Subject:
|
Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:22:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
429 times
|
| |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 1999 13:04:24 GMT, "Scott E. Sanburn"
<ssanburn@cleanweb.net> wrote:
> Jasper Janssen wrote:
> > So now antitrust laws are bad too?
>
> Most of the time, especially when the government messes with the private
> sector, in the ridiculous ruling against Microsoft. Especially
> considering the anti-trust laws are from the 1920's or 30's, which has
> no bearing in the marketplace today. It is a hideous example of
Irrelevant to a court case. The law is the law, and if it is being
broken, it must be prosecuted. Not just ignorerd because some
politicians feel the law is unjust.
How would you feel if the second was effectively repealed in the way
you're apparently trying to get the antitrust laws to effectively be
repealed?
> government being totally out of control. I wonder if they are going to
> go after LEGO, for being a monopoly of building bricks, too. I will
But it isn't. Lego is not a monopoly, and what's a lot more important,
it doesn't do monopolistic practices. It doesn't force toyshops to
sell a lego set with every playmobil castle sold if they want to sell
lego at all, they don't make "additional sets" that are completely
useless without the basic set, and use unpublished hooks to hold the
additional sets and the basic set together.
> never forget when Janet Reno, and the prosecuting attorney were up to
> the press conference, smiling, almost in sheer joy announcing this
> verdict.
And well she should be. Microsoft has been doing Evil things. They've
held the development of software back over the past 10 years, instead
of promoting it. That wouldn't be so bad if our society didn't depend
on computers like it does, but as it is, Microsoft is responsible for
a big part of the slump in productivity increase over the past years.
> These people don't even know how to use computers half the
> time, but somehow they can find Microsoft guilty? I don't think so!
"These people" meaning who? The judge? If you're saying he doesn't
know how to use computers, and how that is relevant to the case, I'd
like to see documentation.
Jasper
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
| Jasper, (...) Well, considering the law in this case is something crafted against monopolies, which IMHO, Microsoft did not do. When you lower prices on items, and produce a product, instead of raising prices, it is bad law. I think this whole case (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
| (...) Agreed. One cannot ignore a law because one feels it is unjust if one is a politician. One must stand up and say "I think this law is wrong and I will work to get it changed" and take the lumps, not secretly disobey it. If one cannot support (...) (25 years ago, 28-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
| (...) Most of the time, especially when the government messes with the private sector, in the ridiculous ruling against Microsoft. Especially considering the anti-trust laws are from the 1920's or 30's, which has no bearing in the marketplace today. (...) (25 years ago, 27-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
188 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
