|
 |
|
The following was contributed by Linux Today reader John McLay. Perhaps someone from Redhat or Linux International should contact Congress, or the Federal Trade Commission, to investigate the issue of Microsoft falsifying test results for the purposes of discrediting Linux and Redhat. If the test were rigged and then Microsoft issued a press release on the Internet to promote this misinformation, then they were engaging in advertising data that they new to be false. False advertising is a crime and they should be charged with the crime to stop them from doing it again. It would be unfortunate if Redhat and Linux International felt that pushing for an investigation would be bad advertisement for Linux. The purpose of the investigation is not to cry foul, but to establish the truth and make sure justice occurs. If Microsoft deliberately set out to defame Linux and Redhat and if they did so using fraudulent data, then it is the duty of the injured party to contact the FTC. Not doing so will continue to harm the consumers who have been given false information. Lacking contrary information the consumer will accept the MS results at face value. If a crime has been committed then Microsoft should be brought up on criminal fraud charges. There is nothing to be lost by asking the FTC to be investigating this matter. Just having the FTC initiation an investigation will help counteract the false data that MS reported, even if it doesn't eventually end in any charges. The request to the FTC should include language asking for immediate action because the continued propagation of this false data is doing immediate and irreversible harm to Linux. This damage is being magnified by the comparative size of the parties involved. The small size of Redhat prevents them from effectively competing with MS in the press. If MS can create the impression that the data is correct then the harm could be fatal to Redhat and other Linux companies. This is not like MS falsifying data against Sun or Novell. Those companies are big, financially secure, well established. They can counter the MS claims with studies and advertising of their own. In the case of the Linux benchmark, MS is deliberately setting out to destroy small companies by unfair means. Asking for immediate relief, because the damage is immediate and permanent, could get the FTC to take action in weeks rather than in years. In the eternally optimistic department their is a slim chance that this could have another positive benefit. It is abhorrent, not to mention against regulations, that the government continues to buy proprietary software for the desktop when standards based software is available. A swift ruling by the FTC could possibly include a bar on the the government purchase of MS products for a number of years as punishment. Killing future sales of any MS operating system to any Federal agency would effectively end their monopoly. It is the responsibility of the FTC to conduct investigations such as the one proposed. Here is a quote from http://www.ftc.gov/ that sums up the FTC's policy on investigating advertising. The Commission evaluates comparative advertising in the same manner as it evaluates all other advertising techniques. The ultimate question is whether or not the advertising has a tendency or capacity to be false or deceptive. This is a factual issue to be determined on a case-by-case basis.If MS uses false test results in advertising they may be in violation. And just because the FTC doesn't take up the matter for Sun or Novell doesn't mean that they wouldn't do so for Linux. Another avenue would be to seek a court injunction against MS using any Mindcraft test results in advertisements until an investigation had been completed. The evidence supplied by the Linux community should be sufficient to get an injunction since possible criminal intent is apparent. A second part of the strategy would be to ask the FTC to have NIST, http://www.nist.gov/, conduct the benchmark of the two systems. NIST is often called upon when a neutral third party is required for testing. Congress and government agencies can call on NIST to conduct a test of commercial technology to come up with definitive results. NIST has the technical expertise and the computing resources to conduct the test. For example, one group is investigating NT clustering: http://www.nist.gov/itl/div895/research/PC_Clusters/sld001.htm and another group is doing Linux based clustering: http://www-i.nist.gov/itl/div895/895.02/rapid/index.html The Mindcraft study did not reflect a very real-world situation. It was designed to produce marketing data. The FTC could ask NIST to design and conduct an appropriate test that would reflect a realistic business environment. The Linux community might like to contribute some ideas on what NIST should include in a realistic test. The Linux community is typically adverse to involving the government. Taking the moral high ground against a company that uses every dirty trick in the book is not helping the consumers. Microsoft hides behind laws when it is to their advantage. They also push to have laws passed to their advantage, such as the new rules governing shrink-wrap licensing in the Uniform Code of Commerce. Fighting MS in the legal system is a moral obligation because it helps defend consumers against fraud.  
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
| All times are recorded in UTC. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds. Powered by Linux, Apache and PHP 
Legal Notices, Licensing, Permissions, Privacy Policy.
Whitepapers and eBooks
Webcasts
|
