Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Critic Received $9.75m After Settlement
An anonymous reader writes "Just this month, Microsoft paid almost $20 million to the Computer and Communications Industry Association to make an anti-trust lawsuit go away.
FT.com has just revealed that *half* of that payment was pocketed by Ed Black, the president of CCIA and one of MS's fiercest opponents over antitrust issues. His payment was approved by the CCIA board, which includes Sun Microsystems, Yahoo and Oracle. And here's a quote from this article at Groklaw: Could this be why Nokia quit the CCIA right after the settlement was announced, saying matters were not handled "in the proper way"?"
Or is anyone else coming to the conclusion that any organisation named *IA or *AA is, in fact, corrupt and evil?
I guess this just goes to show that everyone has his price.
Granted, $9.75m is a nice price to have... don't think I'd be too quick to say no myself.
T.
I'm shocked, shocked!, to discover that an out-of-court settlements that consists of paying off your antagonists. Next you'll be telling me that Michael Jackson's settlements were somehow related to the $20 million that he forked out, rather than plaintiffs reaching mutual understanding.
Next week Slashdot will discuss : "The Pope : could he be a Catholic?"
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Man, talk about a bargain. A lawsuit that could potentially bring Microsoft as we know it (one monolithic overreaching organisation) to an end and all it takes to make it go away is $20 million?
I bet the Microsoft people were popping champagne corks over that one. They would have thought nothing of spending $20 million defending themselves in court, so spending that much to make sure it never got that far was probably the easiest decision in the world.
As to where that $20 million went, well, that's another story. If half did go to Ed Black then it seems to me that he's got a lot of explaining to do.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Saw this in the FT this morning. Had a sweepstake on how long it would be before it appeared on
I pocketed what I'll just describe as a 'large one-digit sum'.
Heh heh heh... now to spend my wealth while industry as a whole suffers...
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
Just goes to show, they're all the same, it's a matter of picking out your piece of territory and seeing who can make the most noise. The more I see of capitalism, the more I'm glad that I'm content to work from home earning "enough to get by".
Since when is silencing one person's allegations worth 9 million dollars? Couldn't they just have arranged an "accident" for him?
stuff |
... and you gotta admit that he got a fairly good price!
i wonder if he's getting it in cash or a couple of SQL Server licences...
Firstly because of the settlement. They should have let it go to court, settlements imho always give the impression that it isn't to do about justice, but just about money.
Secondly because to say the least, it seems very dubious that Ed Black pockets half the money himself. It's not like he was damaged personally in the case to which the settlement applies, or was he?
This smell fishy and I can't blame Nokia for saying 'all nice and well, but we won't be part of this.'
---
"The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
Could this be an unwarranted inference on the part of the poster?
And OSDL and RedHat. Was the submitter trying to imply complicity between Sun and Microsoft by omitting those other members from that list?
I liked this link from the "Related Links" section of the article:
Best deals: The Courts
Whoa.
Interestingly, Nokia is a Scandinavian country - and these countries tend to have strong anti-corruption laws (especially Finland) - corruption is regarded as highly unethical and unacceptable from a social POV. If this act had been committed by Fins, or in Finland I imagine people from both sides would be doing jail time by now...
Where can I go and get a degree in being a corporate board member or a CEO?
They seem to be low skill, high pay jobs. And if you get fired, you get a firing bonus in the millions.
It has to be said:
1. Get to head of industry body
2. Criticise Microsoft
3. ????
4. Profit!
Although, I guess the ???? bit has been worked out now.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Worse with each payment the price goes up. If you got a complaint against MS you are hardly going to settle for a handshake are you? They paid in the past so you want your share.
There is a reason IBM didn't just settle with SCO. If they did every lawyer in the world would have send them a complaint.
Sure MS is buying itself temporary peace but this is resulting in two long term effects.
First anybody else who has the slightest case will want their millions.
But second is a far more damaging effect. If you read the FT story it is very clear that the journalist is calling this a clear case of bribery. Now why would you bribe a witness unless the witness has really seen something? I give it a couple more years before most of the real press will have decided that yes MS is a clearly corrupt company. This will cast suspicion on all their dealings.
Surely any good journalist will then start to question every time MS gets a contract or makes a lawsuit go away who has been paid off for how much?
If I were a reporter at the FT looking for a story I would do some investigation into who received what sums of money for the recent NHS deal or the US army deal. The last one is especially good. The US army has said that windows wasn't good enough for their future soldier project but it is good enough for the desktop of soldiers? Wheres the money!
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Nokia's a Finnish company, and I'd like to think it reflects on their corporate culture. Finland's known for the relative lack of gravy. Transparency.org seems to think so anyway.
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
I'm sorry if I haven't offended anyone
Cases which use our justice system, using up taxes, should not merely be settled without a fee. If they're not going to produce a precedent, they should compensate the government at least a fraction of their costs as part of the settlement price. There's no reason why taxpayers like me should be subsidizing their competition without getting a piece of the action.
--
make install -not war
I completely agree. I came over here from the UK and boy was I surprised when I found out that I could pull a lever and get water out! The best thing - you can get it hot or cold!!! Just wait until mother and father hears about this when I send my next letter back home. They'll be so pleased I'm not wallowing around in the mud looking for bugs like my brothers and sisters.
I don't blame him. Fuck, if I got offered $9.75m to stop bitching about Microsoft, I'd take Gates' arm off at the elbow!
D.
And the woman in question was Lady Astor.
They had two other famous exchanges (and strangely always seemed to find themselves next to each other at dinner):
Winston Churchill: Madam, you are ugly.
Lady Astor: And you, Winston, are drunk.
Winston Churchill: Ah yes, but in the morning I shall be sober.
&
Lady Astor: If you were my husband Winston, I should poison your soup.
Winston Churchill: And if you were my wife, I'd drink it.
--- My dad's political betting
Oh, so you're from Glasgow?
Flash is the Herpes of the Internet.
your.opinion >
Why is it that nowadays the media isn't capable of calling a spade a spade anymore? Here we got a case where the position of the writer is quite obvious, and he describes the case is a matter that leaves any thinking person no other conclusion than to assume bribery. But the writer (or at least his editor) just can't dare to actually say the word out loud. If they'd be talking about elephants we'd be hearing somthing like "Ah, yes. We got a big, gray animal here, with four huge round legs, and two flappy ears, and in the front there's a long, flexible trunk...", but they'd never dare to actually use the 'E'-word. I thought this incapability of calling things by it's name were just limited to election issues (and certain presidents' behaviours), but it seems that in general we can't expect the media to call things by it's proper names anymore.