Re: [luv-main] Microsoft requires Windows 8 logo systems to not bootunsigned OS's

Appears that Competition commission are useless as usual. Long response that says nothing and shows that they don't even understand the issue. Funny they have written this rubbish to a Professor of Economics, if any of my students had this little understanding I'd fail them out of hand. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Professor Poyogo-Theotoky, Thank you for your email of 26 September 2011 to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (the ACCC) regarding the Microsoft’s upcoming Windows 8 operating system. Your reference number for this matter is 1154451. The role of the ACCC is to ensure compliance with the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (the Act), which is designed to encourage fair trading and discourage anti-competitive conduct through a specific set of competition and consumer protection rules. One of the Act’s aims is to foster fair markets, that is, markets where normal competition can continue without being hindered by unfair and illegal market practices. Such illegal market practices include price-fixing, market-sharing, resale price maintenance, misuse of market power and certain forms of exclusive dealings/boycotts. Section 47 of the Act prohibits exclusive dealing. Broadly speaking, exclusive dealing occurs when one person trading with another imposes some restrictions on the other’s freedom to choose with whom, in what, or where they deal. Exclusive dealing is only a breach of the Act where the conduct has the purpose, effect or likely effect of substantially lessening competition in the market. In an assessment of the effect of the conduct on competition, it is not enough merely to show that an individual business has been damaged. The wider market for the particular product or service must be considered. The situation you described may raise issues of exclusive dealing, but it is unclear from the details provided whether it would be likely to meet the competition test described. In assessing any complaint, staff of the ACCC would generally determine whether or not the matter falls within the jurisdiction of the Act, whether or not there appears to have been a breach of the Act, and if so, whether the impact of the conduct is so serious and widespread that it is appropriate that the ACCC should take some action. It should first be noted that in general, investigations are conducted confidentially and the ACCC does not comment on matters it may be investigating. Further, complainants will only be contacted by the ACCC where clarification or additional information is sought. It is important to note that the ACCC cannot pursue all the complaints it receives. While all complaints are carefully considered, the ACCC must exercise its discretion to direct resources to the investigation and resolution of matters that provide the greatest overall benefit for consumers and businesses. The ACCC’s Compliance and Enforcement policy describes in more detail how this discretion is exercised. This policy, which is available on the ACCC’s website [www.accc.gov.au], lists a number of factors that are weighed including whether conduct raises national or international issues, involves significant consumer detriment or a blatant disregard of the law. The Act also allows an affected party to take their own legal action for a breach of the Act. You may wish to seek legal advice on the possibility of taking your own action in this circumstance. Thank you for contacting the ACCC with your concerns. I trust this information is of use. Yours sincerely, Katy ACCC Infocentre Ph: 1300 302 502

stripes theotoky wrote:
Appears that Competition commission are useless as usual. Long response that says nothing and shows that they don't even understand the issue. Funny they have written this rubbish to a Professor of Economics, The letter is of course a 'form letter' identical to the one I received; if you look at the problem from the bureaucrats point of view ' a la ' "Yes Minister"; the problem is 1/ to have an identical letter for all similar inquiries, to reduce time and energy. 2/ the letter should suggest something has been / will be done; whilst accepting no responsibility. 3/ the letter should suggest the department has a definite understanding of ' the problem'; whilst ultimately avoiding making any statement which could later be found inaccurate. ...... the trick is to make the bureaucrat realise that you won't go away and that the path of least pain lies in actually doing something about your request; eg. you could write a detailed email response to the form letter...etc.and/ or eg you could write a detailed 'snail-mail' letter to the bureaucrat's minister; thus bringing some heat from above on the individual and the additional work required in printing and mailing a response. if any of my students had this little understanding I'd fail them out of hand.
Well they say to walk a mile in another man's shoes, is to acquire understanding; and as some wag suggested, at worst you have another pair of shoes ! regards Rohan McLeod

Quoting Rohan McLeod (rhn@jeack.com.au):
Well they say to walk a mile in another man's shoes, is to acquire understanding; and as some wag suggested, at worst you have another pair of shoes !
...and are a mile away from their owner!

I sent this mail on last Wednesday. I had the same response. Guys, its time to 'clarify' as they suggested.
From android, me@luke.asia On Sep 28, 2011 2:19 AM, "Rick Moen" <rick@linuxmafia.com> wrote: Quoting Rohan McLeod (rhn@jeack.com.au):
Well they say to walk a mile in another man's shoes, is to acquire understanding; and as some wag suggested, at worst you have another pair of shoes !
...and are a mile away from their owner!
_______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list luv-main@lists.luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main

Luke Martinez wrote:
I sent this mail
Which mail ? and
on last Wednesday. I had the same response.
from whom?
Guys, its time to 'clarify' as they suggested.
Are you suggesting responding to the ACCC form letter ?.....speculating wildly! If so perhaps you can share ideas on clarifications ? regards Rohan McLeod

Alas android, thou art very unclear. I sent a letter to ACCC in regards to this threads topic, , I had the same responce from the ACCC.
but it is unclear from the details provided
They inferred that we should clarify we should directly reply to the email? Regards, Luke On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Rohan McLeod <rhn@jeack.com.au> wrote:
Luke Martinez wrote:
I sent this mail
Which mail ? and
on last Wednesday. I had the same response.
from whom?
Guys, its time to 'clarify' as they suggested.
Are you suggesting responding to the ACCC form letter ?.....speculating wildly! If so perhaps you can share ideas on clarifications ?
regards Rohan McLeod _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list luv-main@lists.luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main

Well they say to walk a mile in another man's shoes, is to acquire understanding; and as some wag suggested, at worst you have another pair of shoes !
The version I heard is that before you criticise someone you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticise them you'll be a mile away, and you'll have their shoes. James

On 28/09/11 10:03, Rohan McLeod wrote:
The letter is of course a 'form letter' identical to the one I received;
Linux Australia have put a more positive spin on it.. http://www.zdnet.com.au/linux-aus-may-have-a-case-on-win-8-accc-339323233.ht... cheers, Chris -- Chris Samuel : http://www.csamuel.org/ : Melbourne, VIC

Chris Samuel wrote
Linux Australia have put a more positive spin on it..
http://www.zdnet.com.au/linux-aus-may-have-a-case-on-win-8-accc-339323233.ht...
"The Act also allows an affected party to take their own legal action for a breach of the Act. You may wish to seek legal advice on the possibility of taking your own action in this circumstance," the regulator added....... ........................... don't know why I didn't think of it earlier :- |
regards Rohan McLeod
participants (6)
-
Chris Samuel
-
James Harper
-
Luke Martinez
-
Rick Moen
-
Rohan McLeod
-
stripes theotoky