Your argument is that customers "expected" a web browser, so as long as they got a web browser, regardless of whether it was IE or Netscape, they were not harmed.
The counterargument is that lack of competition stifles innovation, and lack of innovation does hurt customers. It's not that they didn't get a web browser, it's that they were denied all web browser innovations not developed by Microsoft.
As a mediocre analogy, consider that Henry Ford is usually quoted as saying "You can have any color car you want, as long as it is black." What if Ford had a way to prevent all dealerships from selling any other manufacturer's cars? Black cars sold like mad, and customers got what they wanted (a car), so what is the problem? Well, GM decided to let customers choose their car model and car color. And that innovative idea beneffited consumers.
So yes, customers got what they "expected". But they didn't receive the benefits of innovation that competition brings forth. I don't just mean from Netscape. Someone out there wrote a better browser, but that person's ideas never had a chance because of Microsoft's practices. And that definitely harmed consumers.
I think this would make a good Jerry Springer episode.
22 year old entrepreneur ("lynn") trying to start up a company. (at least a few people would have sympathy for him) But he really runs an internet spam agency.
Two other companies, one who promises that it "doesn't deal with spam companies", could get tricked into appearing. Inurv would be the mystery guest since we don't know anything about them. (Maybe their director of strategic sales could turn out to be Lynn's mother's ex-lesbian lover!)
He didn't break the law. Fair use allows for the copying of copyrighted works for research purposes. Assuming that the kids didn't keep the 6000 songs, it was all "research".
That being said, he's still an idiot. What if the kids did listen to the songs, because they were "researching" bands to find the one whose CD they should buy.
Or get copies of the California state code and email him 1-2 megs of it. This way you aren't sending him unsolicited commercial emails either. Your sending him non-commercial, political email, which is apparently legal under california law.
Wonders how many slashdot users it takes to fill a mail server...
>> launch accelerated electrons out their tail pipe
Change electrons to charged ions and you have the old Ion Thrusters of sci fi. The idea has been circulating in scientific circles for quite some time as well; in one of my nuclear fusion classes in college we had a good discussion on plasma drive.
Uh, the company _will_ be paying for cleanup. Read the article
"Negotiating a cleanup plan" does NOT mean "will pay to have it all cleaned up." And it is unlikely that the government will pressure Solutia to do so.
Think about the Exxon Valdez spill. Exxon paid for the "cleanup", and a lot of oil was removed. But you can still walk down the beach, stick you hand between rocks, and come up with oil covering it.
Slashdot Mirror
Your argument is that customers "expected" a web browser, so as long as they got a web browser, regardless of whether it was IE or Netscape, they were not harmed. The counterargument is that lack of competition stifles innovation, and lack of innovation does hurt customers. It's not that they didn't get a web browser, it's that they were denied all web browser innovations not developed by Microsoft. As a mediocre analogy, consider that Henry Ford is usually quoted as saying "You can have any color car you want, as long as it is black." What if Ford had a way to prevent all dealerships from selling any other manufacturer's cars? Black cars sold like mad, and customers got what they wanted (a car), so what is the problem? Well, GM decided to let customers choose their car model and car color. And that innovative idea beneffited consumers. So yes, customers got what they "expected". But they didn't receive the benefits of innovation that competition brings forth. I don't just mean from Netscape. Someone out there wrote a better browser, but that person's ideas never had a chance because of Microsoft's practices. And that definitely harmed consumers.
I think this would make a good Jerry Springer episode.
22 year old entrepreneur ("lynn") trying to start up a company. (at least a few people would have sympathy for him) But he really runs an internet spam agency.
Two other companies, one who promises that it "doesn't deal with spam companies", could get tricked into appearing. Inurv would be the mystery guest since we don't know anything about them. (Maybe their director of strategic sales could turn out to be Lynn's mother's ex-lesbian lover!)
He didn't break the law. Fair use allows for the copying of copyrighted works for research purposes. Assuming that the kids didn't keep the 6000 songs, it was all "research".
That being said, he's still an idiot. What if the kids did listen to the songs, because they were "researching" bands to find the one whose CD they should buy.
What if you are researching which band's CD you want to buy next?
Or get copies of the California state code and email him 1-2 megs of it. This way you aren't sending him unsolicited commercial emails either. Your sending him non-commercial, political email, which is apparently legal under california law.
Wonders how many slashdot users it takes to fill a mail server...
>> launch accelerated electrons out their tail pipe
Change electrons to charged ions and you have the old Ion Thrusters of sci fi. The idea has been circulating in scientific circles for quite some time as well; in one of my nuclear fusion classes in college we had a good discussion on plasma drive.
Uh, the company _will_ be paying for cleanup. Read the article
"Negotiating a cleanup plan" does NOT mean "will pay to have it all cleaned up." And it is unlikely that the government will pressure Solutia to do so.
Think about the Exxon Valdez spill. Exxon paid for the "cleanup", and a lot of oil was removed. But you can still walk down the beach, stick you hand between rocks, and come up with oil covering it.