Microsoft has a little liability problem called Windows. Many are no doubt aware of a would-be class-action lawsuit launched last week in California. The suit targets Microsoft over security problems. The plaintiff is a woman who had her identity stolen. Details are
here. (NYTimes, free registration required)
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Unfortunately Judge Jackson disagrees with you! He ruled that MS was guilty of using and continuing to use monopolistic practices in the marketplace. The appeals courts NEVER, EVER overturned THAT decision, just the punishment. While they may not have 100%, [even standard oil only had like high 90's too] they are still big enough for the LAW to consider them a threat to the marketplace.
This is Great for consumers because this is something as a concequence of the court case. It could be argued [heck, we all know it to be more or less true] that MS on many occasions sacerficed stability and security for features to keep up its monopoly. Well, now their a monopoly, and this allows the beginings of regulation on it's industry. These are many of the same issues that we had when cars became dominate on the roads too..
Unfortunately, this means software may soon become like other engineering or professional crafts and start requiring licensing to practice. That's both good and bad. After all, most commercial products and structures in the world require certified engineers to sign off on design and structural integrity. Houses, medical care, food, cars, boats, medicine, trailers, skyscrapers, advertizing, accounting, medical devices, radios, child care, tvs, etc all have many requirements by law because when they were new, just like computers, many people abused the systems and tried to cheat, steal, misrepresent products. Computing is just going through the changes much faster, and we notice it more because we're big fans of them. I don't wish to see mandatory licensing happen...but if it was to, I'd be first in line to sign up for what ever they wanted to stay in business!
Unfortunately Judge Jackson disagrees with you! He ruled that MS was guilty of using and continuing to use monopolistic practices in the marketplace. The appeals courts NEVER, EVER overturned THAT decision, just the punishment. While they may not have 100%, [even standard oil only had like high 90's too] they are still big enough for the LAW to consider them a threat to the marketplace.
This is Great for consumers because this is something as a concequence of the court case. It could be argued [heck, we all know it to be more or less true] that MS on many occasions sacerficed stability and security for features to keep up its monopoly. Well, now their a monopoly, and this allows the beginings of regulation on it's industry. These are many of the same issues that we had when cars became dominate on the roads too..
Unfortunately, this means software may soon become like other engineering or professional crafts and start requiring licensing to practice. That's both good and bad. After all, most commercial products and structures in the world require certified engineers to sign off on design and structural integrity. Houses, medical care, food, cars, boats, medicine, trailers, skyscrapers, advertizing, accounting, medical devices, radios, child care, tvs, etc all have many requirements by law because when they were new, just like computers, many people abused the systems and tried to cheat, steal, misrepresent products. Computing is just going through the changes much faster, and we notice it more because we're big fans of them. I don't wish to see mandatory licensing happen...but if it was to, I'd be first in line to sign up for what ever they wanted to stay in business!