IP: "Dave Farber disagreed with my recent column [ Dan Gilmor's ] on Microsoft and how to deal with Windows XP. Here's his take:"

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Dave Farber on Microsoft and Windows XP

Dave Farber disagreed with my recent column [ Dan Gilmor's ]on Microsoft 
and how to deal with Windows XP. Here's his take:

First let me make my position clear. I am not a fan of MS behavior. I and a 
handful of others traded the comfort of sitting by and watching and 
kibitzing for the stress of getting in front of a federal judge and telling 
it the way we saw it. I have changed none of the testimony I gave then and 
standby everything I said.

What I see is the issue behind the attempt to stop the introduction of MS 
Windows XP is the beginning of a slippy slope leading to the inevitable 
regulation of the software industry by the courts at a level that will 
severely damage the US economy. All the evidence I can see says the court 
system is not prepared to examine software architecture and to determine 
what is modular proper programming and what is not. What the packaging of 
DLL that allow maximum competition and what is not. What interfaces are 
validly hidden from applications and which are not.

I believe that it is appropriate for the courts to examine whether licenses 
are anti-competitive or not and to rectify by court action improper 
licenses and marketing arrangements in keeping with the findings of the 
courts.

If the Government -- that is the Courts, Congress and/or Executive think 
that there must be supervision of certain aspects of the software 
architecture, there are several ways of implementation. One is the creation 
of another bureaucracy in DC. As a guy who just spent a wonderful year at 
the FCC and they are doing a good job given the laws they must enforce, 
lets not have the FCC II -- namely the Federal Computer Commission. The 
other is to pass laws and have judicial oversight and supervision. The 
problem with this is that judges don't have the knowledge necessary to 
navigate between the conflicting claims of the sides in such manners. The 
only way I know of to make this work with out destroying our industry is to 
leave those judgements in the hands of real experts in software systems. 
Look at the mechanism of the Master that the FTC created in the AOL/TW 
merger case to oversee the activities of the use of AOL/TW facilities by 
the three required ISPs. Choose a panel of technical masters and make them 
focus only on the technical/architectural issues and advise the court as to 
the facts and any possible cures. Require the judge to make rulings that 
are technologically based on these facts and the law not on endless legal 
documents that will obscure the facts.

I for one would prefer not to see the government/courts micro-manage the 
software industry. If MS is violating the law, break them up and put the 
full power of the legal process to work. Don't assume that patching a bit 
there and a bit here will work. If they are not guilty, leave them alone. 
Lets rapidly decide what the answer is.

http://web.siliconvalley.com/content/sv/2001/08/08/opinion/dgillmor/weblog/index.htm#farber



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/