a bit more on MIT Getting Millions For Digital TV Deal

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Happy to run a 'we are innocent" piece djf

------ Forwarded Message
From: Dana Blankenhorn <danablankenhorn () mindspring com>
Reply-To: Dana Blankenhorn <danablankenhorn () mindspring com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:52:09 -0500
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: <[IP]> MIT Getting Millions For Digital TV Deal

According to the MIT paper's story, a deal was made between MIT and Dolby,
that each would support the others' encoding scheme and share the resulting
revenue.

Seen from that point of view, it doesn't sound too bad. Both groups merely
hedged their bets, negotiating in preparation to the final competition.

But the same facts can be explained in a far more nefarious way. MIT sold
its soul, its vaunted "objectivity," pre-judging the final competition,
promising its vote for money.

Which was it? It was both. The difference is entirely in the eye of the
beholder.

The way MIT sees it, it had judged that its system's and Dolby's were both
preferable to the alternatives (which were known and were being tested at
the time), so its deal was perfectly innocent.

But if you believe the judgment was meant to be made independently, at the
1993 meeting where the "Grand Alliance" was finalized, then you can say that
the MIT delegate's mind was taken away from him, in advance, for a pay-off.

That's the point of view taken by the article.

In other words, I don't think the facts are in dispute. It's the
interpretation of those facts that differs.

Dana Blankenhorn   dana () a-clue com
The Blankenhorn Effect  http://www.danablankenhorn.com
Tell Your Friends! Subscribe free at http://www.a-clue.com

------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To unsubscribe or update your address, click
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/