you saying that you never worked as a paralegal in White Plains? You also say: [SCO has] been attacking my reputation for a long time now, including repeating the false information from Dan Lyons that I supposedly lived in White Plains Do you have a citation for that? I know that David Halperin wrote on March 1, 2004 that Blake Stowell said: http://linuxinsider.com/story/32990.html "Pamela Jones lives ... less than 10 miles from IBM's worldwide headquarters" Are you saying that you did not live within 10 miles of Armonk in 2004? Lastly, with respect to Maureen O'Gara's article, you write: neither of the individuals in the article have anything to do with running Groklaw There are half a dozen individuals mentioned in the article. Do I understand correctly that by "neither of the individuals" you mean neither of the two whose addresses were given, a Pamela Jones and a Barbara Sharnik? If the Pamela Jones of 304 N Central Ave in Hartsdale and phone number 914 761 7423 has nothing to do with running Groklaw, then why do the records of dialog.com show that name, address, and phone number for the registrant of groklaw.com? Please note that I am only interested in any on-the-record responses you may have to these queries. Accordingly, I will assume any response you make to this email is on-the-record and I will feel free to publish it. -Al Petrofsky http://openaccess.dialog.com/ip/forms/PTCDomainNames.html Record Date: October 10, 2002 Type: WhoWas Domain Information groklaw.com Status: Registered Registrar: NetworkSolutions, Inc. Expires: September 26, 2003 Created: September 26, 2002 Registrant Information Name: Jones, Pamela Address: 304 N Central Hartsdale, NY 10530 US Administrative Contact Name: Jones, Pamela Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Address: Hartsdale, NY 10530 US Telephone: 914 7617423 Technical Contact Name: VeriSign, Inc. Email: namehost@WORLDNIC.NET Organization: VeriSign, Inc. Address: 21355 Ridgetop Circle Dulles, VA 20166 US Telephone: 1-888-642-9675 Name Servers ns45.worldnic.com - 220.127.116.11 ns46.worldnic.com - 18.104.22.168 Dialog(R) File Number 225 Accession Number 182494644
Copyright 2005 http://www.ip-wars.net/