In comp.os.linux.advocacy, AqD
<aquila.deus@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Thu, 15 May 2008 19:00:23 -0700 (PDT)
<bc31dcfb-7ffd-4777-b10a-d722f54b9f44@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On May 15, 7:13 pm, High Plains Thumper
> <highplainsthum...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> AqD wrote:
>>
>> > The existence of Linux and Firefox just prove the M$ monopoly
>> > doesn't exist, and all of those accusations are false.
>> > Monopoly cannot exist, unless the company put a gun in front
>> > you - otherwise you can always make your own products.
>> >
>> > Besides, most governments have fairly large bureaucracy which
>> > can act as customers to affect the market without using forced
>> > laws that violate human rights.
>>
>> According to the US Department of Justice, Microsoft engaged in
>> anticompetitive licensing of its operating system to dominate the
>> competition:
>>
>> *1994:*
>>
>> http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f0000/0046.htm
Of interest: #23, #24, #26, and the general verbiage of
"exclusionary licenses". I'll admit to some curiosity
as to who is being excluded, though part of the issue is
simply that OEMs are locked into long duration contracts
(which they willingly signed, so whose fault is it
really?), and therefore might feel they need to sell
DOS&Windows to the exclusion of all other solutions,
just to get their money's worth.
>
> I don't see how this can cause anti-competition.
Having a license lasting longer than the expected product
lifetime is an interesting quirk.
> Windows is a M$
> product, and they're free to do anything with the API they provide -
> which they're NOT obliged to provide and there is no guarantee that
> any 3rd-party softwares should be able to run on windows.
>
> If software companies find Microsoft unfriendly on this issue, why
> don't they switch to other platforms or make their own? Nobody is
> forcing anyone to use windows or to develop windows applications.
>
> The US Department of Justice is ridiculous.
And now paralyzed. Expect no action, especially since
Microsoft has already settled the matter. (It'll be
interesting to see whether Bush initiates a suit against
the EUC on behalf of a wronged American corporation.
Of course, Bush is already in very hot water anyway; no
need to turn up the control to "boiling".)
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
/dev/signature: Not a text file
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
|
|
