Re: Microsoft's vision of empowering

[Mitch Stone <mstone@vc.net>]

--- From a message sent by Gene Gaines on 12/9/99 11:07 AM ---

>It is apparent that Microsoft actions ignore rights and ignore laws 
>FOR THE PURPOSE OF GAINING CONTROL.

Point one: Microsoft may well have violated some of the laws of the land, 
but as far as I can see, nobody has seriously accused them of violating 
rights. I'm not just being nitpicky here. There's an important difference 
between laws and rights.

Point two: All corporations behave in such a way as to gain control of 
whatever fancies them (those that don't, fail). We count on this basic 
greed instinct to be counterbalanced by competition in an open 
marketplace -- and by in large, this occurs. "Corporate avarice 
unchecked" might be a reasonable working definition of an abusive 
monopoly. Fits for Microsoft.

>Being under the control of any entity that is willing to take such 
>actions is not freedom.  
>
>I repeat my thought.
>
>Am I wrong?  Or do we stand by and watch "Freedom to innovate" become
>"Freedom to control commerce" and then "Freedom to control freedom."

I think the issue of creeping worldwide corporate domination was what was 
fundamentally at stake at the recent WTO debacle in Seattle. The question 
of Microsoft aside, we need to somehow figure out how to come to terms 
with the entire phenomenon of global corporatism or we're only going to 
see many more Seattles in the future.

I for one have no answers. I'm not sure I even entirely understand the 
question. I feel confident only in saying that it is a "big picture" 
question, and not a matter of whether Windows includes a web browser or 
not.

Mitch Stone
mstone@vc.net