Miriam English wrote:
>
> Heheheheh :-)
> Want a chuckle?
>
> http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=11321
It's a good example of technical reality vs. the law. Sure, Microsoft
may be committing all kinds of (in the court's expressed opinion)
illegal acts, and it may be violating a consent agreement, but there is
(as yet) no enforcement to back the laws up, therefore the laws are
irrelevant. Likewise, Microsoft can say anything they want - maybe
even get lawmakers to agree - but they tend to get ignored, *even if
laws get passed*, in most cases by those who actually work with what's
being talked about when their statements are false. (Extra emphasis,
however, on the disclaimers here.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:11 MDT