| Submit your comments on this article |
| Government |
| Judge Rules in Favor of Palantir in Lawsuit Against US Army |
| 2016-11-01 |
| [Defense News] WASHINGTON -- In what could be a big blow to the Army’s current path to develop its internal intelligence software suite -- which has been long been marred in controversy -- a presiding judge in a lawsuit brought by Palantir Technologies protesting the Army’s acquisition efforts for the system has ruled in favor of the Palo Alto-based company. Palantir filed a bid protest in the US Court of Federal Claims against the US Army June 30 for issuing what it says was an unlawful procurement solicitation for the service’s next iteration of its Distributed Common Ground System-Army (DCGS-A) that shuts the company’s commercial offering out of the competition. DCGS-A spit, spit, spit. The protest -- filed through Palantir’s lawyers Boies, Schiller & Flexner, LLP -- argues that the lawsuit was necessary because the Army should be stopped from moving forward on an unlawful and risk-prone software development project that would reinvent the wheel at a very high price. Palantir’s lawyers have called the Army’s acquisition efforts for DCGS-A Increment 1 and Increment 2 both illegal and irrational. Not to mention most intelligence analysts hate it. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #8 AlanC, I was just about to repeat the old chestnut "follow the money". This goes back to Lt Gen Legere overriding her subordinates in favor of the programs she started (DGCS-A), forcing them to change their eval to a favorable one from the original unfavorable one - and furthermore ordered the original unfavorable assessment "to be destroyed" (direct quote). This was all back in 2012 but its roots go further back. Congressman Duncan Hunter fought this back in 2014 IIRC. I thought it had been resolved back then, but I haven't been in that part of the loop (or officially in any other loop) for a while. Field troops and people that actually produce intel for the Army favor Palintir because tis intuitive and does its job without getting in the way. DCGS-A is a typical Army committee and review board designed tool, and to quote Men In Black "... everything we've come to expect from years of Government Training." (sarcasm). I've heard it called: Unusable by anyone that actually has to produce actionable intelligence in a timely manner. Not surprised they won the ruling. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2016-11-01 21:49 |
| #7 You've all missed the key word.....graft. Watch where the money goes and to whom it goes. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2016-11-01 20:28 |
| #6 TW: Palantir is an Intelligence Base Operating System (IBOS) analytic tool. The tool and the products produced by the tool are stored on a secure system. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2016-11-01 20:13 |
| #5 Which one is less likely to be hacked? |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2016-11-01 19:26 |
| #4 Which one will the JAGs use? |
| Posted by: Pappy 2016-11-01 12:38 |
| #3 But, but, but...how do you ignore, prune, dilute, disregard or deny content of thematic interest if analysis and reporting isn't centralized? What other mechanisms of delay and plausible denial do we have? |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2016-11-01 12:20 |
| #2 Agree - this is only common sense. Palantir is superior to Lockheed Martin's DCGS-A system for terror analysis and sharing information across DoD, DoJ and any other LE agencies. Palantir much, much better for targeting and defining the criminal enterprises that support and direct the bad actors. Although DCGS has a good geoint set up. Both should exist and the generals and SES's should should shut and stay out of the fight and give the folks the tools they need. |
| Posted by: Tennessee 2016-11-01 10:13 |
| #1 This ruling has great potential for the military intelligence analyst and his or her future contributions to the Global War on Terror. DCGS has been a proprietary pox and systems sustainment money pit from day #1. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2016-11-01 08:49 |