| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Possible Link to SCO Source licensing?Possible Link to SCO Source licensing?Posted Nov 28, 2006 20:21 UTC (Tue) by sveinrn (guest, #2827)In reply to: Possible Link to SCO Source licensing? by tjasper Parent article: Who is being divisive?
There is a theoretical possibility that someone (SEC, antitrust judges, ...) is watching Microsoft because of their involvement in the SCO lawsuits. So it could be possible that Microsoft has a desperate need to show the world that Linux is the new best friend. But the US has so far been utterly incapable of regulating Microsoft's illegal use of their monopoly power, so I doubt it...
(Log in to post comments)
Possible Link to SCO Source licensing? Posted Nov 29, 2006 2:27 UTC (Wed) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] I believe "incapable" in your comment should be read more as "unwilling". Prior to the unfortunate change of Chief Executives in 2001, the antitrust suit against Microsoft was going decently well.
The Descent of David Boies Posted Nov 29, 2006 13:13 UTC (Wed) by brugolsky (✭ supporter ✭, #28) [Link] David Boies is at the center of all three events: hailed as a trust-buster, derided for losing the 2000 election appeal, now roundly scorned for his role in a pump-and-dump stock scam.
Possible Link to SCO Source licensing? Posted Dec 2, 2006 19:21 UTC (Sat) by Lorenzo (guest, #260) [Link] Antitrust going well?
Ha! ... Let's see.
Judge Jackson, the first judge to hear the anti-trust case against Microsoft, saw exactly what Microsoft was doing and chastised them for it. He proposed to break up Microsoft.
Microsoft bought somebody to discharge Judge Jackson in favor of Judge Kolar-Kotely (the most business friendly judge sitting today). Judge K-K dismissed the proposed breakup order. Instead they appointed a do-nothing "special master" (or the like) to "supervise" Microsoft.
Microsoft continues its anti-trust behavior unabated.
Tell me again. Is the anti-trust action against Microsoft going well?
|
|
||||||||||||