Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware
Julian H. Stacey
jhs at berklix.com
Wed Jun 6 23:32:46 UTC 2012
> > Contract penalty clause maybe ? Lawyers ?
> A limited-liability company with no assets is judgement-proof.
There's set up & running costs (time & money), & other exposure
Easiest done by those who have done it before, One would
be careful, there's exposure to directors individual
liabilities eg fraud laws perhaps in some scenarios, & not
wanting to be struck off & listed as somone not allowed to
be a director of other companies.
> > Otherwise one of us would purchase a key for $99, & then publish
> > the key so we could all forever more compile & boot our own kernels.
> > But that would presumably break the trap Microsoft & Verisign seek
> > to impose.
> Could it really be that simple?
I doubt it. Even if so, best avoid one individual in the firing line.
It's not nice being a small company director personaly
targeted by lawyers of a rich malicious company. Being in
another country gives little protection, remote lawyers hire
local lawyers to harass. They don't even need a good
chance of winning, inventive threats, stress & costs unpleasant.
Best activate officials with big budgets & manpower to fight back.
We should unite with other Free Source groups & approach & inform eg
the Competition Commisioner of the European Union (which has already fined MS
heavily before on anti monopoly issues)
I recall George Bush junior quashed the last go at breaking up
Microsoft, but maybe the present USA govt. could be encouraged to
fine MS, even if they don't fancy breaking the monopoly aka
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com
Reply below not above, cumulative like a play script, & indent with "> ".
Format: Plain text. Not HTML, multipart/alternative, base64, quoted-printable.
Mail from @yahoo dumped @berklix. http://berklix.org/yahoo/
More information about the freebsd-questions