[Community_studios] Re: [seul-edu] [Fwd: Re: Request for critique of a MS rebuttal]

tompoe tompoe at aether.raven.cxm
Sat May 4 13:04:07 EDT 2002

Hi:  To get to that point, we need to create or align with an organization
that has an interest in doing so. For example, Walmart went against the
tide, braced, I am sure, for action from M$ on the issue of selling "naked
PC's".  When the rest of the industry follows, which will surely happen,
as linux becomes accepted for it's ability to be utilized by the "masses"
without question or hesitation, M$ will have to step up and try to squelch
it.  In the case of schools seriously considering using linux, we have M$
going after the source, i.e., Donated Equipment.

Thus, the organization that has an interest in doing so, must logically be
residing in the Open Source, and nonprofit sector. Studio For Recording,
Inc., when successful in it's application for 501(c)(3) status, is ideally
positioned to take on this role. The primary reason for this, lies with
the organization's independence of M$, the anticipation of providing
large-scale community-based education programs tied to local school
districts, and logically, thereby, providing resources for obtaining
significant numbers of donated computers for the various networks.

However, this is all a pipe-dream at this time. RedHat, Inc., is ready and
positioned to take on this role.  SuSE, Inc., is ready and positioned to
take on this role. As are other such organizations. I think we should move
forward with the official response, and then pursue other leveraged
actions designed to inform the General Public. The official response acts
as a vehicle for moving forward.  And, in my opinion, a demo for schools
to play with, represents an even more important accomplishment, as the ISO
developed here, in the near future will make it possible to engage an
all-out assault by providing a uniform approach for LUG's and other Users'
Groups to ramp up, and get those demos in front of schools.
Tom Poe
Reno, NV

On Sat, 4 May 2002, Leon Brooks wrote:

> On Saturday 04 May 2002 06:20, Douglas Loss wrote:
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > From: Dean Pannell <dinotrac at dinotrac.com>
> > To: Douglas Loss <drloss at suscom.net>
> > At that point, the line "So sue me" sounds good.   Threats are only
> > good when people are afraid of them.  If Microsoft actually sued on
> > something as stupid as that, I would love to see someone stand by
> > their guns and sue for malicious prosecution and Rule 7 (or state
> > equivalent) recovery.
> > Ferderal Rule 7 is (or used to be, remember, I'm an old rust-bucket)
> > is the law requiring that a lawyer certifiy that an action being
> > brought comes under Federal Law or a reasonable extension thereof.
> > Something like this is so lame I would take the Rule 7 flier.  Nice
> > thing about Rule 7 is that you can get a judgment against the lawyers
> > as well as their client.
> Now THAT is an attractive proposition... (-: Anyone have any idea how we'd go
> about provoking such a situation? :-)
> Cheers; Leon

More information about the Community_studios mailing list