Why lawyers don't like Linux
Professionals who work on the basis of billable hours rarely take the time out to write an article for publication unless they have a valid reason for doing so. That's why I'm generally a bit sceptical when lawyers come out with articles that attempt to make a case against the use of free and open source sofware.
No lawyer would ever be paid the same rates for a third-rate article about FOSS as he/she is paid for listening to a client - hence my scepticism.
But, surprisingly, over the past three months two members of the legal profession have taken the time to pen what they, no doubt, consider to be serious objections to the use of FOSS.
In one case, I went into detail about the article and pointed out some of the areas in which it was deficient in reasoning.
This time, I didn't think it worth bothering to do so, because the article contains quite ridiculous claims - and the Groklaw website author, Pamela Jones, has shot down the credibility of the author in a much more forensic manner than I ever could.
But it is interesting to muse on something more general, which, nevertheless, is connected. Why do lawyers dislike Linux?