I just went to this site today, it turns out to be the same as the one I posted, so... either will do, both would be waste. I can forward copies to noland or whatever... Noland Has offered to donate money to EFN based on responses, so... If he gets a bunch from us, that may impact donations made to EFN. Even though this is not an official EFN project, EFN/OPN could benefit from them going through noland, and ofcourse we all hope to benefit from the government stepping in to stop microsoft from their proprietary and monopolistic practices.
Jamie On Wednesday 23 January 2002 09:37, you wrote: > Step one. Read this. > > The Tunney Act: A confession of shame, and a call to action > http://www.codeweavers.com/~jwhite/tunney.html > > Step two. Send email to the DOJ. Tell them what you think about the > proposed Microsoft settlement. ("Stop hassling America's > only innovative corporation" or whatever) > > Step three. Send a copy to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bcc, not CC. > > Deadline is next Monday, January 28th. Do it now. > > my letter is below. > > ----- Forwarded message from Bob Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- > > From: Bob Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 09:32:05 -0800 > Subject: Microsoft Settlement > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The proposed final judgement on Microsoft is too lenient. Microsoft > has repeatedly engaged in criminally monopolistic activity, and it > needs a judgement severe enough that it will be dissuaded from more > criminal behavior in the future. > > The proposed final judgement is too narrow. It treats specific > symptoms, some of which are already obsolete, but it does not attack > the root of the problem. It should restrict Microsoft's ability to > use its PC monopoly to enter new markets, but it does not. It should > restrict Microsoft's ability to shut out competing software vendors in > the PC market by requiring Microsoft to release API information well > before software using those APIs is released, but it does not. It > should specify how it will be enforced, with Microsoft bearing the > burden of proving it is not abusing its monopoly powers, but it does > not. > > Most importantly, Microsoft should be prohibited from discriminating > against open source software. Microsoft should be required to make > its APIs available to the public, not just to licensees. Microsoft > should be specifically prohibited from licensing any of its products > in ways that exclude open source software. > > The proposed final judgement is not justice. It's barely a slap > on the wrist.
