[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [school-discuss] Shocking news about Microsoft's ability tokill Open Source
It was never going to be an easy fight, but hang on in there, open
source will win!
-another open source user-
On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 20:10, Tom Adelstein wrote:
> I'm scheduled to speak at the Desktop Linux Consortium on November 10th
> at Boston University. My subject relates to Linux in State and Local
> Government, a subject about which I have some knowledge.
> This morning I discovered from a reliable source that we will not be
> invited back because Microsoft offered BU a Gold Partnership agreement
> and marketing money to never "do this again".
> Jsut slightly infuriated, I inquired anonymously about the situation. I
> contacted the Department of Justice and spoke to an attorney. Imagine my
> surprise to discover Microsoft didn't do anything wrong. What they did
> doesn't violate the law. I couldn't believe it.
> Imagine, all the time spent trying to stop them from restraining trade
> and it means nothing. They can pay companies to "not sell" Linux. They
> can provide "marketing money" to make sure their products are put ahead
> of others, make sure certain products don't get shelf space, advertise
> on every page featuring Linux or Open Source Software and they don't
> break the law. Basically, they're not considered criminals as far as I
> can tell.
> Now, if they threaten you with bodily harm, that's different. But what
> does one get other than maybe a settlement if they do? That's something
> else I found out.
> I've followed Microsoft's antics for years now and seen some amazing
> things. Some of those include what I thought were "kickbacks". But in
> reality, they must not be kickbacks. I guess if they won a contract and
> paid the procurement officer, that would be a kickback. But, no one has
> accused them of that - at least not in any way about which I know. Price
> cutting, sure they do that. Lobbying, they do that too. Whining, I hear
> they whine and spin. Evidenttly, nothing is wrong with that either.
> So, all I can conclude is that we shouldn't call them crooks. We might
> wind up the subject of a defamation suit.
> I wonder if we could suggest a boycott?
> Would doing that be a violation of law?