8 hours of jury deliberations means...
on
Novell Wins vs. SCO
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
...that even a lay-person jury could see that SCO's case was worthless. I'm a lawyer, and I'm here to state the obvious: juries take longer than 8 hours to decide many petty theft cases. Trustee Cahn, who is effectively running SCO, needs to wake up and smell SCO's dead feet. SCO is dead, dead, dead I say!
My apologies. I linked to the incorrect story in the main summary above. The LinuxTech.net blog mentioning the placement on Amazon Germany is actually here. Again, my apologies for the inconvenience and inaccuracy.
Christian Einfeldt
Look at any finance service, such as Yahoo Finance or Google Finance. Microsoft's look-up symbol is MSFT. Microsoft's chart is here on Yahoo Finance. Red Hat is growing. Microsoft is stagnating.
Assuming that it is true that loads of people are installing Microsoft Windows XP on their Linux-powered Dell Inspiron netbooks (which I'm not sure is true, since the original article didn't mention that), it doesn't really matter. A Linux sale is a Linux sale. When the Dell managers evaluate their future strategies, how much will they consider whether XP was installed post-sale? Very little.
And the same is true for Dell's competitors. If Dell's competitors see that they can move product in a down market by installing Linux on the machines, will they spend much time contemplating whether XP is installed on the machines? Probably not.
Most OEMs have small margins on their sales of all but the upper-end machines. Volume is what matters. Hence the power of Microsoft Windows. At least until today. For OEMs and pretty much everyone in the channel, volume is what matters. As of today, they will know that Linux distros have proven that they can drive one-third of that volume. That is what really matters.
And it gets better. As Linux-related desktop sales increase, you will see more and more third party vendors, such as 2dBoy, port their products to Linux, as maker of the popular indy game World of Goo has recently done.
Volume is king. And now Linux is seeing some significant volume sales.
Microsoft is going to fight this decision tooth and nail. They will appeal it and appeal it and appeal it. Microsoft has no good faith intention of complying with this order, any more than they comply with any other order. Look at what they did with the US anti-trust case. They stalled until W became the unelected US head of state, and then Bush promptly caved in and gave Microsoft everything it asked for.
It is important to remember that there are no implementations in the real world of Microsoft's OOXML schema, as discussed in Andy Updegrove's blog, quoting David Worthington:
Worthington's story includes quotes from Matusow and Mahugh that provide intriguing insights into how the decisions were made. After noting that saving to the OASIS ODF 1.1 format would now be possible, Worthington writes:
However, the company is not quick to embrace its own creation. Mahugh stated that Microsoft would not implement the final ISO version of OOXML until Office 14 ships at an unstated date in the future. This variant of OOXML was designated ISO/IEC 29500 at the time it was certified as an ISO International standard in April.
"One way to look at it is the prioritization of formats," Mahugh explained. "We reach a point in time where we have to decide whether to continue to invest in a previous version [of Office] or to cut the cord and move forward."
ODF support was a priority for Microsoft, Mahugh noted, adding that "real world" customers say that there is a pressing need for PDF [AU: ODF?] support. "At this point there are no products using [ISO/IEC 29500] in the marketplace."
When will Microsoft support its own file format? Worthingon quotes Gartner Research's Michael Silver on that question as follows:
"Customers that are expecting true document fidelity from XML-based, ISO-standard document formats will continue to be disappointed." Silver observed that the most compatible formats to use today are Microsoft's legacy binaries, and he believes that Microsoft will be unlikely to convince customers to move to OOXML in the foreseeable future.
It appears that Microsoft is shifting its competitive strategy with regard to ODF from rejecting the ODF standard to fighting for control of the standard in the committees. Below is a statement from James Plamondon, Technical Evangelist, Microsoft Developer Relations Group, describing his view of how to leverage Microsoft's influence over committees. One wonders to what extend Microsoft might have used these tactics in New York and Minnesota:
have mentioned before the "stacked panel." Panel discussions naturally favor alliances of relatively weak partners -- our usual opposition. For example, an "unbiased" panel on OLE vs. OpenDoc would contain representatives of the backers of OLE (Microsoft) and the Backers of OpenDoc (Apple, IBM, Novell, WordPerfect, OMG, etc.). Thus, we find ourselves outnumbered in almost every "naturally occurring" panel debate.
A stacked panel, on the other hand, is like a stacked deck: it is packed with people who, on the face of things, should be neutral, but who are in fact strong supporters of our technology. The key to stacking a panel is being able to choose the moderator. Most conference organizers allow the moderator to select die panel, so if you can pick the moderator, you win. Since you can't expect representatives of our competitors to speak on your behalf, you have to get the moderator to agree to having only "independent ISVs" on the panel. No one from Microsoft or any other formal backer of the competing technologies would be allowed -just ISVs who have to use this stuff in the "real world." Sounds marvellously independent doesn't it? In feet, it allows us to stack the panel with ISVs that back our cause. Thus, the "independent" panel ends up telling the audience that our technology beats the others hands down. Get the press to cover this panel, and you've got a major win on your hands.
It bears scrutiny as to who was on the New York and Minnesota panels, and their affiliations and histories. I don't actually know of the composition of those panels, so I am posing a question, not making a statement.
when Ballmer's letter was released to the public, so the market didn't have time to take the Ballmer letter into account before the close on Friday, 2 May 2008. In fact, Yahoo stock jump of which you speak was predicated on further efforts by Microsoft to acquire Yahoo:
Shares of Yahoo (YHOO) gained ground Friday, rising 6.9 percent to $28.67. The Wall Street Journal reported that Microsoft (MSFT) is likely to undertake a hostile takeover if YHOO does not accept its $42.4 billion offer. Shares of MSFT fell half a percent to $29.24.
A more likely scenario is that Microsoft is trying to wear down Yahoo management, and is betting on the fact that the weakening US economy will hurt Yahoo's share price more than it will hurt Microsoft's share price. Microsoft's stock is a more mature stock and is less susceptible to vicissitudes of the economy. Yahoo's stock is still a much less mature stock with a higher price / earnings ratio. So the factors seem to be in Microsoft's favor to 1) throw down the gauntlet to Yahoo management, who must now deliver shareholder value in short order; 2) Microsoft's stock will gain against Yahoo's stock, making a Yahoo acquisition cheaper later.
Oh, and if Microsoft never acquires Yahoo, MSFT will have succeeded in creating division amongst Yahoo investors, management, and employees, thereby weakening the number two search competitor.
Let's hope I am wrong, because Microsoft is a dangerous company, and needs to be held at bay.
You wrote: So what you're saying is that if it's not open source, it's not good?
No, what I am saying is that Microsoft will continue its predatory practices until its two main profit centers, Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office, are GPL'd.
I know that not everyone likes Free Open Source Software for all purposes. As it so happens, I am an attorney who runs his law office on Free Open Source Software only (except for Adobe Flash, the only non-Free package in my office). But Free Open Source Software is not suitable for everyone.
Microsoft is a different case, though. Their stock depends on the maintenance of their monopoly position. So they are not to be trusted. No other company is similarly situated in the desktop consumer software market.
I will remain skeptical of Microsoft until the day it GPLs its source code for Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office, and adopts ODF as a standard. Until then, Microsoft will be the same Microsoft that just last month engaged in cheating and fraud to get its MOOXML specification accepted as a standard.
This is not to say that I hate Microsoft or wish their stock ill. But it does mean that Microsoft's business model is based on leverage its monopoly on the consumer desktop operating system and its office productivity suite application. Relentless, merciless competition is deeply embedded into Microsoft's business structure, much more so than other proprietary software vendors. Because Microsoft's business structure depends on maintaining its monopoly status, they will not tolerate any competition at all in that space, and they will resort to both legal and illegal (anti-trust) means of achieving their goals.
And it's the same with software. Microsoft, in particular, is very annoyed that it will lose control over the desktop market, because, like the RIAA and the RIAA's constituent members, control assures profit. So Microsoft, like the people in the record labels, are going to need to learn a new way to make money. Free Open Source Software will not mean the end of Microsoft and Magnatune will not mean the end of the RIAA; but in both cases, Microsoft and the RIAA will lose their strangeholds on those respective markets. Which is appropriate.
Microsoft's stock has become a widows and orphans fund since 2002. It is no longer a growth stock. It has flattened out. The market obviously has intuitive sense that yes, Moore's law is pricing Microsoft stock out, in the face of the growth of Free Open Source Software. I am not an investment adviser, but I would not hold onto Microsoft stock right now. The borg's best days are behind it.
I hope the first thing that Microsoft learns is that we in the FOSS community are not stupid, and we remember being called "cancer" and "communists". I personally will welcome Microsoft when they GPL Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. Until then, I am inclined to believe that it is just preparation for more "extend, embrace, and extinguish."
Sam offered to come speak at our local LUG, and we turned him down, because we didn't think that he had anything of relevance to say to us. So be advised, Microsoft is sending Sam out on a tour to make nicey with the FOSS communities. But until they GPL Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office, it is still all part of "extend, embrace and extinguish" the cancerous commies.
...well, I had to ask, because my reading and search of the article doesn't find a mention Linux, and I can't imagine something innovative like this running on Windows, especially when Microsoft is still struggling to nail down file copying Vista. So, just curious, you know.
No, and thank goodness for that. Can you imagine the liability that would be incurred from owning Anonymous? I like their legal activities, such as protesting, but imagine what a nightmare it would be to actually own Anonymous and have to accept service for all of the lawsuits that the cult of Scientology would file against you. No way. Not me. I wouldn't even do it for the lulz. heh
SCO doesn't kill people with negligent pseudo-medicine or stuff all its BPR's into a filthy basement and forbid them to go outside, all the while convincing them that it's their own fault that it's happening to them...at least not that we know of?
I was, of course, being somewhat facetious in comparing SCO to Scientology, because Scientology clearly is much worse. But don't you get the feeling from Daryl and his boys that they just sit around thinking up ways to continue to attack Linux as "unAmerican" other similar rubbish? And what can you say about a company that sues its own customers? And continues to make claims about "owning" Unix that has been disproven in court? And claiming that Unix code from the OS they don't own has shown up in the Linux kernel, when that also has been disproven? There is a religious-like fervor emanating from SCO that feels a lot like Scientology. It's like they are on some kind of wacko righteous quest to attack the GNU Linux operating system. Or at least the Linux kernel project.
SCO makes Scientology look like a glee club. I'm not advocating DDOS, which is certainly illegal and immoral, even against these two cults, but after all of the protests that Anonymous was able to drum up against one cult, why not go for the SCO cult? Like the Scientology cult, the SCO cult supposedly has offices worldwide, making it a challenge worthy of the merry band of pranksters that is Anonymous.
SNCP has developed a business plan for SCO that includes unveiling new product lines aimed at global customers. This reorganization plan will also enable the company to see SCO's legal claims through to their full conclusion.
That's code, I think, for 'this will enable the company to continue to attack Linux'."
ECMA is an industry group focused on advancing the interests of its members, which is the similarity to the RIAA. When people think of the RIAA today, they think of litigation. But the RIAA has always done more that just litigation, much like the MPAA has done more than litigation, including the famous ratings of film. At least that is what I draw from the referenced article. Here is a description of ECMA from the Wikipedia page:
Unlike national standardization bodies, Ecma is a membership-based organization; it prides itself on the resulting "business-like" approach to standards, claimed to lead to better standards in less time thanks to a less bureaucratic process focused on getting results by consensus.
Note that ECMA does not pretend to be plenary in scope, unlike ISO, which purports to be a truly world standards body. ECMA feels that its value stems from the business focus that it brings to discussion. It is a basic difference in world view. ISO believes that it is important to have standards that are acceptable to a much wider group; ECMA feels that its business focus can bring "better" standards to the fore in a more timely fashion. It's a continuation of the timeless debate between those who advocate the efficacy of the private sector versus the inclusion of the public sector.
Is it possible that Microsoft will come to regret paying a premium for a business position in an industry it has yet to master, despite extraordinary expenditures (on-line revenue generation). Looky at how much ground Microft must make up to catch Google:
Rank Search Engine Volume
1. www.google.com 65.98%
2. search.yahoo.com 20.88%
3. search.msn.com 5.33%
4. www.ask.com 4.14%
Note that msn searches have declined despite significant investment by the borg in pumping up its performance. There is strong reason to believe that Microsoft will not be able to tie its Yahoo properties to its Microosft Windows and Microsoft Office monopolies, and there is not a single one of Microsoft's properties that have succeeded to drive significantly scaled revenue unless it is tied to the Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office monopolies. Halo was a huge seller, but them Microsoft sold off the Bungie, the creator of Halo, on October 1, 2007 after milking the cow dry.
The X-box was wildy outsold by Wii. MSNBC is popular but not a huge money maker. There is simply nothing outside the Microsoft Windows / Microsoft Office monopoly that shows signs of supporting Microsoft's stock is down 6.35% at the moment on the day, despite the Yahoo announcement. MSFT's stock is trading at $30.51, meaning that it is right back down in the same dolldrums where it has been since Q3 2003 , with no intervening splits!
There are lots of analysts talking about a glut of Vista machines, and wondering if CompUSA's bk might be the canary in Microsoft's coal mine. Microsoft's recent report of a 67% increase on its net reflects ADVANCE SALES of Vista licenses which Microsoft imposes on its vendors. If its vendors are overstocked with Vista machines, you wonder how much more Microsoft can cram down the pipeline in coming quarters.
In the meantime, Linux and Unix boxes have been selling very well on Amazon.com and swept all the categories for Amazon for 2007. From a recent story on/.'s fp:
http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/12/29/1959244.shtml
"Computers and handheld devices running default GNU Linux or Unix OSes have swept Amazon's 'best of' list for 2007, according BusinessWire.com for 28 December 2007. Best selling computer? The Nokia Internet Tablet PC, running Linux. Best reviewed computer? The Apple MacBook Pro notebook PC. Most wished for computer? Asus Eee 4G-Galaxy 7-inch PC mobile Internet device, which comes with Xandros Linux pre-installed. And last, but not least, the most frequently gifted computer: The Apple MacBook notebook PC."
Sure, MSFT is powerful, but with this Yahoo acquisition, they are taking on premium-weighted debt, and it really raises a question as to whether that asset will justify the premium. Yahoo has been declining, and it is not clear that the mere acquisition of Yahoo by Microsoft will succeed where Microsoft has failed in all of their other non-Windows-Office monopoly. That is the $44 billion dollar question, IMHO.
I interviewed Sterling about this very topic in his home. His video is here. If you like hi-res, you might want to consider downloading it, rather than streaming it. This is raw video (raw meaning un-retouched, not raw.dv), for the world to rip, mix, and burn, as long as you comply with our Creative Commons Attribute-ShareAlike license. The first segment is here
I think that it is really funny that this story still has legs. Microsoft and the BSA really shot themselves in the foot with this tactic. Sterling says that, as of 2005, he had saved $200,000.00 easily for his business by switching to Free Open Source Software.
Christian Einfeldt,
Producer, The Digital Tipping Point
Slashdot Mirror
...that even a lay-person jury could see that SCO's case was worthless. I'm a lawyer, and I'm here to state the obvious: juries take longer than 8 hours to decide many petty theft cases. Trustee Cahn, who is effectively running SCO, needs to wake up and smell SCO's dead feet. SCO is dead, dead, dead I say!
My apologies. I linked to the incorrect story in the main summary above. The LinuxTech.net blog mentioning the placement on Amazon Germany is actually here. Again, my apologies for the inconvenience and inaccuracy. Christian Einfeldt
Look at any finance service, such as Yahoo Finance or Google Finance. Microsoft's look-up symbol is MSFT. Microsoft's chart is here on Yahoo Finance. Red Hat is growing. Microsoft is stagnating.
...and the return rate for Linux netbooks is comparable for the return rate for XP netbooks, according to Dell senior product manager John New. So Microsoft's numbers are suspect.
Assuming that it is true that loads of people are installing Microsoft Windows XP on their Linux-powered Dell Inspiron netbooks (which I'm not sure is true, since the original article didn't mention that), it doesn't really matter. A Linux sale is a Linux sale. When the Dell managers evaluate their future strategies, how much will they consider whether XP was installed post-sale? Very little.
And the same is true for Dell's competitors. If Dell's competitors see that they can move product in a down market by installing Linux on the machines, will they spend much time contemplating whether XP is installed on the machines? Probably not.
Most OEMs have small margins on their sales of all but the upper-end machines. Volume is what matters. Hence the power of Microsoft Windows. At least until today. For OEMs and pretty much everyone in the channel, volume is what matters. As of today, they will know that Linux distros have proven that they can drive one-third of that volume. That is what really matters.
And it gets better. As Linux-related desktop sales increase, you will see more and more third party vendors, such as 2dBoy, port their products to Linux, as maker of the popular indy game World of Goo has recently done.
Volume is king. And now Linux is seeing some significant volume sales.
Microsoft is going to fight this decision tooth and nail. They will appeal it and appeal it and appeal it. Microsoft has no good faith intention of complying with this order, any more than they comply with any other order. Look at what they did with the US anti-trust case. They stalled until W became the unelected US head of state, and then Bush promptly caved in and gave Microsoft everything it asked for.
hi,
/. journal here:
Like any other job offer, this job offer will eventually be pulled off of LinkedIn, and so I have archived it for posterity in my
http://slashdot.org/~christian.einfeldt/journal/223179
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20080521092930864
Oh, and if Microsoft never acquires Yahoo, MSFT will have succeeded in creating division amongst Yahoo investors, management, and employees, thereby weakening the number two search competitor.
Let's hope I am wrong, because Microsoft is a dangerous company, and needs to be held at bay.
@CannonballHead:
You wrote: So what you're saying is that if it's not open source, it's not good?
No, what I am saying is that Microsoft will continue its predatory practices until its two main profit centers, Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office, are GPL'd.
I know that not everyone likes Free Open Source Software for all purposes. As it so happens, I am an attorney who runs his law office on Free Open Source Software only (except for Adobe Flash, the only non-Free package in my office). But Free Open Source Software is not suitable for everyone.
Microsoft is a different case, though. Their stock depends on the maintenance of their monopoly position. So they are not to be trusted. No other company is similarly situated in the desktop consumer software market.
I will remain skeptical of Microsoft until the day it GPLs its source code for Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office, and adopts ODF as a standard. Until then, Microsoft will be the same Microsoft that just last month engaged in cheating and fraud to get its MOOXML specification accepted as a standard.
This is not to say that I hate Microsoft or wish their stock ill. But it does mean that Microsoft's business model is based on leverage its monopoly on the consumer desktop operating system and its office productivity suite application. Relentless, merciless competition is deeply embedded into Microsoft's business structure, much more so than other proprietary software vendors. Because Microsoft's business structure depends on maintaining its monopoly status, they will not tolerate any competition at all in that space, and they will resort to both legal and illegal (anti-trust) means of achieving their goals.
And it's the same with software. Microsoft, in particular, is very annoyed that it will lose control over the desktop market, because, like the RIAA and the RIAA's constituent members, control assures profit. So Microsoft, like the people in the record labels, are going to need to learn a new way to make money. Free Open Source Software will not mean the end of Microsoft and Magnatune will not mean the end of the RIAA; but in both cases, Microsoft and the RIAA will lose their strangeholds on those respective markets. Which is appropriate.
I was not able to access the games on that site using ff under Feisty. Anyone else have any luck using GNU Linux to access that site?
Microsoft's stock has become a widows and orphans fund since 2002. It is no longer a growth stock. It has flattened out. The market obviously has intuitive sense that yes, Moore's law is pricing Microsoft stock out, in the face of the growth of Free Open Source Software. I am not an investment adviser, but I would not hold onto Microsoft stock right now. The borg's best days are behind it.
I hope the first thing that Microsoft learns is that we in the FOSS community are not stupid, and we remember being called "cancer" and "communists". I personally will welcome Microsoft when they GPL Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. Until then, I am inclined to believe that it is just preparation for more "extend, embrace, and extinguish."
Sam offered to come speak at our local LUG, and we turned him down, because we didn't think that he had anything of relevance to say to us. So be advised, Microsoft is sending Sam out on a tour to make nicey with the FOSS communities. But until they GPL Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office, it is still all part of "extend, embrace and extinguish" the cancerous commies.
...well, I had to ask, because my reading and search of the article doesn't find a mention Linux, and I can't imagine something innovative like this running on Windows, especially when Microsoft is still struggling to nail down file copying Vista. So, just curious, you know.
SCO makes Scientology look like a glee club. I'm not advocating DDOS, which is certainly illegal and immoral, even against these two cults, but after all of the protests that Anonymous was able to drum up against one cult, why not go for the SCO cult? Like the Scientology cult, the SCO cult supposedly has offices worldwide, making it a challenge worthy of the merry band of pranksters that is Anonymous.
"Hahahaha. Maybe this is the key? That's code, I think, for 'this will enable the company to continue to attack Linux'."
Is it possible that Microsoft will come to regret paying a premium for a business position in an industry it has yet to master, despite extraordinary expenditures (on-line revenue generation). Looky at how much ground Microft must make up to catch Google:
/.'s fp:
Rank Search Engine Volume
1. www.google.com 65.98%
2. search.yahoo.com 20.88%
3. search.msn.com 5.33%
4. www.ask.com 4.14%
http://www.hitwise.com/datacenter/searchengineanalysis.php
Note that msn searches have declined despite significant investment by the borg in pumping up its performance. There is strong reason to believe that Microsoft will not be able to tie its Yahoo properties to its Microosft Windows and Microsoft Office monopolies, and there is not a single one of Microsoft's properties that have succeeded to drive significantly scaled revenue unless it is tied to the Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office monopolies. Halo was a huge seller, but them Microsoft sold off the Bungie, the creator of Halo, on October 1, 2007 after milking the cow dry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bungie_Studios
Microsoft took a $1 billion hit on the X-box:
http://www.news.com/Microsoft-to-extend-Xbox-360-warranty,-take-1-billion-hit/2100-1014_3-6195058.html
The X-box was wildy outsold by Wii. MSNBC is popular but not a huge money maker. There is simply nothing outside the Microsoft Windows / Microsoft Office monopoly that shows signs of supporting Microsoft's stock is down 6.35% at the moment on the day, despite the Yahoo announcement. MSFT's stock is trading at $30.51, meaning that it is right back down in the same dolldrums where it has been since Q3 2003 , with no intervening splits!
There are lots of analysts talking about a glut of Vista machines, and wondering if CompUSA's bk might be the canary in Microsoft's coal mine. Microsoft's recent report of a 67% increase on its net reflects ADVANCE SALES of Vista licenses which Microsoft imposes on its vendors. If its vendors are overstocked with Vista machines, you wonder how much more Microsoft can cram down the pipeline in coming quarters.
In the meantime, Linux and Unix boxes have been selling very well on Amazon.com and swept all the categories for Amazon for 2007. From a recent story on
http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/12/29/1959244.shtml
"Computers and handheld devices running default GNU Linux or Unix OSes have swept Amazon's 'best of' list for 2007, according BusinessWire.com for 28 December 2007. Best selling computer? The Nokia Internet Tablet PC, running Linux. Best reviewed computer? The Apple MacBook Pro notebook PC. Most wished for computer? Asus Eee 4G-Galaxy 7-inch PC mobile Internet device, which comes with Xandros Linux pre-installed. And last, but not least, the most frequently gifted computer: The Apple MacBook notebook PC."
Sure, MSFT is powerful, but with this Yahoo acquisition, they are taking on premium-weighted debt, and it really raises a question as to whether that asset will justify the premium. Yahoo has been declining, and it is not clear that the mere acquisition of Yahoo by Microsoft will succeed where Microsoft has failed in all of their other non-Windows-Office monopoly. That is the $44 billion dollar question, IMHO.
Ooops, that long URL to Sterling's interview got snipped. Here is the TinyUrl
http://tinyurl.com/ynp7c7
I interviewed Sterling about this very topic in his home. His video is here. If you like hi-res, you might want to consider downloading it, rather than streaming it. This is raw video (raw meaning un-retouched, not raw .dv), for the world to rip, mix, and burn, as long as you comply with our Creative Commons Attribute-ShareAlike license. The first segment is here
http://www.archive.org/details/e-dv259_02_sterling_ball_001.ogg
Slashdot doesn't let me link all of the video, so I'll just tell you that the second segment is here:
http://www.archive.org/details/e-dv259_02_sterling_ball_002.ogg
And the third segment is here:
http://www.archive.org/details/e-dv259_02_sterling_ball_003.ogg
You get the pattern.
The last segment for that tape is here:
http://www.archive.org/details/e-dv259_02_sterling_ball_006.ogg
And the last segment in the whole interview is here:
http://www.archive.org/details/e-dv260_03_sterling_ball_001.ogg
This is the link to search for Sterling Ball's interviews:
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=mediatype%3Amovies%20AND%20collection%3Adigitaltippingpoint%20AND%20subject%3A%22Sterling%20Ball%22
I think that it is really funny that this story still has legs. Microsoft and the BSA really shot themselves in the foot with this tactic. Sterling says that, as of 2005, he had saved $200,000.00 easily for his business by switching to Free Open Source Software.
Christian Einfeldt,
Producer, The Digital Tipping Point