Don't know if this has been discussed in the comments yet, I'm too lazy to read them all, but I believe the ruling is unfair.
Well, not the whole ruling, but a part of it. Basically this is my understanding of a part. Microsoft can not share information with itself, unless it shares it with the world. Since Microsoft will be two companies now then I believe they should be treated like two companies. All other companies in the US can share information with each other without having to make that information public. Just because Microsoft has the money of a few countries doesn't mean anything. Throw all their power and money aside and you still have a company trying to turn a profit just like any other company.
For an example, say Valve and Interplay hooked up. They could share all their information without having to give any information to another company, including Microsoft. "Trade secrets" I guess. Anyway, if Microsoft wanted to hook up with Valve and share source codes with them, Microsoft would then have to offer those same source codes to the public (i.e., Interplay, id, Microprose, some dork in Idaho programming missle plans for blowing up Cuba). Also, when divisions of Interplay, which act as individual companies basically get together on a game they don't have to offer their source codes to the public. However, if the software division of Microsoft wanted to borrow some codes from the OS division of Microsoft (two different companies actually) they couldn't. The OS division would have to either open source the codes or sell a copy to the software division.
I can NOT see how this is fair to Microsoft as a company. If I am wrong then so be it, whatever, just let me know. -----------
Slashdot Mirror
Don't know if this has been discussed in the comments yet, I'm too lazy to read them all, but I believe the ruling is unfair.
Well, not the whole ruling, but a part of it. Basically this is my understanding of a part. Microsoft can not share information with itself, unless it shares it with the world. Since Microsoft will be two companies now then I believe they should be treated like two companies. All other companies in the US can share information with each other without having to make that information public. Just because Microsoft has the money of a few countries doesn't mean anything. Throw all their power and money aside and you still have a company trying to turn a profit just like any other company.
For an example, say Valve and Interplay hooked up. They could share all their information without having to give any information to another company, including Microsoft. "Trade secrets" I guess. Anyway, if Microsoft wanted to hook up with Valve and share source codes with them, Microsoft would then have to offer those same source codes to the public (i.e., Interplay, id, Microprose, some dork in Idaho programming missle plans for blowing up Cuba). Also, when divisions of Interplay, which act as individual companies basically get together on a game they don't have to offer their source codes to the public. However, if the software division of Microsoft wanted to borrow some codes from the OS division of Microsoft (two different companies actually) they couldn't. The OS division would have to either open source the codes or sell a copy to the software division.
I can NOT see how this is fair to Microsoft as a company. If I am wrong then so be it, whatever, just let me know.
-----------
Jøkey/xero
xerotek