Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Antitrust: EU Commission ensures 2004 Decision compliance against Microsoft

Micoshaft Asstroturfer amicus_curious berger wrote on behalf of Micoshaft
Corporation:

> 
> "High Plains Thumper" <highplainsthumper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:fjeefm$58m$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://europa.eu/rapid
pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/07/1567&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
>>
>> or http://tinyurl.com/yqljzw
>>
>> [quote]
>> Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes stated: ?I welcome that Microsoft
>> has finally undertaken concrete steps to ensure full compliance with the
>> 2004 Decision. It is regrettable that Microsoft has only complied after a
>> considerable delay, two court decisions, and the imposition of daily
>> penalty payments. However, the measures that the Commission has insisted
>> upon will benefit computer users by bringing competition and innovation
>> back to the server market. The Commission will remain vigilant to ensure
>> that Microsoft continues to respect its compliance obligations and does
>> not engage in other anti-competitive behaviour. I have always said that
>> open source software developers must be able to take advantage of this
>> remedy: now they can.?
>> [/quote]
>>
>> Following has an interesting statement regarding Open Source as being the
>> only competition Microsoft has in the server market.
>>
>> [quote]
>> Microsoft has a 95% market share on the desktop operating system market,
>> and in excess of 70% on the market for work group server operating
>> systems. Open source work group server products are virtually the only
>> alternative for users and are thus the main surviving competitive
>> constraint on Microsoft. More competition on this market should offer
>> consumers more innovative products, with improved functionality at better
>> prices. For that reason, it is vital to the effectiveness of the 2004
>> Decision that Microsoft also complies by giving access open source
>> developers access to the interoperability information.
>> [/quote]
>>
>> At least now it seems that we have at least EU to provide a protective
>> eye against abuses:
>>
>> [quote]
>> In addition to the two licences Microsoft will publish an irrevocable
>> pledge not to assert any patents it may have over the interoperability
>> information against non-commercial open source software development
>> projects.
>> [/quote]
>>
> I still think that this is a strong move against the GPL.  If you look at
> the cite, you see:
> 
> "First, ?open source? software developers will be able to access and use
> the interoperability information. Second, the royalties payable for this
> information will be reduced to a nominal one-off payment of ?10 000.
> Third, the royalties for a worldwide licence including patents will be
> reduced from 5.95% to 0.4% - less than 7% of the royalty originally
> claimed."
> 
> So a developer pays 10K euros for the disclosure and .4% product royalty
> on
> use.  That's quite a bargain, considering the original development costs
> to Microsoft, 


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!
Cut and Paste BSD code costs micoshaft corporation $10K???

Micoshaft developers being ordered to fsck with Samba costs micoshaft
$10K???

You are a bloody asstroturfing fool!


> but, even so, the GPL does not allow for any payments, which
> would preclude any of this technology compatibility being released under
> GPL.

A clean API that works can be released under GPL with 
a driver to make up for the rest.



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index