IP: a comment re Microsoft "profoundly dangerous to the rule of law" - Boston Globe

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> To: farber () cis upenn edu
> Subject: Re: IP: Microsoft "profoundly dangerous to the rule of law" - 
> Boston   Globe
> From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry () piermont com>
> Date: 11 Jun 2000 22:48:33 -0400
>
>
>
> > > Bill Gates and his entourage have come to represent a certain kind of
> > > techno-libertarian dissent that has grown up in the United States 
> since the
> > > 1970s.
> [...]
> > > How will Microsoft's conduct be thought of in terms of the history of the
> > > decade? As being profoundly dangerous to the rule of law.
> [...]
>
> As an actual live libertarian, let me note:
>
> 1) Bill Gates is NOT a libertarian. So far as I can tell, he holds no
>    libertarian views, contributes money to causes that libertarians
>    would not support (such as various educational tax measures he has
>    supported in Washington State), and to my knowledge is a member of
>    no mainstream libertarian leaning organizations (such as the Cato
>    Institute). There are lots of Real Live Techno-Libertarians out
>    there. They created organizations like EFF and such. Bill Gates has
>    never shown the slightest inclination to support their causes, or
>    the slightest public support for their viewpoints.
>
> 2) Libertarians are intensely concerned with the primacy rule of
>    law. One of the main libertarian issues of recent decades has, in
>    fact, been the decay of the rule of law in the U.S. -- libertarians
>    are profoundly concerned that rights are often trampled because of
>    public opinion or expediency, and that deeper principles are
>    ignored. If anyone would hold that law must be made in the
>    legislatures and courts, and not by poll and public relations, it
>    would be libertarians.
>
> 3) I'm also rather concerned by the notion of "libertarian" as a dirty
>    word being subtly pushed here. Liberty is a notion that most of us
>    hold very dear. Freedom speech, freedom of religion, etc., are
>    cornerstones of our nation. The country was founded on libertarian
>    principles. What's wrong with all that?
>
> Perry