Please stop spamming this list with Microsoft related messages

[Evan Leibovitch]

Byron Sonne wrote:

> When people talk about shareholders, they're not talking shit. They
> *will* do what their shareholders demand. *That* is what scares me.

Seen from another POV, this could be seen as a justification to *not* 
pursue IP claims against Linux. One could see this as "we're not going
to do it until/unless our shareholders demand it from us". MS management
has not waited for explicit shareholder approval of its other tactical

Everyone sees what's happening to SCO, and Microsoft's role in its
actions has been laid bare. Going after Linux (which would mean taking
on IBM, HP, Novell and any vendor that supports it (which is more
far-reaching than SCO which really just went after IBM). This could mean
getting Microsoft involved in a deep, costly and long-lasting legal
battle which offers little positive PR, and likely wouldn't stall
implementors who were not scared by SCO's moves.

Shareholders care about share value, and the fact remains that SCO's
stock tanked (after a brief spike) due to its attack on Linux. Would MS
shareholders want to risk the value of their shares should it repeat
this strategy?

Worst of all, attacking Linux that way is a clear admission to its
market that MS can't compete on its own merits. And should IBM and HP
counterattack with their arsenals of defencive patents, people will have
reason to fear using MS products. Is that a risk they want to try?

While I agree that MS needs to be watched, I wouldn't read quite so much
dread into that particular interview. I interpret it that they're
keeping their options open but will wait for shareholder direction (that
will likely never come) to take that specific strategy.

- Evan

--
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