Slashdot Mirror

Let's see - study comes from a Microsoft/Google/Apple-sponsored group that asks site visitors to join the CEOs of those companies to demand that Congress cough up $250 million in K-12 computer science education funding.

http://actonline.org/act-blog/files/Tinfoil-Hat2.jpg [actonline.org]

Senator: “Do recognize that in the words that are used in antitrust kind of oversight, your market share constitutes monopoly, dominant — special power, dominant firm, monopoly firm. Do you recognize you’re — you’re in that area?”

Schmidt: “I would agree, Senator, that we’re in that area" link

That's disingenuous at best.

Microsoft may be one of 59, but most of the rest are Microsoft partners.

To pick only the headlined companies:

These smaller, entrepreneurial technology firms like Sax Software, ComponentSource and EnsuredMail have long been the driving force behind innovation and job growth in the industry.

• Sax Software; Microsoft VB and ActiveX tools.
• ComponentSource; Microsoft WinForms, ASP.NET, WPF and Silverlight tools & controls.
• EnsuredMail; Microsoft Outlook mail filter.

See any pattern there?

Microsoft is one of 59 members of the Association for Competitive Technology
[1]. The only victim here is the readership of Slashdot. There is a concerted campaign here to slate Microsoft regardless of any basis in reality.

Wikileaks claims the president of the ACT has strong ties to Microsoft, but only provides the ironically named, unsourced open-access Wiki, SourceWatch[2], as evidence for this latest smear campaign.

This is not the work of Microsoft. This lobbying was perpetrated by the software industry in general. People round here fail to see, for reasons unbeknown to me, that Microsoft is not exceptionally evil as corporations go.

Bruce Perens has responded to the papers I wrote for ACT without having read them. He made the absurd statement to eWeek, repeated here, that the Daniel Wallace case "shows the GPL is unlikely to give rise to any significant liability." I was talking about GPLv3, not an earlier version and the Daniel Wallace case was based on a predatory pricing theory - not group boycott theory as I discussed. Different facts, different law, different result. It would be great if someone with some legal training look at this, if not Mr. Perens. They are at http://www.actonline.org/documents/ACT-GPLv3-Legal -Risks.pdf and http://www.actonline.org/documents/GPLv3-License-o r-Contract.pdf.

Bruce Perens has responded to the papers I wrote for ACT without having read them. He made the absurd statement to eWeek, repeated here, that the Daniel Wallace case "shows the GPL is unlikely to give rise to any significant liability." I was talking about GPLv3, not an earlier version and the Daniel Wallace case was based on a predatory pricing theory - not group boycott theory as I discussed. Different facts, different law, different result. It would be great if someone with some legal training look at this, if not Mr. Perens. They are at http://www.actonline.org/documents/ACT-GPLv3-Legal -Risks.pdf and http://www.actonline.org/documents/GPLv3-License-o r-Contract.pdf.

Who is Association for Competitive Technology? http://www.actonline.org/aboutus.htm While ACT members include some household names like eBay, Orbitz and Microsoft, our members are primarily small and mid-size companies. Smaller, entrepreneurial technology firms like Sax Software,

Ahhh, yes. Mike Sax. This is the dude that showed up at the committee hearing for the Oregon Open Source bill (HB2892, 2003 session) and made a total FOOL out of himself erecting strawmen to pick a fight with.

He concluded his testimony with this outlandish statement: "Red Hat's business model is to hand out free rice to [prison] inmates and then make money selling constipation medicine." As the author of that legislation, I was in the room and had a hard time keeping from busting out laughing.

But wait! It gets better... he's actually proud of having used the word "constipation" in front of an august panel of lawmakers. It's in his blog here.

Yes, folks, THESE are the people who are opposing Open Standards in government. Constipated indeed!

Ken Barber

The key sentence:
Jim Prendergast is executive director of Americans for Technology Leadership.

Americans for Technology Leadership Founding members
        * Association for Competitive Technology
        * Citizens Against Government Waste
        * Cityscape Filmworks
        * Clarity Consulting
        * CompTIA
        * CompUSA
        * Microsoft Corporation
        * 60Plus Association
        * Small Business Survival Committee
        * Staples, Inc.

http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id =8966&news_iv_ctrl=1037

itizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today urged Congress to eliminate the National Institute of Standards and Technology's Advanced Technology Program (ATP), which funds private sector research and development

These are the other tech programs CAGW doesn't like.
http://www.atp.nist.gov/gems/listgems.htm

Who is Association for Competitive Technology?
http://www.actonline.org/aboutus.htm
While ACT members include some household names like eBay, Orbitz and Microsoft, our members are primarily small and mid-size companies. Smaller, entrepreneurial technology firms like Sax Software,

http://www.actonline.org/principles.htm
ACT and its members believe that the best way to achieve a healthy Tech Environment and a thriving technology industry is to apply free-market principles that promote innovation, investment and competition. ACT is committed to core free-market principles including:

        1. Consumers, not governments, should pick winners and losers in the marketplace.

        2. Small tech businesses thrive on innovation, not regulation and litigation.

        3. The law of regulation includes the corollary of unintended consequences.

  60 Plus has set ending the federal estate tax and saving Social Security for the young as its top priorities. Why should they be against this? It would save money in the long term.

        The Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council (SBE Council) works to influence legislation and policies that help to create a favorable and productive environment for small businesses and entrepreneurship. By educating policymakers, elected officials, the media and the public about the critical role that small businesses play in our economy--and how government actions can positively or negatively affect the small business community.

I don't know about you, but I'd want a refund from the SBE Council if they are supporting not going to an open document standard. A standard means that every small business could work and bid on any part of the project. Odds are most of the work would be done locally and not outsourced overseas. This is a great move for small business. (It is a bad move for those small businesses that store everything in their own little data format that only they know about. Which is exactly what this effort is trying to get rid of in the government realm.)

The key sentence:
Jim Prendergast is executive director of Americans for Technology Leadership.

Americans for Technology Leadership Founding members
        * Association for Competitive Technology
        * Citizens Against Government Waste
        * Cityscape Filmworks
        * Clarity Consulting
        * CompTIA
        * CompUSA
        * Microsoft Corporation
        * 60Plus Association
        * Small Business Survival Committee
        * Staples, Inc.

http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id =8966&news_iv_ctrl=1037

itizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today urged Congress to eliminate the National Institute of Standards and Technology's Advanced Technology Program (ATP), which funds private sector research and development

These are the other tech programs CAGW doesn't like.
http://www.atp.nist.gov/gems/listgems.htm

Who is Association for Competitive Technology?
http://www.actonline.org/aboutus.htm
While ACT members include some household names like eBay, Orbitz and Microsoft, our members are primarily small and mid-size companies. Smaller, entrepreneurial technology firms like Sax Software,

http://www.actonline.org/principles.htm
ACT and its members believe that the best way to achieve a healthy Tech Environment and a thriving technology industry is to apply free-market principles that promote innovation, investment and competition. ACT is committed to core free-market principles including:

        1. Consumers, not governments, should pick winners and losers in the marketplace.

        2. Small tech businesses thrive on innovation, not regulation and litigation.

        3. The law of regulation includes the corollary of unintended consequences.

  60 Plus has set ending the federal estate tax and saving Social Security for the young as its top priorities. Why should they be against this? It would save money in the long term.

        The Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council (SBE Council) works to influence legislation and policies that help to create a favorable and productive environment for small businesses and entrepreneurship. By educating policymakers, elected officials, the media and the public about the critical role that small businesses play in our economy--and how government actions can positively or negatively affect the small business community.

I don't know about you, but I'd want a refund from the SBE Council if they are supporting not going to an open document standard. A standard means that every small business could work and bid on any part of the project. Odds are most of the work would be done locally and not outsourced overseas. This is a great move for small business. (It is a bad move for those small businesses that store everything in their own little data format that only they know about. Which is exactly what this effort is trying to get rid of in the government realm.)

As a VB/ASP developer, I know that IE is not just an "application". It's just the "outer layer" of an entire infrastructure of COM objects and services for internet interaction. Removing that WOULD break much of my code. Having to worry about supporting 10+ "alternatives" would be this developer's Hell! I wish to provide my customers with solutions, NOT a mess of extra plumbing!

For a good discussion of this, I suggest you check out this study on "ACTONLINE":

States' Proposed Remedies in Microsoft Case Could Cost Software Developers and Consumers $80 Billion

Did anyone else notice that the "Association for Competitive Technology" lists Microsoft Corporation as one of its members? Can you say "astroturf"?

Anyone else find it rather odd that supporting opinions from the Associate for Competative Technology and the Center for the Moral Defense of Capitalism? Maybe not. But then they also were both formed in 1998. Call that a coincidence. Also, the Computing Technology Industry Association was formed in 2000 (as far as I can tell).

I didn't bother searching for the other two opinions for the settlement. Here's hoping that the judge can read between the lines here. Lord knows I can't figure out just who is the main contributer to these organizations.

"...a pro-Microsoft trade group, the Washington-based Association for Competitive Technology, said only Microsoft's competitors don't want to see a settlement."

"Microsoft also funded the Association of Competitive Technology for the same exact purpose (of being a front group)."

Not much unless your willing to become a corporate member ($100 minium fee)

Snipped from the ACT Membership agreement

Voting rights and all other benefits priviliges of the Association are restricted to those members of the Association belonging to the "General Membership" (ie - corp. member) category.

Individuals or businesses applying for membership in the "Supporting Member" category acknowledge that no special benefits or privileges are conveyed by such membership except as may be specifically accorded by the Board of Directors according to the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws of the Association.

What a sad, pathetic special interest group. Of course, no matter how completely asinine their mission statement sounds, they have the money to shove whatever they see fit down Washington's throat.

What happens if we were to all join up and subvert it from the inside? C'mon everybody, join and start e-mailing them your input. As a concerned member, they have to listen to you ;)

What a sad, pathetic special interest group. Of course, no matter how completely asinine their mission statement sounds, they have the money to shove whatever they see fit down Washington's throat.

What happens if we were to all join up and subvert it from the inside? C'mon everybody, join and start e-mailing them your input. As a concerned member, they have to listen to you ;)

Not only is M$ a founding member of ATL itself, but they're behind some of the other ATL members too, e.g., ACT. They're heavily involved in others, e.g., Clarity.

There's more (but I don't think I can stomach any more right-wing conservative propaganda. Yikes.