VanLUG Email Archive
This was on the Portland LUGs list. I thought it of relevance.
-Chris
Forwarded message:
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1998 11:56:48 -0700
From:
(Geoff Burling)
I know this topic is a bit off-topic, but in the latest copy of IEEE's
magazine, _Computer_, Ted Lewis discusses the issues at stake in this
lawsuit. The URL for this article is:
http://dlib.computer.org/co/books/co1998/pdf/r9112.pdf
In a nutshell, Lewis argues that the crux of this lawsuit is that thru
``path dependency" -- that is, coupling the success of one product (in this
case, MS's various mail, http, & other internet services servers) to another
product (Windows). Andrew Schulman's _Undocumented Windows_ (2nd ed.) has a
chapter relevant to this line of reasoning. ``If the plaintiff's approach
proves effective," Lewis remarks, ``[...] the legal community could add path
dependence to the list of monopolizing activities, just as the law deemed
the use of predatory pricing monopolistic on the part of Standard Oil."
If this monopolizing activity is proven at law, though, Lewis states that
the DoJ would have to go beyond the Sherman Act -- with actions that would
effect all of us in both inside the free source movement & outside. (One
possible remedy Lewis suggests would be to fine any company that sells or
gives away its product for less than it cost to make it -- which could
effectively kill free software like the GNU toolsets & possibly even shareware!)
I added a brief description of this article, since the text on the Computer
website is in .pdf format, & I'm sure that some people want help deciding if
it's worth also downloading the Acrobat viewer to read this.
Geoff Burling,
-- Chris Halsall, Software Dev. (
) Phone: 250.953.2680 CSP Internet Ltd., the Complete Solution Provider. Fax: 250.953.2659 4252 Commerce Circle, Victoria, BC. V8Z 4M2 http://www.wabbit.com/ "It's the little touches that make a future solid enough to be destroyed." "People think I'm paranoid, but, um, I'm not." - Grant Jansky