The EU, like many governments is always looking for ways to control everything, which is consistent with the socialist agenda. One of these methods of control used in the EU as well as the US and other places is this so called anti trust like laws. Those laws are perfect for socialist control of business because they can not be complied with. At any time it can be proven any business is breaking one of those laws because those business basically have too prove they are not breaking those laws, which is impossible. Besides the fact it is impossibly too prove a negative, the laws are written specifically to ensure the government can succeed in prosecuting a business at any time. Successful prosecution always guarantees the government incredible amounts of money as a fine as well.
Of course the other us of these laws is for businesses who are unable to compete legitimately. These businesses will claim anti trust and ban together with the government to force some company to change their successful business model so competitors can get more business, sometimes these lawsuits result in the so called victims getting money as well.
In comes an EU lawsuit against Microsoft. The details can be found anywhere, this blog post is about Microsoft's actions they were required to take. At heart of the alleged crime is Microsoft installing their own free Web Browser on their own Operating System that they sell too the general public. The Political Shaman will never understand how a company is committing a crime when they sell their own stuff with their own stuff but this is a different debate. Basically the victims complained that Microsoft is "forcing" consumers onto its free browser and not offering those customers a choice in available browsers. This opens the question as too why it matters what free browser is used, also who chooses which browsers are valid enough for inclusion in this list of choices and seems too ignore the fact that it take a customer all of 3 seconds to click on and install any browser they wish anytime.
Microsoft's response was too sell in the EU the next version of windows with no Browser at all.
Well now the same EU regulators and the so called victims are complaining this is not what they intended. They want Microsoft too offer all of their Browsers as part of the install of the Operating System. The EU is claiming instead of offering choices that Microsoft has offered no choice at all.
Microsoft chose the correct response. If the EU wants to decide what a company can sell and what they can install, what people can choose to have and when, they they can spend the money and resources on getting these choices to the consumers. Why should Microsoft have to spend its own money on other companies software, especially when this software is all free and has no expected return on costs nor will make a direct profit. Microsoft was told not to include their browser because it was them using their alleged Monopoly power on an operating system to crowd out competitors. However, we are discussing all FREE software, there is no market to crowd out.
So now the EU consumers will get no browser leaving the consumers additional complexity in finding one to use the Internet. How can they complain, the consumers voted in the Government that did this to them. They wanted the socialist government and it is controlling their lives.
I guess the joke is on the EU, they got what they demanded and it turned out too not be what they expected.
The Political Shaman suggests that competitor browsers actually compete in the market and then perhaps they will actually succeed in their desire to be on top.
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20090612/D98P69MG0.html
No comments:
Post a Comment