[Discuss] Fighting UEFI

[abreauj at gmail.com (John Abreau)]

I wasn't questioning whether the FTC was likely to intervene; I was questioning
the implication that government oversight was in principle "not right".



On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Tom Metro <tmetro+blu at gmail.com> wrote:
> John Abreau wrote:
>> Tom Metro wrote:
>>> ...it doesn't seem right that some outside force (an
>>> FTC lawsuit, for example) should compel Microsoft...
>>
>> Let's apply this logic to other areas of commerce:
>>
>> [I]t doesn't seem right that some outside force (a government food safety
>> inspector, for example) should compel a restaurant to include in its
>> "Food Preparation Requirements" that ingredients are handled in a manner
>> that ensures they won't serve food-borne pathogens to their customers.
>
> I don't see the relevance in the comparison. The example you site is a
> matter of public safety and presumably the FDA would be operating within
> its authority granted by law.
>
> In the case of Microsoft and Secure Boot, the situation would need to
> pass some thresholds of anti-competitive behavior to be in violation of
> the law, and enforceable by FTC action. That's what I am doubting. Not
> that a government agency can or should regulate commerce in general.




-- 
John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix
PGP KeyID: 32A492D8 / Email: abreauj at gmail.com
PGP FP: 7834 AEC2 EFA3 565C A4B6  9BA4 0ACB AD85 32A4 92D8