[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Message 00591: Re: nytimes

right, what I mean is that if the NYT piece doesn't go I'm totally up
for using my name with stunts like forwarding the criminal attorney

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Carl Malamud <xxxxxxx@media.org> wrote:
> On Feb 10, 2009, at 4:39 PM, Aaron Swartz wrote:
>>>> and if the schwartz gives up on getting the nyt piece out, i'm happy
>>>> to talk about alternate ways of going public
>>> heh.  that train has left the station ...
>> ?
> This is already semi-public, just not publicized.  that is the uscourts.gov
> page.  We've had a major WIRED piece, Ambrogi is tracking it, we're getting
> daily uploads to our scribd area.
> That process will continue ... I have a letter from ILCD ready to publish,
> likewise a letter to the Veteran's court of appeals.  John knows about all
> this.
> I'm looking at a variety of plan b's just in case nytimes doesn't happen.
>  That's what I wrote to you about ... I will continue to publish any letters
> from the courts as they occur, will probably fire off a couple more letters,
> and just wanted to know how public you wanted to be.  For example, one plan
> B I'm considering is to send my bill for $992.50 from our criminal lawyer to
> the chief justice and ask him to pay it since the AO of the Courts totally
> overreacted.
> It is not a big problem if you don't want you name used ... I had reached
> the point where I thought that would be useful and definitely wanted to ask
> you before doing so.  I hear you and Schultze and it is ok not to use your
> names.
> Carl