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 : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: miraje who wrote (20145)	6/23/1998 2:15:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

The inability of the softies to use analogy really throws me. Let's try that car analogy again. If Windows were the road, MSFT would dictate what car you could buy to drive on it. If Windows were the car (which it soon would be if Windows had previously been the road), MSFT would try to dictate what packages you could buy and carry in the trunk. Next they would rule on what family members you could let ride with you, after paying the per-seat licensing for the 'extra' seats in the car. Cars with extra seats would be known as Windows NT. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge. ;-) Think the DOJ will appeal the new ruling to the Supreme court in order to take a stab at MSFT's favorite appeals judges, or will they be content to just move ahead with the main case? Have a nice day, Chaz

To: miraje who wrote (20145)	6/23/1998 2:42:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Enforcing copyright and patent laws, on a global basis, is not just in MSFT's interest. Oh sure. But of the many differences we have with China, do you think this is the most important? Trade imbalances, human rights, all that other jazz, it's not important to Bill so it's not important to our government either? Good consistent Libertarian philosophy, I guess, I apologize for being a bleeding heart on the matter. Cheers, Dan.

To: miraje who wrote (20145)	6/24/1998 8:52:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

It's Your Problem (Not Theirs) around.com An old friend, in a month old column. telling me something I already knew about the integrity and uniformity of the Windows experience. Actually, this one is about copyright and contracts, but also says something about the glass house phenomenon wrt crybaby whiners lobbying the government. Microsoft leave the lawyers out of it? Haha. Bill's just a software engineer, you know. He said so, it must be the TRUTH. But first, a word on the much dreaded automotive analogical front, from an interesting source. Steve Tapia, a Microsoft corporate attorney, says it just wouldn't be fair to hold software to the same standards as, say, a car. That's lucky for him, because car makers have found it very expensive to sell cars with defects--especially defects they knew about. They can't just disclaim any obligation to guarantee their products. Software is different, Tapia says, "because personal computer software may be used for a myriad of different purposes on an infinite amount of hardware combinations." Maybe I posted this one before. Anyway, I'd be temped to say this ought to put the Chrysler car radio to rest, but that would be a small mind hobgoblin thing. One other little jab in passing, before getting on to the main issue: Meanwhile, the agreement that comes with Microsoft Agent, software that lets people create cute interactive animated figures, holds that you may not use the characters "to disparage Microsoft, its products or services." Will the next version of Microsoft's operating system have a clause like that? I'll have to find a typewriter? Me too. Nah, there's always Linux. On to sacred intellectual property and contract rights, and the fruit of politically naive Bill's non-lobbying efforts. Perhaps some of these contract terms are striding defiantly past the limits of existing law--but the law is likely to change shortly, in all 50 states. A major revision is under way in the foundation of American commercial law, the Uniform Commercial Code. The drafters, a committee of lawyers established for the purpose, have created a new statute, Article 2B, specifically to cover software and other information products. To the horror of some consumer groups, the current draft--expected to go to the state legislatures in January--ratifies the most aggressive provisions of today's software licenses. It would set into law the idea that software customers aren't buying "goods" but merely licensing certain rights. It makes the licenses binding even when customers have not read them, when the customers casually clicked an on-line button, and when the customers could not have seen the agreements until after buying the products. The draft legitimizes confidentiality and nondisclosure clauses like Network Associates', forbidding users to publish reviews of a product. And it would explicitly allow manufacturers to disclaim warranties; it even suggests language: "this [information] [computer program] is being provided with all faults, and the entire risk as to satisfactory quality, performance, accuracy, and effort is with the user." "It's the drafting committee's view that bugs are inevitable in software and that makes software different," says Cem Kaner, a lawyer and software consultant opposing these provisions. He argues that Article 2B in its present form will be a disaster not only for consumers but also for the more honorable software companies; it will reward companies that try to grab market share by rushing to market with buggy software. "If there are no refund rights, no lawsuit rights, no legal disincentives, then companies that ship prematurely enjoy an unfair advantage," Kaner says. "In the process of protecting the worst companies from the consequences of their worst products, we pressure better companies to do a worse job." It's left to the reader to judge better and worse companies on these matters. But who was it that maybe to this minute still has that grotty old August '95 Windows release on the store shelves? The release that the OEMs wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole? Just Bill giving the customers what they want again, I guess. On a more serious note, my understanding is there's a parallel effort to internationalize the section 2B stuff under the so-called WIPO treaty. I haven't got a ref on that handy though. Cheers, Dan.