[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: myturn@vcol.net
          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 <machan@chapman.edu>
  To: Multiple recipients of list <am-info@essential.org>
  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.]