Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> __/ [ William Poaster ] on Tuesday 13 February 2007 13:02 \__
>
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:36:09 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> __/ [ [H]omer ] on Tuesday 13 February 2007 10:58 \__
>>>
>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>>>
>>>>> Antipiracy group makes list of worst-offender nations
>>>>>
>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>> | Microsoft has sought to actively protect its intellectual property in
>>>>> | countries singled out by the filing, including Russia, where one case
>>>>> | involving pirated Microsoft software used by a provincial secondary
>>>>> | school recently garnered international attention.
>>>>> `----
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
> http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/antipiracy-group-makes-list-worst-offender/story.aspx?guid=%7B994F0B4D%2D68F0%2D4EFC%2D8390%2DFA002A4F2188%7D&siteid=yhoo&dist=yhoo
>>>>>
>>>>> Microsoft is believed to have used its Russian BSA equivalent to bully
>>>>> and imprison a poor teacher. The outcome wasn't that which they had
>>>>> hoped for.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Russian Schools to Switch to Linux After Microsoft Piracy Case
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.mosnews.com/news/2007/02/07/linuxschool.shtml
>>>>
>>>> They must have been testing their "make the Chinese pay" stategy on the
>>>> Russians to see if it works.
>>>>
>>>> Oops.
>>>>
>>>> Oh well, it all worked out for the best in the end, eh?
>>>
>>> A subsequent interview with a Microsoft exec/spokesman (in Russian, I
>>> think) had them very embarrassed. Linux got mentioned, Microsoft avoided
>>> the subject and then stubbornly touted the 'virtues' of Windows. I can't
>>> recall where I read this, but it was funny at the time.
>>
>> The 'virtues' of Windows? Surely there's some mistake & he meant
>> *viruses*? Oh, 'scuse me, I forgot Windoze *is* the virus. ;-)
>
> I'm quite sure it was a she. Still, it's better than hearing them slag Linux
> off. They have done this many times before, with or without 'proxies'. Last
> year, for example, a Microsoft guy told the BBC that Open Source/Linux is
> "undependable". The BBC drones just published that without considering
> addition of /balance/. That's how stererotypes are created.
>
That really is top-notch fud, isn't it? I suspect that in this
particular arena, many of the BBC reporters are no more educated about
the issues than the average person in the street, or, for that matter,
the average senior executive. I'm quite certain that, given a little
more information, the BBC would be *very* happy to print a rebuttal, in
that their stock-in-trade is journalism, and they are not funded by
advertising, so have no need to follow any particular line.
One wonders if an awareness group, perhaps like the OSC, could look out
for such things and provide corrections?
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
