Announcement

**Asher** · October 23, 2002, 22:54

Originally posted by monkspider
Hasn't MS been in league with the RIAA lately Ashie?

No, what are you talking about?

MS has actually been removing some "anti-piracy" devices from WinXP Media Center Edition, which has really pissed off RIAA/MPAA...

BTW, Drake, to put the "huge" donation MS made to the Republicans at $600,000US...

What word would you use to describe Bill Gates' donations to charities through the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, currently at $5,501,179,880.

Quit dismissing my arguments as fanboyism and admit you're wrong, Drake.

**monkspider** · October 23, 2002, 22:56

I applaud MS for the media center thing, I found that rather surprising. Hopefully it's a sign that the RIAA is loosing steam.
But It seems like MS has been one of few significant technology companies supporting RIAA's various DRM initiatives.

**Drake Tungsten** · October 23, 2002, 22:57

What world would you use to describe Bill Gates' donations to charities through the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, currently at $5,501,179,880.

If you meant what word I would use, I would have to say "irrelevant". Comparing political and charitable donations is idiotic. I'd expect nothing more from you...

**Asher** · October 23, 2002, 22:59

Originally posted by monkspider
I applaud MS for the media center thing, I found that rather surprising. Hopefully it's a sign that the RIAA is loosing steam.
But It seems like MS has been one of few significant technology companies supporting RIAA's various DRM initiatives.

I wouldn't say they were supporting it. They've added DRM controls into Windows Media Player, but it's totally optional.

They don't force it on anyone, and don't plan to force it on anyone, but they do offer content control as an option.

**Asher** · October 23, 2002, 23:01

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

What world would you use to describe Bill Gates' donations to charities through the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, currently at $5,501,179,880.

If you meant what word I would use, I would have to say "irrelevant". Comparing political and charitable donations is idiotic. I'd expect nothing more from you...

Dig yourself deeper, Drake.

$600K is a smallass donation. It really is. Politically, charitably, whatever -- it's TINY for a company worth what MS is.

Why can't you admit that Bush told the DOJ to back down because he's in favor of big business? I don't understand...

AOL/Sony/Sun have no doubt surpassed MS' donation of $600K anyway.

I'm really confused about why you keep defending a statement that you should have conceded was wrong a while ago.

**Drake Tungsten** · October 23, 2002, 23:02

Quit dismissing my arguments as fanboyism and admit you're wrong, Drake.
* You have asserted the reason why the case was effectively dropped was because of the "huge" amount of money MS donated to the republicans
* MS donated ~$600,000 to the republicans
* Bush was opposed to the trial long before he was in office

You may know computers, Ashie, but you don't know jack about politics. The fact that Bush opposed the sitting Democratic president on the MS trial during his campaign doesn't mean that Bush was intent on dropping the case once in office. Without the huge donations from MS, I'll almost guarantee you that the case wouldn't have ended so quickly and painlessly. Don't be so naive.

**Drake Tungsten** · October 23, 2002, 23:09

Page not found - InternetWeek.com

http://www.internetwk.com/story/INW20010907S0001

Seems that amount donated was much greater than the amount listed in my previous CNN article.

By the year 2000, computer and Internet companies ranked No. 7 on the list of the biggest industry contributors on the federal level, giving more than $39.7 million, she said. Since 1997, Microsoft has been the industry's biggest contributor. Microsoft nearly tripled its campaign contributions and more than doubled its lobbying expenditures since the antitrust case was filed.

During the 1999-2000 election cycle, Microsoft contributed more than $4.7 million in “soft” or unregulated money, political action committee and individual contributions to federal candidates and parties, Bailey said. More than two-thirds of that money went to Republicans.

I'm really confused about why you keep defending a statement that you should have conceded was wrong a while ago.

As much as you may wish that I was wrong on this, it frankly isn't true. I can't expect you to admit to your folly, however; you have to keep your bosses pleased.

**Asher** · October 23, 2002, 23:10

That's right, Drake, that massive donation of $600K was entirely responsible for Bush dropping the case. Let's CONVENIENTLY ignore that Sun, Sony, Netscape, and others probably all donated ~$600K a piece too, which would no doubt outweigh MS' contribution.

Bush and his administration have always been in favor of big business. They publically opposed the trial before he was in office, they put an end to the chance of a breakup while in office.

You sit here telling me it's entirely because of a $600K donation, despite all of this and despite the fact that the competitors for MS no doubt donated far more.

And you still keep trying to defend the assertion.

Absolutely incredible.

Incase you haven't noticed, the majority of the republicans on here also opposed the MS trial. Do you think they were bought off by MS too? Give me a break.

**monkspider** · October 23, 2002, 23:10

I think both you and Drake have some fair points here Ashie. Bush is, undoubtedly pro-big buisness and pro-laissez-faire capitalism. But there is no denying that 600,00, though relatively small, coudln't have influenced him to some degree in regards to the the dropping of the case. Would it have influenced him enough to be significant? I'll let you guys argue about that.

**Boris Godunov** · October 23, 2002, 23:13

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

CNN.com - Will Microsoft ruling affect campaign contributions? - June 7, 2000

http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/06/07/microsoft.politics/index.html

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Microsoft has contributed $1.1 million dollars in soft money to both major political parties this cycle -- $529,000 to the Democrats, and $607,000 to Republicans.

The software giant gave another $700,000 to individual candidates -- and it is those numbers that tell the story behind the company's newfound political activism.

Over a million dollars in contributions counts as huge to me. Have any other great ideas on how to change the subject, hotshot?

And how much money did Apple and AOL give to the Democrats and Republicans? Isn't it a little unfair to single out Microsoft for donations when all corporations do it? That is the system, after all. If you don't like that, I would suggest supporting campaign finance reform.

**Drake Tungsten** · October 23, 2002, 23:14

$600,000 isn't a relatively small amount, Monkspider. While not at the highest levels of contributions, it is still a huge amount. For the tech industry, it is massive. Don't let Asher's bull**** propaganda convince of things that aren't true.

**monkspider** · October 23, 2002, 23:15

I agree it isn't chicken scratch, but it isn't on the level of say, Big Music or Big Oil.

**monkspider** · October 23, 2002, 23:16

Don't get me wrong, I wish I had 600,000 bucks. But at this juncture, I would happily settle for 600.

**Drake Tungsten** · October 23, 2002, 23:19

And how much money did Apple and AOL give to the Democrats and Republicans? Isn't it a little unfair to single out Microsoft for donations when all corporations do it? That is the system, after all. If you don't like that, I would suggest supporting campaign finance reform.

It was never my intention to single out Microsoft. I only meant to disprove the idiotic statement Asher made about the antitrust case being ended because someone "up top" thought the whole thing was a ploy led by MS opponents, not because of the huge contributions made by MS after the trial started. Both sides are swimming in dirty money in this whole deal. I'd like to see Asher admit that.

**Asher** · October 23, 2002, 23:25

Drake...wake up, I've admitted countless times that money is flying left and right.

But what it comes down to is MS donated, MS' competitors donated, Bush dismissed the possibility of breaking MS out because he's pro-big business.

Why is this so complicated?

Bush knew that the case against MS was largely unfounded anyway, and it's obvious to most non-Linux zealots following it that the case was a farce from both sides. The competitors struggling to find a way to make it look like MS muscled them out of business, while MS' legal time kept changing tactics.

But in the end, Bush did it because he's in favor of big business -- not because of money.

Announcement

I hate Microsoft

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment