A comparison between Microsoft’s anti-Linux tactics and SCO’s anti-Linux tactics was mentioned just days ago. The gist of it is that both companies are using tactics which borrow a lesson from the days or racketeering, only without the physical threat (corporal punishment).
A few days ago, the RIAA got its way, having jumped through hoops and probably broken the law in the process (pretexting, extortion, racketeering and lying are among many other allegations). There is now a rising concern.
The reason I was disappointed was the validation of the RIAA’s strategy, which goes well beyond education and pursuit of egregious offenders and burdens privacy, Internet service providers and others. When I was writing about the SCO Group’s claims and lawsuits against big Linux users in 2004, there were parallels to what the RIAA was doing.
Would it mean that broad, vague claims could be brought against a wide swath of individual consumers to make them face the full force of a company’s legal maneuvering and extreme financial penalties in the courts? Could this embolden Microsoft to consider the upside of such a strategy against open source users?
Threats about lawsuits are already out there, so there are parallels. Microsoft has already gone as far as the RIAA in the sense that even resorted to extortion. The media gave this no coverage at all. But why?