Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Introduces IM Licensing
prostoalex writes "The MSN Messenger ban of outside clients and cited security issues might be explained by yet another Microsoft move. The company's Internet unit, MSN, contacted third-party providers like Trillian and Odigo with a suggestion to buy access licenses. From the ZDNet article: 'Running an (IM) network is expensive,' said Lisa Gurry, group product manager for MSN at Microsoft. 'We can't sustain multiple other people's businesses, particularly if they charge for certain versions of their software. We're introducing licensing processes for third parties like Trillian.'"
Let's do a search and replace:
The www.msn.com web server is Microsoft property. If they want to charge users of 3rd party browsers to access it, it's their prerogative.
If they can control access, good for them. But if it's accessible from the web, and there's a third party client that's capable of accessing it, then Microsoft is unreasonable to expect that access will be limited to official clients.
". . . they don't have to be anti-competetive, business-stealing, life-destroying bastards to make money."
Unfortunately for your argument you've very succinctly described the very raison d'etre of MSN.
KFG
Does this mean Tim Berners Lee can now approach Opera software and ask them to license use of his world wide web network? What a joke.
Companies have every right to continually upgrade their software in a never ending arms race to fend off competition. That is a healthy marketplace.
What is not healthy is the idiotic notion that you can declare a protocol on an interconnected mesh network to be exclusively yours is bogus to the extreme.
To the posters in this thread who thought this was a 'good idea', please wake up and get a clue.
haha, like msn.com is the only web site in the world that doesn't work with lynx... gimme a break, the reality is noone gives a flying fuck about the handful of retards who still use Lynx.