Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Doing the Math in the Microsoft Anti-Trust Cases

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the your-puny-fines-are-no-match-for-the-power dept.

Microsoft 407

coupland writes "Bob Cringely has posted this week's column and has made some interesting comments. He says that regardless of what happens in the EU, DOJ, and class-action proceedings, Microsoft can't lose. Why? Because they make more money by paying lip-service to the law and accepting the occasional fine than by complying. He even does some simple math to prove his point. Fascinating stuff."

cancel ×

407 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

FOAD (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8750958)

Linux is for nutjob puritanical assholes. It's been used in 100% of the terrorist operations in the world!

Stop Lunix now!!!!

Re:FOAD (0)

SA3Steve (323565) | more than 10 years ago | (#8750981)

I'm pro-Microsoft...and even I find this type of a post completely useless and irrelevant to any reasonable discussion. Modify the parent down here...

Re:FOAD (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751012)

Thanks for feeding the trolls, now that one will keep comming back...

Tell ya what... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751123)

If it bothers you so much,

why don't you GO FUCK YOURSELF!

kthxbye

Re:Tell ya what... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751164)

Little Johnny goes out fishing with his grandpa one day. Like most grandfathers would, grandpa brings along a cooler of beer for his enjoyment. As he opens a refreshing beverage, Little Johnny asks "Hey Grandpa, can I have one?"

"Well Johnny, can your dick touch your asshole?" asks Grandpa.

"No Grandpa, it can't." Johnny replies.

Grandpa tells Johnny "Well when it does, you can have one."

So Grandpa and Johnny fish for a while when suddenly Johnny gets a big catch. As he reels it in, it turns out not to be a fish but a briefcase full of money.

"Hey Johnny, whatcha say we split the money?" asks Grandpa.

"Well Grandpa, can your dick touch your asshole?"

Grandpa, being the clever old man responds "Why yes Johnny, yes it can."

Johnny responds "Well then go fuck yourself old man, this money is mine!"

Re:FOAD (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751019)

I agree; in the same sense that Mac OSX is the

"Gay OS", Linux in it's many varieties can

reasonably be considered the "Terrorist OS".

hehehehe (-1, Offtopic)

ScurvyDawg (98220) | more than 10 years ago | (#8750959)

Fist time I got the first post hehehehe

Re:hehehehe (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8750972)

Hehehehehehe

You fail it!

And you laugh like a little girl!

Blow me!

Re:hehehehe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8750999)

Nuts@ck! ZING! thou hast failed hard..suck my boot!

Third post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8750979)

Wh00t. This is cockboat stuff anyway, the american government almost fucked microsoft hard by splitting them up. Microsoft doesn't want any of that.

www.groklaw.net (-1, Troll)

ScurvyDawg (98220) | more than 10 years ago | (#8750980)

www.groklaw.net has the lowdown on Macrosift and their cronies. Check em out :)

NO SHIT, REALLY?!?!?!?!?! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751025)

i must be new here

microsoft can't lose (-1, Offtopic)

joesoundbyte (699248) | more than 10 years ago | (#8750988)

microsoft can't lose.. hmmm.. anyway.. i dont' understand the l33tness of first post. and never will

Re:microsoft can't lose (-1, Redundant)

joesoundbyte (699248) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751017)

... well.. good job deleting the stupid "can't believe i'm first post" post :D

Re:microsoft can't lose (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751051)

that's cause, first you didn't get first post, and second, you suck...

Total BS (1, Troll)

Neil Blender (555885) | more than 10 years ago | (#8750989)

There is nothing to stop the EU from retrying them and upping the fine if they keep it up. That's like saying you should get life for your first parking ticket.

Re:Total BS (2, Informative)

xianman84 (730183) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751151)

I'd say anti-trust violations are a bit higher up on the old crime scale than a parking violation. For example, if I commit murder for the first time should I only be issued a parking ticket? Then depending on however many people I kill after that the penalty should only incrementally go up?

Re:Total BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751212)

Nothing stopping MS from pulling every windows liscense in Europe too then suing those that don't comply...

Re:Total BS (5, Insightful)

Maestro4k (707634) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751242)

  • There is nothing to stop the EU from retrying them and upping the fine if they keep it up. That's like saying you should get life for your first parking ticket.
Did you actually RTFA? Cringley points out that even that won't matter. The justice system moves so slowly that by the time the new trial winds down and MS has to pay the fine, they'll have earned billions more than the fine costs them, even adding in interest from the original fine date. The EU's max fine isn't enough to even dent MS.

I hate to say it (because I don't care for Microsoft's actions) but I'm afraid Cringley is right, MS will win no matter what as far as the courts and anti-trust goes. Ironically the biggest threat to them is possibly Wal-mart's new PCs coming with Sun's Java Desktop on them. What's so ironic about it is that Wal-mart is another example of a company so huge that it can just ignore compliance because it'll cost it less to pay the fines.

Great Business Plan! (0, Redundant)

Kirill Lokshin (727524) | more than 10 years ago | (#8750991)

1. Crush competition.
2. Get sued for monopoly abuse.
3. ???
4. Profit!

Guaranteed to work!

Re:Great Business Plan! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751130)

Dear Fuckbag,

You are not funny by using tired old /. jokes. Especially
when you're a fucking 700K+ UID. I have underwear older than
you. I have cumstains on my sheets more intelligent than you.
I have shitsmears on my toilet bowl that are funnier than you.

Please fill your bathtub with water and jump in with your
computer. Ensure the computer is plugged in.

Now... fuck off and die, cockmunch.

Your (real) Father,
Manuel Sanchez Fuckstick
from federal prison

Re:Great Business Plan! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751210)

mod ParenT Up Insightful! mod PaREnt up Insightful! MOD PareNt up Informative! MOD PaREnt Up Underrated! MoD PareNt Up Interesting! MoD ParenT Up Insightful! Mod ParenT UP Informative! mOd PareNt UP Insightful! Mod ParenT up Insightful! MOD PARENT uP Underrated! MOD PareNT UP Informative! MOD PareNT UP Informative! Mod PARENT up Interesting! mOd PaREnt Up Insightful! MOD PareNT up Informative! mOd PareNT up Underrated! mod ParenT UP Informative! MOD ParenT Up Interesting! Mod PareNt UP Interesting! mod ParenT Up Funny! Mod ParenT up Interesting! Mod PareNT up Informative! mOd PaREnt up Informative! MOD PARENT UP Interesting! MoD PaREnt UP Interesting! mod ParenT UP Funny! mod PaREnt up Funny! Mod PARENT uP Funny! MOD PareNt uP Informative! Mod PARENT UP Funny! mOd PareNT uP Insightful! MOD PareNt UP Interesting! MoD PareNT up Funny! MOD PARENT uP Insightful! Mod ParenT UP Underrated! Mod PareNt up Insightful! mod PareNt UP Underrated! mOd PaREnt Up Underrated! Mod ParenT up Underrated! mod PaREnt up Interesting! MoD ParenT Up Insightful! mod PaREnt Up Underrated! Mod ParenT UP Underrated! MOD PareNt up Interesting! mOd PareNT up Interesting! Mod PareNt uP Underrated! Mod PaREnt Up Underrated! MOD ParenT uP Interesting! MOD PARENT Up Insightful! Mod PareNT uP Informative! MOD PareNt UP Insightful! MOD PareNT UP Informative! Mod PareNT Up Interesting! mod PARENT UP Underrated! Mod PARENT up Interesting! mOd ParenT UP Informative! Mod PARENT uP Informative! mod PareNT up Insightful! Mod PARENT Up Insightful! MoD PaREnt Up Informative! mOd PareNt UP Informative! mod PaREnt UP Informative! mod PaREnt UP Interesting! mod PareNT up Underrated! MOD PARENT uP Funny! mod ParenT Up Funny! mOd PaREnt up Underrated! MoD PaREnt Up Funny! Mod ParenT Up Informative! mod PareNT uP Interesting! Mod PARENT UP Insightful! mOd ParenT uP Funny! MOD PareNT uP Informative! mOd ParenT up Underrated! MOD PaREnt uP Interesting! Mod ParenT Up Informative! MoD PareNT Up Underrated! mod PaREnt Up Insightful! mOd ParenT up Underrated! mOd PareNt up Insightful! MoD PARENT uP Informative! MoD PaREnt Up Insightful! Mod PareNT uP Insightful! MoD ParenT Up Informative! mOd PARENT up Funny! MoD PaREnt up Interesting! Mod PaREnt Up Funny! mod PaREnt UP Interesting! MOD PaREnt Up Funny! Mod PareNt uP Interesting! mod ParenT UP Insightful! mOd PareNT up Underrated! MoD PARENT Up Informative! MOD ParenT up Interesting! mOd PareNt Up Interesting! Mod PARENT Up Informative! mod PaREnt UP Insightful! MoD PareNt UP Funny! mOd PareNt up Informative! MoD PaREnt uP Funny! MOD PareNT Up Insightful! MOD PARENT UP Informative! MOD PareNT up Insightful! MoD PaREnt uP Informative! Mod PareNT uP Interesting! mod ParenT Up Funny! MOD PARENT up Underrated! mOd PaREnt up Insightful! MoD PARENT UP Insightful! Mod PARENT up Funny! MoD PareNT UP Interesting! MOD PareNT uP Underrated! mod PareNt up Funny! Mod PaREnt Up Underrated! Mod ParenT uP Informative! MoD PareNt uP Underrated! mod PareNt up Insightful! mOd PareNt Up Informative! mOd PareNt up Insightful! Mod ParenT up Informative! MoD ParenT UP Funny! MoD PareNt Up Insightful! mOd PARENT up Insightful! MoD PareNt UP Funny! MOD PaREnt uP Funny! MOD PaREnt Up Informative! mod PareNT uP Underrated! MOD ParenT up Interesting! mod PareNt UP Underrated! mOd PareNt UP Informative! MoD PARENT Up Interesting! MOD PareNt Up Underrated! mod PaREnt up Funny! MoD PaREnt up Informative! MoD PaREnt UP Underrated! mod PareNT UP Underrated! MoD PaREnt Up Funny! MOD PareNT UP Insightful! mod PareNT up Underrated! mOd PARENT UP Interesting! mOd PARENT uP Informative! mOd PARENT UP Funny! MoD PARENT uP Underrated! MoD PARENT UP Informative! MoD PARENT Up Funny! MOD PaREnt Up Underrated! MoD PareNt UP Funny! MOD PaREnt up Insightful! mod PARENT uP Informative! mOd PaREnt Up Interesting! MOD PareNT Up Insightful! mOd ParenT up Insightful! MOD PARENT UP Informative! MOD PareNT Up Informative! MoD PARENT up Informative! mod PareNt up Underrated! MoD PareNt Up Informative! Mod PaREnt Up Underrated! mOd PareNT UP Underrated! MOD PaREnt UP Interesting! Mod PARENT up Insightful! mod PARENT uP Funny! mOd PareNT uP Informative! mOd PareNT uP Interesting! MOD ParenT Up Informative! MOD ParenT UP Funny! MoD PareNT uP Funny! mod ParenT Up Informative! MOD ParenT up Informative! mod PaREnt up Informative! MOD PareNt Up Informative! Mod ParenT uP Underrated! MOD PARENT UP Funny! mOd ParenT uP Insightful! Mod PaREnt uP Informative! MOD ParenT uP Interesting! Mod PareNT Up Funny! MOD ParenT up Informative! mOd PARENT UP Funny! mOd PaREnt uP Interesting! mod PaREnt UP Interesting! Mod PaREnt Up Funny! mOd PARENT UP Underrated! mOd PareNt UP Insightful! mOd PareNt up Insightful! mod PareNt up Underrated! Mod PareNT uP Underrated! mod PareNt Up Insightful! mOd PareNT uP Funny! mod PARENT uP Insightful! mOd PareNT Up Insightful! mOd ParenT uP Underrated! mod ParenT Up Interesting! mOd ParenT uP Underrated! mOd PARENT Up Underrated! MOD ParenT uP Underrated! MoD PareNT up Underrated! mOd PareNt up Interesting! MOD PareNT UP Underrated! MOD PARENT uP Underrated! Mod PareNT UP Insightful! mod PaREnt uP Interesting! mod PARENT UP Informative! Mod PARENT uP Funny! mod PareNt UP Underrated! mod PareNt up Underrated! MOD PaREnt Up Interesting! mod PareNT up Insightful! mOd PARENT Up Underrated! mod PareNt Up Interesting! mOd PARENT Up Informative! mod ParenT uP Interesting! Mod PareNt up Underrated! MOD PareNT up Informative! mOd PareNt UP Funny! MoD PareNT Up Insightful! Mod PareNt Up Insightful! Mod PareNt UP Insightful! MOD PARENT up Underrated! Mod PareNt up Interesting! mOd PARENT UP Informative! mod PareNT Up Interesting! Mod PareNT UP Underrated! MoD ParenT UP Underrated! mod PareNt up Insightful! Mod PareNT up Underrated! mOd PARENT UP Informative! Mod PaREnt UP Insightful! MOD ParenT UP Underrated! mOd PaREnt Up Interesting! Mod PareNt uP Informative! MOD PareNt up Informative! mod PareNt uP Interesting! MoD PareNT Up Insightful! MoD ParenT up Interesting! mOd PareNT uP Insightful! MOD PareNt UP Interesting! mod PARENT Up Informative! mOd ParenT Up Interesting! Mod PareNT UP Funny! mOd ParenT up Informative! mod PareNt uP Funny! MOD ParenT up Informative! MOD PARENT up Funny! mod PARENT Up Insightful! MoD PaREnt Up Informative! mOd PareNT UP Funny! mod ParenT UP Underrated! mod PARENT UP Underrated! mod PaREnt up Insightful! Mod PareNT up Interesting! MoD PareNT up Insightful! Mod PareNt Up Funny! MoD PareNT up Interesting! mOd PareNt up Underrated! MOD PareNT up Insightful! mod PARENT Up Informative! Mod ParenT UP Informative! MOD PARENT uP Informative! Mod PARENT up Insightful! mod PaREnt UP Underrated! Mod PareNt up Informative! mOd PaREnt Up Underrated! MOD PareNt uP Informative! MoD PARENT UP Insightful! mOd PaREnt up Interesting! mod PARENT uP Funny! mOd PareNt uP Informative! MOD PareNt UP Informative! Mod PaREnt uP Insightful! mOd ParenT uP Underrated! mOd PaREnt UP Informative! mOd PareNt UP Interesting! Mod PareNt uP Funny! mod PareNT up Underrated! Mod PaREnt Up Interesting! MOD PARENT UP Insightful! Mod PareNT uP Informative! MOD ParenT Up Funny! mod PARENT up Insightful! Mod PareNT UP Insightful! mOd PaREnt Up Underrated! MOD PARENT Up Interesting! mOd ParenT uP Informative! MOD PareNT UP Funny! mOd ParenT Up Insightful! mod PareNt up Underrated! Mod PaREnt UP Insightful! MOD PARENT UP Funny! Mod PARENT uP Insightful! mOd PareNt UP Informative! Mod PareNT up Informative! MOD ParenT UP Funny! MOD ParenT uP Interesting! MoD PaREnt uP Insightful! MOD PareNt up Funny! mod ParenT up Informative! MOD PARENT up Insightful! MoD ParenT Up Informative! MOD PareNt up Funny! mod PaREnt Up Informative! MOD PareNt up Underrated! MoD PARENT Up Interesting!

Re:Great Business Plan! (4, Insightful)

tsg (262138) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751138)

Step 3 is: Make so much money that the fines just become a cost of doing business.

I seem to remember[1] this being a problem with the EPA laws years ago. The cost of disposing of waste legally was more expensive than dumping it illegally and paying the fine. It's a no brainer from a business point of view. As long as non-compliance makes them more money than compliance, even with the fines, guess which they're going to choose.

[1] this might be an instance of "creative memory" rather than actual fact, but the analogy still holds.

Don't mod parent offtopic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751142)

Funny thing is, this actually works for M$.

I knew it! Microsoft is a troll organization!

"Oh, I'll just pay the fine..." (5, Interesting)

vudufixit (581911) | more than 10 years ago | (#8750992)

Bill Janklow was a recalcitrant breaker of traffic laws. He went on record saying, "Oh, I'll just pay the fine" even though he probably racked up enough violations to have his license taken away. He kept on "paying the fine" until his car met a motorcyle and the person driving the latter was killed.

For everyone else's benefit (4, Informative)

Raul654 (453029) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751015)

The 411 on Bill Jankow [publicradio.org]

Re:"Oh, I'll just pay the fine..." (3, Insightful)

JWW (79176) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751078)

Where are you from? I didn't know of anyone outside of South Dakota, who even knows about Janklow.

But you are correct, he even got a large number of "warnings" while in office. Once he got elected to the house he should have gotten a driver to drive him around (espically if the health concerns he used in his defense were vaild).

Oh, and to stay on topic. Yes, I do believe that one day MicroSofts flouting of anti-trust laws will actually get them in trouble. But, it took Janklow almost 30 years to get in trouble driving, so it might be a while.

Re:"Oh, I'll just pay the fine..." (3, Interesting)

vudufixit (581911) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751211)

I knew about this because it was a national story. I honestly don't follow much about South Dakota, although I loved driving through and seeing the Badlands and Mount Rushmore in person.
True, my comment wasn't especially relevant, except in the sense of it being an example of a powerful person who broke the law repeatedly and was content to shrug it off and "simply pay the fine."
It's especially egregious in the case of politicians, because they routinely exempt themselves from justice.
It's outrageous that a person ran through a stop signal, and killed someone. It's more outrageous that they were a persistent violator of traffic laws. It's even more outrageous that this was someone who makes laws and is sworn to uphold them.

Re:"Oh, I'll just pay the fine..." (1)

Rydian (29123) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751290)

I'd say a lot of Minnesotan's know about Janklow as well.

Anyways, Janklow really isn't paying his dues either, 100 days in jail for vehicular manslaughter is a slap on the wrist compared to the maximum of 20 years that could have been given to him. It disgusts me that the person he hit and their family are the ones that are really paying for his crime. I'm sure if it was just an average person that was in the same situation, they would have gotten much closer to the maximum sentence.

Re:"Oh, I'll just pay the fine..." (3, Insightful)

Maestro4k (707634) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751282)

  • He kept on "paying the fine" until his car met a motorcyle and the person driving the latter was killed.
An apt analogy considering how many small companies Microsoft has killed over the years through its practices (both legal and illegal ones).

Postponing trials and appealing... (5, Insightful)

Phisbut (761268) | more than 10 years ago | (#8750994)

Any company that can afford the legal game and then postpone the trial and then appealing the decision will make more money by doing that than by complying. Considering they (Microsoft or any other company) can still use their current strategy during the time of the appeal, or before the final judgment is made (it took what? 5 years for the WMP case in Europe?), a couple of million of Euros is nothing compared to what they did in those 5 years.

Judges should act quicker and allow for much less delay is anti-trust cases, because time plays against the ones they're trying to defend.

Re:Postponing trials and appealing... (3, Insightful)

Kirill Lokshin (727524) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751054)

Judges should act quicker and allow for much less delay is anti-trust cases, because time plays against the ones they're trying to defend.

Innocent until proven guilty, remember? There's no reason that someone accused of anti-trust violations should have less of an opportunity to defend themselves than anyone else.

Having said that, I agree that the length of time most (not just anti-trust) trials take is riduculous, especially when you count the years of appeals. The obvious solution would be to create some special court to hear the appeals in such cases (rather than having them go through several levels of appeals), but that would require messy changes to the judicial system.

Re:Postponing trials and appealing... (3, Insightful)

SheldonYoung (25077) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751101)

There is also another reason to postpone trials and drag the legal battle out as long as possible... deprecation and interest. A rate of 5% interest over 3 years on 600 million is approximately 100 million dollars. That's got to be like, what, a thousand bucks for every lawyer?

I did the math (4, Interesting)

krray (605395) | more than 10 years ago | (#8750996)

Interesting take on things -- and I will say that I am no Microsoft fan. I was ticked when I had to pay the Windows tax to get a PC during the time period Microsoft got away with such tatics. Working in IT myself and being a business owner I will say that as a end user I do not trust Microsoft anymore. Not for a long time. WFW3.11 and NT had it going on back in the day. 95 came to market too soon (and no, I didn't buy). 98 wasn't any good until the se release. Me was nothing but a money grab. 2K is barely usable and XP is a joke (IMHO :).

Funny -- of course the offices all run on Linux (and/or Netware to this day, thank you :). New desktops are either OS X or Linux based. Period. Where possible (CAD groups) the networks have been segmented off and there's little Windows worlds that, in a couple of my offices ... can't see the Internet. Ever. Yeah, I believe it has come to that (already). Funny, but the networks always ... just work. Always.

There something wrong with this guys equations ... and I believe that it does NOT account for people like me. There's many of me out there it seems. I took my mom and dad off Windows years ago and they THANKED ME. Go figure. My contribution to the Microsoft coffers since 2000? $-0-

It sure seems that with EVERY major computer type company you look at they're all going one Unix or the other. IBM is Linux. Redhat Linux (obviously :). Mac's are BSD based. BSD is alive and strong, don't think it's not... Novell has gone Linux. HP and Dell want into the mix directly. What do the best tv video recorders all run on?

Microsoft obviously has enough money to be a around for a long while. Even while their markets are being eaten left and right. Windows is, well, a technological JOKE at best -- comparing it personally to any of the Unix's out there. OpenOffice sure isn't going away. Who knows WordPerfect may decently re-appear and there's always -X- company out there to come along. What else does Microsoft make money at? Not much.

I see their bottom line continueing to be eaten away -- left and right. Mean while their costs will continue to sky rocket and things will be, well, fun to watch...

Re:I did the math (1)

ajutla (720182) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751108)

Microsoft may in fact always have a niche in the OS / office application industry. Many people still find *NIX too hard to understand (yeah, I know it's easy to figure out, but there are some extremely computer-illiterate people out there). Windows is crummy compared to Unix in my opinion, but for the general user, Windows is probably better. You can plug peripherals in and they Just Work. You can do mundane, everyday office things with Windows and it Works pretty well. Granted, try to do anything complex with a Windows box and it falls over, but for basic computing needs for those who are computer illiterate, it's probably the best solution. Some people will always want a basic OS that comes preloaded on their computer that does the basic stuff they're used to. You know, the type of person who uses their computer twice a week to check their e-mail or write letters or whatever. That's why MS will continue to be profitable; their main user base isn't going anywhere.

Re:I did the math (5, Informative)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751112)

"2K is barely usable and XP is a joke (IMHO :)"

Those of us that use XP and 2k would not agree with you. They are both a hell of a lot more stable than Win95/98/SE/ME. 2K in particular is very popular with 3D artists who couldn't bear to lose a render to a crash.

Re:I did the math (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751159)


They are both a hell of a lot more stable than Win95/98/SE/ME

In a rear-end collision a Corvair is safer than a Pinto.

Re:I did the math (1)

ajutla (720182) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751189)

I use XP. Well, I dual-boot it with Linux on one of my machines. It kind of is pretty sucky. It is more stable than is Win 95/98/Me, but it still suffers from the major Windows flaws, nameley:
The system gets slower and slower as time passes; cruft builds up in the registry and there's no way to get rid of it.
The system IS more stable than other versions of Windows but still crashes for no reason; things break when they're not supposed to. For example, for the last month I have been unable to change my desktop background. Why? I have no freaking idea.
It's still significantly slower than Linux. I find myself waiting on explorer to open a directory a lot longer than I should.
So XP, while calling it a joke might be slightly too harsh, is still, basically, crap.

Macs are Mach-based (1, Interesting)

bonch (38532) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751172)

Mac's are BSD based.

They run on a Mach kernel with some BSD userland tools.

Microsoft obviously has enough money to be a around for a long while. Even while their markets are being eaten left and right.

Heh, only on Slashdot do you see statements like this. "Microsoft's market is being eaten left and right!" I've been hearing that since 1998. Linux makes gains here and there, but it's mostly in markets in which UNIX has traditionally existed. Nobody's market is really being eaten except for UNIX. Windows is so fine-grained in the populace, it's become synonymous with computing for most of the world. Contrary to the "frustration" stories you always here, most people are happy with Windows. I can't imagine their frustration stories if given a copy of Linux...

Re:I did the math (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751252)

Funny, but the networks always ... just work. Always.

Funny, my networks always worked too - even mixed environments of Novell, Windows, and *nix...dumbass...

What a suprise (5, Insightful)

imgumbydamnit (730663) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751013)

What whould you do if the parking ticket cost less than the parking meter?

Re:What a suprise (4, Interesting)

awtbfb (586638) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751092)

We had a similar situation when I was at school. Paying to park at the meters for the bulk of the day was more than the parking ticket - which could only be issued once per car per day. The rule became, put coins in the meter if you'll be there less than 4 hours, otherwise, skip it.

Of course, they may have wanted it that way since it requires less labor to process the ticket than it does to haul away all those coins.

Re:What a suprise (1)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751177)

"We had a similar situation when I was at school. Paying to park at the meters for the bulk of the day was more than the parking ticket - which could only be issued once per car per day. The rule became, put coins in the meter if you'll be there less than 4 hours, otherwise, skip it."

The school I was at had an interesting solution to this problem. Every time you got a ticket, the new fine was the previous fine times 2. If you paid $10 on the first offense, the second offense would be $20, the third would be $40, etc.

Re:What a suprise (2, Insightful)

System.out.println() (755533) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751120)

I actually put this to use last quarter. I parked in the parking lot by my dorm, where parking passes were $70 and tickets were $25. I knew that unless I had to park there more than 3 times, it'd be cheaper to just park there.

Re:What a suprise (1)

gid13 (620803) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751289)

At McMaster in Hamilton, Ont., it costs $15 for a full day of parking. If you park off campus, a ticket is apparently $12. And sometimes that'll get you closer to class.

Well, of course... (3, Funny)

ajutla (720182) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751014)

They're Microsoft! What, were you expecting them to play nice?

How they'll pay Sun Microsystems... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751016)

Word on the street is that Sun will get $2 billion dollars of vouchers for Windows 98 and Office 97.

Re:How they'll pay Sun Microsystems... (0)

darth_MALL (657218) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751035)

hand delivered by Clippy

TO antitrust,competition,consumer & trade prac (4, Informative)

NZheretic (23872) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751018)

Wednesday, March 10, 2004
A plea for relief from Microsoft's escalating anti-competitive tactics. [blogspot.com]
An open letter to antitrust, competition, consumer and trade practice monitoring agency officials worldwide.

The role of trade practice and antitrust legislation is to provide the consumer with protection from abusive business practices and monopolies. In one of the most serous cases of monopolization in the information technology industry, the agencies charged with protecting the competitive process and the consumer have utterly failed to stem the offending corporation's anti-competitive practices.

Re:TO antitrust,competition,consumer & trade p (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751044)

An open letter to antitrust, competition, consumer and trade practice monitoring agency officials worldwide.

...who will never see it, and wouldn't give a shit if they did see it. Basically a form of masturbation.

Japan Joins Global Pressures on Microsoft (1)

NZheretic (23872) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751117)

Japan Joins Global Pressures on Microsoft [eweek.com]
The message from this country's Fair Trade Commission was clear: Japan is not about to sit idle as other global powers raise concerns over Microsoft's suspected abuses of its domination in the computer software business.
Many voices speaking the same message can make one loud sound.

Die PHBs!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751034)


The PHBs phear LINUX because they are GHEY and don't understand UBERLEET h4z0r1ng of one's own kernel! The PHB f4gg0rz will DIE under the Grand Boots of Linus!

PHBs will succum... oh bugger, wrong story..

Same concept as the old-style FCC finings (5, Insightful)

Theaetetus (590071) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751037)

... with Howard Stern.

Previously, the FCC was limited to fining $27,500 per offense - and Clear Channel, pulling in many millions a year syndicating Howard Stern, would gladly pay the small fine knowing that the 'controversy' only increased his ratings, resulting in even higher profits for them. When the FCC recently changed their fine structure to $275,000 per station per offense, that could result in many millions in fines each time... which is what resulted in Clear Channel dropping Stern from most of their stations.

In both this and the EU/Microsoft cases, small fines don't work, and large fines will either be appealled and reduced or attacked as being unreasonable. The only solutions that will actually change behavior are the ones that will cause serious economic harm, without seeming unreasonable - suspending licenses of non-complying stations, or forcing Microsoft to open code/APIs and unbundle apps (or even splitting up the different sections of the company.)

-T

OMFG (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751150)

Save [savehoward.org] Howard [howardstern.com] !

Re:Same concept as the old-style FCC finings (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751227)

This is not insightful, Stern was dropped before the fines were raised.

Re:Same concept as the old-style FCC finings (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751234)

He was only on 6 Clearchannel stations, so we're only talking $1.6mm. Clearchannel, being in bed with the current administration, more likely booted Howard off for his anti-bush comments and used the current situation with "indecency" fines as an excuse. Keep in mind that far-worse stuff comes out of the mouths of Clearchannel's own DJs.

Interesting, but his economics are wrong. (1, Troll)

airrage (514164) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751049)

I like Bob, but invariably he always argues the economics from the business side. What about what you and I paid for this legal battle? What is the average cost of an anti-trust proceeding?

What they needed in this, and many other anti-trust cases, is to think outside the box: why not use the RICO statutes? What not have the Federal Trade Commission declare Microsoft OS defective and pull it from shelves? Why not go after Bill and Steve like they did with Enron's Skilling and Lay?

I think Bob is a good at prognosticating, but seriously, every time he starts talking BUSINESS he simply misses the point.

Re:Interesting, but his economics are wrong. (3, Insightful)

Kirill Lokshin (727524) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751179)

What not have the Federal Trade Commission declare Microsoft OS defective and pull it from shelves?

IANAL, but I believe that a product can only be pulled if it poses a (physical) danger to its users. Buggy as Windows may be, I hardly think software poses that kind of threat (unless it is used in life-threatening environments, which the EULA specifically prohibits, anyways).

In any case, there's a difference between going after a company for its behavior and removing products from the market for political reasons. Nobody should be forced to buy Windows; but if I want to use it, there's no reason I should be prevented from doing so, either.

Re:Interesting, but his economics are wrong. (0, Flamebait)

lordscotus (728448) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751266)

Enron's Skilling and Lay? ... What?! Ken Lay et al. get a free pass as long as Bush is in office. It's the same with Microsoft, whom they just adore! I *hope* the next President is a little smarter than GW!

MOD PARENT UP -- INSIGHTFUL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751053)

I thought so, anyway.

Well, Duh! (4, Interesting)

fm6 (162816) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751055)

Anybody who's followed Microsoft's legal hassles -- or the legal hassles of any big corporation -- knows this stuff.

Back during the Watergate scandals, a big corp got caught making illegal contributions to a Republican slush fund. They had to pay a fine, of course. A reporter, noticing the paltry size of the fine, remarked to one of the lawyers, "I'll bet your fee was higher than that." The lawyer responded heatedly, "I should hope so!"

But don't respond with a round of lawyer bashing. That's like blaming garbagemen for pollution. Instead, go out and elect a President who will appoint an Attorney General who thinks that anti-trust laws need penalities that actually hurt.

Re:Well, Duh! (5, Insightful)

tsg (262138) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751260)

Instead, go out and elect a President who will appoint an Attorney General who thinks that anti-trust laws need penalities that actually hurt.

These two are mutually exclusive. Anyone who can get elected will have had their campaign financed by someone that this hurts. Anyone who hasn't had their campaign financed by someone that this hurts can't get elected.

Im homosexual. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751062)

Im also queer.

Re:Im homosexual. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751070)

Ahhhhhh...but are you GAY? HeauxMeaux

Re:Im homosexual. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751131)

Hmm...*thinking*. Yes, I think I am ! *proud!!*

Why is this a troll?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751158)

Stupid moderators...

bah... (2, Insightful)

SnappleMaster (465729) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751074)

The article does have some valid points but there's some stupid stuff in here as well.

In anti-trust law the actors are individuals, companies, and regulators. The clock rate of the overall system was defined no later than the 1930s when the most recent anti-trust laws were passed. The primary data bus is provided by the U.S. Mail.

Holy mixed metaphors Batman! This just makes no sense. Actors and clock rates! Please... don't overclock your actors! Also what is the US Mail doing in here? Maybe I missed something but I don't recall the USPS having anything to do with Microsoft's legal difficulties.

It looks tough, but Microsoft gets to appeal, remember, and this particular part of the EU bureaucracy has been reversed on appeal two out of the last three times. So whatever the fine, Microsoft has two-to-one odds of not having to pay it

I don't recall the proper term, but this is logical fallacy. The fact that the EU has a lousy record does not give MS 2:1 odds of beating the rap. This is not coin-flipping, this is complex legal stuff. Simple odds do not apply.

However, I really love the last paragraph, especially the suggestion that justice be meted out through death and maiming. I'm all for that!

There are only two ways for a society to address such taking advantage of a legal system. One way is to drag that legal system into the 21st century, which isn't going to happen in America. The other way is to dramatically simplify the legal system along the lines of nomadic justice where there are no prisons nor even capability for collecting damages, so all correction comes down to death or maiming. That isn't going to happen, either, so Microsoft wins.

Re:bah... (2, Insightful)

Tony (765) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751263)

Holy mixed metaphors Batman! This just makes no sense. Actors and clock rates! Please... don't overclock your actors! Also what is the US Mail doing in here? Maybe I missed something but I don't recall the USPS having anything to do with Microsoft's legal difficulties.

An "Actor" may not be a person; it is an "object" that has an "action." ("Gratuitious" use of quotes provided by Qwerty(r).) He is comparing the legal system to a digital system; it kinda works, I guess.

As far as the USPS is concerned: the modern legal system is designed to use the USPS as a medium to transfer large amounts of data, via "packets." These packets are generally yellowish in color.

The USPS is slower than, say, a network of connected computers (hypothetically called an "Internet"), at least for less-than-massive amounts of data. Since our legal system is currently designed to use the USPS, Microsoft can use this high-bandwidth, extremely high-latency data bus to their advantage: the longer it takes to convict, sentence, and enforce violations, the more money Microsoft makes from their illegal behavior.

I don't recall the proper term, but this is logical fallacy. The fact that the EU has a lousy record does not give MS 2:1 odds of beating the rap. This is not coin-flipping, this is complex legal stuff. Simple odds do not apply.

If the EU had a record of *not* reducing the remedy on appeal, I would feel much more confident about this. As it is, since they have a history of reducing the fine on appeal, I certainly don't feel very confident they'll have the balls to stick to the original remedy.

Simple odds don't apply, but you can use past behavior as an indication of future behavior with a fair amount of confidence.

Re:bah... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751278)

Did you hear that whoosh? that was Cringely's article going right over your head.

Re:bah... (4, Interesting)

lawpoop (604919) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751280)

He is using metaphors, but they are certainly not mixed. They are apt! Apt, I say!

Basically Cringely is arguing that the court system, whose timetables are based on pre-industrial information flows (i.e. the time it takes a man on horse and buggy to get the handwritten documents from the lawyer's office to a court house), cannot keep up with the hijinks MS is pulling in the relatively fast-paced digital age. By the time this particular case goes through appeals, etc., the story will be ancient in computer terms. MS will have screwed consumers 50 ways from Sunday in the meantime.

As far as USPS, or European postal systems having to do with MS legal difficulties -- how do you think the documents were presented to the courts? Fax? Email? ;) Now, reflect and understand why the courts can't keep up with MS-BS.

Nothing you can do... (3, Interesting)

opusman (33143) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751075)

I thought Bob was unusually long winded this time. All he is basically saying is that Microsoft have so much money that no court-imposed monetary penalty can possibly be a problem for them. This is obvious I would have thought.

Even a forced break-up, splitting up the OS and Office divisions, would probably not slow them down too much. Then you would just have 2 monopolies instead of 1.

The forced open-sourcing of Windows is the way to go!

Re:Nothing you can do... (4, Insightful)

SnappleMaster (465729) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751111)

"The forced open-sourcing of Windows is the way to go!"

I hope to God you are kidding. Not only would this be completely unfair, but it would also be an admission that Open Source cannot compete with MS.

If you think forcing MS to open source is fair, maybe you wouldn't mind if the state turned your lawn into a public park? Property is property.

Re:Nothing you can do... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751240)

If you think forcing MS to open source is fair, maybe you wouldn't mind if the state turned your lawn into a public park? Property is property.

Yes, but as a *punishment* it does make some sense. Suppose you were guilty of constantly blowing up public parks with dynamite, and the court tried to come up with a really fitting punishment.. turning your property over to the city might be acceptable punishment wouldn't it?

Re:Nothing you can do... (1)

Mr. Sketch (111112) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751258)

The forced open-sourcing of Windows is the way to go!

That is a bit overkill and unnecessary. All they would have to do is open the APIs and File Formats which would allow interoperability with third party applications and that should be sufficient.

Re:Nothing you can do... (1)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751267)

"The forced open-sourcing of Windows is the way to go!"

And why's that?

Old news... (4, Interesting)

gpinzone (531794) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751081)

MS has been doing this for YEARS. He's just catching on now? What about DriveSpace and the lawsuit by Stac? MS had to change a little code and Stac went out of business. MS stole Apple's quicktime coded for windows 3.11 and all they got was a slap on the wrists. Makes you wonder how much crap they actually got away with.

Re:Old news... (2, Insightful)

Tony (765) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751141)

Makes you wonder how much crap they actually got away with.

All of it.

Microsoft Opening Source? (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751084)

Not really, it's just more "Shared Source", but probably a bone tossed in apeasement in connection with the anti-trust settlement. Interesting reading. [cbronline.com]

Not hard for MS to pay - how to penalize them? (1)

Blue23 (197186) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751091)

Cringley is right (who'd of thunk I'd say that). Not only is the amount fairly trivial, not only can it get reduced or removed via appeal, but the interest they get off the profits from that market while they are appealing will pay for a good chunk of the fines.

So, if punitive monetary damages aren't sufficient to hurt a company, how CAN a government wield a realistic prod to get them back in line? They can't tell MS that they can't sell - companies would go crazy. Tariffs and taxes are again just money. What type of stick could a government wield to actually make MS take notice and play nice?

Cheers,
=Blue(23)

Re:Not hard for MS to pay - how to penalize them? (1)

pknoll (215959) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751168)

Jail time for the executives responsible for the decisions that led to the behaviour?

OT: your sig line (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751221)

DUDE!

that is why Sesame Street rules... what other kids show would use the word "misconception".

I miss being five.

Corporate corruption (3, Insightful)

Citizen of Earth (569446) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751093)

Why? Because they make more money by paying lip-service to the law and accepting the occasional fine than by complying.

Sounds kind of like corporate corruption. If you are a corporate officer and you can pillage $100M and face a 10% chance of being caught and receiving a slap on the wrist (paying a $5M fine, being banned from being on a board for directors for five years, and publically announcing that you will stop breaking the law), what would stop you?

In Microsoft's case probably most if not all of their $52B cash pile is ill-gotten and their EU fine is what, $620M? Most government taxes are higher than the 1.2% ill-gotten-gains tax.

Fines are not Punishment (5, Insightful)

erick99 (743982) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751107)

I think a lot of folks equate monetary fines as the equivalent of punishment. I supposed that the EU and other such bodies might also think that monetary fines are punishing. However, as a psychologist, I know that punishment, by definition, reduces or eliminates the target behavior. I don't think that Microsoft even finds these fines as particular noxious. It's just a cost of doing business. So, if these legal bodies that go after Microsoft want to do something *punishing* so that they can reduce/eliminate certain behaviors, then they have to do something like putting executives in jail. Bill Gates might not care much about a $600M check, but laying down in a cell bed at night and wondering if his 300lb cell-mate is going to get romantic.....

Happy Trails!

Erick

Related (4, Insightful)

crawdaddy (344241) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751148)

In other news, I wouldn't care about traffic fines if they only cost a quarter.

Fight Club? (5, Insightful)

Aardpig (622459) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751149)

This reminds me of the scene in the movie, where Ed Norton's character explains that if it is cheaper for a company to pay fines, than to recall a potentially-deadly product, then they will opt for the former.

This is one rather unfortunate downside of capitalism; it only works when government has enough regulatory power to compell companies not to harm its citizens. Once a government is in the pockets of business, the citizens are in big trouble.

Re:Fight Club? (2, Informative)

Johnny Doughnuts (767951) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751192)

a * b * c = x

"Take the number of vehicles in the field, (A), and multiply it by the probable rate of failure, (B), then multiply the result by the average out-of-court settlement, (C). A times B times C equals X.

If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one."

Why not? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751157)

I think he dismisses the killing and maiming option far too quickly.

This happens.. (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751180)

It's my understanding that this happens very often in large corporations. There was a recent article on a large pipe manufacturer that refuses to comply with OSHA standards for factory safety because it's MUCH cheaper to pay an occasional fine than upgrade; don't think this is a tactic only big n' evil Microsoft uses.

It seems he forgets one small detail (3, Insightful)

toopc (32927) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751183)

He seems to base his whole article around the idea that Microsoft appeals simply to postpone any form of compliance so that they can continue to make as much money as possible.

I wonder if it occurs to him that maybe the appeal because they don't feel what they're doing is illegal, or at least feel the punishment handed out is too harsh.

Internal Oversight Panel? (1)

ItWasThem (458689) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751196)

Wasn't there supposed to be a panel of 3 or so outsiders brought on site to Microsoft to oversee compliance with the US ruling? What ever happened to that? Was it only a suggestion?

I'm not saying 3 people could really change them, but are they actually there watching this unfold or has the oversight since been dissolved for some reason?

Summary (5, Informative)

DarkHelmet (120004) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751205)

No need to read the article. Here is what it says in short.
  • Microsoft is too big to care about any small-time financial punishment that a government deals out to them, since they still profit heavily in the end.
  • Any ruling the DOJ gives Microsoft doesn't mean that Microsoft has to comply to it. This is much like giving somebody who steals 1,000,000 dollars a 1,000 fine, but not force them to give the money back.
  • That Cringely guy really likes geometry.

Maybe it's me, but that article was waay too long winded to state the obvious: As long as Microsoft can turn a profit after any sort of penalities given them, they have no motovation to comply to any sort of antitrust regulation.

That, and that Pulpit guy likes Geometry.

Cut the Gordion Knot (1)

rgmoore (133276) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751222)

Cringly is generally correct, but he misses a very important point; MS's approach only works if the worst punishment available is a fine. In theory, at least, there are more drastic punishments available. The most obvious, and one that Judge Kollar-Kotelly should consider if she agrees that MS is failing to behave- is to break up the company. Breaking up the company was the originally proposed solution, but it was rejected as too drastic; if fines and behavioral constraints don't work then the courts should consider going back to the original idea.

This guy sucks (2, Informative)

The Bungi (221687) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751231)

Cringely is so far out there, so consistently wrong in amost every single slightly technical topic he tackles that I find it hard to believe that anyone still reads his crap.

Don't believe me? Look up the last slashbork story that quoted him on anything remotely technical and read through the comments, preferably at +3 or so. Yeah, that hurts.

Oh, but when he goes off in a bogus "M$ is teh suxx" rant, he gets airplay. I don't believe for a second he's got the scoop "from friends of friends" on what's going on with the compliance team in Redmond. Bullshit. Not that I don't doubt Microsoft is ignoring it, but that's not the point. But bring up a vague accusation using vague references to vague characters in vague positions and presto, you have a fact! Journalism at its best.

Prison (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751237)

All we need is a little tweak to the legal system to make the officers/directors personally and criminally liable for the actions of the company! No major overhaul of anti-trust law needed.

Can you imagine Bill Gates doing 7-10 in prison?

But Microsoft will lose. (2, Interesting)

k4_pacific (736911) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751239)

...because of patent infringements. Patent infringements are like nukes in the IT world. Everyone has them, but no one will sue over them because, well, everyone has them. Also, given the number of patents out there, chances are every major company has inadvertently infringed on somebody else's patent. So here is how it goes down:

Linux adoption continues to increase.

Microsoft has a bad quarter.

Microsoft panics.

Microsoft digs through their 100s of patents, and find something that IBM unwittingly violated.

They sue IBM for say, 3 billion dollars.

IBM digs through its much larger patent portfolio and finds several that MS inadvertently vioplated.

IBM sues MS for 60 billion dollars.

MS wins its suit against IBM and nets 3 billion.

IBM wins its suit against MS and nets 60 billion.

And Microsoft is broke.

Injunctions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8751245)

Bob missed a key point. Our legal system has two kinds of penalties: fines and injunctions (though one of my 1st law profs liked to note that injunctions could also force someone to do something, as opposed to prevent). Incremental fines aren't what MS is concerned about, injunctions would wreak havoc on their business model.

Microsoft could still be broken into multiple parts, and then they could no longer fund their research (call it MSN or XBox, but the red at the bottom line makes it research in my book).

If Microsoft isn't allowed to sell a product (patents) they would be hurting.

Bob is right that our legal system can be slow, but it can exact its punishment.

Doing the math in the Linux cases: Linux cant win (5, Funny)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751249)

0$ profit
-$699 liscencing fee
= -$699 net profit

Poor Justice (1)

Dr. Mojura (584120) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751256)

"Justice may be blind, but she is also slow"..."Justice is blind, slow, and unequal"

Hey, stop picking on poor Justice. Sure she may have put on a few pounds, is no longer nicknamed 'swift Justice' any longer and has clouded vision at times, but I'd still rather have her as my friend than my enemy.

Corporation = Army (1, Insightful)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751281)

This is whats wrong with the world today, while the US government has made absolutely sure that where-ever you are in the world, and whatever citizenship you hold, you can be arrested without trial and taken to their camp, but companies can do whatever the hell they want - problems in one country? just move your 'location' to another country - that usually just means changing a few documents, dodgy business practices? dont worry, your legal entity is separate from your company. Fines are money so ofcourse they are going to be treated as just another cost! you have to make real consiquences for a company that breaks the law, fuck les'afairs.

Autos too... (1)

red floyd (220712) | more than 10 years ago | (#8751294)

Wasn't it Ford or GM who got caught with this sort of logic? Something about the payouts in lawsuits being less than the cost of a recall?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>