[msg]

How is it an immature attack to point out that an advocate for the opposing side failed to predict the future? Or that he has no real expertise? It goes to his credibility.

[ewillbefull]

I'm not sure how the intellectual properly blogging scene operates, but it doesn't seem necessary to call Florian a "self-described patent expert" unless they have some personal vendetta against him. It shouldn't be relevant to the case anyway, as their legal analysis should be impartial and not about what some random blogger said.

[gillianseed]

He is not some 'random blogger', he is paid by Oracle to present himself as an expert on patents and put an Oracle-positive spin on the case. In effect he is an Oracle spokesperson.

[taligent]

That's being disingenuous.

Many bloggers are paid for by large companies without necessarily 'shilling' for them. It seems to be de rigeur in fact.

[gillianseed]

Really? Are you saying that you believe bloggers who are being paid by companies are reporting objectively on those same companies? Seriously? Oracle pays Florian Mullers salary, so yes he is 'shilling' for them.

[ktizo]

But if they are commenting directly on the actions of a company that is paying them, then they are usually in the business of PR.

[taligent]

And how is his credibility or positions relevant to Groklaw ?

That's the immature part. You can report facts and do fantastic analysis without trying to take shots at your competition.