It isn't a conspiracy at all when the principals themselves publicly ask for summit negotiating proposals about legal defense funds under the EFF or FSF, and then execute their plans later in broad daylight with a lot of fanfare while specifically mentioning their associations with each others organizations. I felt that when it became very clear what was going on last year, the silence about the whole situation in the IT press got even more embarrassing.

I could write a series a short articles about this topic, but it would take a very long time to get everyone up to speed on the historical developments. Here is long discussion of a little known chapter in Linux history for those who are interested. I'll do another diary on the Lasermoon FT/Caldera development later on.

The "essential facility" doctrine has been articulated as a subset of the so-called "refusal to deal" cases which place limitations on a monopolist's ability to exclude actual or potential rivals from competing with it. The doctrine is one long-standing limitation on the general rule that a firm has no obligation to deal with its competitors. Robert Pitofsky, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center; Former Chairman, United States Federal Trade Commission

I think that most of the problems people here have in dealing with discussions about Groklaw are those based upon some sentimental belief in PJ, and not upon any facts that they possess about her, or any errors in the reports we have been providing to them.

I've seen a lot of debate and discussion both here and elsewhere about Groklaw. Oddly enough my viewpoint is seldom represented in the comments I see from others in the community. I thought I'd put in my two cents worth on the off-chance that there are some others that feel the same way I do.