Microsoft puts the squeeze on NW schools

The Oregonian ^ | April 21, 2002 | Steve Duin

[StockAyatollah]

Why aren't all of these perpetually (supposedly) budget-strapped public schools ALREADY running Linux? Maybe this will inspire them to do so.

[eFudd]

They out to send a report to Microsoft that says 84,275 computers, all using Linux.

[LoneGOPinCT]

So? Businesses and corporations are expected to pay the licensing fees, why shouldn't the school system?

I'm no fan of Microsoft's products, but I do feel they've been improperly vilified. Ostensibly because they didn't donate enough to the democRATs. Microsoft has probably gotten fed up with the b.s. from all sides and finally just said screw 'em all.

[UnsinkableMollyBrown]

That's a hot button topic for me.

Years ago Oregon instituted the lottery to "help" pay for education. So why are the schools in Oregon in such grave financial straits?
Further, our corrupt politicians have shifted a higher percentage of school dollars to the Portland metro area, leaving the rest of the state with very little. My kids are in a rural district. The elementary school doesn't have a lunch room, the kids have to pick up their trays and take it back to their class to eat. Also, there is not enough room for the fifth grade classes, so they bus them to another school. And the Jr. High doesn't have a lunch room, they have to walk over to the High School to eat. And to even think there are such luxuries as Marching Bands is laughable. It seems that the Portland school districts (with the help of some gov officials) are doing a little squeezing of their own.

[B Knotts]

The problem here is they don't have any specific evidence to show that there are license violations; Microsoft is basically extorting the taxpayers on this. This is just more of those infamous Microsoft business tactics that have made so many people hate them...

I think the school district should tell them to get a court order, and challenge their legally-questionable EULA.

Meanwhile, a lot of people on slashdot are volunteering to help them migrate to Linux. :-)

[B Knotts]

*ping*

[gcruse]

Microsoft is well within its rights to call for an audit.
 "They just want to squeeze every nickel out of us they can."

Piss off.

[Bush2000]

The problem here is they don't have any specific evidence to show that there are license violations;

Sorry, Knotts. The license specifically gives MS the right to audit enterprise customers.

Microsoft is basically extorting the taxpayers on this. This is just more of those infamous Microsoft business tactics that have made so many people hate them...

Awwwww, my heart just breaks over all your widdle hurt fee-wings. Read this: http://wsrn.com/apps/news/art.xpl?id=4239669&f=NEWS&s=MSFT. MS has been screwed for years by people stealing its software -- and enterprises are generally the worst offenders. Sorry, no sympathy here. Either pay, or stop using the software.

I think the school district should tell them to get a court order, and challenge their legally-questionable EULA.

It's a contract, Knotts. I know that that's inconvenient -- you know, signing a document and actually having to live up to the terms -- but it's reality. And it would be pretty funny seeing the school district pay for a bunch of fancy lawyers in its current so-called "cash-strapped" state (which I don't buy for a minute). The only reason they're having problems complying is they have a bloated bureacracy that can't tie its own shoelaces -- a bureaucracy, I might add, that costs twice as much per student as other industrialized nations and can't meet the same quality bar ...

Gee ... I really feel bad for them /sarcasm

Meanwhile, a lot of people on slashdot are volunteering to help them migrate to Linux. :-)

I think that's a great idea. Once the district comes in contact with some of those vitriolic losers, they'll never look at open source crapware ever again...

[Dinsdale]

25,000 computers, assume 5 year average life, also assume new software with new computers.

Windows at $70, Office educational edition at $100. Also 1000 (for the older kids) copys of Dev studio leaning edition at about $100. That's in the neighborhood of a million a year.

On it face it seems like the license terms will save the schools money. Also allow the schools to install uniform OS's and tools across all machines. If MS wants this kind of money just for windows though they should get stuffed.

Except the schools would have to buy 'naked PCs' and install all the software thmselves. But with students messing with things (I deleted the /system32 folder, Microsoft messed up my PC!) the schools have got to have the reinstall process down pat.

[Bush2000]

"Schools and government agencies that are paying for Microsoft Office are wasting money," Nelson said. "They should be using free software. A lot of this stuff has become generic. It doesn't take a fancy program to make something bold."

Schools and government agencies that are paying for useless teachers and bureaucrats are wasting money," Bush2000 said. "They should fire them."

[Quix]

I think it's typical of the habitually ruthless to bring to bear the most unreasonable pressure at the most inconvenient time. . . . all very legally proper, of course. . . at times. . . . in some contexts. . . .

[Dinsdale]

I think the school district should tell them to get a court order, and challenge their legally-questionable EULA.

It's a contract, Knotts.

In fact click through licences have generally not been found enforcable. And yes you have a right to use software absent any EULA. You got the legal right because you paid for it. EULA's restrict that right, they don't convey it.

[discostu]

Simple. Schools are run by C students. While Linux is very powerful it is not very C student friendly.

Also remember the majority of computers in schools are in the student lab to teach students something that supposed to be useful. MS rules the computing world, teaching students how to use Linux won't give them any useful skills in a world where 90+% of the desktops aren't Linux.

[B Knotts]

I won't argue that the school district people are anything other than incompetant boobs, but...it should be illegal to waste taxpayer money on licenses and license compliance for proprietary software when free software exists for the application intended.

And, Microsoft isn't going to win any support for their current antitrust position by employing extortionist tactics against school districts and other taxpayer-funded organizations.

[Bush2000]

In fact click through licences have generally not been found enforcable. And yes you have a right to use software absent any EULA. You got the legal right because you paid for it. EULA's restrict that right, they don't convey it.

Wrong, totally wrong. And there are many examples that prove you are wrong...

http://www.pcworld.com/resource/printable/article/0,aid,46764,00.asp

"Virtually all software programs, and most Web sites that require registration, offer consumers a EULA or TOS contract. These contracts are legally binding documents that provide information about how the publisher will support the product, and include a disclaimer of liability. They're similar to shrink-wrap licenses for packaged software. Those state that by opening a shrink-wrapped package, you've agreed to abide by the license agreement within. On the Web and in downloaded software, so-called click-wrap agreements require you to click an "I Accept" button located at the end of the agreement before you can use the service or install the software. "Mass-market click-wrap license agreements are inherently 'contracts of adhesion,' meaning the consumer's negotiating power is limited to 'take it or leave it,'" says CPT's Bushnell. He notes that "if you scrutinize the legalese governing many Internet services, the owner is often allowed the ability to change contractual terms without notice to the consumer." Click-wrap has its place, however. Consumers want to download software, and vendors want some way to secure their own licensing rights. "Online agreements are enforceable if they're done right," says Brian Burr, a technology transactions lawyer with the law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe. And just in case there was a lawsuit, software companies have tweaked the user interface of EULA mechanisms to force you to at least try to look at the text. Many EULAs now require a user to scroll through the document to get to the "I Accept" button; some companies require users to click on checkboxes or otherwise indicate that they've read--or at least lingered near--the clauses within."

[B Knotts]

In this case, Adobe's EULA was found to be irrelevant.

[Bush2000]

I won't argue that the school district people are anything other than incompetant boobs, but...

Here we are in agreement...

it should be illegal to waste taxpayer money on licenses and license compliance for proprietary software when free software exists for the application intended.

Illegal?!? Are you smoking crack?

And, Microsoft isn't going to win any support for their current antitrust position by employing extortionist tactics against school districts and other taxpayer-funded organizations.

I doubt they care. The NEA is filled with socialist teat-suckers, anyway, so their support for any business is highly questionable. Personally, I'd write 'em off...