home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
- Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!news!manta!discar
- From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
- Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
- Message-ID: <1993Jan4.190707.9742@nosc.mil>
- Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
- References: <8256@lib.tmc.edu> <1992Dec31.040712.3797@microsoft.com> <8285@lib.tmc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 19:07:07 GMT
- Lines: 31
-
- In article <8285@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
- >In article <1992Dec31.040712.3797@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
- >> Jay, this tactic of branding everyone who doesn't agree with you
- >>as "trying to work for MS" is getting really tiresome. If you can't
- >>address the points made in the posts, why bother to post this kind
- >>of drivel?
- >
- >Because I cannot fathom why someone would leap to the defense of sucvh
- >obviously bad, monopolistic practices as MS engages in unless there's
- >something in it for them. You're hardly an unbiased judge of the situation.
- >--
-
- Because we are not like cows being led to the slaughter. Some of us own
- businesses--and look at a "brother" company being harrassed without
- (it appears) good cause... and we say to ourselves "hey, that could be
- *us* in five or ten years."
-
- Some of us own businesses and don't have a battery of lawyers to tell us
- if a particular action is FTC-compliant or not--some of us have to rely
- on our own ethics and common-sense; when we see what we perceive to be
- a "legal" action being defamed, can we not rightly question "why?"
-
- The precedent is there; in the name of "freedom of speech", some argue
- that we have voted away the right. What applies to large businesses
- (such as Microsoft, IBM, and, yes, Standard Oil and AT&T) in the eyes of
- the law apply to Mom and Dad's Corner Camera Repair as well.
-
- Joe
- My opinions.
-
-
-