More Linux/Microsoft (anti) competitive infomation

[Rick Tomaschuk]

Lots of good computer industry background material at: http://lxer.com/
and DOJ site  "http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_index.htm" If anyone
has good resources for marketing info, rhetoric, etc. please let me know
by posting or emailing me links.
Thanks,
RickT
http://www.TorontoNUI.ca


Including http://lxer.com/module/newswire/lf/view/50179/
Congress: Clear the Air and Stop Preloads
Lxer Day Desk; By Tom Adelstein, Editor-in-Chief
American consumers do not like living in the dark when it comes to
products we buy. In that respect, we don't believe citizens of other
countries do either. So, with consideration to the people who drive the
US economy, we would like some straight answers to questions which
should shine some light on an area of darkness with which we lived far
too long.

1. Does the US Administration lobby on behalf of Microsoft and if so
should it cease and desist from such activity?

2. We ask Congress to evaluate the administration's role with regard to
Microsoft's monopoly.

3. We ask Congress and the President to prohibit Microsoft preloading
agreements.

4. We ask for Congress to perform a comprehensive review of Microsoft's
political activities including and starting with the House Ethics
committee's failure to investigate the links between Tom DeLay, Jack
Abramoff, Preston Gates &Ellis and the BSA.

5. We request Congress to enact laws requiring Original Equipment
Manufacturers to disclose their policies with regard to selling
Microsoft products.

6. We ask for schedules of payments to and from Microsoft and OEMs be
disclosed immediately to the public so we can ascertain the influence
exerted on consumers buying computers and computer related products. 

Consumer consumption determines the health of the US Economy. Some of us
would prefer a return to manufacturing, distribution, exports and
technological innovations. But poor decisions in the past have painted
us into this corner. 

As consumers, we need more information about the products we buy. Today,
for example, we know about the employee discounts for most automobile
manaufacturers. We know a lot more about the availability of generic
drugs versus name brand drugs whose patents have run out.

Now, we believe we need to know more about the computer systems offered
to us in stores and off web sites. So, we believe consumer advocates
should lobby for a small set of simple requests with regard to the US
computer industry as it affects consumers.

Gives us the answers to these six questions or requests discussed below:

1. Does the US Administration lobby on behalf of Microsoft and if so
should it cease and desist from such activity?

In particular, we feel courious as to why the US Justice Department
lobbied on behave of Micrsoft when the South Korea found Microsoft
guilty of anti-trust. In an article entitled U.S. Wades Into Korea's
Microsoft Controversy Chosun.com states:

        The U.S. Justice Department on Wednesday took the unusual step
        of sharply criticizing a decision by Korea’s Fair Trade
        Commission to fine Microsoft W33 billion (US$33 million) in an
        antitrust case, which it said went “beyond what is necessary or
        appropriate.”
        
        (It went on to say)
        
        FTC director-general Kim Byung Bae said it was rare for the U.S.
        Justice Department to issue a statement on the matter since it
        was customary to respect decisions by partnering institutions.
        That was why the Korean government made no comment on a recent
        decision by the department to fine Samsung Electronics for
        price-fixing, Kim said. Asked if the U.S. statement could lead
        to a full-scale trade war, Kim said the FTC decision was based
        solely on whether Microsoft violated antitrust law or not, so it
        was not a trade issue.
We're also concerned about the Administration's attempts to convince the
European Union to back off on Microsoft. 

2. We ask Congress to evaluate the administration's role with regard to
Microsoft's monopoly.

Our reference here relates to the fact that Microsoft and the Department
of Justice reached settlements in which a District Court objected: 
        The judge found it odd that Justice initiated a massive
        antitrust probe, found significant violations in the large
        market and only wrote a complaint alleging minor anticompetitive
        practices. He felt the decree didn't work in the public interest
        because: 1) It declined to provide the Court with the
        information it needed to make a proper determination. 2) The
        scope of the decree was too narrow. 3) The parties did not
        address other anticompetitive practices. 4) The Court was not
        satisfied that enforcement and compliance mechanisms were
        satisfactory.
We wonder why the Department of Justice and Microsoft jointly appealed
the Court's decision.

3. We ask Congress and the President to prohibit Microsoft preloading
agreements.

We feel that as long as Microsoft maintains their preloading agreements
with Original Equipment Manufacturers, no one can break the Redmond
Company's grip on the computer market. We believe it maintains an unfair
monopoly restraining trade.

        While we can see the power of preloading an operating system
        today, we didn't think much about it in 1992. Today, 95% of the
        people who own computers use what comes on their PCs.
        
        Preload agreements seemed like a clever marketing tool. In the
        least they gave someone an edge. At the other end of the
        spectrum under the Sherman and Clayton acts they should be
        potentially felonious.
        
        Back when these agreements started, preloads gave OEM's a good
        price on DOS. But OEMs had to agree to buy Windows, too. They
        would have to pay for DOS and Windows for every computer they
        shipped, whether DOS and Windows were on it or not.
4. We ask for Congress to perform a comprehensive review of Microsoft's
political activities including and starting with the House Ethics
committee's failure to investigate the links between Tom DeLay, Jack
Abramoff, Preston Gates &Ellis and the BSA.

Recognizing that the Chairman of the House Ethics Committee represents
Redmond, Washington, we wonder if he is so disposed as to keeping
potential wrong doing from disclosure. We have knowledge of the Gates
foundation contributing to the foundation Tom DeLay allegedly used to
launder contributions to other candidates. 

5. We request Congress to enact laws requiring Original Equipment
Manufacturers to disclose their policies with regard to selling
Microsoft products.

We don't know what agreements exist today because disclosure goes beyond
the scope of the US Government's enforcement of their agreement with
Microsoft. Everything is done in secret without public disclosure.


6. We ask for schedules of payments to and from Microsoft and OEMs be
disclosed immediately to the public so we can ascertain the influence
exerted on consumers buying computers and computer related products.

We simply want to know if Microsoft's monopoly position results in funds
going back and forth between OEM's and Microsoft. For example, does
Microsoft reward OEM's for recommending Microsoft XP? When Congress
returns to work in January, we want these questions put on the
Congressional agenda. We also request these questions be considered
priorities.

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml