Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of?

Julian H. Stacey jhs at
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
 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.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list