Slashdot Mirror
CD Duplicator Refuses Linux Job, Citing MS Contract
Jonathon writes "Seems a Microsoft imposed restraint of trade agreement and concerns about the SCO suit have prevented a New Zealand company duplicating 500 CDs for our upcoming installfest. The installfest was mentioned on /. just days ago."
As one of the helpers for the installfest, I can say that this is pretty much only going to help our cause. We couldn't ask for better advertising (both the NZ Herald, and Slashdot).
We will be ready, Saturday, with plenty of CDs (we hope).
I use to have a funny sig, but slash cut it off, and I forgot what the punchline was.
Either one would be a valid, LEGAL reason for not doing the work, even if it was unhelpful. With the apearant backpeadaling, I'm likely to suspect that someone waffled after hearing about SCO's lawsuit.
It wouldn't be worth the risk of a big MS contract over 500 cd's anyway, to any cd copying company.
"Go into the hall of mirrors and have a bloody hard look at yourself" - HG Nelson
I do not think that the SCO case made them refuse the job. When I read the article, the SCO case gives them an excuse not to do the CD duplication (of a small number, 500, of CDs).
They lose almost nothing, while they are sucking up to M$, possibly gaining much more with the obfuscated licensing. I assume M$ will gladly pay their losses, considering the press coverage this thing will get.
Genius doesn't work on an assembly line basis. You can't simply say, "Today I will be brilliant."
I don't know how the law works in New Zealand, but I know for sure that in France (and probably in other countries where Latin right rules), it is illegal to refuse to sell goods or services without reason. In this case, the SCO thing is clearly insignificant... So I very much think that there could be a quick legal decision that would force this CD press to do the job, would the case arise in France.
Did anyone check how things work in NZ ?
This is of course total BS. If MS does somehow have a hand in this, maybe it's time to get SCO out of the way after all. The longer they stay around, even though their case against IBM is close to vapour, the longer MS can trick these companies into believing the FUD - they probably don't know any better, who can blame them?
My $0.02.
zWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
It's from the contacts page so I guess he wants people to call him their.
One can usually discriminate however one wants, with the exception of certain sorts of discrimination that are prohibited. You can kick someone out of your restaurant because you think they're an ass and personally dislike them, but you can't kick someone out of your restaurant because they're black and you personally dislike black people. In some countries there are exceptions to this for private clubs (e.g. the Masters can prohibit women, and the Boy Scouts can prohibit atheists and homosexuals).
But in any case, this case is completely unrelated to that, as it's about restraint of trade and anti-competitive business practices (if it's about anything at all).
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Slackware IS a commercial distro and in fact one of the oldest commercial distros.
However, your point is well taken. Just replace "Slackware" with Debian.
Take Care
A1miras
I don't know of any such laws. You wouldn't get away with refusing to serve homosexuals etc.
I doubt the courts would actually even care about the issue.
"It's very much a Coke/Pepsi situation. If you are an ad agency dealing with Pepsi you don't pick up business with Coke."
Um... I work for an ad agency, and our company deals with both of the above mentioned companies. We work around the possible problems by having different teams work with the individual companies. (I think this is semi-public knowledge, but I'm posting AC anyhow, to be on the safe side.)
That said, the deal with Software Images is just a hiccup, lost business for them. I'm sure there is a long list of other companies that will duplicate for them without any trouble at all. Move on, nothing to see here.
What are you talking about? ATI supports linux, go to their site and see, the unsupported was there for 6 hours when they were re-doing their site. I thought this matter was resolved. Why is everyone modding the troll above?
I'm a Radeon 9700 user and I just got an updated driver from their download page. And am playing UT right now using that (which is btw giving me more fps than the xp version).
Hey, hey! Here is a feedback form!
Yesterday Software Images declined to do the job, citing intellectual property concerns.
When questioned by the Herald on Friday, Software Images chief executive Allan Morton said his company's wariness of Linux was due to legal action between SCO and Linux over intellectual property issues.
This is anti-competitive behaviour.
i -c ompetitive%20practices%20final.pdf
Raising Your Concerns by Contacting the Commission
Readers who are aware of behaviour that appears to breach the Commerce Act can forward information to the Commission. The Commission will consider this information and, if appropriate, initiate an investigation.
The Commission also carries out its own market monitoring and surveillance activities. An investigation that identifies a breach of the Commerce Act may lead to the Commission taking one of a range of actions, including prosecuting businesses in the High Court. Actions the Commission can take are outlined in the Commission Processes section of this publication.
To contact the Commission with information:
Telephone 0800 94 3600
Write to:
Contact Centre
Commerce Commission
P O Box 2351
Wellington
Email: contact@comcom.govt.nz
http://www.comcom.govt.nz/publications/pdfs/ant
Put Software Images out of business.
remember that SCO has so far only put out threats and not sued
No, they have formally filed suit. What they haven't done is gone into court, which promises to be intensely amusing, and not in a good way for SCO.
What they have threatened is to reveal evidence that would be damaging to IBM and give them control of Linux. Anybody who has actually looked at the details of the situation knows this is just verbal flatulence, with overtones of commercial fraud.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
FUD = Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.
RTFA = Read The Flaming(*) Article.
* There was a bit of a crackle on the line as the person said this word, but I can't think of anything else that would fit.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
Fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Companies use it when they have an inferior product to try to scare people away from their competitors. It usually only works on people who don't know the real merits of the products.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
That 'discovery phase' that you incorrectly put into quotes isn't some made up thing that SCO is using to delay a court action. Discovery is a part of every litigation that happens. Unlike TV courtroom dramas where the defense introduces some amazing new evidence at the last minute, thus saving the day, in real court cases both sides know *everything* the other side knows *before* the trial even starts. There are no surprises and no 11th hour miracles.
The fact that the litigation is now in discovery does not in any way, shape, or form, indicate that SCO is just interested in FUD.
Geez, if you can't be bothered to learn even a little bit of how the court system works at least go rent a copy of, "My Cousin Vinny". Discovery is covered very well in that movie by Marisa Tomei.
What they have threatened is to reveal evidence that would be damaging to IBM and give them control of Linux. Anybody who has actually looked at the details of the situation knows this is just verbal flatulence, with overtones of commercial fraud.
Exactly.
What are you talking about? In that movie Marisa Tomei's character was a surprise expert witness put on the stand at the last minute to present a dazzling display of automotive knowledge and trounce the prosecution's case by using obscure knowledge. :)
Other than that, your statement is correct.
I do not have a signature
Read your Robin Hood a bit more carefully.. Whenever possible Robin Hood *humiliated* his enemies. He tried to avoid killing them. (Though he did make them walk home barefoot and in their underwear..or occasionally tied backwards on a horse.) But he carefully robbed them of all the wealth they were carrying.
I'm not sure whether the Normans had a rule about "kill one of us and we'll kill ten of you", but that's a rule that dominant agressors have used frequently. So Robin Hood acted in such a way that it wouldn't have mattered if it had existed.
Note also that justice didn't have much to do with either sides actions. Or at least not always. (The Robin Hood of legend was much more heroic than I can imagine in a real person.)
I say the Robin Hood of Legend, because the name doesn't seem to attach well to any one historic character, though there are tales that attach to various outlaws which are also attached to Robin Hood. I suspect that if the deeper roots were followed there would be a connection between Robin Hood (i.e., Robin i' the Hood), and Robin Goodfellow (alias Puck). And, quite possibly, to the English bird... (Not to the US bird called a robin, which is a different species with a much less feisty temperment.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.