Verily I say unto thee, that Linonut spake thusly:
> * Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:
>> In article <g52ru0$uvk$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Richard Rasker
>> <spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>>> Why doesn't the exception in item 43 apply?
>>>
>>> Because it is taxpayers' money, and their collective right to
>>> know how it's spent outweighs Microsoft's "trade secrets" and
>>> other reasons for obfuscating the cost of their crapware to
>>> society.
>>
>> By that argument, then isn't item 43 completely pointless? If so,
>> why is it there?
Why indeed.
IMO it shouldn't be.
The taxpayers have a right to know how their money is being spent.
> Wiggle room.
I.e. a concession to the monopolists who "lobby" those who made that
exception in the first place.
This is a clear case of corruption, and should be put before parliament,
if not the European Commission, as a matter of urgency.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "Stallman has frequently pointed out, Free Software is by no means
| antithetical to making money: it's just a question of how you make
| money." ~ Glyn Moody: http://tinyurl.com/4wn2l2 (ComputerworldUK)
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
22:46:35 up 201 days, 19:22, 2 users, load average: 0.04, 0.08, 0.17
|
|
