[TriLUG] if you're upset about the feeble microsoft settlement ...

[rpjday]

On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Marc Johnson wrote:

> Given the state's finances, I'm afraid this may be a non-starter. Much as 
> I'd like to see us on the side of the good guys, I don't see the motivation 
> for our attorney general to jump on this issue. In fact, I can just see the 
> campaign ads for his opponents next term, "and with the state's finances in 
> their worst condition in decades, what did he do? He decided to squander 
> millions of OUR tax dollars fighting Microsoft, something even the 
> spendthrifts in Washington were unwilling to continue. And for what?"

if we begin with your presumption of the state's finances being in their
"worst condition in decades", how is it improper for an attorney general,
someone who is supposed to represent the people, to continue fighting
for consumer rights against a monopolist who has already been convicted
of an abuse of their monopoly power?

if both individuals and corporations are feeling the financial squeeze
these days, how does it serve either of them to give free rein to a
company that has gouged them financially for years?

and finally, have you actually read the proposed settlement?  i see
nothing in there that prohibits microsoft from forcing microsoft
pre-loads on vendor PCs, just as it has for years.  go ahead.  read
it carefully.  there's no mention about a remedy for the appalling
"microsoft tax" we're been forced to pay for years.
i can't think of any more obvious abuse of monopolistic power than
to be able to *force* consumers to buy a product they don't want.
 
it's not roy cooper's job to worry about the budget.  it's not his
job to look good and worry about the next election.  it *is* his job
to protect consumers.  and he just failed at it.

rday