On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 04:06:16 -0700, "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
> Right I understand that. You could have complied simply by only selling >computers with Windows preinstalled. In other words, you could have treated >this the same as a demand for franchise or exclusivity if you had wanted to. It is obvious to everyone WHY MS did this, to maintain monopoly. But ignore motive for a while and see what they actually did and exactly how they intended to carry out he threat of destroying my business. What they did is clearly criminal. The hard part is proving it. Like any smart criminal who makes a threat, MS left no paper trail.. 1. it was a threat to destroy a business -- e.g vandalise tens of thousands of dollars of property. For all practical purpose they threatened to steal my business. It would be roughly the same dollar value as threatening to burn down a large house. 2. it was a threat to force me to commit a criminal act -- namely extract money from people and hand it to Microsoft and give those people nothing of value in return. That in principle is no different from demanding I go out an night and rob people and give MS the proceeds. The selected victims were those who expressed a contempt for MS products by refusing to buy or even have any need for them. 3. What MS did was theft, namely taking money from people and giving them nothing of value in return against their will. What if MS had simply made the threat without being specific about how they were going to carry it off? Would you consider MS so innocent then? -- Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green. http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
