[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Microsoft vs. Justice Department
I estimate that virtually all the recipients of this
List understand the false nature of arguments
against the anti-trust action to enforce its
agreement with MS, (wherein MS promised to
compete fairly in the market.)
It may be that MS will prove in court
that its attempt to choke competition, (by
forcing computer sellers who want to offer
its copyrighted Windows OS to also sell its
browser), is not in violation of its agreement.
But this List ought to hear only bona fide
opinion on the matter.
General attacks on anti-trust law from ill
informed sources can be ignored. Or a
moderator can be found to keep them off our
air. Unless I missed them, this is the first such
attack on the suit and on the purposes of this
If the List receives many it will lose subscribers
like myself. No great loss in exchange for free
expression? Maybe. But moderated Lists are
made for the reasonable needs of subscribers.
The places for this kind of writing are numerous
on the net. This is not one of them.
John Gelles email address: email@example.com
http://www.myturn.org ; http://www.rain.org/~jjgelles/
The Web addresses above argue for economic rights and
wealth creation, and for individual and national security,
to be financed by credit and protected against inflation by
full automation and saving -- not by high interest, high
unemployment and high taxes.
From: Tibor Machan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list <email@example.com>
Subject: Microsoft vs. Justice Department
Date: Sunday, November 02, 1997 2:46 AM
[From The Chicago Tribune, etc.]
Microsoft and Nanny Reno
[Misleading material in original message deleted.]