Competition Act

[Dylan McCall]

Sign me up!

What kind of signature do you need?


Dylan McCall

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Tom Mckay<tom.mckay1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I would love to get on board with this.
> Tom McKay
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Darryl Moore <darryl at moores.ca> wrote:
>>
>> Russell, I agree completely with your conclusion here, but at the same
>> time I think we are now looking at a slightly different kettle of fish.
>>
>> With the DVD-CCA issue it is very difficult to point at any one company
>> and say that they are suffering as a result of anti-competitive
>> practices. There is nothing stopping you, in Canada anyway, from
>> installing decss on anything you want. Perhaps the big DVD player
>> manufactures would be able to claim greater hardship, but I also suspect
>> they were not included in your submission.
>>
>> In this case I think it is easy to point to any number of system
>> integrators (you, myself, others) who can put quantifiable numbers on
>> the extra cost required to meet Microsoft's arbitrary terms, so that
>> they can give the minimal 3rd party compatibility necessary to make the
>> product technically feasible.
>>
>> That coupled with the fact the MS already leverages their monopoly to
>> get 3rd party S/W vendors to subsidize the OS effectively giving it a
>> negative cost to the consumer, and I think you have a reasonable case.
>>
>> Given that to date the CB has done nothing to reign in this monopoly,
>> perhaps this will be viewed as their opportunity to do something, and
>> they'd be helping small businesses more than the big ones for a change.
>> They'd also be seen as leveling the playing field for OSS which is
>> becoming more and more popular with governments these days. (At least,
>> they like to give it more lip service now )
>>
>> I would love to see what you submitted to the CB all those years ago if
>> you are willing to share. It might help me put together an initial draft
>> for this submission.
>>
>> cheers,
>> darryl
>>
>>
>> Russell McOrmond wrote:
>> > On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Darryl Moore wrote:
>> >
>> >> Interesting according to section 10(1)(a) they HAVE to open an
>> >> investigation if 6 people file a complaint. I wonder if Russell's
>> >> original complaint had 6 names
>> >>
>> >> Also once the inquiry is open they have to keep you appraised of its
>> >> progress. 10(2)
>> >
>> >    Yes and Yes.  The second part was fulfilled by phone calls from the
>> > bureau explaining that they did a quick market analysis and didn't think
>> > there was a reason to investigate further.
>> >
>> >    My complaint, partly coordinated to have other people send in letters
>> > through the Digital-copyright.ca mailing list, was about the DVD CCA and
>> > DRM.  Microsoft was peripherally mentioned as a beneficiary of locked
>> > platforms, and the whole issue became a chapter by Michael Geist in "In
>> > The Public Interest" (DRM and competition), but nothing much came out of
>> > it.  He was also hired to do a report for the bureau, and I made a
>> > number
>> > of (unsolicited) submissions.
>> >
>> >    I'm of the opinion that we need to get MPs in the right committees to
>> > get excited about this before much will come out of it.  The designed-in
>> > secrecy of the under-resourced bureau has allowed it to be invisably
>> > ineffective.
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> ubuntu-ca mailing list
>> ubuntu-ca at lists.ubuntu.com
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ca
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-ca mailing list
> ubuntu-ca at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ca
>
>