RE: FreedomScientific, Inc. Asked to Cease Lawsuit Against Serotek Corporation

  • From: "Jeff Bishop" <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 15:24:18 -0700

Might I suggest Bruce that you wait to hear Serotek's position on this?
Also, all we are asking is that they not persue this and focus money on
working on their product.  There is nothing wrong with that from a consumer
perspective. 

-----Original Message-----
From: jfw-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jfw-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Bruce Toews
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 3:03 PM
To: jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: FreedomScientific, Inc. Asked to Cease Lawsuit Against Serotek
Corporation

But I strongly suggest that there is public expression of same, which is why
I have called you on it. Even the domain name, saveserotek.org, is very
leading. the grounds for my accusation are sound, and since you are putting
forth these leading petitions and so forth publicly, they are open to public
criticism from those of us who believe they should be publicly criticized.
You claim to be an accessibility evangelist. Then be prepared for the same
type of scrutiny any other evangelist needs to be prepared for as through
life they evangelize along.

Bruce

--
Bruce Toews
Skype ID: o.canada
E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: DogRiver@xxxxxxxx
LiveJournal: http://brucetola.livejournal.com Radio Show and Podcast:
http://www.totw.net Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries):
http://www.ogts.net Info on the Best TV Show of All Time:
http://www.cornergas.com

On Mon, 21 May 2007, Darrell Shandrow wrote:

> Hello Bruce,
>
> We do not censor comments on our petition.  Sorry.  That would not be 
> appropriate.  People who sign the petition are free to say anything 
> they like, so long as it does not contain any abusive language or 
> otherwise anything that a reasonable person would not consider "family
safe".
>
> As we are sentient human beings, we have opinions, some of which we 
> have publicly posted from time to time.  We have encouraged everyone 
> to do their research and, only if they agree with the petition, then 
> sign it.  The petition statement also does not express any opinion 
> other than that the authors believe Freedom Scientific should stop the 
> lawsuit.  Period.  End of story.
>
> On a more personal note, Bruce, I feel it is unfair for you or anyone 
> else to attach impure motives to this effort when there is no such 
> intent or public demonstration of same.
>
>
> Darrell Shandrow - Accessibility Evangelist Visit 
> http://www.SaveSerotek.org and ask Freedom Scientific to stop suing!
> Information should be accessible to us without need of translation by 
> another person.
> Blind Access Journal blog and podcast: 
> http://www.blindaccessjournal.com Check out high quality 
> telecommunications services at http://ld.net/?nu7i
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bruce Toews" <DogRiver@xxxxxxxx>
> To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 2:30 PM
> Subject: Re: FreedomScientific, Inc. Asked to Cease Lawsuit Against 
> Serotek Corporation
>
>
> Except that many implications are being made, and you are allowing 
> them to be made unchecked. It is clear, just from looking through the 
> signatures so far, that people are under the impression that Freedom 
> Scientific is trying to shut down Serotek. Neither you nor Jeff has 
> done anything to dispel this misconception because, I submit, it fuels 
> anger and makes people more likely to support your petition. This, I 
> also submit, is very irresponsible of you, and is already enough to 
> discredit the petition, which I will never sign. Freedom Scientific 
> maintains, and I see no reason to doubt them, that they have looked 
> for an out-of-court agreement for years, and that Serotek has refused 
> to cooperate. All Freedom wants is for Serotek to change the name of 
> the product, they do not wish the product to be eliminated. By not 
> making this clear and not only allowing but encouraging the 
> misconception (don't try to tell me that saveserotek.org isn't 
> misleading in this respect) you and Jeff discredit both yourselves and 
> any other Access-technology enterprises you claim to represent, even 
> if you try to distance your blogs and your petition from those other
endeavors.
>
> Bruce
>
>
--
JFW related links:
JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/ Scripting mailing list:
http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
JFW List instructions:
To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe
from this mailing list, send a message to jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the
word unsubscribe in the subject line.
Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw

If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or the
way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather contact the
list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


--
JFW related links:
JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
Scripting mailing list: 
http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
JFW List instructions:
To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to 
jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw

If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or the 
way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather contact the 
list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. jfw
  3. Archive
  4. 05-2007