On 2007-05-07, John Locke <johnlocke98513@xxxxxxxxxxx> claimed:
> On Mon, 07 May 2007 22:46:50 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
><newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>Teacher fined for Microsoft piracy
>>
>>,----[ Quote ]
>>| Putin has described the case as "utter nonsense" and former Soviet
>>| President Mikhail Gorbachev even asked Microsoft co-founder Bill
>>| Gates to intercede on the teacher's behalf.
>>`----
>>
>>http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/05/07/russia.microsoft.reut/index.html?eref=rss_tech
>>
>>
> "Ponosov, a headmaster in a remote school in the Perm region of the
> Ural mountains, said he did not know the computers had fake licenses
> when they were delivered by a sub-contractor."
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Wouldn't the sub-contractor be liable in this case ? I really don't
> understand this case at all.
MS always goes for the easy target, not always the guilty party:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/05/25/disabled_mother_of_four_beats/
http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/Disabled-mother-innocent-in-MS-piracy-case___.html
--
The brain of the average IE user. Divide by five for Outlook.
/
/
.
|
|
