 |
Microsoft colludes with public universities to subvert state public records laws |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Anonymous (Name Withheld on Advice of Counsel) writes " Many states have public records laws similar to the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
which require open access to information regarding the affairs of government and the official
acts of public employees and officials. Generally, these laws are applicable to publicly-funded
state universities.
In the last few years, Microsoft has been aggressively signing up colleges to it's Custom
Enterprise and Education Select licensing programs. For a yearly fee, an educational institution
receives the right to sell Microsoft software at a nominal fee to it's students and employees.
However, as part the of the license agreement, Microsoft has been stipulating that the terms of
the contract be kept under non-disclosure. Public institutions covered by public records laws
are clearly unable to abide by such terms. There are very few exemptions to the disclosure
requirements of these laws. Indeed, non-competitive contracts with convicted monopolists
would seem to be expressly what these laws should allow to be exposed.
Surprisingly, a number of public universities have been signing off on these non-disclosure
terms in apparent breach of their state's public records laws. For example, both the University of Michigan
and The Ohio State University claim that they are unable to disclose substantive details
of their respective Microsoft licenses due to contract terms. See the Ohio State FAQ
here and the University of Michigan FAQ
here."
|
|
 |
| |
 |
Login |
 |
 |
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name. |
|
 |
 |
Related Links |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Options |
 |
Re: Microsoft colludes with public universities to subvert state public records laws (Score: 0) by Anonymous (Name Withheld on Advice of Counsel) on Tuesday, December 24 @ 18:07:44 EST |
From the faq at the university:
Your new computer must be purchased with an operating system
|
[ Reply to This ]
Re: Microsoft colludes with public universities to subvert state public records laws (Score: 0) by Anonymous (Name Withheld on Advice of Counsel) on Tuesday, December 24 @ 18:55:48 EST | What happens if I want to use Linux? Do I still need to purchase a computer with Microsoft operating system?
Remember there are other operating saystems besides Microsoft. |
[ Reply to This ]
Re: Microsoft colludes with public universities to subvert state public records laws (Score: 0) by Anonymous (Name Withheld on Advice of Counsel) on Tuesday, December 24 @ 21:08:50 EST | It seems like subversion of public law started before the secret contract. A contract of that size should have begun with competitive bids in response to an advertised specification and invitation to bid.
One might imagine a bid spec that required software to create interchangable .doc, .xls, .html and .ppt files; include mail and web server software, robust firewalling, and a sophisticated image manipulation program. Then an enterprising company could bid to furnish their own RedHat CD packed with OpenOffice and make a good profit while saving the taxpayers a lot of money. They could even use Fvwm95, refuse to furnish any user support and thereby closely approximate the Windows Experience.
But, I have a feeling the bid specification was written something like, "All submissions must include logos with colorful butterflies and nifty flag icons."
After all, why conform to standards when you can buy "the standard?"
|
[ Reply to This ]
Re: Microsoft colludes with public universities to subvert state public records laws (Score: 0) by Anonymous (Name Withheld on Advice of Counsel) on Tuesday, December 24 @ 23:54:25 EST | I am not a lawyer. Can someone please, please, please explain how something like this is allowed for a publicly funded institution? How is this legal? If it is, why (is it legal), and if it is not, why is it allowed? One of the posters here mentioned a bidding process. Isn't a bidding process supposed to public to a point? Or at least the dollars and cent's cost made public. |
[ Reply to This ]
Re: Microsoft colludes with public universities to subvert state public records laws (Score: 0) by Anonymous (Name Withheld on Advice of Counsel) on Wednesday, December 25 @ 13:14:23 EST | I suppose, that like almost anything to do with either Microsoft or an ever-increasing number of publicly-funded interests, the only response that will turn the tide is for third-party interests with enough money to sue the universities in question. The discovery process, and the case itself may bring lots of interesting little details into the public eye, showing just how insidious this practice can be.
I find this particularly appalling in light of the issue with certain state governments that have considered an "open source only" policy - which of, course, has been attacked many times by Microsoft on the premise that it's anti-competitive, and of all things, "un-American". This might lead one to ask, 'What is 'American', then?" If it has anything to do with Microsoft's current monopolistic, ethically-challenged behavior, maybe us Americans need to reassess our priorities. |
[ Reply to This ]
Re: Microsoft colludes with public universities to subvert state public records laws (Score: 1) by HowardGilbert on Wednesday, December 25 @ 23:44:09 EST (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.yale.edu/pclt | The strange nature of the post and comments seems to show what is wrong with Blogs. I have never seen a stranger collection of conspiracy theories about something people don't understand. Software costs money to develop, but there is almost no incremental cost to add a license. Vendors have always had a discount program for universities.
Microsoft Select simply gives students and faculty the option to buy Microsoft software at a very deep discount. The University doesn't contract to buy anything, just to sell it to those who want it (and not to sell it to those who don't). Twenty years ago IBM sold mainframe and Unix software at a deep discount in a similar program. Today Borland, Sun, and a host of other vendors have discount programs.
Why do you have to have an operating system on your computer? Because Select only sells upgrades (from Windows 98 to XP) but doesn't provide a license for a computer you build yourself out of parts. If you want to run Linux, fine, but then you don't want to buy any of this stuff.
The idea that a discount program contract be non-disclosed is also not unique. There is ususally a contract clause that allows public universities to disclose the contracts to just about anyone having administrative oversight. You just can't publish the contract terms in the student newspaper. I don't know why, except that Microsoft doesn't want someone paying full price to know someone else is getting it for 10% of list.
Select is not unique to universities. Almost every large company also uses it, although they pay more per product than the academic Select pricing.
If you don't think students should get a deep discount when it is available, and not just from Microsoft but also from Sun, IBM, Borland, and everyone else, then complain away. Otherwise, this is the most bizzare misrepresentation of reality I have seen recently. |
[ Reply to This ]
Any 3rd grader can tell you (Score: 0) by Anonymous (Name Withheld on Advice of Counsel) on Thursday, December 26 @ 10:39:30 EST | Any 3rd grader can tell you that the word it's is the contracted form of the words it is or it has. The word its is the possessive form of the word it. You apparently skipped school during the time when the lessons dealing with this were held. While you're busy railing about the illegality of Microsoft's non-disclosure agreements you might also avail yourself of the opportunity to learn the grammar that you never bothered to learn in the first few classes of writing at the elementary school(s) you attended. |
[ Reply to This ]
|
|