From owner-freebsd-chat  Fri May 29 07:37:56 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA20917
          for freebsd-chat-outgoing; Fri, 29 May 1998 07:37:56 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: (from jmb@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA20813;
          Fri, 29 May 1998 07:37:39 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from jmb)
From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb>
Message-Id: <199805291437.HAA20813@hub.freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Why we should support Microsoft...
In-Reply-To: <00a701bd8ae2$eda38300$023aa8c0@kib.kib.net> from Jason at "May 29, 98 05:19:46 am"
To: kib@poboxes.com
Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 07:37:38 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: jak@cetlink.net, freebsd@atipa.com, brett@lariat.org, jkb@best.com,
        freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL32 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

Jason wrote:
> All I know is that the DOJ seems way too vague on their accusations.....I
> mean having a monopoly is not illegal....using that monopoly to do illegal
> things is however.

	using their OS monopoly to push their browser.
	gateway recently announced that MS will allow
	gateway to ship computer with the netscape browser.

	gateway should not need nor seek MS's allowance or
	approval when installing another company's software
	on gateway computers.

	it is illegal to use a monopoly in one area to push
	your product in another.  a browser aint part of the
	OS.  one can make a browser the sole interface to the
	OS, but it aint part of the OS.

	this is how i understand this one issue in the DOJ suit.
jmb

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message