Slashdot Mirror


Public Comment Period In MS/DOJ Battle

PacketMaster writes: "Somthing that I didn't know, and perhaps many others didn't know is that now this settlement by the federal government and some of the states will go back before the judge and be opened for a 60 day commentary period by the public as required by the Tunney Act (See Sec 5,USC Sec 16). This is a great opportunity for everyone to send in their intelligent and informed opinions on the matter. If some of the major developer groups (i.e. Samba) would put together a well-thought-out and easy-to-read commentary on their concerns, maybe we as a community can affect the process. See the ZDNet article for more information." No forum for public comment is up yet (first, the proposed settlement must be published in the Federal Register), but should be in the near future.

3 of 204 comments (clear)

  1. Best way to contribute by overshoot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We all know that the deal sucks, we all tend to agree that the deal-making process sucks, and most of us think that the deal-makers have serious personal problems.

    Don't bother telling the Judge that part.

    What we can tell her that the Court might actually listen to is this: how can Microsoft wiggle through loopholes? A consent decree is, when you get down to it, code. Legal rather than computer code, but code nonetheless. Let's apply the famous myriad eyeballs to finding bugs in the code here, and tell the Court in clear terms (as the Samba team have) just how it's broken.

    Let's tell the Court what they don't know about this deal.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Best way to contribute by Surak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What we can tell her that the Court might actually listen to is this: how can Microsoft wiggle through loopholes? A consent decree is, when you get down to it, code. Legal rather than computer code, but code nonetheless. Let's apply the famous myriad eyeballs to finding bugs in the code here, and tell the Court in clear terms (as the Samba team have) just how it's broken.

      Well, that's just it. It won't be a consent decree, it will be a court-imposed penalty. What penalties the court will be allowed to give is unclear to me, but I'm fairly certain that the court-imposed penalties will be much harsher than anything the DOJ and Microsoft and 19 states were going to work out together.

      Of course, the ruling itself will be like code, yes. The question is, how good is the judge at writing said code? Because Microsoft, unlike in the case of a consent decree, will have no say in what goes into that penalty whatsoever. But neither will the DOJ or anyone else but the judge really, unless she solicits their opinions on what the penalty should be or unless she adopts the consent decree in draft form, but I don't see either one of those happening.

      Also, said ruling won't be available until the judge writes it. Which AFAIK won't be until *after* the 60-day comment period mandated by the Tunney Act.

      So we could pick apart the consent decree, but there's no guarantee that's what she'll use and in fact it's probably NOT what she'll use.

      But then again, IANAL either. :)

  2. Calls for a 10 questions Interview by smittyoneeach · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do an interview, let the /. unwashed mod up the 10 best, or at least 10 lucid, remarks, filter them through the proper suit to correct the general non-command of English you see on here, and submit.

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear