Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 06:48:00 -0400 From: Jerry <gesbbb@yahoo.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Canon printer and TurboPrint Message-ID: <20090529064800.7c0c10d3@scorpio> In-Reply-To: <200905290934.36220.j.mckeown@ru.ac.za> References: <23711563.post@talk.nabble.com> <20090528220640.77ebc490.freebsd@edvax.de> <20090528165247.665ae52c@scorpio> <200905290934.36220.j.mckeown@ru.ac.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_/FxPOlEmbNJy1PY5cLFslzco Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 29 May 2009 09:34:36 +0200 Jonathan McKeown <j.mckeown@ru.ac.za> wrote: >On Thursday 28 May 2009 22:52:47 Jerry wrote: >> >> Did you ever bother to consider that if the printer manufacturers >> actually formed a consensus on a printer language, some third world >> county or the EU would probably sue them. Nothing I have seen in 20 >> years equals the audacity of the EU. As long as no 'standard' no >> matter how arbitrary, stupid or counter-productive exists, they are >> in theory safe from the EU. Besides, nothing stifles development as >> tightly as being bound to an arbitrary 'standard'. > >What a breathtakingly stupid remark. > >The EU has acted against two companies (Microsoft and Intel) who have >used illegal business methods to protect and extend their monopolies >and suppress competition. > >Or are you suggesting that a format or protocol which is implemented >by several different companies, allowing vendors to compete fairly on >other grounds (price, features, quality, ... ) while protecting >consumers by making it possible for them to move from one vendor to >another, is somehow a worse idea than a proprietary format or protocol >which is forced into a market-dominating position by illegal tactics >such as paying manufacturers extra to incorporate it, or penalising >them financially for providing competing products? The concept behind the EU is socialism, pure and simple. It attempts to create an artificial playing field that allows the incompetent to compete with the motivated. It forces those who create new technology to share it, usually sans monetary compensation, with common bottom feeders. A free, open market is the way to encourage development and new ideas and technology. Not some pathetic, socialistic concept. >If that's the case, why is no-one trying to use the courts to prevent >the use of ODF, a published standard which is now used by several >companies and Free Software projects to provide a common format for >documents? > >Once a company dominates a particular market it's held to a different >standard than other companies in that market - because the power of >the monopoly can be used not only to prevent competition in the >original market, but to extend the market domination into new markets, >by techniques like product tying, distributing at below cost >(effectively drawing subsidy from the original monopoly product) until >competitors are driven out of business, and so on. A company has the right to disperse their product as they see fit. I know a socialist like you finds that abhorrent; however, it is never the less true. Tell me, if I wanted to sell you a $300 thousand dollar Ferrari for $10, would you: A: complain to the police or what ever legal authority you feel so fit to complain to; B: slam $10 in my hand in a heart beat? I think we know the answer. You are a hypocrite. Has it ever occurred to you how a company grows and becomes successful? I know, in your world it is by using the Government to squash competition; however, in a truly free society, it is by hard word and giving the consumer what they want at a price they are willing to pay. Basic business 101. >Microsoft has been convicted of doing all these things, in US courts, >in courts in Asia, and in courts in Europe. These are matters of fact, >not opinion. > >Intel has been convicted of many of these things in courts in Asia and >in Europe. > >The fact that the US system is too supine to take action against these=20 >companies doesn't make the EU ``arrogant''. Let's not forget why Unix >took off and expanded the way it did: once upon a time the US courts >did take antitrust seriously, and prevented AT&T using its telco >monopoly to expand into market domination of the computer business. The spinelessness of the American court system is that they do not take legal action against European countries that practice reverse discrimination, or the outright breach of copyright laws, etc. I know, you socialists also abhor copyright laws. The concept of an individual actually benefiting from his/her hard work and not having to share it with every scum sucker who comes begging at his door disturbs you. --=20 Jerry gesbbb@yahoo.com All God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable. Fran Lebowitz, "Metropolitan Life" --Sig_/FxPOlEmbNJy1PY5cLFslzco Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkofvWsACgkQBvaKIJWWCO2w4ACgmTdmEvbFS30exnAV3iaOQ5sk fBkAnihGewgD9acZ9oZxsfgotWz4V3FJ =zSwj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/FxPOlEmbNJy1PY5cLFslzco--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090529064800.7c0c10d3>