Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft turns to U.S. for EU Antitrust Help
An anonymous reader writes "The NY times reports that Microsoft has asked U.S. goverment officials to intervene on their behalf in the EU antitrust case. The US (through diplomatic channels) has asked the court to be 'fair'." From the article: "Microsoft has complained frequently in recent months that it has been denied the right to a fair defense in the continuing antitrust case with the European Commission. It has also accused the commission of collaborating with its rivals in the software industry and denying it access to what it contends are vital documents it needs to prepare its defense. A memo written by unidentified government officials in Washington stated that Microsoft's complaints raise 'substantial concerns' about the way Microsoft is being treated, according to a person close to the commission who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the memo."
Asks GWB to help win their hearts and minds with an arial bombardment.
Until the memo actually shows up going to have to take this story with a pinch of salt. This sort of story wouldn't fly in the EU, you would need at least something to back it up.
Because the judge said no in an earlier story are they now hoping the government officials will somehow help them? I do think they should have rights to see any information relevant as long as it strictly conforms with the trial.
Heh ... if big daddy uncle sam knew how much microsoft had gobbled up and/or swindled from him, I think a fine would not do ... it's not "fair" ... something more appropriate, like say, a breakup, might be in order. How about adding in jail time as well?
Why not?
What, they take Microsoft's word for it just like that?!
Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
Why doesn't M$ just defends itself with good arguments instead of requiring help from US government. If you're sure of your case, don't need to be scared ;-)
So when Microsoft plays unfairly with it's competitors it's fine. But when the EU does it to them, they run to daddy?
who lies more? the government or microsoft. beats the crap out of me. but if they are both saying the same thing, then this is easy.
Why the hell does the government care how they're treated? I think it's ridiculous, the US says "Please be nice to Bill." What the hell? All the bullshit they pull, like getting patents awarded for stuff a lot of us know they never created themselves, all the stunts they pull to weasel their way into wherever they want more control just to have it, to try to screw over whatever alternatives in the field (you name it, from browsers to consoles.) I say screw them, let the EU be as unfair to them as they want, as if they've been fair with anybody else. About time someone pushed MS around and made them cry for fairness instead of the other way around. Besides, the EU does what it feels it should, (right?) I don't think they'll do things differently because MS requests it.
Gentoo Linux - Wouldn't have it any other way. And fuck beta.
They are wasting an enormous amount of time and effort trying to stop Microsoft crushing their competition reactively, when they could take a much more preventitive measure.
All they need to do is clearly legislate that software patents are not allowed in Europe and the rest will take care of itself. Open source alternatives will establish themselves more quickly in the mainstream and competition will accellerate like there's no tommorrow.
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
I mean if you can't beat em, bomb em. Right?
I thought it was bomb 'em first, then figure out whether you can beat 'em...
Shit djupedal, at least try to read the story.
This has nothing to do with the judges decision, this is about US diplomats not judges.
"And today we introduce our newest product "Microsoft carpet bombing 2006(only sold for citizens of United States of America)" Anyways to the serious stuff. Have anyone noticed that when bullies get bullied with their own stuff, they always find someone "stronger" to go whine about it. Not that I car, Microsoft deserves it
I'd love to know what exactly was in that memo, since the wording would have to be just right to avoid offence - especially if you consider that there's probably some implied 'or else' condition...
My, that was a yummy potato!
See preceding story on the home page.
Interestingly enough, the next chapter in this story was published on Slashdot LAST NIGHT!
The US courts told MS to go pound sand.
"Yeah, they've outlawed buying off their legislature, so we're having to work in the back channels to get our decision barged through, but half the time these guys ain't even speakin fuckin English, so we're being blocked out from the bribery channels unfairly..."
I can see how that might be an issue.
kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
Yeah, sure. I'll listen to them as soon as I can send them a memo asking them to start "being fair" with their pricing schemes and monopolistic practices, and they actually listen to it. Until then, forget it.
Tluin natha Linux xxizzuss uriu olt bwael mon'tun.
Yes this was reported earlier, though I do not remember if Microsoft "formally" requested help from the U.S. An official from the DOJ was telling the EU that they should treat Microsoft fairly and that official held up the U.S.'s Anti-trust case as an example on how to treat Microsoft.
Thankfully the EU, so far, has told the U.S. (in some many words), to go F@$# itself. Rolling over is not the way to treat Microsoft. The EU has legitimate gripes with MS. MS failed to deliver documentation explaining one of their APIs, with which program can be made to work with Windows. This is gross negligence on MS's part.
The irony is it takes a foreign governmental body to discipline a mis-behaving U.S. company.
Oh Teddy Roosevelt where are you when we need you!
Don't you just love these guys.. They'll try everything possible within the law, then pretty much everything that loads of money can buy which is slightly outside of the law, then pretty much everything outside of the law.
And when that doesn't work, they start asking their paid for political buddies to help them out with some 'overseas' troubles..
Absolutely incredible..
The only conclusion that I have reached during the years of the Microsoft monopoly cases is that the law is totally broken.
Well, which success are they speaking about? Has Microsoft monopolistic behaviour changed anyway since this "successfull" rulling has taken place? In some PR speech perhaps.
The DOJ settlement was only successfull for Microsoft, its shareholders, and for nobody else.
Has anybody heard of any positive effects it would have had?
I am not so sure the EU will buy such a weak argument. At least I hope it does not.
I am not Remy Mouton, unfortunately: http://remy.mouton.free.fr/art/
So when Microsoft plays unfairly with it's competitors it's fine. But when the EU does it to them, they run to daddy?
I think you suffer from a serious prospective problem. You sound like my 5 year old cousin whining after he gets caught.. "but he hit me first". Just because they have done Bad Things(TM) in the past doesn't give anyone the right to do Bad Things(TM) to them in the present. Their hearing should be fair... and I don't think it's too much to ask. The entire point of "freedom" and "liberty" is that things are fair for all, even those with whom we disagree... cheering and hoping for injustice against your opponents is borderline facism.
That being said, until I get something other then vague generalities about "documents", it's going to be impossible to convince me that anything unfair is actually occurring.
It has also accused the commission of collaborating with its rivals in the software industry
You would get paranoid too if everyone is against you.
-- AC because everyone is against me.
It has 0 to do with the court decision, this is microsoft going through diplomatic channels, asking the EU court (not the US court) to be fair to microsoft.
Took out the F, because I don't see the need to be rude..
He tried to kill me with a forklift!
"Steve Ballmer was quoted as saying, 'I'm gonna fuckin' kill(R) Europe!' It's the final countdown!"
"Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on
Several country's ambassadors have written to the US State Department to complain that their citizens are not being treated 'fairly' in Guantanamo Bay.
The State Depatement replied that they will be sure to return the bodies if they can find all the bits.
Since Microsoft is still under government observation for being a Monopoly, it would be a conflict of interest to interefere. Plus, what the US Government is getting is a one sided story and as any good diplomat will know is to get both side.
Politicians may want to get involved but diplomats will not. Watch the days coming to see which politicos are dumping their Microsoft stock and that will give you a good idea of what is to come.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
What??? Is Microsoft now a ward of the state??
No, you take Microsofts money for it, just like that.
Yeah, but we're talking about Microsoft.
Microsoft: If you can't beat em, buy em
Government: Bomb em first, then try to beat em.
MS + Government: If you can't beat em, bomb em.
I'll admit to only the scanty knowledge from reading the article, but if Microsoft really is being denied proper legal defense, that is an issue. Just because someone employs criminal practices doesn't mean you should allow criminal practices back at them. That way leads legal vigalantism and rubber-hose beatings. I personally don't like Microsoft, but the right to a fair trial is something espoused by the EU, right?
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
...makes it much more sensible to use the GPL for software to avoid all the legal problems just like this. Of course I'm fairly ignorant, so if someone can show why even the GPL wouldn't prevent this kind of problem feel free to shoot me down.
I'm too tired to be righteous.
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." -- Albert Einstein
Is there anything that could possibly be more relaible than a story submitted by an anonymous reader about unidentified officials relayed by some anonymous person? That's about as iron-clad and trustwrthy as you can possibly get...
Seriously, I bash Microsoft about as much as any Mac user, but that summary was so free of content that it might as well have been penned by the bureaucrats of the Neutral Planet on Futurama.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
hehe ;-)
Given the current public opinion in Europe about the current US Administration, i kinda doubt that what amounts to a request from the Bush administration to "Cut some slack with Big American Company" would actually produce any positive results.
Most likelly it will make no difference.
Possible it might actually make things worse for MS.
Additionally that they even asked just reinforces the widespread opinion here in Europe that the US administration (and by association the Americal people) believe that the whole world should play by made-in-US rules except themselfs.
Almost any person can be convinced that you're right if they don't know the other side of the story.
Most people would rather take someone's word for something, than go to the effort to find a countering viewpoint. That this should be true of government is no surprise...
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
EU is not playing unfairly.The only things they did is communicate the MS document about the interoperability to the competitors to check that the documentation was enough to be useful by other parties to communicate with MS windows without problems.The competitors told no, the documents are so bad that you can't understand anything, as the expert nominate by MS itself said.
Everyone in Europe LOVES what the american government is doing in the world, I imagine this could backfire on microsoft in so far as an expectation that this could effect positive change.
get cranky and seize operations in Europe to punish us.
Sincerely
A swede
"Microsoft has complained frequently in recent months that it has been denied the right to a fair defense in the continuing antitrust case with the European Commission."
We can't bribe the prosecution like we did back in the US!
EU = Waste/Joke/Trash
I'm tired of reading all these stupid articles. This will go on forever.
Honestly, Dont they have more important things to worry about? I assure you I can find 50 more important things the EU should focus on at the moment.
I think they will be treated fairly, and I would want nothing less.
I don't think that a fair response to their abuses is actually what they want, though.
I'm guessing Bill meant to be asking for MERCY, not fairness.
You sound like my 5 year old cousin whining after he gets caught.. "but he hit me first".
Someone should teach this child, and you apparantly, about the idea of "Self Defense". "But he hit me first" IS a valid defense. Get this kid in a martial arts class before your family turns him in to an overweight pussy. The exercise, self confidence, and perhaps most importantly -- skill to control his abilities -- will prove incredibly valuable.
~Rebecca
WAR!
:)
EU Vs The States...
Now that's something you don't see every 60 years or so...
By the way, M$ is what I was referring to in the title. Honestly. 'Absolutely Nothing' would be a follow up.
Microsoft vs ???
You know although one always hears about politicans being bribed/lobbied in one way or another. I doubt that the US could do anything if the EU decides to impose a large hefty fine of several XX billions on Microsoft. I don't know if anyone here kept track of the dividing of the spoils after that tobacco lawsuit a few years ago? The US states were more than happy to take that money. If the EU basically puts down a fine of several billion or a flat ban on the sale of any MS OS in the EU, you'll see MS either shutting up and trying to pay as quietly as possible or yelling and screaming while paying the EU.
I hate to be really cruel, but if they really wanted to pound it into MS that they've been bad, they'd set up a percentage to be used funding open source government software solutions for nearly ever level of EU government. Actually, in several respects it makes sense for the EU to do that anyway just to stick to a US company and use the money to fund domestic EU programing groups.
I'd actually be shocked if MS didn't try to use the US government to get around other government's fines if at all possible. Part of me wants to say that it would be a bad idea preventing/limiting the sale of MS OS and Office apps in the EU, but then there is the other part of me that says that the EU has just as many able programmers as the US and should be able to come up with their own EU version of MS in 3-5 years. I'd also be interested if India or China developed their own OS and/or office products. Both markets should be able to support a lively local OS/Office suite.
Interesting question...
This will be a good time to see to what extent there is still a difference between the EU and the US concerning the entanglement of politics and business. I for one sure hope there still is one.
J.
Their hearing should be fair...
Yes, but...
That being said, until I get something other then vague generalities about "documents", it's going to be impossible to convince me that anything unfair is actually occurring.
Exactly. They are being treated fairly. They just claim that they aren't. Just their latest attempt at making the EU fall over like the US did. They hope that somewhere, someone will whisper in the right ears that after those accusations, the punishment should not be too stiff, because it would confirm the (baseless) accusations.
Diplomatic games, that's all.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Rumours that Microsoft would rather the Antitrust ruling be done by Slashdot.com than the EU are unconfirmed.
Exactly when is it a good defense? When you know the kid you're messing with doesn't have a knife in his pocket? And how do you know that?
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
As far as I can see, the DOJ did not drop the case for juridical reasons, but for political ones. As in the new adminstration didn't want this case to go any further.
Why might one ask? Well ... one consideration might be that on the whole it wouldn't be in the US interest at all to see its great software champion cut up into "Opsco" and "Appsco" (an Operating System division and an Application Software division). So that competition laws would have to take a backseat to National Interest (which certainly would be a legitimate point of view). I'm sure though that conspiracy theorists could come up with other, less savory, alternatives.
Therefore, err ..., might the EU be justified in expressing "substantial concerns" about "US" motives for having such 'substantial concerns about the whether Microsoft is being treated fairly'?
My second point is that this whole charade began 2 years ago. In 2004. After Microsoft was found guilty of violating EU competition laws and was ordered to disclose publish the API's that allow Windows Clients to interact with Windows Servers, so as to allow others (SUN, IBM, HP, and Samba) to make their OS act as Windows Server to Windows Clients and to allow their clients to log into Windows Servers.
Does that seem reasonsable? I think it does. Because if that sort of inter-operability isn't available then anyone trying to sell a competitor to Windows Server will have to convince their prospect that their (ubiquitous) Windows desktop machines will be running crippled when logging in to their proposed servers. And because anyone pushing Linux desktops will have to explain why it isn't important that they won't be able to work well with their prospect's (widely used) Windows Servers. Either way Microsoft would be using its current monopoly position as a competitive weapon, which is illegal.
Therefore requiring the API's to be published, open, and usable sounds like honest enforcement of competition laws to me. Now Microsoft had 2 whole years to come up with the required documentation.
And what did Microsoft do? They:
Now does that sound as if they were trying to comply with a reasonable request or if they were just trying to get things done their way? I think the latter.
And now that they seem to have lost traction in the EU courts and have reached the deadline they chant that "fines are not the solution" and bring in their big brother to apply some pressure. Well ... it would be a good stunt if they get can away with it, but I'm not sure if this is something we should be happy with.
Translation gratis.
The NY times reports that Microsoft has asked U.S. goverment officials to intervene on their behalf in the EU antitrust case.
Balmer asked for the US to nuke 'em from orbit with an endless rain of chairs.
The US (through diplomatic channels) has asked the court to be 'fair'."
"Bow down before the biggest political funds contrib- um... Most innovative and fair company on the face of the planet. Being fair means you'll shake hands, apologize and grant Microsoft Favored Nation status and give them letters of marque along with the trade treaty."
From the article: "Microsoft has complained frequently in recent months that it has been denied the right to a fair defense in the continuing antitrust case with the European Commission. It has also accused the commission of collaborating with its rivals in the software industry and denying it access to what it contends are vital documents it needs to prepare its defense.
"We just want the names and home addresses of all those people making a case against us. The rumors of ninjas and cruise missile strikes are not true. We just want them to treat us fairly, and do what we tell them to do."
A memo written by unidentified government officials in Washington stated that Microsoft's complaints raise 'substantial concerns' about the way Microsoft is being treated, according to a person close to the commission who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the memo."
"Don't screw with them. They're unstoppable. Hell, we screwed with 'em, brought them to trial and looked what happened to us. Run! Run while you can, before- No, not the pain! Please! I'll be good!"
Want "Freedom" and "Liberty"?
Don't AGREE to exchange them for priviledges.
When Microsoft BEGGED PERMISSION to operate a business in a particular jusridiction, THEY AGREED to abide by the REGULATIONS therein.
NOW "THE RULES" are too onerous? Boo Fucking Hoo, and Caveat Emptor, MSFT...
Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
... even slashdot is against me.
Is it a privilege or a right to do business in the European Union?
To do business in the European Union, abide by EU laws. If the cost of doing business in the EU is too high, don't do business there. It's that simple.
However, MS not doing business in the EU hinders Bill's sociopathic plans of world domination.
"Just because they have done Bad Things(TM) in the past doesn't give anyone the right to do Bad Things(TM) to them in the present."
aaah... so that's why (for example) the US has the death penalty... wake up, in the real world that we live in, we live by "an eye for an eye"...
Grrrrr... (a letter bill needs to read)
You undercut your competitors to popularize your OS, was found guilty years later and paid 1/20 of what your revenues EIGHT YEARS BEFORE. How many times have YOU been convicted? Five six times...? How the hell can this fucker still vote?
You copy other peoples work and leverage them out with your misbegotten OS the only constant in M$ world. Consistently developers and companies under the M$ flag have seen their livelihood vanish thanks to your embrace and extend every fucking time one of you guys worry about your stock.
Get a fucking clue, THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR, it's not even capitalism you slimy piece of crud.
It seems they are prepared to do anything, wriggle any way they can, absolutely anything to avoid having to provide the documents required of them. This is ALL about documentation, secrecy and customer lock-in.
What MS are after is the same fair treatment that received in US courts, they find it unbelievable that they should actually have to PROVE compliance with a courts decisions and that being found as a monopoly engaged in deliberately predatory approaches should have any punishment doesn't make sense for an organisation used to dealing with the good ole DoJ.
Its quite simply ridiculous that the EU should find a company guilty of being a monopoly that uses that position to crush its opposition AND THEN require the company to change its behaviour. This is a very childish position for the EU to take in this globalised era, sure it might have been okay back with Standard Oil and Bell to force monopolies to change, but that was a different time when goverments actually had some say in how the world worked.
The EU should clearly back down, pay Microsoft compensation for wasting their time, sign software patents into Law and give Microsoft the job of validating them.
Its either that or Microsoft would have to operate legally.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
OK, forgive me for being dumb and semi-pro-Microsoft, but WHY does Microsoft have to make their software clients operate with any given server OS? I mean, it's their software, why must they allow other server OS's to interact with their client?
Please keep in mind this is a question of what they must do, not what is advisable. (i.e. it is advisable for MS to allow other server OS's to operate with their client software because they can sell more client licenses.) That's not the question. The question is, again, why do they have to let other Server OS's emulate theirs?
Anonymous Cowards are at -6...
Contrary to popular believe amongst some US people, not the whole world runs their justice system. Some countries have sensible ones. Like, where judges are elected by the people, not the prez. Like, where laws are made by experts and not in courtrooms.
So what is "fair" first of all depends on the justice system you're dealing with.
Now, if you don't want to deal with a justice from some country, stay away from it. It IS actually that simple.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Nope, it's clasic liberalism and it's rampant around here on Slashdot. Someone is always the "victim" and someone is always the "perpetrator" and since no one is responsible for their own lot in life it's ok for the perceived "perpetrator" to be penalized in order to make things "fair" for everyone else. It's a 5th grade mentality and it makes me laugh. Newsflash, life isn't fair. There are winners and there are losers. Keep penalizing the winners of life's lottery and pretty soon all you're left with is a country filled with a disproportional amount of losers. Need an example, see any country where real communism (minus recent free market reforms in places like China) has been tried.
Since they started dumping money into political campaigns and hired their own lobbying group about ten years ago Microsoft has become one of the most generous contributors to politicians in the country:
h tml
s _microsoft.php
s _microsoft.php
n g.html
i alsID=440
s p
t m
1 1.callahan.think.html
LXer: How Microsoft wastes its money on anything but software
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/55497/index.
Election 2004: How to Excel in DC
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0438/040922_new
A Bug in Windows GOP (Seattle Weekly)
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0522/050601_new
Microsoft And The G.O.P.: Antitrust Insurance?
http://www.time.com/time/reports/gatesbook/lobbyi
Microsoft's lobbying efforts eclipse Enron
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-835267.html
Redmond | Feature Article: Following Microsoft's Money
http://redmondmag.com/features/article.asp?Editor
News Alert 9/6/01: Microsoft
http://www.opensecrets.org/alerts/v6/alertv6_26.a
Commentary: It's Back to Charm School for Microsoft
http://www.businessweek.com/1999/99_45/b3654183.h
"The Think Tank As Flack" by David Callahan
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/1999/99
This is the penalty phase of their antitrust trial. This is MS corporate whining it's not faaaaaiiiiiiirrrrrrr at the extent of their punishment.
No, it's intemperate mockery.
Racist, totalitarian, militant ... you can be all of those and not be fascist. The defining characteristic of fascism is the notion that government exists to serve corporations.
As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
The same administration that made the DOJ drop its case against Microsoft. The same Microsoft that had launched an all-out lobbying offensive after it was convicted by judge Jackson, and had made substantial campaign contributions.
1) The DOJ did not drop its case against Microsoft. MS was proven guilty and punishment was handed out. Whether you agree with the settlement terms is a subject for a different debate.
2) Judge Jacksion was removed from the bench for discussing an on-going case with the media. Either the DOJ had to start another trial or come up with a penalty agreement with Microsoft. They would have won a second trial but not after several more years of litigation.
If you were the President during a recession had to make a choice that would impact the economy in a negitive way, what would your decision be?
I happpen to agree with the settlement. It keeps a single Microsoft mired down protecting the Windows monopoly instead of two or three nimble Microsofts. All the proprietary API's and formats in the world don't make much of a difference if no one is buying your product.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
A concern does not an issue make.
Because Microsoft is a monopoly? Most countries has laws protecting their citizens against the power of monopolies and so does the EU - if Microsoft doesn't want to abide by those laws willingly they should be fined for not doing so or forced to do so if they want to keep on doing business in the EU.
The laws weren't created to annoy Microsoft but to protect the EU citizens - something that often seems to be forgotten in all this.
The EU competition commissioner, Neelie Smit-Kroes, will not give in under pressure. She was responsible for bringing down the Dutch coalition government Lubbers II. She had proposed to abolish tax dedution for over 10 km daily commuting. Het own party couldn't agree. She held her ground resulting in the end of the coalition.
I think Microsoft knows by know she will not give in so they are trying other ways to get it's own way. She will be fair. She will make Microsoft to do what she told them to do. And it is clear Microsoft doesn't like that at all.
Nyh
Here is a revolutionary idea: Why don't we (the U.S.) just simply NOT get involved. True, Microsoft is an American company, but this hearing is not taking place in America. When a company sells their wares in another country, they need to play by the rules of that country, not this one. This is an EU hearing, on EU soil, and EU matters. I don't recall when EU officials pressured the U.S. to go easy when our Microsoft anti-trust case was open.
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
RTFA. TFA is from the NYT. And you are either a shill, a stooge, a troll, or just fucking stupid.
"But he hit me first" IS a valid defense.
Haven't spent much time around five year-olds, have you? In any situation of this sort when you dig into the details you find that while A hit B first, it was only after B pushed A down, which was only after A threw a nerf ball at B's chest, which was after B called A a "stupidhead" which was after A... you get the idea. If you follow it all the way to the root cause (assuming the kids remember, which they usually don't) that the culpability is mutual.
As a dad, I used to trace those cause-and-effect chains, but I gave that up years ago as pointless. It just confuses the issue which, at bottom, is that it takes two to tango. Now, absent blood or obvious bruises, I make them both stand in the corner. Not only is it much easier, it actually seems to be more effective than holding a mini-trial.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
M$ has been caught red-handed with its hand in the monopoly cookie jar over and over. It's time they get spanked, liberal weenie!
They are both out to defeat Democracy and establish dictatorships. Remove them both, now!
i ves/005083.html
It is obvious from the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and Microsoft's misdeeds with the U.S. market since the 80's and the Department of Justice. Even former Honorable Jackson said "Nothing has changed." Microsoft should have been dismantled a long time ago.
Jackson: 'Nothing changed'
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/arch
I think that Microsoft (as are other American companies) is being treated alittle harshly in the EU on account of our current administration's foreign policy. That being said, I am not saying that NOTHING needs to be done to deal with the monopoly that Microsoft created for itself and now abuses regularly.
My point is the following: If our country (the US) dealt properly with this problem during OUR anti-trust case with them, we they would not be in the situation they are in now. A good description of what happened can be found here. A brief excerpt:
The DOJ, now under the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, announced on September 6, 2001 that it was no longer seeking to break up Microsoft and would instead seek a lesser antitrust penalty.
Our country was about to deal with the problem appropriately. The current administration, in its typical short-sighted knee-jerk response opted to step in and give them a slap on the wrist. Fastforward 5 years and Microsoft is facing the same problem again - this time they are at the mercy of other countries where anti-American sentiment (probably rightly so) is running high. Plain and simply - they are going to take a beating and it all could have been avoided if Dubbya let things run their natural course here. If he had, MS would likely be two profitable companies, neither of which would be in trouble overseas.
i think it was a typo, here :
A memo written by unidentified government officials in Washington stated that addressing Microsoft's complaints could result in 'substantial donations'
The entire point of "freedom" and "liberty" is that things are fair for all, even those with whom we disagree... Uhmmm... war in Iraq - is fair (for all)? We disagree with the way things are run there (Sadam Hussein and his regime), but is it fair to invade their country and spread democracy upon its people? Yes, I agree that the MS suit should be fair, but interference of US govt into EU's business makes it fair how? Plus, who said that it wasn't fair to begin with? Maybe MS was just whining cause it wasn't getting what it wanted?
Exactly when is it a good defense? When you know the kid you're messing with doesn't have a knife in his pocket? And how do you know that?
Umm, "Self Defense" is always a valid defense, regardless of the size/type of the weapons of your opponents. "Self Defense" refers to whether you should punish the victim, like the GP apparantly feels about his cousin.
You can make an argument about escalating violence, but in general you are justified in self defense for raising the violence level by one degree. IANAL, so I don't have all of them memorized. Maybe someone can dig up a good link for you. Basically, if someone hits you with their fists, punch him back (same level), or whip out the pepper spray (non lethal weapons). Then you're cool legally, and as far as I am concerned, morally as well.
Up until the point they show you the weapon, I would definately say you should fight back. At that point they've raised their own bar to attempted murder, and you need to decide whether you are capable of defending against the weapon in question. If you took the aforementioned martial arts classes, with a proper focus on self defense, a knife should be no problem. Depending on your skill level, a handgun probably isn't a problem either. If you're not capable of the requisite level of defense, then run. In either case however, it is the aggressor who is guilty, not the kid getting bullied.
If you're going to just cower and get beat on because someone might have a bigger weapon in hiding, you need the martial arts class just as bad as the poor kid in the GP post.
Further, even the way you phrase it shows you are a product of this ridiculous parenting method. The kid that "might have a knife in his pocket" is messing with you, not the other way around.
~Rebecca
There's only a tiny fraction of EU citizens that will ever be affected by this ruling. The most benefit is to be had by US competitors to Microsoft. The EU is acting as an attack dog for US corporations just like the US was in the last anti-trust trial with MS.
and denying it access to what it contends are vital documents it needs to prepare its defense.
Doesn't that remond you of another case: SCO, "we're breaking up Jim, we need more documents..."
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
see subject :)
A black cat crossing your path signifies that the animal is going somewhere. -- Groucho Marx
If you're too cowardly to fight, then don't. Go sew and bake cookies and look after the children.
At some point, however, somebody righteous has to fight against somebody wicked, or only the wicked shall wield any power.
It's been a long time.
What seems to have been forgotten is that microsoft
actually lost it's antitrust case by the DoJ in the US.
For some reason the DoJ dropped the case in the penalty
phase, coincidentally shortly after a change in leadership
in the executive branch (which I'm told isn't supposed
to be able to influence the actions of the judicial branch).
Given this history, it doesn't seem at all surprising that
MS are asking the US government for assistance with the
case in the EU...
A lot of political trouble can be stirred up over whose companies get to trade where. If countries can fight about bananas and other seemingly insignificant things, the US government won't be shy about making its point when it comes to their technology industry, the future dominance of the digital economy, etc. Sadly, the US government in this case, like many governments who listen to corporations, will be pawns working for the wrong side.
Oh no... Microsoft have done something nasty to the EU... good old EU for wanting to use Linux. No wait? The EU are doing something nasty to a large US corporation... bomb them! Oh hang on... that EU, not OPEC. The US Government are the ones to blame because they are spying on everyone and... Nope... they are not the bad guys here... No wonder all the posts are drivel... you can't fit this into one of the standard Slashdot Linux using American mindsets. Next thing we know Google will be doing evil.
Be nice, sponsor me: http://jailbreak.ragabonds.org.uk
Competitors...the same ones that touched off the lawsuit? The "nominee" that was fifth on the list and apparently isn't even a programmer?
Asks GWB to help win their hearts and minds with an arial bombardment.
No, I think you mean that character from The Tempest...
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Don't taint the term "classic" with your new age political theatre. 'Classical Liberalism' and 'Classical Conservatism' are specific terms which are completely unrelated to the unreal microcosm that is American politics.
It's been a long time.
MS always was a crew of paranoid cry babies. Can't stand to compete for anything on the merits of their products. Never have and never will. Gutless fsking wonders. Rich ones but not through legal tactics.
Even if what you say is totally true, what reason is there not to disclose the content of those communications to Microsoft? How could a judge possibly rule that irrelevant?
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
You make a very valid point criticizing my analogy... but what you've shown is that my analogy is somewhat faulty, but not my original point. Self-defense implies some kind of immediacy... I can't get punched in the head today on my walk home from work, and three weeks later find him, go to house, and stab him in the face.
Utter rubish.
The EU citizens have a great deal to gain from preventing Microsoft or others from abusing their monopoly position. Increased competition will encourage innovation and lower prices. In the case of the EU, unlike the US, the prices issue not only affects individual businesses, health services, local government, education etc. but also affects the overall economy and balance of payments, because the MS tax is permanently removed from the EU economy and transplanted to the US economy.
This alone (ignoring the welfare of individual businesses) is reason for the EU to be interested in preventing monopoly abuse that locks in and artificially bolster prices, and for the US government to try to influence the EU to allow that monopoly to continue its abusive practices.
Exactly. They are being treated fairly. They just claim that they aren't. Just their latest attempt at making the EU fall over like the US did. They hope that somewhere, someone will whisper in the right ears that after those accusations, the punishment should not be too stiff, because it would confirm the (baseless) accusations.
I really wasn't trying to get into the details of the case. I haven't followed it closely enough to make a judgement on the merits... I put that last comment in there specifically to gaurd against the slashbot zombies misinterpretting my post as a defense of microsoft. I'm not. I'm just saying that IF Microsoft is being treated unfairly, that is WRONG. The "It's ok to screw people... as long as we are screwing Microsoft" is terrible logic and incredibly rampant. Look at the replies I've gotten.
My main point is... an unfair trial isn't "ok" if you agree with who is being unfairly treated because you don't like them. That's a Slippery Slope(TM) and every freedom-orientated individual should be against it... but because this topic is about the M-word, we have an explosion of hatred and rah-rah cheering going on...
If, on the other hand, this was a story about some US detainee who wasn't being treated fairly by the system, I imagine the attitude of these people would have been slightly different. We should be striving for fairness in all our dealings... and accusations of unfair practices should be taken seriosuly on all sides. "It's ok to be unfair to Microsoft" is a terrible line of reasoning.. and the entire purpose of my post was to debunk it.
Which is starting to sound like the US
"Depending on your skill level, a handgun probably isn't a problem either. If you're not capable of the requisite level of defense, then run."
Yep, just run from the guy with the gun. You can outrun bullets right?
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761568245/Fas
"Fascism rejects liberal ideas such as freedom and individual rights, and often presses for the destruction of elections, legislatures, and other elements of democracy.", which is an uncited excerpt from the writings of Oxford professor Roger Griffin.
Another website defined Fascism as: "Mussolini said that fascism should more properly be called "corporatism" since it was, under Mussolini, a blending of state and corporate power. Mussolini ought to know; he was the first fascist leader."
But, I like what Henery A Wallace said, in 1944:
http://www.furnitureforthepeople.com/danger.htm
" If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful.
American fascism will not be really dangerous until there is a purposeful coalition among the cartelists, the deliberate poisoners of public information,
Still another danger is represented by those who, paying lip service to democracy and the common welfare, in their insatiable greed for money and the power which money gives, do not hesitate surreptitiously to evade the laws designed to safeguard the public from monopolistic extortion. American fascists of this stamp were clandestinely aligned with their German counterparts before the war, and are even now preparing to resume where they left off, after "the present unpleasantness" ceases: The symptoms of fascist thinking are colored by environment and adapted to immediate circumstances. But always and everywhere they can be identified by their appeal to prejudice and by the desire to play upon the fears and vanities of different groups in order to gain power.
"
That last sentence defines what is now called 'FUD'. The Germans are no longer the threat they once were, but Microsoft has seen no problem helping the Communist in China round up dissidents and jail them, or worse.
Now, Microsoft is calling in its chips, all those "campaign contributions" it has flooded the Congress and the Senate with.
Do you NOW see what happens when Justice is thwarted and the guilty are given mere slaps on the wrist and with a wink and a nod told they can continue with "business as usual"?
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
From TFA:
Does anybody honor their authorization any more? I understand that underhand practices are best uncovered, but how can those people even stay at that work when they have to do stuff they don't agree with? I'd expect the source "close to the commission" to resign now and look for a job where they will be more satisfied. I'm not saying he shouldn't have leaked the info, but does he have the guts to do more than anonymous leak?
Yesterday was the time to do it right. Are we having a REVOLUTION yet?
It just confuses the issue which, at bottom, is that it takes two to tango.
This entire discussion is really offtopic, but I wanted to comment here, as this hit home very, very personally.
I don't know you, so it'd be unfair of me to say you're an abusive father. However, I personally grew up in an environment with an abusive family, and this "two to tango" line was the justification. It still echos in my ears.
You see, my sister is younger than me, and took great advantage of that two-to-tango line. I have several scars from her scratches, I'd take a great deal of physical abuse from her because at the time, it was drilled in to my head that I couldn't fight back. After she'd get done with her assaults, which could involve anything from fingernails to a lamp, inevitably my parents would get involved, which meant the both of us got punished. Using the two-to-tango logic, I was the more guilty party being older, and as such I got a second beating from whichever parent happened to find out.
So now, yes, I say you should be finding out what happened, and not be being a lazy parent at best, or an abusive one at worst. Self defense still applies even if it takes some effort on your part to find out what happened and teach your kids right from wrong.
~Rebecca
have to compenstate MS for the seizure of its IP
How could Internet Protocol have a heart attack?
To uphold the law?
Prosecutors felt they had enough evidence. Last I heard, a bad economy was not a defense against criminal behavior.
That is all.
And you might think what does fair mean? Is it the court or the law? to me the american laws seems fairly insane! It would not supprise me if americans thought the same about our (european) laws...
Because it is irrelevant. For the EU to find out if the documentation is enough, they have to, you know, contact the people wanting to use the documentation.
Microsoft wants to go on a fishing expedition with the documents, find something and take it out of context, and stall the trial even further.
This thing has been going on for TWO YEARS.
"Sufferin' succotash."
The way the eu has been acting I really do not think they are treating microsoft fair. Microsoft handed the source code to them and they still said no.
All the documentation is on msdn and tech net.
What more do they want? They already have a version of windows without the stuff that was in question ?
I really think the eu has it in for microsoft.
Microsoft still has to understand that EU is not a vulgar copy of the US.
...
...
... only US administration, and Microsoft but I don't have to specify that ;)
A lot of Americans, and visibly not only the average citizen, still thinks that we in Europe are trying to build a European copy of the US with the same economical model and its influence on the politic. How can they be so wrong
Let's take a simple example, in US if you say you're a socialist people will look at you like you have some strange disease while in Europe half od the countries are actualy lead by goverments where the Socialists have the majority.
With that in mind, you are probably more prepared to understand that Microsoft is seen as "The Devil" by lots of the EU citizens and therefore by a lot of the guys they've elected to represent them at the European parliament.
Combine this with the actual image that people in Europe have in mind when you're talking about the US administration and you'll probably have a clearer picture of how people will react to this in Europe. And by people I mean the peoples and their deputies
EU will just see this as one more attempt from the US administration to influence the EU domestical affairs; and seriously, peolple are just fed up with this attitude.
PS: note I'm not blaiming "America", or "US"
The problem is that the concept of "fair" is vague. MS probably thinks it's unfair if they can't use all of the tools available to them to turn the tables against their competition. If they have a bigger gun, why shouldn't they be able to use it?
The EU's, or mine or your, idea of "fair" may mean that MS should compete on the merits of each individual product, not the leverage they can gain from abusing standards and their monopoly power. Unfortunately, I don't think it's people like us that the current US administration agrees with...
"...denying it access to what it contends are vital documents it needs to prepare its defense."
I believe that the issue is Ms.Software, and that Ms. has those documents already. Also, Ms.Sotfware makes a habit of wrecking other software installs. Fair? I think the EU is bending over backwards to Ms.Gates. Maybe Ms.Gates would prefer it if the EU bent over forwards?
Excuse me, but how many knife fights have you been in to support this claim? Even with years of martial arts training, with focus on self defense, a knife is a problem. Against a bladed weapon, even the most skilled warrior runs a substantial risk of severe or fatal injury. If you have only taken a few dozen classes, then you are in serious trouble.
The whole point of anti-trust law is to improve competition in the economy, to make the market more effective. Thus, unless you somehow believe that letting a monopoly freely expand its monopoly power to other markets is good for the economy, the conclusion must be that the administration did in fact make a decision that impacted the economy in a negative way, and keeps on doing so.
If all the documentation was in MSDN and Technet we wouldn't have to have people reverse-engineering (and re-reverse-engineering) CIFS and other interfaces on a regular bases.
Making the source code available is 100% useless unless it's available royalty-free, freely redistributable, and with no NDA. If they don't want to do that, then they need to document *and* maintain the documentation to a level that it can be used without additional resources to implement an interoperable client and server (or application and emulator).
Thanks God M$ haven't accused the european court system in collaborating with its rivals. You heard probably, the whole case was brought to court by this communists/terrotists (underline matching) rivals! And they still work with our rivals against us!! This is conspiracy!!! They are plotting something!!!!! US gov't has definitely to apply pressure and probably send troops somewhere. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/03/ms_eu_co
From all I heard, even IBM after it's first anti-trust case was less verbal. After second one IBM have learned the lessons and changed completely the way they do business and cooperate with others in industry.
IMHO, M$ must be fined for just going around and telling press that they did nothing bad. After they were found guilty. Twice - not less - in US and EU. It's just hard to beleive M$' top management flies so high in the skies...
P.S. I wonder what kind of disaster would happen when they fall. It's just like RFC 1925, rule #3.
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
IANAL, but as I understand it, they don't. They do have to publish the documentation required for OTHERS to write software that can talk to Microsoft software.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Yeah. It's pretty damn ineffective, for one. What typically happens is that a mob will pick the weakest person they can find, subsume their dark impulses upon that victim, label him as the problem, and walk off morally satisfied.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
That opinion exists outside of Europe too. Canada has signed several trade agreements with the USA. Notice that I don't say "free trade" agreements. If anything, theese trade agreements have increased the number of punitive tariffs against Canadian products. The fact that the courts have sided with Canada in every trade dispute has done nothing to remove these tariffs.
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
"Microsoft turns to U.S. for EU Antitrust Help"
Okay, sure. We'll send the Judge who presided over your US anti-trust case as a character witness...
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
I have several scars from her scratches, I'd take a great deal of physical abuse from her because at the time, it was drilled in to my head that I couldn't fight back. After she'd get done with her assaults, which could involve anything from fingernails to a lamp, inevitably my parents would get involved, which meant the both of us got punished. Using the two-to-tango logic, I was the more guilty party being older, and as such I got a second beating from whichever parent happened to find out.
Re-read the above, then re-read what I wrote. You'll see they're quite different in many ways. One particular item of importance is that if there is injury involved, I treat the situation very differently. I also don't punish the older child more just for being older. That's not "two-to-tango" logic. If punishment isn't equal, it's the first one to escalate to physical violence (any sort of contact) that gets the more severe punishment, under the "sticks-and-stones" logic.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
The EU knows exactly what they are asking for and it ties directly to samba. They are asking for a SMB CIFS manual that can tell other people how talk to windows servers that dominate the market. They want documentation that a group like Samba can use "free and clear". That's not requiring Microsoft to release their software for "free" or their precious secret "IP" considering most of that's not valid in Europe (yet). So it's just as valid as requiring GM or Ford to allow mechanics to read the codes on engine computers.
WHAA
Two things:
i ndex.html">theories about the DOJ, MS, and "Linux"</a>. Yeah, it's a bit biased politically, but there are some players you may recognize. For example, the lovable Jack Abramoff (paid $560,000 by MS) had an associate Ralph Reed who he paid $240,000 annually while (at the same time) Reed was a senior consultant to the 2000 Bush presidential campaign. Seriously, you can't make this stuff up.
The first is that it's interesting to compare the edict from the EC regarding MS's APIs and how the French copyright law we're hearing so much about could affect Apple regarding itunes/ipod. Of course, there are a few different things with Apple, one being that they haven't been convicted of violating laws in the same magnitude MS has.
The second is that there are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories regarding the current US administration and MS. One that i read, and Slashdot rejected, was one detailing <a href="http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/51589/
In addition to above two points, it is also important to remember that Microsoft is a constantly moving target. Even if you had the source code, and even if you could create usable documentation from that source code, and even if you could distribute that documentation, by the time anyone could design, write, and test code that could interoperate with Microsoft software, Microsoft will have changed the API via Windows Update, and your code will be broken. Microsoft does not *want* to document their API because that would be indicative of commitment to that API.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
proof that microsoft is a bunch of retards. if you dont like the way your treated move along, pull out of the country, and refuse them service. im not a big microsoft fan, but they are crying to the wrong people. im sure if the tables were turned, microsoft would say 'tuff shit, get over it'. its just like going to a resturant, if you dont like the service/food you dont go back. microsoft is just too greedy to relise this though, and wont pull out. they would rather pay the fines which doesnt amount to anything near there profits.
Good to see that corporations are getting welfare from the government as regular citizens are getting the shaft.
Microsoft: We now take over BMW!
EU: Hey, USA! See? They're fucking evil!
USA: Yeah, yeah, you're right. I guess we kinda screwed up that DOJ trial. This is pretty embarrassing, you know...
EU: OH MY GOD! Now they're swallowing our banks! We can feel the money being sucked out of us... rectally! THE HORROR!!
USA: Mister Gates, would you care to explain yourself before we inevitably raid every single office your company has ever owned (as well as a few others while we're at it), brutally sodomizing the workers before using flamethrowers to torch them down along with the building, after which we will do things best not mentioned for the sake of our international relationships to you, your family and all your friends?
Bill Gates: Er... Donations?
Meanwhile in Redmond, VA...
Steve Ballmer: *having half of his face painted blue, waving a chair over his head* They can take our lives but they can't take our monopoly! What we need now is cannon fodder, cannon fodder, cannon fodder, cannon fodder, cannon fodder, cannon fodder...
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
When is ignorance a good self-defense?
Proper training (which includes physical AND mental aspects) will ALWAYS increase the chances for survival for a given individual for a given situation.
In other words, why would you argue that, if a bully is expected to attack you (even, perhaps, with a knife) no matter your actions, then would you rather A) cower in fear and plead for mercy, or B) React in a manner appropriate with prior training, which has been given forethought and can be planned somewhat.
The best response for self defense is the response that has the best chances for survival for the victim(s). In the case of rape, this means FIGHT BACK and RUN as soon as possible. In the case of armed robbery, this means TOSS THE MONEY, it's not worth it, do what you have to to get out of there, and get to safety.
Self-defense isn't about winning a fight you didn't start. It's about preserving life and liberty for the one(s) being attacked. And the fellow who asked about outrunning bullets? I have a heck of a lot better chance against a gun, if I don't stand dead still and make myself a practice target. A person committed to shooting first in a fight, will have SHOT FIRST. Get the hell out of Dodge when you have a chance.
I spent some time reading Microsoft's 78 page PDF file from
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/legal/02-23-06R esponsetoECSO.mspx/ [microsoft.com]
It's hard to follow without the context of the original Statement of Objections to compare against. Does anyone know of a groklaw like website that is capturing all the publicly available legal documents on this case and organizing them in a coherent manner?
The message I get when reading it is that Microsoft says we're trying to comply but the commission is not cooperating and is biased against us and preventing us from bringing this to the Court of First Instance ("CFI") in Luxembourg.
Here are some of the more interesting snippets taken from Microsoft's document:
1. Hundreds of Microsoft employees and contractors have worked for more than 30,000 hours to create over 12,000 pages of detailed technical documents that are available for license today. In addition, Microsoft has offered to provide licensees with 500 hours of technical support and has made its source code related to all the relevant technologies available under a reference license.
3. The Commission continually changed its interpretation of what technical documentation was required by the vague language in the Decision, and refused to put its new interpretations in writing despite repeated requests from Microsoft [...]
4. The Commission has denied Microsoft's fundamental right of defence by prohibiting fair and full access to the file underlying the Statement of Objections, including correspondence between the Commission and the outside experts upon whose evidence the Commission relies.
9. The Commission refused to provide Microsoft a meaningful written statement, apparently because it wished to demand a broad scope of documentation, while, at the same time, preventing Microsoft from placing that fact squarely before the CFI in the appeal against the 2004 Decision (as substantiated by statements discussed in later sections of this Response). Microsoft, although dismayed by this gamesmanship, itself stated in writing that it would supply what it understood the Commission was requesting.
15. The Commission did not comment upon the 11 December 2004 draft documentation for more than six months, and then ignored the 8 August 2005 revision for several months more. Specifically, it never challenged Microsoft's description of the scope of the documentation that was being developed and supplied to the Commission.
18. With regard to the scope of Microsoft's Technical Documentation, the Statement of Objections claims that Microsoft has provided only "on-the-wire" protocol information, that is, information relating to how the protocols communicate information between computers in a Windows network, such as how data must be formatted by the sender to be read by the recipient, and how the meaning of the information transmitted can be understood. The Statement of Objections asserts that Microsoft has refused to supply a broader range of information which would help explain why the computers in a network communicate particular information and how the communicated information is used and with what results.
20. The usability problems asserted by the Statement of Objections relate to its ease of use. According to the Statement of Objections, descriptions of the proper sequencing of messages communicated between servers are not provided in a way "consistent with the kind of description commonly used in the industry" and in some instances are not provided at all.
24. The Commission has also contested the significance of Microsoft's voluntary offer to allow licensees to use the actual source code for Windows, even though the Commission itself demanded that the Trustee must be given the same code in order to determine Microsoft's compliance.
28. The Commission cannot have it both ways. If it claims that the Trustee and its consultants are merely acting as a constituent pa
I don't doubt that Microsoft's internal documentation of their protocols might be lacking. Some of it may indeed exist only inside programmers' heads and the source code. So here's a solution.
Have Microsoft provide the Samba team with a contact to answer all questions they have about the way these things work. No NDA's, no license fees, just the info. Then let the open source samba code act as 'non-poisoned' documentation.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
It is your perspective that is wrong. Microsoft did a bad thing, they got caught (by the DOJ.) After that was over with, they were still up to no good. Jackson: Nothing has changed. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/229468_msft jackson22.html
And that is why they are in front of the EU. Except, they are 19 now, and Jr got caught with his pants down! So he hits up Dad to bail him out.
Why don't you grow up and open your eyes to reality. Microsoft hasn't changed. They don't just need a swat on the rear. They need to be jailed, because the teen is still acting like a five year old. And as comparing to family, I have a 19 year-old step son that acts just like Microsoft. Getting into trouble, asking his parents to bail him out. What an idiot.
That's not self-defense, that's revenge.
I suspect they would be locked hard. You'd likely need to low level the drive to get linux or BSD on it.
There would be HUGE pain with no time to plan a changeover.
At that point the EU would no longer have any leverage on MS. Bill WOULD relase the hounds.
Computer systems would stop working all over europe. Their economys would lose trillions. Europeans would be boiling water to drink and shitting in buckets (not all of them, just those unfortunate enough to depend on any MS product to keep their infrastructure going).
I don't see it happening.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Racist, totalitarian, militant ... you can be all of those and not be fascist. The defining characteristic of fascism is the notion that government exists to serve corporations.
Actually...
"Although the broadest definitions of fascism may include every authoritarian state that has ever existed, most theorists see important distinctions to be made. Fascism in Italy arose in the 1920s as a mixture of syndicalist notions with an anti-materialist theory of the state; the latter had already been linked to an extreme nationalism. Fascism in many ways seems to have been clearly developed as a reaction against Communism and Marxism, both in a philosophic and political sense, although it opposed democratic capitalist economics along with socialism, Marxism, and liberal democracy. It viewed the state as an organic entity in a positive light rather than as an institution designed to protect collective and individual rights, or as one that should be held in check...
Fascism is also typified by totalitarian attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life: political, social, cultural, and economic. The fascist state regulates and controls (as opposed to nationalizing) the means of production.
(Quoted from Wiki.)
Fascism really has nothing to do with association of goverments with corporations...
'...computers in the future may have only 1000 vacuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1.5 tons...' Popular Mechanics, 03/49'
I agree with you completely.. even if I am an AC.
The OP shows signs of having never been in an altercation of substantial seroiusness as anybody (including so-called "trained" martial artists) facing a knife should get the hell out of Dodge if possible. Couple that with the most popular martial art in the US (and maybe the world?) being Tae Kwon Do and you have a recipe for disaster. Even Brazillian jiu-jitsu folks have trouble when facing somebody with a knife. I think everybody gets this picture of somebody pulling it and executing an orderly thrust or some erratic pansy-assed slashes. We had a kid in high school (back in the 80's.. oh my) who pulled a Buck knife and when completely apeshit.. totally erratic. He was fast and not over-committing. There was no defense against that and they hauled the other kid out on a stretcher.
Have you any idea of the level of fear that Billy G turning of Europe would cause to the rest of the world. Every other country would be scrambeling around for an exit plan from M$
Wouldn't it be nice if schools got all the money they wanted and the army had to hold jumble sales for guns
To uphold the law?
Prosecutors felt they had enough evidence. Last I heard, a bad economy was not a defense against criminal behavior.
How did the administration not uphold the law? Which law was broken? Guilt was found and punishment applied, they were not let off the hook (look at all the auxillary lawsuits that happend afterwards). I said in my orignial post the DOJ could have won a second trial.
US Law does not specify monopoly punishment guidelines. Don't forget that Microsoft still has to report and explain thier actions to judge Kelly every once-in-awhile.
It sounds like you disagree with the terms of the settlement (don't forget all the state AG's signed off on the agreement as well).
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
That's not self-defense, that's revenge.
Which is exactly what the original poster wanted. Revenge. I didn't use the term "self-defense", the GP did.
MS asks US backup.. US should think before acting, not forgeting that there was antitrust case inside US five years ago.. It is good time to sort thing out.
Bill would turn off europe if they tryed that.
Most countrys understand that if you intend to kill something as big as MS you better kill it cleanly on the first shot. (I can't see any way to do it)
Otherwise you are screwed. MS is restrained by legal threats. But if the EU does its worst do you expect MS to just lay there? They will simply say, 'OK. No windows for you. Enjoy the rioting.'
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
A government official, speaking on a condition of anonymity told us that they were offered the full Office pack, not just Word.
?SYNTAX ERROR
What most people seem to forget is that the EU started out as a trade federation with the explicit goal of creating one, open, european market. This is why, in the last two decades, so many of the utilities in Europe have been privatized. This is why the euro has been introduced. This is why people in the richer countries are so terrified of Polish cheap labor being made available*. All because of the (perceived?) benefit of that huge european market.
In this light it boggles the mind that it has taken them so long to crack down on Microsoft.
The OEM deals would never have been accepted if they were in any other industry. Imagine going to the supermarket (Dell) to buy the ingredients for pasta you're cooking (your new laptop). When you're checking out you notice you're also paying for a six pack of crappy beer (XP whatever-edition). However, you do not drink or would prefer a good bottle of wine. Then it turns out that, well, since nearly everyone drinks the same crappy beer, it's been added to your shopping list and you have no choice but to pay for the beer. Would anyone accept this?
At least you can toss away the beer and get some free coffee (Ubuntu).
* Because, honestly, we're the rich guys and no else should be. The richer european countries have no moral obligation to their eastern neighbours whatsoever. [/irony]
I agree. I have a very deep-seated dislike for M$, but for a number of reasons they definitely should be treated fairly - if only to lower the chances for a successful appeal.
However, I also believe they should be treated fair, but harsh. They have done an enornemous(sp?) amount of damage to others, and if they are convicted, it is time that they pay society back what they've taken.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Just where do you live?! I don't know many people that see MS as 'the devil' even though I'm amongst geeks/nerds all the time. Most people have probably never even thought about microsoft being evil or not...
I think you mean "Caveat Venditor"(let the seller beware). "Caveat Emptor" means let the buyer beware.
God is imaginary
Events are not pleasing to Microsoft and the EU courts are not rolling belly-up.
Therefore, call the Homeland Security Dept. that the "foreign" courts are being nasty.
Payoff said officials.
Wait for bailout.
This post encoded with ROT26. If you can read it, you've violated the DMCA. Handcuffs please, sergeant.
But if the EU tryed to simply take away MS's copyright MS would retaliate with all they had. They know if the source is legally available in europe their whole business model go's away. Everybody will interoperate. Half of MAD has already happend. You're Gates. You know your main cash cow is dead (but you're still set for life). Do you suck it up and continue or release the chair throwing hounds out of spite?
As to the not updating approach. Expect a new exploit that will shutdown any networks with unpatched machines (of COURSE MS would know nothing of it). Europe would be down at least long enough to reverse engineer the update and remove the shutdown EU machines part.
Given these unspoken possibilitys the EU will not start MAD, MS will not finish it.
The fact is that what the EU wants is in the SAMBA source. Everything else is MS's competitors monkey wrenching.
As to ditching windows, good luck to them without a work alike better then WINE. You know how much software development costs and how many person-years are sunk into these systems.
It would certainly cost MS in future sales, shutting down europe would not be financially advantagous in the long run. But being europes bitch is'nt financially advantagous eather.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
For a few systems. They'd undoubtedly nail a few non-Europeans and piss them off, too. Then:
It's just a fantasy, anyway, but if the EU did stop enforcing Microsoft's copyrights, MS would be have to be very, very dumb to respond by sabotaging Europe's Windows boxes with Windows updates. Partly for the reaction, and partly because it would be ineffective anyway. Enterprises and critical infrastructure machines aren't updated with Windows Update anyway. Home users and small businesses are the ones who would be hit.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
"Trained" martial artists will indeed be better equipped than your average couch potato in an unarmed altercation against a knife wielding assailant. "Posers", "wanna-bee's" and "trolls" will serve to discredit any amount or style of training. Furthermore, to pretend that a particular (well developed) style of martial art is inherently superior to another is, in my experience, another hallmark of the novice, or armchair enthusiast.
The above quote is exactly right in its last sentence. In no way does a trained individual enter a knife fight willingly. Self-defense is almost always at the disadvantage, as the assailant will always be in charge of picking the time, place, and circumstances of the situation. Get out with life intact, is what a reasonable person should learn from self-defense training in any martial art.
The usual comment about disliking the fact that Microsoft can't ship slim software or that Microsoft can't produce meaningful, stable documentation is, "Well then, don't use their stuff."
Of course, the clear analog: "Well then, don't sell in the EU," escapes them.
If you took the aforementioned martial arts classes, with a proper focus on self defense, a knife should be no problem.
Bull. If you took the aforementioned martial arts classes, even with a proper focus on self-defense, all you've done is learn a martial art. If you want to learn self-defense, learn self-defense, not a sport. You'll get a superior level of training if you find someone who teaches hand to hand combat.
Martial artists don't learn Dirty Fighting. They learn to fight by a bunch of rules that their trainers taught them to fight by.
What's the difference? Street fighters don't fight by rules. They carry chains, knives, guns, batons, clubs, swords, and god knows what else.
Karate is not a real form of combat - two of the local regional champions (black belts) attacked the guy in my town who teaches advanced combat. He broke the nose of one of the attackers, and reduced the other black belt to tears with a couple of punches, and a good throw. They were lucky, he could have done much, much worse.
Judo is no better - the aforementioned combat teacher also has a 7th Dan black belt in Judo. As well as this, he has a 3rd Dan combatu jiu jitsu grading (which of itself isn't really a martial art, as it's made up of boxing, wrestling, and all of the holds from the other martial arts), as well as being a boxing coach, and is directly associated with special forces around the world. His boys (and girls) train 3 nights a week, for up to 3 hours a night, plus their little "tasks,"usually involving groups of them finding local street gangs (or whoever) and beating the living hell out of them.
His predecessor taught some very interesting hand-to-knife combat, ranging from disarming your opponent by smothering him, right through to disarming him by crushing his wrist.
Your average black belt versus these guys has no hope at all, they just don't know enough.
It's really quite amusing to hear all the hyper-aggressive nerds with martial arts training bleat on about how dangerous they are, but the truth is that everyone is vulnerable. You've got to sleep sometime, and if you beat the wrong person up you can be damned sure that they have friends who will take you to pieces.
"They haven't done the "unbundling" that they were ordered to do either."
Um, yes they have but there was no market impact. Nobody wants an OS that doesn't have 'stuff' with it. It was a dumb decision to say they had to do it.
While we're on this wonderful topic of forcing M$ to do stuff what do you think about the idea of handing IP (Intellectual Property) over to your competitors? Is that how it is done in the EU, to force companies to give away their IP so that everyone has a fair chance? If that's the case then innovation is not important because it will be used by your competitor tomorrow, and likely no one would innovate anymore.
Really, I think this case is about 2 things; the EU wants money (because social programs costs loads), and the EU wants to show American companies that they have to play by completely different rules when trying to do business there. I hope the EU keeps doing this to technology companies (if M$ loses) because eventually innovative firms would say fcuk the EU I won't do business there...
In short term, you can run unpatched. That buys you time. Microsoft usually does not bother releasing patches until the threat is already in the wild, so no big loss here anyway - it already happened, I think it was the WMF hole, that a third-party developer released a wrapper around the affected DLL that blocked the problem by eliminating the vulnerable library call. Not mentioning the possibility to screen the code with antivirus-like software directly on TCP/IP and library-call levels. That can be made within Europe virtually overnight, leveraging existing antivirus technology. See also Hogwash, a Snort-derived packet scrubber.
The critical infrastructure will stay up and running. With hiccups, perhaps, but if your crisis scenario comes, I don't expect more than little temporary discomfort followed by a blissful era without intentional incompatiBILLities, longer uptimes, and better general reliability.
Billy may throw a hissy fit and cut Europe off. All he gets in that case is pissing off and temporarily inconveniencing couple million people, creating a large-scale proof-of-concept mass migration project for the rest of the world to follow in a more leisure pace, and creating a market for non-Windows software large enough for even non-EU vendors to cater for.
What may at a cursory glance look like MAD is more likely to be a suicide.
This guy is nuts.
musings which were reported on the Mini-Microsoft blog this past week.
Remember? Somebody posted that the word around the water cooler at Microsoft Legal was that the delay for Vista had nothing to do with the code, and everything to do with the EU's case against Microsoft. Word is that Microsoft intended to delay Vista until the US Commerce Department or the WTO could be "persuaded" by corporate pressure from corporations wanting to upgrade to Vista (are there any, however?) to intervene on Microsoft's behalf.
The purported reason? Microsoft wants to avoid having to open their server APIs so that Samba absolutely would not be able to interoperate with Vista the way it does with Windows 2000 and 2003 Server.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
This geezer is not nuts ! He can't spell, but he's not nuts.
How many beans make five, anyhow ?
We're talking here about the trial, not just about the company and in this case people are indeed seing MS as the devil. The trial is well covered by the medias and the image given by the medias is that MS is "The Devil"
... some people speak another language than English.
And sorry for the bad spelling
What options do I have if someone attacks me using martial arts unprovoked? Beyond contacting the police, can I go to his teacher or would that be bad form? I don't condone squeeling, but it is a topic of abuse of a highly respectable art form and a student who fails to respect the basis of his teachings.
What do you think?
(And I don't really have time and it should not have to be so that I am forced to take martial arts classes in case someone who knows martial arts decide to attack me. This is 2006 europe, not 1100s japan).
What options do I have if someone attacks me using martial arts unprovoked? Beyond contacting the police, can I go to his teacher or would that be bad form? I don't condone squeeling, but it is a topic of abuse of a highly respectable art form and a student who fails to respect the basis of his teachings.
Despite what appears in movies, most martial artists are really not going to be street thugs. There's a level of dedication and discipline that comes with it that pretty much ensures street thuggery is out.
Some punk that took 6 months of "Karate" so he could beat people up is less of a threat to someone trained than an untrained person. Untrained people are silly, and unpredicatable. There's a period where you're actually worse because you are starting to use the proper techniques, but you're predictable, telegraphing your moves, and prone to "repeat" attacks.
However, to answer your question: The same thing you against any other weapon. Only this time the weapons is Hands & Feet, but the premise is the same. Assess your ability to defend against such a weapon. If you aren't up to the task, try and run. Even the best martial artists are limited by how fast a human can run, and how far do you have to make it to get somewhere where an angry mob isn't going to join in should he pursue?
~Rebecca
Substitute "corporations" for "means of production" and ask yourself what a fascist government has left to be for after you eliminate that against list.
As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
Thank you for the advice, but I was thinking on the longer term.