Fallout from the MS Anti-Trust decision -- move to an off-topic list?

[Bryan J. Smith]

[ I welcome everyone to come discuss this on an off-topic list -- LEAPBS.  FYI,
Mr. Litt, author of Samba Unleashed, is a subscriber there (and co-founder of
the local LUG).  You don't have to be a list member to post either -- although
be sure to CC yourself if you want to get copied on a response. ]

Quoting "Christopher R. Hertel" <crh at ubiqx.mn.org>:
> I have been communicating with a lawyer friend who had some involvement
> with the Microsoft case.  Looking at the decision from the judge, we
> noted that it seems as though the prosecution failed to clearly explain
> Open Source and its importance in the marketplace to the judge.  As a result,
> the Judge did not recognize the importance of full and open disclosure
> of the APIs.

And when was Open Source _ever_ represented in the case?

That's been my "problem" with it all along.  You've got a mis-mesh of "screwed
over" 'competitors' and "we thought there was a free lunch" 'partners.'  _Never_
was Open Source _ever_ represented.

I have long advocated the government could do far more as Microsoft's largest
_customer_ than the nation's _regulator_.  I was surprised to see Mr. Ralph
Nader, who I really don't think much of, agree with me on this recently.

-- 
Bryan J. Smith, E.I.            Contact Info:  http://thebs.org
A+/i-Net+/Linux+/Network+/Server+ CCNA CIWA CNA SCSA/SCWSE/SCNA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Every year a "robin" points a gun at you and forces you to
give your property to the "needy."  After a couple years, the
"robin" starts pocketing half of the property.  After a few
more years the "robin" requires you to bring twice as much,
since he now needs three times as much as he passes on.