Micoshaft Fraudster and Asstroturfer Moshe Goldfarb wrote on behalf of
Micoshaft Corporation:
> On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:52:24 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>
>> Regarding Microsoft's excuse, previous reports contradict this. Microsoft
>> seems to have just felt a little lazy. No competition = complacence.
>
> But yet you spam message after message claiming Microsoft is going out of
> business, Microsoft is terrified of Linux and open sores software.
Micoshaft should be terrified of the courts but they
own big law firms so they walk with impunity.
Micoshaft has through deliberate and calcualting negligence
allows users to be exposed to vulns. They had not
sought to warn users over a period of years
despite taking their money. Had users known about
the absense of a fix, these
users would have shifted to Open Office and the
spreadsheet programs free of charge.
http://www.openoffice.org
And they could have protected themselves.
The fact they could not because of the withholding
of vital security information, any damage done to their
systems is intentional on the part of micoshaft and requires legal remedies
to compensate victims. The damages should be punitive
and substantial to prevent a recurrance.
Sun$ which sells Star Office competitor to micoshaft
probably has a legal case against Micoshaft for same old
anti-trust behaviour that needs to be punished yet again.
By not disclosing the vulns that would have allowed
users to migrate to Star Office, Sun$ the business has
been hurt and requires redress through the courts
for a span of several years of market abuses by micoshaft.
|
|
