FIND Dr.NUÑEZ LETTER HERE!

[Alan Dayley]

Microsoft's argument is refuted by Dr. Nunez in his letter, pointing out that 
the proposed law does not discriminate WHO can provide the software 
(non-discriminatory) but only HOW it must be provided (free as in freedom).

The "how" has nothing to do with discrimination.  MS would be welcome to 
provide software if it is provided in a free "as in freedom" manner (open 
source, modifiable by the customer, open data standards).  If that excludes 
MS because their chosen business model does not fit, that is not 
discrimination, it is a business process criteria.

I hope this law passes in Peru.  I wish it could pass here.

Alan

On Monday 06 May 2002 08:11 pm, you wrote:
> Regarding the Nunez letter:
>
> Text at:  http://www.sahuaro.f2s.com/peru.txt
>
> or HTML at:  http://members.cox.net/vodhner/peru2.html
>
> The first Microsoft argument (as quoted by Dr. Nunez per
> the cited translation) very interesting.
>
> 1. The bill makes it compulsory for all public bodies to use
>   only free software, that is to say open source software,
>   which breaches the principles of equality before the law,
>   that of non-discrimination and the right of free private
>   enterprise, freedom of industry and of contract, protected
>   by the constitution.
>
> Microsoft argues that the state should not dictate the
> standards for software that it would acquire.
>
> Would Microsoft argue against a private corporation
> decreeing an all-Microsoft shop?  Or wouldn't that be fair?
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
> post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
> PLUG-discuss mailing list  -  PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss