On Monday 05 May 2008 12:48:46 pm Kiran Jonnalagadda wrote: > > I suspect that corporations like Microsoft have been trying (more or > > less > > successfully) to tell people that they are "human" and therefore > > different > > from animals, and that they should therefore respect IPR and > > copyright etc. > > But in the real world, humans are also animals - they are no > > different. > > Shiv, > > You have to realise that Microsoft is a recognised monopoly and > subject to anti-trust regulation in the US and Europe. This means they > *cannot* license their software at different rates around the world > (unless as part of a scheme that their lawyers clear as being non- > discriminatory, which is how retail and OEM licenses are > differentiated).
In practical terms what difference does this explanation make? They could make it uniformly cheaper in the US, Europe and the rest of the world. But they wouldn't would they? Good corporations (like Microsoft) working out of successful economies that support such corporations have built in systems to make more profits, not give concessions. When this system comes into contact with grabbing hungry animals, the animals will grab and the corporation will squeal and try and punish the animals for being themselves. The rationalization that it is good practice to keep the rates the same "because they are a monopoly subject to anti-trust legislation" is a convoluted excuse for maximizing profits by keeping rates high in the US and in countries that can afford such high rates, while merely whining about piracy in countries that cannot afford such rates, where penetration is, in any case low. They could in theory drop their rates everywhere (US, Europe and elsewhere) and not face anti-trust lawsuits for that - but the maximum profits have been coming from the US and Europe, so that would never have made sense. Now suddenly they do not see growth any more and the shareholders will scream - so they must show "growth" in BRIC - the growing economies outside the US and Europe. Hence the focus on piracy and punitive crippleware, but not a chirp about price - which as you say is kept stable (and high) to maximize existing profits where they do have a monopoly. For some reason, I see a connection between this and something else I read today: http://www.indianexpress.com/story/305307.html shiv
