Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Attempts to Quash OSS Recommendations

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the can't-quash-what's-already-open dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Inside Higher Ed has a story detailing Microsoft's attempt to alter a report created by the Secretary of Education's Commission on the Future of Higher Education. Gerri Elliott, corporate vice president at Microsoft's Worldwide Public Sector division, complained about recommendations in the report to look into 'open source' and 'open content' at higher education institutions across the country. Elliott, who is on the voting committee, waited until the last minute and tried to have the report changed after a public vote. Although she does have a point that 'open source' is a development model, it still has collaboration at its heart. Can Microsoft argue against 'open' and win?"

3 of 179 comments (clear)

  1. Define Win by Analogy+Man · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Can Microsoft argue against 'open' and win?

    It all depends on how you define winning. Does it mean having a few senators and congressmen in your pocket? Does it mean having a public debate where it is clear that your position is correct? Does it mean spreading enough FUD that people are confused/fearful enough not to take an "undesirable" action?

    My interpretation of a Microsoft win is to perpetuate a perception that OSS is a hippy commune free for all not to be trusted by the government. It fits with the current mode of debate in DC. Adopt an rediculous position that cannot be supported with facts or logic and label anyone that challenges it a extremist fanatical zealot.

    --
    When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
  2. Re:[OT] Google unreachable?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    Its fine. And your retarted.
    It's fine. And you're retarded.


    There. All better.

  3. Re:There is an interesting question here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Rubbish. The GPL might prevent companies trying to sell me stuff my tax dollars have already paid for once... If anything it's better than the (often blatantly ignored) rule that software developed with public money is supposed to be public domain and uncopyrightable in the first place (NASA gets, or at least used to get, this right, at least).

    Of course companies would "have a beef with it", but government is by the people of the people and for the people. And corporations aren't people, no matter what mere law says.