[nzlug] 'MS Tax' versus Commerce Commission

[Michael Field]

I must be getting too old, and jaded. I can perfectly see how the
Commerce Commission can't act without proof of underhanded arm twisting.

1. Manufacture designs builds machine to run an operating system. They
design it to whatever is the standard of the day.

2. They test it to run properly with all the drivers, and bundle up the
'great' recovery disk feature.

3. They sell the system to customers, including the operating system it
is designed for, rather than supplying an 'blank' system and CDs for the
customer to install from.

That makes perfect logic to me.

4. Before purchase somebody asks if they really have to include the
operating system, they are bound to answer yes for the following
reasons:
- The machine is shipped into the country pre-installed.
- It has all the drivers required
- It has all the 'value adds' that differentiate the product
- They have engineered their support process to work with that system
configuration. 




-----Original Message-----
From: nzlug-bounces at linux.net.nz [mailto:nzlug-bounces at linux.net.nz] On
Behalf Of David McNab
Sent: Monday, 2 July 2007 4:12 p.m.
To: NZLUG Mailing List
Subject: [nzlug] 'MS Tax' versus Commerce Commission

Hi all,

I received a phone call from the Commerce Commission earlier today,
responding to my earlier enquiry about what we 'endearingly' (not) refer
to as the 'Microsoft Tax'.

The ComCom guy advised me that there are several sections of the
Commerce Act and other legislation where the MS Tax could be in breach,
depending on how it is effected.

For example, if OEM licenses are sold for below cost price, that is
clearly in breach. Similarly, if MS tells any hardware vendor not to
sell any Windows-less boxen or else they'll cut off supply, that is also
in breach.

The possibility of MS offering an OEM license discount in return for not
supplying Windows-less boxen, according to ComCom, is a grey area but
one that could still be investigated under anti-competitive provisions.

What ComCom makes clear (and this is to be expected) is that they would
require fairly good evidence of shady practices taking place before they
would allocate resources to investigate. Such evidence could come, for
example, as testimonials/affadavits from current or former insiders to
MS or hardware vendors.

But wherever ComCom stands on the issue, the problem remains - it's damn
near impossible to buy a computer, especially a laptop, for the purposes
of running Linux without paying a portion of the price to Microsoft, for
software that one will never use.

In comparison, many of us would not like it if we could not purchase a
stereo without $100 worth of CDs of the Spice Girls, Crazy Frog, Vanilla
Ice etc being tacked on to the price tag.

Cheers
David

P.S. It's not beyond sanity to envisage an organised campaign of Linux
enthusiasts ringing the big hardware vendors and asking for hardware
without MS Tax, especially when we're actually ready to pay for new
hardware.




_______________________________________________
NZLUG mailing list NZLUG at linux.net.nz
http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nzlug
Computer Concepts Limited
25 Leslie Hills Drive
PO Box 8744 Riccarton
Christchurch, New Zealand

Phone:  +64-3-348-2500
Fax:    +64-3-343-7569

Notice of confidential information:
The information contained in this e-mail message is 
confidential information and may also be legally privileged, 
intended only for the individual or entity named above.  
If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby
notified that any use, review, dissemination, distribution
or copying of this document is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this document in error, please 
immediately notify the sender by telephone and destroy the
message. Thank you.

All prices quoted in this email are exclusive of GST & Freight and
valid only while stocks last.