Slashdot Mirror
Judge Grants MS's No-Press Request
jeffy124 writes: "We already know that Microsoft has requested to bar the media from proceedings in the anti-trust suit. Judge Kollar-Kotelly has granted that request. A 1913 law permitted public access to anti-trust proceedings, but only if the federal government were involved. Because the case no longer includes the feds, that law no longer applies, so MS has successfully closed the doors to the press and public." An anonymous reader points out this coverage at InfoWorld as well.
if only they could close the security doors on their products...
Now maybe they can sneak one of their settlements past the public. How about 2 billion dollars in free software to needy kids that purchase Windows XP?
Coding Blog
Who does get to know about what is going on in court. This type of trial should be public, mostly b/c of MS's history.
Carpe meam simiam!
That's it! I'm packing my bags and moving to Canada. I'm now convinced that our government is in the back pocket of MS and corporate interests. Enron is just the beginning. Welcome to the end...
ugh...
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
It funny how many weird/dumb law we have, in this case (no pun intended, lack thereof).
What are we to do? Well What can we do. The Law is the law, and creating a law for this specific incident would be a little rediculous. Oh well You win some you lose some, unless you are a citizen, then you only lose. (Yes! not LOOSE like some of you spell it)
This page left intentionally blank.
How about this conspiracy theorists? Does this in effect give m$ a media monopoly to cover the trial in its own self interest? Hmmm
Somebody had to mention it.
Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
Generally any government, institution, or corporation that denies information to the public besides for security issues is corrupt.
I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule. -Randal, Clerks
Now, are the hearings just closed to the media, or close completely to the public. I would think that they couldn't be, and that they shouldn't be since they would be publicly involved. If so, there could be people that would attend the hearings with recording devices, and they could just anonymously release them into the public, where media producers could randomly pick them up and use them. Kind of like the undercover investigations some news sources produce.
Appropriate that they wouldn't want press. Pressing anything crashes Windows.
This only applies to the deposition gathering process. This is the normal way such things are done. Allowing public access, as was done in the DOJ proceedings, is the exception.
see, real companies (not open source 'pseudo-companies' that don't ever make a cent.. eg. VA Linux) care about their public image. Therefore it makes sense that ms would do this, which is just fine and legal. Is this really news? nope.
The Slashdot Effect: A new for
Their primary motive is probably to put themselves in the position to leak information as they see fit. It's not so much to keep the press from reporting about this as it is to have greater control over the content of the reporting that does get done.
visit the hwky website for a lyrical genius infusion.
Now this is kind of scary, as the media have the media's best interest, not society's or either of the party's involved. Oh wait, one of the plaintiff's is AOL Time Warner?
I do not like to be the one with the extreme Orwellian predictions, but allowing the media to be heard is just asking for trouble. Imagine a case involving a popular figure... "And now the court will hear from the National Enquirer."
Troll Like a Champion Today
Press won't be allowed to witness the depositions. BFD, really, as those often don't take place in court. The proceedings in court, however, cannot be private.
And the depositions become public record once they're submitted as part of the case. So, there won't be any reporter's spin on what he saw/heard during the depositions....you'll just have to read them yourself.
After all, winning a case like this could prove difficult when you're not allowed in the courtroom.
"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance" - Derek Bok
...does M$ want to keep it's users clueless about the machine itself by dumbing down the OS, they also want to keep it's users clueless about their bad business practices as it continues to get exposed.
Great.
Bill still wins, even when losing. Gotta love America...
I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
The shredders are kept on idle .. waiting for the next assignment.
see title
The antitrust laws were made to protect consumers, but it seems consumers aren't getting to see how the antitrust laws are working for them. Just doesn't seem right to me, but I'm no lawyer (just a consumer).
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
I can already see the posts piling up about how this proves that the government is in MS's pockets. I hate to break the news to you, but all this proves is that everyone has to follow the laws. I don't like the decision, but if the law states that only trials involving the feds are open, then that is what it states. You can't ignore this law and still try to punish people (or MS in this case) for ignoring laws. I don't like the law and think it should be changed, but I can't fault MS for using the law. If we expect MS to follow the law (which is what this is all about) we can't complain when the follow the law, even if it is to their own advantage.
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
.. AOL is not one of the plaintiffs. This is the original anti-trust suit against Microsoft, not AOL's suit.
visit the hwky website for a lyrical genius infusion.
seeing what the press coverage ended up doing to Jackson's ruling (his interviews with the press painted him as being biased, which had a part to play in the appealate decision to remand the case..) maybe it's a good think CK won't be under the same scrutiny.
Indie rock lives! b-side!
I can see why SlashDot would feel the need to post this. It IS pretty newsworthy when The US of A decides to FOLLOW IT'S OWN LAWS. Oh, wait, the laws don't apply to MS, do they? All are equal, some are just less equal, right? Or did they forfeit their rights somehow? If so, that just means that everybody else in the US can 'forfeit' their rights. Slippary slope.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
the crew knew they would probably loose their lives in this run
It is doubtful that the crew would "let loose or release" their lives; that sounds rather like suicide, and context would lead me to believe that was not your intended meaning. The word you were looking for was lose.
Congratulations AC, you have been participant #8 in my campaign to rid Slashdot of this error.
Proudly correcting Slashdot's most irritating linguistic error since 2002.
Hey, dude, check this out..
0 1/ virus_alert.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/office/20
Look at the bottom of the page:
"If you are using an Macintosh e-mail program that is not from Microsoft, we recommend checking with that particular company. But most likely other e-mail programs like Eudora are not designed to enable virus replication."
Outlook enables viruses BY DESIGN!
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Mod this guy down, he's distracting us from the kneejerk, fearmongering comments everyone should be reading.
If you bring common sense to slashdot, then the terrorists have won.
Please mod this up. This is exactly right.
Come play Heroes of Might and Magic Mini online.
butbutbut...
the government DIDN'T help Enron...
that's why they collapsed...
duh...
In the Real World, that is, outside Slashdot, AOL Time Warner is sometimes considered part of media. It is mostly in here we tend to think of them as some abstract nastyness which make our lives stink in vague undefined ways.
"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance" - Derek Bok
Just another example of security through obscurity
1. Don't worry--with microsoft's security problems, the proceedings will leak out somehow :-)
2. I just realized that it is possible the court system hearing the case may themselves use a computer system run by microsoft's products. That could have some interesting implications. (Like the judge typing up his opinion then realizing he's using MS Word to type it. Possibly causing him to change some aspect of his opinion.)
----
Quake is just a crutch for those who can't handle Descent.
Jerry
Yep, Bill's wrist will be sore for three seconds after this judge gets through with him.
I begin to wonder how this shit makes it paste the lameness filter.
i hate pansy republicans
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Shut up, looser.
Well it looks as if Bill is once again going to just get his hands slapped. If it were any other company this would of been settled long ago, I guess if you have bottomless pockets to drag this on for as long as they have you'll always buy justice...
rm -r windows
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
what kind of crazy url is zdnet.com.com??????
Decisions and briefs aren't being sealed here. We'll still have a window (urp!) into the progress of the suit.
"Even if you are on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there" - Will Rogers
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Excellent post. You had the linux kiddies right with you to the end, then punched them from behind. Good job.
This is not trolling. Why is the public barred? I thought trials dealing with public matters were public. So, are they saying that this trial does not concern us, as citizens? Or is the corporate machine exempt?
STOP POSTING MORE CRAPPY SLASHDOT STORIES.
And any trolls in this forum...YOU MAY CONTINUE EATING MY SHORTS. The Elvis has landed...thankyou...and shutup TIMOTHY!
If it's OJ Simpson, then the judge is a publicity whore, and it turns into a media circus. If it's Microsoft, there's no media to "show us the truth." I'll take my chances for once on something _not_ becoming a media circus, and maybe a cool-headed judge doing right by the law. Let's hope he's a cool-headed hangin' judge!
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
Our more recent, highly publicized court cases have fallen prey to this media frenzy. Now, OJ Simpson walks as a free man, thanks to the travesty of justice that was his trial, and Bill Clinton's legacy is now "the guy who got a hummer in the Oval Office", instead of "the guy who purjured himself, obstructed justice, and disgraced the Presidency".
So I ask the Slashdot community: is extensive media coverage of the Microsoft proceedings necessary? As is demonstrated on this site daily, this issue is an emotionally-charged one, and the media hounds will do more harm by running wantonly with similar emotion. The focus of Microsoft's business practices will be lost, and people it claims to serve will be misled, all in the name of 'getting the scoop'.
Please consider letting the justice system do it's duty without undue distraction. Trust me, with the power at Microsoft's disposal, their task is difficult enough as it is.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Voters of the 2000 election were told that the press would not say who was "winning" until the election was basically over. Then they called the states when they were done voting, and Florida 20 minutes before.
The press gets away with a lot of stuff, and we shouldn't expect that they wont get away with this.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
Microsoft has reasons that the mind cannot know. We are but children, not all is revealed to us. Seek inner peace, and have faith that the Beast of Redmond will deliver us from this nightmare that is Linux.
And isn't it strange that the day after public comment closed that this would happen?
So the Public is not allowed to know what the Public says?
Something is seriously wrong with this picture
It looks like reporters ARE going to be allowed in. In this AP story, the judge rules that reporters CAN listen to pretrial depositions, unless MS can prove that confidential information would be disclosed.
Oh right, like MicroStuff themselves are not going to continue to spend billions of dollars telling everyone that they are being persecuted for inovating, that they have exonerated themselves beyond a shodow of a doubt and that they will continue to bring you the world's finest software without interuption. The spin never stops. Pray tell, why are you here defending the evil empire's preference for the dark?
A normal company would want the widest possible public hearing when accused. What do they want to hide? While you dissmiss "reporter's spin", let's not forget the reason spin comes about, that the new institution itself was bought or has an interest in the outome of what they report. This is an outrage that only be protected against by having multiple news outlets owned by independent companies. Cool reason can only go so far when presented with lies. Reason only works with truth, and the truth only comes from informed but disinterested third parties.
It's too bad we won't get the details of the proceedings. A room full of reporters would be a good thing. Every paper in the US printing the mindless pro Microsoft wire story is what you will get. The news outlets that will be excluded will be the indepenent ones, Wired, the Register, and anything else not owned by M$, Disney, GE, Westinghouse or the Associated Press International. Microboft will make up what it wants you to hear, and it's usual friends will quote it as honest news. The depostition may not be important, but there's no reason to keep it secret.
If only they would put 1/100th of that money and effort into implimenting widely accepted standards and security measures, they would not need to break the law.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Grammar aside, it's a tempting thought...
SB
It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
it would be a safe bet to guess that M$NBC or any other M$ ownerized tv network won't be covering this without a significant deal of spin...while im sure AOL/TW owned networks will be barkin up the tree to find something through this story that will bury M$, we can only hope....one corporate giant crushed by another, hrmmm......which is the lesser of two evils?
The Associated Press is saying the opposite in this story, titled Reporters OK'd at Microsoft Hearing. I quote the first paragraph: "The judge in the Microsoft antitrust case ruled Tuesday that news organizations can listen to lawyers question technology executives in pretrial depositions unless Microsoft can prove the sessions would reveal confidential information."
For the public good! Don't let anyone know or say anything.
2+2=5. Once you have mastered this, all else follows.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
please mod this exactly the same. it does a fine job wherever the hell it is.
foo foo.
but where the hell ami?
No more web page like this remains on MS web site as of 9:26PM CST. Anyone got mirror?
If the depositions become public record once they are submitted as part of the case, they can form the basis for news articles at that time. So it seems somewhat pointless to ban the media when the depositions initially take place.
As for 'spin', true objectivity is not always attainable, but the media is often accused of flagrant bias for no good reason. (To paraphrase an old saying "never attribute to conspiracy what can be adequately explained as f---up!").
IMHO, reporters do a really good job at 'summarising' and 'interpreting' events to the general public. In the case of court reporting, sceptics are always entitled to attend court or read the original documents for themslves, but most people have neither the time nor inclination to do this. The media ensures the widest possible audience has the necessary information.
So it only applies to depositions? Does this mean we won't get to see Bill being interviewed on tape? That was one of the most entertaining parts of the trail to date!
:-).
This talks about some of the funny parts (arguing over the definition of "define"
Other things he couldn't define were "we", and "compete." What a hoot. Another great quote: "I have no idea what you're talking about when you say 'ask'." It really smacked of a guy who had some professional coaching on how to dodge questions, but executed it very inelegantly.
If not showing this type of questioning publicly is indeed what the court order means, I'm not surprised Microsoft fought hard for it. Bill just looked as dishonest and sneaky as many people think that he is.
-me
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
Thanks for pointing out the every-present slashdot leftist bias.
Free Unix? Free Windows. http://www.reactos.com
Make a travesty of justice yet again.
How is this any different from Enron?
Oh right, like MicroStuff themselves are not going to continue to spend billions of dollars telling everyone that they are being persecuted for inovating, (sic)that they have exonerated (sic)themselves beyond a shodow (sic)of a doubt and that they will continue to bring you the world's finest software without interuption. (sic)The spin never stops.
But these are depositions. Whatever is said outside the courtroom doesn't really have any bearing on what the contents of the depos are. Any attorney with half a brain will not allow the PR line to be the entirety of the testimony. In fact, I seriously doubt that any of Microsoft's public mouthpieces will even get a subpeona.
Pray tell, why are you here defending the evil empire's preference for the dark?
I'm not. I can read the depositions, and they won't be full of spin. As I said in the previous post, those become part of the court record, available for anyone to examine.
Reason only works with truth, and the truth only comes from informed but disinterested third parties.
And herein lies the fallacy of your argument. You, as a person, simply because you exist, have the ability to reason. You are capable of taking information from many different sources and divining the truth from those sources. Sure, the story you get from MSNBC will be slanted towards MS. The kewl story posted here will be slanted towards Microsoft's detractors. Read the two, and decide for yourself where the truth lies. You can do that, can't you?
If only they would put 1/100th of that money and effort into implimenting (sic)widely accepted standards and security measures, they would not need to break the law.
Somehow I think it'd take more than that to make Windows secure. But I'm from the camp that says it's eternally fsck'd due to the attempts to keep it backwards-compatible. Their securest system, NT, has morphed into XP, which has already developed serious security holes. If they were smart, they'd start with a BSD core OS, and build up from there.
But that has little chance of ever happening.
(AP newswire article)
If I'm interpreting this correctly (and IANAL), seems that the judge agrees that the statute requiring open access to the depositions doesn't apply in this circumstance. In fact, the judge seems to be requiring MS to do the heavy lifting demonstrating why the media should be excluded from a particular deposition. My guess would be that MS's legal team will concentrate on sealing any depositions of the big guns (pretty much anybody above product manager level, or whatever the equivalent is at MS), so that they don't experience a repeat of the Gates video debacle. The small fry will be left open, but they probably won't offer anything we haven't already heard.
In any event, I'm not sure what the flap is about even if some/all depositions are closed. The judge can only consider what is actually presented to her as formal evidence (which will end up being a subset of the deposition material IMHO). Deposition transcripts entered as evidence will be available to the public.
Besides, it's not like the technical/media community is suffering from a shortage of "Two-fisted MS business strategy" stories right now anyway...
It's still there, keep your pants on. Just remember to take out the space that Slashcode puts in the URL to prevent page widening posts.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
>>"the guy who got a hummer in the Oval Office"
I thought the president road around in armored limos and suburbans. And why would he park it in the oval office? Nothing about your post adds up at all. Also, hummers get bad gas mileage. They wouldn't sell me one with a gun turret still on there, the bastards. This concludes our broadcast day.
This only applies to the deposition gathering process.
Exactly. And heaven forbid Microsoft acts in it's own interests in complete accordance with the law. Next thing you know they will figure out how to cut development costs to increase their profits. It's as if they're trying run a business in the USA of all places!
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
How the hell did this get modded as Insightful?! THE MODS ARE ON CRACK! That's the stupidest thing I've ever seen in my life! You people are MORONS!
If there is especially sensitive material then it is appropriate to ban the press. For example, in Australia it is illegal to report on proceedings in the Family Court, which deals with divorce and custody issues.
But this has to be balanced with the fact that we (the US, Canada, Australia etc) are a democracy and one of the fundamental principles of democracy is the fair and open administration of justice. Having faith in the justice system can only come from regular public scrutiny, which includes press scrutiny.
I don't agree with your suggestion to shut the press out at the "slightest perception of a problem". It's very easy for a company like Microsoft to create the perception of the problem, when this is not necessarily backed up by reality. To me, 'erring on the side of caution' entails allowing public/press access unless there is a very compelling reason not to. And by that I don't just mean the potential embarrassment of a multibillion dollar software company.
I dont care much about technicalities, but if reporters cant report about this, great. Remember, MS always wins when it is in the news.
Now Bill can't use his press time on the stand to pimp .NET
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
Does this matter all that much? The tech-curious members of the public-- namely, us-- would probably keep an eye on any proceedings as if it were OJ 2, so we're missing out on something. But the court of public opinion has already rendered judgment, and Microsoft has undoubtedly lost as much respect from the whole antitrust ordeal as it ever could.
They'll make any attempts to twist the law that they can-- wouldn't you?-- but the damage in the public's mind is probably already done. Unless any judgments are absolutely absurd in either direction, I don't really think anybody can cry foul here.
"the guy who purjured himself, obstructed justice, and disgraced the Presidency"
If you don't mind my saying so (even if you do, for that matter), it seems to me that with the possible exception of Carter, this describes every U.S. President in the past 40 years.
"the guy who got a hummer in the Oval Office"
That too.
What is Microsoft so worried about that they don't want the proceedings covered by media? Surely a corporate entity intent on settings things right would want the greatest transparency possible.
It is possible that Microsoft is about to propose another remedy and hopes that this time, since the media will be barred from seeing the proceedings, the outcry will be lessened enough that some of the remaining states will be willing to cave in.
--
Some people say there is no money in Linux. Well, the problem about Windows is that Microsoft wants all the money. At least in Linux I don't have to worry about big brother being able to murder my business using dirty tricks.
What kind of business case does a company have when its competitor can prevent all its products from being on the shelf at whim? Thats what happened when OEMs tried to bundle products Microsoft didn't approve of with new computers.
The government has a moral obligation here. Oddly, it appears only a few of the states are answering.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
The Post Of Death debacle has washed so many moderators out of the running that the slashcode's attempts to have a certain number of moderators has sucked in more newbie moderators, many of which have always longed in their heart to be hall monitors, security gaurds, or otherwise have the opportunity to abuse some puny authority.
I believe the judge should make Microsoft release the source code, internal documentation and all trade secrets to the public domain within a week. Furthermore, the judge should make Microsoft evenly split all their money and assets between all free and open source software projects in existance, even those projects started for the sole purpose of getting that free money, as the purpose isn't to help free software and open source projects, but to ruin Microsoft. Furthermore, the judge should rule that all shareholders, management, employees, family and friends of employees, and anybody else who is even remotely related to Microsoft must give all their personal assets to the aforementioned free software and open source projects. Furthermore, all those people must sell themselves as slaves and give that money to those projects as well. Finally, when all is said and done, there will be no more Microsoft, and the world will have no choice but to have a choice in the matter of what operating system and software they will use from now on.
Oh well.
Negra Modelo... because Guiness sucks.
Your "tearing, mangling and persuing mundane details" doesn't just describe the media, it also describes the Court process. Have you ever sat through a real court case? "The wheels of justice may grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine." In this sense, the media is accurite.
As for the OJ criminal trial, I don't think the presence of cameras influenced the case one bit. It sure did influence the public, though. Calling the outcome a "travesty" betrays a vengeful motive, or at least a misunderstanding of "the true goal of the proceedings" of criminal justice. It is not to punish wrongdoers, but to maintain order by punishing wrongdoers. Subtile but big difference. Do you know why it is better that 100 guilty walk free than 1 innocent be convicted? Hint -- it has to do with freedom, and IMHO has resulted in Anglo-Saxon countries enjoying greater economic development than those without this legal tradition. Or doesn't a impeached, perjuring, racist star prosecution witness count towards "reasonable doubt"?
As for Bill Clinton, his trial was by the Senate with no cameras present. How did cameras or the media circus win him leniency? [Where is that transcript?] They exposed most of his wrongdoing.
I will answer your question: Yes, coverage of the MS proceedings is vital. On the principle of open courts alone. Sure, some people may be mislead by the media. Better that than rumours and innuendo. Fortunately, we will get coverage. It's only the depositions that are private, probably as they should be until admitted into evidence.
How did the feds get uninvolved in this?
Think maybe they've got something to hide?
I'll dance in the streets if those scumbags are ever held accountable for their thievery.
... to hide from the general public.
Wonder what that could be? Maybe: Price gouging? Security problems? Bloating problems?
Guess we'll never know unless we read the court transcripts.
"Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
everytime some scumbag has done something wrong and they are hauled into court for it, unless it is some show trial (John Walker, OJ.. etc..) People get barred when there are some real juicy bits.
Take for example, the barring of the media during the Iran/Contra hearings when the talks turned to drug issues, in the name of national security.
My website has two very curious events..STORIES that were released in the mainstream Media right after the SOTU adresss.
Both Cheny and Bush have told Dachle and the rest of the Senate not to head any (planned) investigation into the events of 9/11.
Interesting. More juicy bits. The same thing with Enron, the whitehouse just flat out says: we will not give you what you are asking for, even if you use the law to try and obtain it.
It scares me that this kind of behavior is being used more and more in this country, and that it is seen as expected "normal" behavior.
propaganda arts
Ashcroft is afraid of TITS for christ sake.. Now I understand why
Last I heard Microsoft owned most of the media anyway.
'More Stories on MS's wonderful security!' @ 5c a word, written in a dank back office by IT grunt
sweet!
'MS Legal coverage' @ 15c a word + expenses (sandwiches + hotel rooms cost a lot near court houses) written by legaly trained IT grunt
eek!
This is all part of a MS cost cutting exercise. Please disregard, the public's best interests are in mind.
I will try to summarize what happened.
Back in the days of MS-DOS rule in PC's, there came to be a form of coercion called "the motherboard tax". Even though software was already dirt cheap to mass produce, Microsoft managed to strongarm PC vendors into package deals wherein it was a bit cheaper to obtain MS-DOS per-computer licenses. As part of closing the sale with each big PC vendor, Microsoft insisted that each motherboard to ship from, say, Gateway 2000, to its customer in a computer system would trigger a sale of one MS-DOS license. In other words, even if the PC vendor (and software license reseller) did not put MS-DOS into the computer, the PC vendor would have to pay Microsoft as if the PC vendor did put MS-DOS into the computer.
Thus, Microsoft exacted the so-called "motherboard tax". You want to provide OS/2 Warp? Fine. Resell it, and pay the tax to Microsoft, once per motherboard. You want to ship it with SCO? Same deal. Most relevant legally, if you want to ship the computer with DR DOS or Novell DOS 7.0, you still have to pay Microsoft the motherboard tax.
Caldera obtained the rights to DR DOS (after it came to be known as Novell DOS). Caldera's rambunctious CEO took on Microsoft. In a secret deal, Caldera won.
So what? Great for Caldera's shareholders short term. What difference did it make in the overall pursuit of justice in the context of the goals of the Sherman Act? Not much.
I find it a little bit hard to believe that this topic has yet to come up on slash dot. Oh well. Now it's here. Please comment.
Why did a Federal Judge make this decision(sp)? If they are no longer involved? Sounds like BULLSHIT to me.
You are to blame for enabling Microsoft to get away with this shit. Take your copies of windows whatever and mail them back to Microsoft telling them "no thanks never again" and go out and buy yourself a copy of Linux or BSD or whatever else besides Microsoft.
Remember back in the good ole days when all we had to worry about was the President diddling an intern? Now we have to worry about the President supressing papers from public viewing, invading foriegn countries, incarnerating people without checks and balances. Hmmm, maybe the current president wouldn't be doing these things if he'd just get a hummer or two
Well, I could say ``good point, it's not like Microsoft were at all subtle about raping their competitors and tying their customers' limbs to the bedposts (or was it the other way around?)'' but in reality Microsoft lose a lot of public image as people discover from reports of court proceedings just how selfish, blind and ruthless Microsoft really is (or at least, the people controlling it really are). What Microsoft has essentially gained is protection against people finding out quite so directly what they're really like.
Now MS can make their own press releases, the AGs can make theirs, and because there are no direct quotes it looks to the public more like two approximately equal powers having a spat - spouting their opinions - and less like policemen carefully reining in the excesses of a thoroughly-proven criminal behemoth.
Also, Bill only stopped talking long enough to change feet when he was making his video testimony, so when the next similar event arrives MS will want to sweep the results carefully under the publicity carpet.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
The press can't attend? Well, if John Q. Public can attend, what's to stop him from posting trial reviews on Usenet? Or, better yet, from abroad via e-mail and an accomplice that's safely beyond the reach of yankee kangaroo courts???
IANAL.
UANAL?
There is nothing to see here.
Move along.
>Never underestimate the power of the Borg.
I used to wonder what was so holy about a silent night, now I have a child.
The federal gov't is the largest employer in the US, as well.
the u.s. government has been for sale to the highest bidder long before any of us were born.
in money we trust, right?
Im not much for conspiracies, but something just doesnt seem right anymore with this whole anti-trust thing. I mean, first - MS gets a slap on the wrist by the feds, then all of a sudden the FBI is interested in XP's security problems, and then B Gates decides to focus all their efforts on security, and now public hearings are not allowed.
Insert your own idea of whats really going on here...
Judge Kollar-Kotelly is a she.
Now none of my software works. I can't get any work done or play any games. Your magic solution of Linux/BSD just turned my computer into an expensive paperweight. Nice job.
Microsoft, the most innovative company in the world, has introduced the world to a brilliant new idea - from the makers of closed-source software, comes closed-source courts. Remember people: letting the public view court-cases is like a cancer, or a virus, it kills lawers' intellectual property. The way a lawer bull-shits is part of their creativity and protecting this will protect the winning of large corporations in anti-trust cases.
Don't worry though, the judges in america are all corrupt, so you can buy transcripts and recordings of the whole case for a small cough.. bribe.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
...unfortunately for them, the judge will still see it all, and that's who matters.
This is a world run on money. The worlds richest man and the arguably richest company are on trial against a country fueled by drug money.
Do you think anything but Bill Gates wallet is on trial? There is no price too high for justice. Especially not for someone with enough money to pay for it.
Fuck capitalism, not just microsoft. The USA too.
Oh shit i'm a terrorist now i guess. I hope I don't lose my rights like the people of Afghanistan. the USA doesn't take prisoners anymore, they interrogate and torture the Taliban to get answers.
One day we'll be fighting the same fight we are, teh fight for our freedom. Every day we lose a right. Every week we lose track of where we once were. A civil nation opposing British rule, now we're strongarming everyone into supporting the USA war for oil.. err against terrorism. Right.
Somalia was invaded because the President was overthrown by a warlord who opposed the USA. Not to mention the former president of somalia agreed to let the USA drill for oil.
But hey, we don't hear about this on CNN/PropagandaNews.
The best things on the news are inbetween the lines. You don't think they're in Afghanistan looking for Osama did you? They're securing facilities in Western Afghanistan responsible for manufacturing heroin from poppy fields in Afghanistan. Don't wait til all of our rights are gone like ours in Afghanistan.
Praise be with you,
Maskal El
MS is only using laws that 'We the people' in this democracy wrote to begin with. If there aree faults in those laws, we had ought to be thanking them for pointing them out. I would hate to think that our society is coming to a ppoint that you will be pegged as distrustful if you happen to defend yourself to the best of your ability using the laws as they were written and intended to be used.
Have a problem? Solicite your local government reps. to have the laws changed.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This only applies to the deposition gathering process. This is the normal way such things are done. Allowing public access, as was done in the DOJ proceedings, is the exception.
OK, I'll have to trust you on this part. So the deposition gathering process is closed, but I'm presuming that key parts of the proceedings will still be available to the public.
My major concern was to see Bill Gates answering questions in his usual sideways style, because it's so entertaining. I can see him going goggle eyed when asked about "air supply".
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Much is usually lost in transcription. My mom became an OJ trial junkie while that mess was going on. There was a huge difference between watching the witnesses and reading a few blurbs. I got to see that lunatic that claimed she wore three writst watches all the time but was not and the father of LSD's broken leer as he tried to debunk DNA testing. It was much different from the AP garbage summaries.
What the public will lose here is a forgone conclusion. Though abuse of the worst kinds have been proved and are part of your precious public record that no normal person will ever see, the "punishment" will not be worth much. Our leaders have spoken and I am dissapointed. The whole thing is getting swept under the rug and this is just another piece of it.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
This is the reason Slashdot sucks so much now, if the trolls get lazy, where are we going!
I'm pretty sure the lameness filter checks how well the post compresses, and since the post is made out of random numbers, it doesn't compress very well. Or maybe it only filters letters...
What are you smoking. The press only reports what it wants people to see. It's as or more manipulative than MS or the government.
... heaven forbid Microsoft acts in it's own interests in complete accordance with the law.
I don't think heaven forbids Microsoft acting in accordance with the law, that's probably just an internal policy.
I choose Microsoft - why settle for a lesser evil?
As I have been quoted as saying in the past in InfoWorld, Fortune, and BusinessWeek, the only just resolution is the death penalty for Microsoft.
All good things can be subverted by evil, for evil.
Look, the laws are there to allow the innocent to have some protections from unreasonable procecutors, but the guilty have the same access. In cases where it's REALLY DAMN CLEAR (like the fact that MS is guilty as hell), those check and balance laws can be abused. Should we change the laws? No. But we CAN express our outrage when all the little loopholes are exploited while companies like MS continue to rape and pillage.
Billy needs to be aware that the public (and the people that really matter, like IT managment) won't put up with his crap forever. Everything MS is doing with licenses, extortion audits, etc. will come back to haunt them in the long run.
The courts WILL punish MS for their behavior - especially since they CONTINUE this destructive anti-competitive abuse of monopoly power as we speak.
MS and their crappy software has cost the world BILLIONS, and the world has had enough. It's bad enough that MS has set the computing world back 10 years from where it should be in terms of functionality, stability, usability and performance through their destruction of competitors.
As an example: The Commodore Amiga had an OS back in 85 with multitasking that Windows didn't have until about 1998. Hell, windows XP server still isn't as stable in server funtions as BSD unix was in the late 80's either.
So your answer to "solicite govt to have laws changed" is bogus. While you're at it, outlaw rope because someone can use it to hang someone. Hell, rope was made for hanging things, wasn't it?