Linux Networks & the Competition Act (Was: Fwd: [d at DCC] Competition Act)

[Darryl Moore]

ted leslie Write:

> just some thoughts,
> 
> - MS isn't a monopoly , it was, it is a big company that extorts
> (now), but a monopoly? saying its a monopoly (on OS), means you don't
> really think to highly of linux? - MS can legally run on VM, you just
> have to pay for the version that does, the higher priced version. - I
> did some reading years ago, and found some stuff that seemed to
> indicate MS agreements that running the cheaper copies on VM, may not
> be binding in Canada. is your fight for Canada or US?
> 

MS is most definitely a monopoly on the business desktop. It has been
proven in both US and EU courts.

As far as charging more for the ability to run Windows on a VM, I
believe that is covered under section 78 of the competition act

78. (1) For the purposes of section 79, “anti-competitive act”, without
restricting the generality of the term, includes any of the following acts:

(a) squeezing, by a vertically integrated supplier, of the margin
available to an unintegrated customer who competes with the supplier,
for the purpose of impeding or preventing the customer’s entry into, or
expansion in, a market;

Please give me any references you may have regarding the enforcability
of the MS EULA.

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists