FW: [SLE] [OT] Legal Issues Type Question
From: Samy Elashmawy [mailto:samelash@ix.netcom.com]
Take your money elswhere.
At 12:44 PM 5/2/2001 +0100, Eddie Howson wrote:
There is a company, Simply Computers (http://www.simply.co.uk) who will not sell a computer without an operating system. However, they do not offer any Linux distos. The only solution they offer is to buy MsDOS even if you are never going to use it. Is there anything that can be done or is there anyway that we can put pressure on the them to rethink their policy?
Just wondered.
Eddie
On Tuesday 01 May 2001 02:22, Stuart Powell wrote: Hello, everyone.
I just wanted to see what trouble I could stir up this evening with an article I found this morning. I'm surprised Fred didn't send it on. If you don't think of MS as the Evil Empire yet, this may well push you over the edge.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/2/18589.html
This article raised many questions in my mind. Predominantly, though, is this: Just how far can Microsoft go in its pursuit of pirates without overstepping the mark ? How much of this power can be wielded beyond US borders ?
Let's say that I buy a shiny new PC from Gateway, for the sake of argument. I order it without an OS, since I intend to install a lovely fresh copy of SuSE on it, and don't want to have to pay the MS Tax. A vigilant Gateway employee then calls up MS and says "Stoo just bought a new machine without an OS. Please add another point to my score, as I am trying to win my own yacht from the MS 'Shop Your Customers for Profit' promotion". The next thing I get is a phone call from a drone in Redmond. The call goes something like this...
Drone - "Mr. Powell, it has come to our attention that you just bought a whizz-bang new Gateway PC without an OS. We will be sending the PC
(http://www.bsa.org) over to make sure you bought a valid Windows
for that PC."
Me - "Sod off ! It's running Linux."
Question; can they still send the PC police round to check and see if I actually have Linux on the box ? What about the other PCs here that may or may not be running Windows ? Can they check those just because they're here and they feel like it ? How about my friend's PC in the corner
These people's business includes selling software licenses - check the home page. Just because you don't agree with someone's business doesn't mean you have the right to 'stir up trouble'. Find a dealer you like. police licence that I
will be upgrading with a new processor in a couple of days ? I don't know if he has a valid Windows licence or not. I certainly can't produce one for it myself.
And finally, how long is this kind of behaviour going to be tolerated before someone sees the light and puts a stop to this kind of thing ?
Let the battle commence...
Stuart.
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com
Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 05:13:40PM -0700, jennifer moter wrote:
These people's business includes selling software licenses - check the home page. Just because you don't agree with someone's business doesn't mean you have the right to 'stir up trouble'.
Find a dealer you like.
I don't think anyone was trying to stir up trouble. Many people object to the "every computer must sell with an OS" policy. They object because it stems from exclusive licensing deals which Microsoft made with PC manufacturers. I agree with your recommendation, but you have to realize that it does suck when all or most of your local vendors insist on charging you $70 - $100 for an OS you don't wish to use.
From: Samy Elashmawy [mailto:samelash@ix.netcom.com]
Take your money elswhere.
At 12:44 PM 5/2/2001 +0100, Eddie Howson wrote:
There is a company, Simply Computers (http://www.simply.co.uk) who will not sell a computer without an operating system. However, they do not offer any Linux distos. The only solution they offer is to buy MsDOS even if you are never going to use it. Is there anything that can be done or is there anyway that we can put pressure on the them to rethink their policy?
Just wondered.
Eddie
I thought the vendors were supposed to accomidate the clientele. If they want a computer without an os then they should get one. But then again were talkin M$ here. The vendors want to supply the customer with the leading market share product, unfortunately that's Windblows. The only way they can get a license to do so is on M$' term - and we know what those are. The part that bugs me is that they are willing to sacrifice sales to those that don't want an OS pre-installed. That's just not smart. When will they realize that they have the power to sell what the customer wants? M$ has probably imtimidated them so much that they are worried that if M$ finds out that they are selling comps without an os that they will get their license jerked - the wonderfully vague license agreement! You know the one that M$ set up so that when asked about they can twist anyway that suits them. The license agreement that baffles even the most savvy lawyers. The license that scares the S#$% out of the vendors 'cause they can't figure it out either. -----Original Message----- From: Victor R. Cardona [mailto:vcardona@home.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 2302 To: SuSE Linux List Subject: Re: [SLE] FW: [SLE] [OT] Legal Issues Type Question On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 05:13:40PM -0700, jennifer moter wrote:
These people's business includes selling software licenses - check the home page. Just because you don't agree with someone's business doesn't mean you have the right to 'stir up trouble'.
Find a dealer you like.
I don't think anyone was trying to stir up trouble. Many people object to the "every computer must sell with an OS" policy. They object because it stems from exclusive licensing deals which Microsoft made with PC manufacturers. I agree with your recommendation, but you have to realize that it does suck when all or most of your local vendors insist on charging you $70 - $100 for an OS you don't wish to use.
From: Samy Elashmawy [mailto:samelash@ix.netcom.com]
Take your money elswhere.
At 12:44 PM 5/2/2001 +0100, Eddie Howson wrote:
There is a company, Simply Computers (http://www.simply.co.uk) who will not sell a computer without an operating system. However, they do not offer any Linux distos. The only solution they offer is to buy MsDOS even if you are never going to use it. Is there anything that can be done or is there anyway that we can put pressure on the them to rethink their policy?
Just wondered.
Eddie
I apologize for the tone of the response. I hit the send button too quickly this time. jennifer At 11:01 PM 5/2/2001 -0500, you wrote:
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 05:13:40PM -0700, jennifer moter wrote:
These people's business includes selling software licenses - check the home page. Just because you don't agree with someone's business doesn't mean you have the right to 'stir up trouble'.
Find a dealer you like.
I don't think anyone was trying to stir up trouble. Many people object to the "every computer must sell with an OS" policy. They object because it stems from exclusive licensing deals which Microsoft made with PC manufacturers. I agree with your recommendation, but you have to realize that it does suck when all or most of your local vendors insist on charging you $70 - $100 for an OS you don't wish to use.
From: Samy Elashmawy [mailto:samelash@ix.netcom.com]
Take your money elswhere.
At 12:44 PM 5/2/2001 +0100, Eddie Howson wrote:
There is a company, Simply Computers (http://www.simply.co.uk) who will not sell a computer without an operating system. However, they do not offer any Linux distos. The only solution they offer is to buy MsDOS even if you are never going to use it. Is there anything that can be done or is there anyway that we can put pressure on the them to rethink their policy?
Just wondered.
Eddie
-v -- Victor R. Cardona vcardona@home.com
"Behold the keyboard of Kahless, the greatest Klingon code warrior that ever lived!"
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Well and good, but when an international giant is using strongarm tactics to try to pressurise manufacturers and dealers into refusing customers' requests for PCs without an OS (see all the links sent earlier in the discussion), your 'market forces' fix is not going to work in the way you suggest. When the market is being deliberately distorted by near monopolies, your economic analysis needs to come up a level from the 'choose a different Mom and Pop on Main Street' cure. If major injustices are going to be prevented, public discussion is vital and telling people to keep quiet and enjoy the just and fair operations of the great corporations is naive. On Thursday 03 May 2001 01:13, you wrote:
These people's business includes selling software licenses - check the home page. Just because you don't agree with someone's business doesn't mean you have the right to 'stir up trouble'.
Find a dealer you like.
I agree with Ms Moter's response. I an earlier response, one mailed the night before I tried to point out that alot of what we're seeing here revolves around Microsofts license agreement and their market practice. One has to ask why the U.S. Federal government and a slew of U.S. State Attorney Generals went after M$ with such a vengence. I realize the the current political climate and the fact that the acitons of the Federal Judge (Penfield) have resulted in a watered down case against M$. However, the individual states will still press on and most likely win the fair percentage of their cases. One to the reasons the M$ found itself in court was because of practice such as we're discussing. Yes, I know that the major thrust of the Federal case revolves around anti-competitive practices and tying IE into the OS as a way of killing the Netscape and other browsers functionality/performance and then "strong arming" vendors/OEMs with the license agreement. However, the majority of the individual State cases if focused on issue that are similar to those discussed here. Such as in California where a case was ruled for the plaintiffs (the consumer/State) related to unfair control of consumer choices and violations of the California business code/fair trade policies. -----Original Message----- From: Fergus Wilde [mailto:fwilde@chethams.org.uk] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 0739 To: jennifer moter Cc: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] FW: [SLE] [OT] Legal Issues Type Question Well and good, but when an international giant is using strongarm tactics to try to pressurise manufacturers and dealers into refusing customers' requests for PCs without an OS (see all the links sent earlier in the discussion), your 'market forces' fix is not going to work in the way you suggest. When the market is being deliberately distorted by near monopolies, your economic analysis needs to come up a level from the 'choose a different Mom and Pop on Main Street' cure. If major injustices are going to be prevented, public discussion is vital and telling people to keep quiet and enjoy the just and fair operations of the great corporations is naive. On Thursday 03 May 2001 01:13, you wrote:
These people's business includes selling software licenses - check the home page. Just because you don't agree with someone's business doesn't mean you have the right to 'stir up trouble'.
Find a dealer you like.
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com
What I meant to say was I agree with Ms. Moter in general. However, Mr. Wilde has a very valid point! Sorry for the mis-type :/ Curtis Rey -----Original Message----- From: crrey [mailto:crrey@home.com] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 0804 To: jennifer moter; Fergus Wilde Cc: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: RE: [SLE] FW: [SLE] [OT] Legal Issues Type Question I agree with Ms Moter's response. I an earlier response, one mailed the night before I tried to point out that alot of what we're seeing here revolves around Microsofts license agreement and their market practice. One has to ask why the U.S. Federal government and a slew of U.S. State Attorney Generals went after M$ with such a vengence. I realize the the current political climate and the fact that the acitons of the Federal Judge (Penfield) have resulted in a watered down case against M$. However, the individual states will still press on and most likely win the fair percentage of their cases. One to the reasons the M$ found itself in court was because of practice such as we're discussing. Yes, I know that the major thrust of the Federal case revolves around anti-competitive practices and tying IE into the OS as a way of killing the Netscape and other browsers functionality/performance and then "strong arming" vendors/OEMs with the license agreement. However, the majority of the individual State cases if focused on issue that are similar to those discussed here. Such as in California where a case was ruled for the plaintiffs (the consumer/State) related to unfair control of consumer choices and violations of the California business code/fair trade policies. -----Original Message----- From: Fergus Wilde [mailto:fwilde@chethams.org.uk] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 0739 To: jennifer moter Cc: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] FW: [SLE] [OT] Legal Issues Type Question Well and good, but when an international giant is using strongarm tactics to try to pressurise manufacturers and dealers into refusing customers' requests for PCs without an OS (see all the links sent earlier in the discussion), your 'market forces' fix is not going to work in the way you suggest. When the market is being deliberately distorted by near monopolies, your economic analysis needs to come up a level from the 'choose a different Mom and Pop on Main Street' cure. If major injustices are going to be prevented, public discussion is vital and telling people to keep quiet and enjoy the just and fair operations of the great corporations is naive. On Thursday 03 May 2001 01:13, you wrote:
These people's business includes selling software licenses - check the home page. Just because you don't agree with someone's business doesn't mean you have the right to 'stir up trouble'.
Find a dealer you like.
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com -- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com
As a consumer , you can either make niose , or take your money/cash to another vender whom is more accomidating towards you. No one puts a gun to your head and forces you to spend your money so its your choice in the end where you spend it. Dont like the service go esle where. At 05:13 PM 5/2/2001 -0700, jennifer moter wrote:
These people's business includes selling software licenses - check the home page. Just because you don't agree with someone's business doesn't mean you have the right to 'stir up trouble'.
Find a dealer you like.
From: Samy Elashmawy [mailto:samelash@ix.netcom.com]
Take your money elswhere.
There is a company, Simply Computers (http://www.simply.co.uk) who will not sell a computer without an operating system. However, they do not offer any Linux distos. The only solution they offer is to buy MsDOS even if you are never going to use it. Is there anything that can be done or is there anyway that we can put pressure on the them to rethink their policy?
Just wondered.
Eddie
On Tuesday 01 May 2001 02:22, Stuart Powell wrote: Hello, everyone.
I just wanted to see what trouble I could stir up this evening with an article I found this morning. I'm surprised Fred didn't send it on. If you don't think of MS as the Evil Empire yet, this may well push you over the edge.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/2/18589.html
This article raised many questions in my mind. Predominantly, though, is this: Just how far can Microsoft go in its pursuit of pirates without overstepping the mark ? How much of this power can be wielded beyond US borders ?
Let's say that I buy a shiny new PC from Gateway, for the sake of argument. I order it without an OS, since I intend to install a lovely fresh copy of SuSE on it, and don't want to have to pay the MS Tax. A vigilant Gateway employee then calls up MS and says "Stoo just bought a new machine without an OS. Please add another point to my score, as I am trying to win my own yacht from the MS 'Shop Your Customers for Profit' promotion". The next thing I get is a phone call from a drone in Redmond. The call goes something like this...
Drone - "Mr. Powell, it has come to our attention that you just bought a whizz-bang new Gateway PC without an OS. We will be sending the PC
(http://www.bsa.org) over to make sure you bought a valid Windows
for that PC."
Me - "Sod off ! It's running Linux."
Question; can they still send the PC police round to check and see if I actually have Linux on the box ? What about the other PCs here that may or may not be running Windows ? Can they check those just because they're here and they feel like it ? How about my friend's PC in the corner
At 12:44 PM 5/2/2001 +0100, Eddie Howson wrote: police licence that I
will be upgrading with a new processor in a couple of days ? I don't know if he has a valid Windows licence or not. I certainly can't produce one for it myself.
And finally, how long is this kind of behaviour going to be tolerated before someone sees the light and puts a stop to this kind of thing ?
Let the battle commence...
Stuart.
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com
Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com
Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com
participants (6)
-
crrey -
Fergus Wilde -
jennifer moter -
Jennifer Moter
-
Samy Elashmawy -
Victor R. Cardona