but HOW illigal is it? I mean, I got the idea that some european law meant it was LITERALLY illigal to only offer one browser etc. I remeber all the hype about how we would now all see mozilla on our library or whatever computer.<br>

<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Matthias Kirschner <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:mk@fsfe.org">mk@fsfe.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">

* Anna Morris &lt;<a href="mailto:say.hello.to.anna@googlemail.com">say.hello.to.anna@googlemail.com</a>&gt; [2011-10-04 17:02:12 +0100]:<br>
<div class="im"><br>
&gt; Isnt one point of our argument that offering ONE choice (not just a non-free<br>
&gt; choice, but only one option) is agaisnt the law becuase its monopoly-ish.<br>
&gt; like you should have more than one web brouser etc?<br>
<br>
</div>Yes, it is.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">Matthias<br>
<br>
--<br>
Matthias Kirschner - FSFE - Fellowship Coordinator, German Coordinator<br>
FSFE, Linienstr. 141, 10115 Berlin, t <a href="tel:%2B49-30-27595290" value="+493027595290">+49-30-27595290</a> <a href="tel:%2B49-1577-1780003" value="+4915771780003">+49-1577-1780003</a><br>
Free Software is important to you? Join today! (<a href="http://fsfe.org/join" target="_blank">fsfe.org/join</a>)<br>
Weblog (<a href="http://blogs.fsfe.org/mk" target="_blank">blogs.fsfe.org/mk</a>) - Contact (<a href="http://fsfe.org/about/kirschner" target="_blank">fsfe.org/about/kirschner</a>)<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>&quot;There is no satisfaction whatever at any time. There is only a queer, divine dissatisfaction; a blessed unrest that keeps us marching...&quot; <br><br>Martha Graham<br>

<br>