Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Microsoft Corp. - Moderated (MSFT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles Tutt who wrote (809)	10/29/2002 3:05:46 AM
From: technologiste	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19790

Charles gets a lot of mileage on this board from the Microsoft court decisions, but his fervent interest in applying Federal law seems curiously restricted to antitrust matters. Violations of high tech export restrictions are apparently not even worth a mention on the Sun board. Specifically, Sun in 1999 paid a fine to settle charges that it knowingly provided through a reseller technology to the People's Republic of China, in violation of U.S. law. It appears that Sun management would have been wise to have something learned from that experience; from Sun's 2002 annual report [page 16]: In early February 2002, Sun and two of its subsidiaries received several charging letters from the United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, Office of Export Enforcement (BIS) claiming that we had violated export control regulations. The letters relate to sales in 1998 in Egypt and in 1997 to a reseller in Hong Kong for subsequent resale in the People's Republic of China. sun.com A passionate belief in the sanctity of Federal law is certainly admirable, but when accompanied by a seemingly benign indifference to allegedly repeated illegal sales to a repressive regime with an appalling human rights record, one could well be led to question whose interests are really being served in this discussion.