Slashdot Mirror


China Plans Domestic Software Quotas

October_30th writes "In order to fight the alleged Microsoft monopoly, the Chinese government is establishing quotas for foreign software. While the details are still unclear, the government may require that up to 70% of software on Chinese computers is produced domestically. Regulations like this are, of course, expected to come under fierce criticism from the WTO."

5 of 473 comments (clear)

  1. Quotas are generally a bad idea... by Killswitch1968 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Like tariffs, quotas are used to protect domestic industry at the expense of foreign industries and more importantly consumers. They usually require this protection because they either have a poor product or a product that costs much more than their competetitor's. Preventing imports forces consumers to spend more than they normally would on the same good.

    However in terms of software this may be a blessing for China. Linux's problem isn't price so much as it is marketing. However the real question is whether China will be able to use Linux or must they code their own O/S?

    --

    Corporations: your universal scapegoat for all society's ills.
  2. A Crippling Decision... by Aphrika · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd wager that their domestic software industry will do well, but their domestic industry as a whole will not.

    Why?

    Ok, limiting software that people can use limits people's choices (obvious), but it also removes the ability for people to choose the absolute, best software they need to do their job. Consequently, you'd have to make some purchasing decisions which might actually affect the ability of your company to do work. Imagine how a video post production house trying to get by without AfterEffects, Flame, 3D Max, Maya - you get the picture.

    The only way they could possibly circumvent this is by loading their machines up with 70% worth of crap they don't want - hey ho, I think I've found the solution!!

  3. Not such a big deal. by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The statement from the summary:

    While the details are still unclear, the government may require that up to 70% of software on Chinese computers is produced domestically.

    implies that they plan to issue a general nationwide ban on too much foreign software. However, that's not what the article says. It actually says:

    Officials say a new law will be announced by this summer requiring a minimum percentage of software purchased by the government be produced in China.

    So we see that this policy would only apply to government purchases. Thus, this is little different from when a corporate IT department standardizes on choosing certain software products and not others.

    The U.S. federal and state governments also promote a variety of policies by placing extra conditions on their procurements and contractors.

    So, while this is somewhat interesting, this doesn't look to me like as big a trade issue as a lot of posts seem to be making of it.

  4. Re:In other news... by fermion · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The monopoly is not alleged. In the US the monopoly has been proven in the court of law. This means that those that respect law and order, and those that use law and order to justify other actions, must take the definition as proven and not alleged. Whether it is a monopoly by other definitions is open to discussion, but alleged is typically used only with respect to an entity that has not have the full process of law, i.e. alleged draft dodger.

    If the Chinese were doing something illegal wrt to clothing, the most likely of which would be dumping products in US markets, then the US would likely appeal to the appropriate trade organization and ask the practice to stop. This might result in tariffs placed on China and theoretically increase sales of US domestic products in that category.

    The interesting thing is that MS claims it is not a monopoly, and the prices it charges are determined by a competitive market and are generally the cheapest it can sell the products for and still make a profit. If we accept this as fact, and look at the deep discounts offered to in certain US and non-US markets, it appears that in fact MS is dumping product, a practice that is defined as unacceptable under many treatise.

    We therefore have a situation in which MS is a monopoly and charges arbitrary prices not controlled by the free market, or it is the habit of dumping product onto certain markets, with the assumed intention of destroying competition. In either case, the action warrants defensive measures to protect those markets.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  5. I am not going to read these comments by Britz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because I would get sick and angry. The American govt. and many American institutions always talk in favour of free trade and try other nations to come into the WTO. But while talking like the biggest supporters of globalisation abroad (maybe because of jobs they talk different at home) the US has never been very supportive of free trade.

    They only allow free trade when it serves their interest. This is not to say they are the only ones, because the EU also protects their markets wherever they can.

    Only Americans seem to think that the US allows free trade, which it doesn't. The only countries that swallowed this load of crap and opened their boarders to foreign products were developing and least developed nations.

    While the EU and the US heavily protect their markets (mainly through subsidies, 'cause they can afford to) in some areas China is now doing the same in other areas.

    What China is doing is bad, but they are just following up on the example set by the US.