Mario Monti rebuttal?

[Rui Miguel Seabra]

On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 13:18 +0000, Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
wrote:
> I thought I would point out that  no where does the press release
> mention anything about MS being allowed to charge fees. I doubt it

Yes it does. Not only quite explicitly, but also the wording suggests
RAND license fees.

> means what Samba et al believe it does as the EC are genuinely
> trying to show that they are not in bed with MS and are going to be
> forceful but fair on them. They would tell it as it is in their press
> release. 

Not necessarily in bed, but deceived by someone (could be an insider).

> >>I agree that we need to leave the benefit of doubt for CEC and wait
> until they publish the decision, but from the imperfect info we have
> I'd say they could put their interfaces on RAND in as much as they
> can patent software. <<
> 
> I think that it is possible but extremely unlikely that uers of the
> interface information will have to pay MS, but we obviously do have
> to wait until the full decision is published.
>
> We must, however, remember that the EC are IMO genuinely trying to
> produce a decision that is fair to all sides, and that Mr. Monti is
> trying to show that he cannot be pushed around or bribed by MS.

IMO they hid it better than the US courts.

> In this context, I find it unlikely that the EC would issue a ruling
> that MS's competitiors would have to pay MS for information required
> to stop MS from extending its illegal monopoly.

I'm waiting for the published resolution, but judging from the PR
wording, it's not unlikely, it's certain.

It seems you haven't read the PR with attention.

Rui

-- 
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20040326/6a6f8e46/attachment.sig>