Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Microsoft's Lobbying In Massachusetts

Posted by kdawson on Mon Dec 04, 2006 01:26 PM
from the schmandards dept.
Andy Updegrove writes "Carol Sliwa at ComputerWorld has posted two excellent stories just now on ODF in Massachusetts, based on over 300 emails secured under the Massachusetts Public Records Law (the local analogue of the Federal Freedom of Information Act). The longer and more intriguing article focuses on Microsoft's lobbying efforts in Massachusetts, and confirms, as I reported last week, that Microsoft lobbyist Brian Burke was spearheading an effort to bring pressure on the state's Information Technology Division (ITD) by promoting an amendment that would have taken away much of the ITD's power to make technology policy. The article goes on to describe the back-channel negotiations between State CIO Louis Gutierrez and Microsoft's Alan Yates, and the way that Microsoft played the lobbying card throughout those discussions in an effort to protect its wildly profitable Office software franchise against potential erosion by competing products that support ODF." Andy has a blog entry on the lobbying effort.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] MS Anti-ODF Lobbyist Named As MA Tech Advisor 170 comments
Andy Updegrove writes "For the last year and a half, Massachusetts has been a battleground between Microsoft, on the one hand, and IBM, Sun and open standards advocates on the other over the state's plans to implement ODF. That effort has sparked similar initiatives around the world that threaten to erode Microsoft's multi-billion dollar profits on Office software. Now, we have a new governor set to take office, and observers are waiting to see if he will continue to support ODF like his predecessor, or back off in favor of Microsoft Office. Last week, Governor-Elect Deval Patrick named a new transition advisory group to make recommendations on the state's IT structure, and one of the eight members he appointed was none other than the Microsoft lobbyist that has been leading the charge to not only defeat ODF in the Bay State, but to gut the power of the State's CIO and Information Technology Division as well. Not a good sign of independence from special interests for an administration that has yet to even take office."
[+] Texas Bill For Open Documents 197 comments
Ditesh Kumar tips us to a blog entry by Sam Hiser noting a bill filed in Texas that would require state agencies to conduct their work in an open document format. After Microsoft's grueling battle against ODF in Massachusetts, bluest of blue states, it must be galling to face te same fight in the reddest of the red. Hiser notes that the bill includes a rigorous and sound definition of an open document format, which ODF would meet but Microsoft's current OOXML submission would not.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 04 2006, @01:29PM (#17102038)
    far to many re-defining words in todays world

    s/lobbying/bribing

    s/pretexting/lying

  • Moral (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 04 2006, @01:29PM (#17102040)
    Any supplier that makes enough to pay a full time lobbyist is overcharging.
    • by Mateo_LeFou (859634) on Monday December 04 2006, @01:54PM (#17102392) Homepage
      It takes a lot of energy to convince people that using open, standard formats to store files somehow gives "preferential treatment for specific vendor products"
      • by genooma (856335) on Monday December 04 2006, @03:31PM (#17103862)

        It takes a lot of energy to convince people that using open, standard formats to store files somehow gives "preferential treatment for specific vendor products"
        "energy", what a strange way of spelling money.
    • Re:Reality Check (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mpapet (761907) on Monday December 04 2006, @03:40PM (#17103998) Homepage
      I don't normally reply to AC's but it got modded insightful for no good reason and saddens me because it suggests there is way too much ignorance on the issue.

      In my limited experience working on the contractor side of gov't projects, I promise you lobbying of all kinds is done for every single expenditure. Standard Operating Procedure.

      I don't know how much of it is legal versus illegal, but this is an excellent example of how gov't IT expenditures really work. Nearly all of the decision making is done via back channels, then the appropriate public documentation is created and the money is spent.

      If there was ever a better application of the term "textbook case" I cannot think of it.
  • Of a dying company?
  • by PHAEDRU5 (213667) <instascreed&gmail,com> on Monday December 04 2006, @01:35PM (#17102110) Homepage
    Long ago I remember a Microsoft that had nothing but contempt for the political process. A Microsoft that intended to dominate the market through mass, vendor lockout, FUD, giving stuff away, etc.

    You know, the Microsoft that got sued.

    Having learned the lesson that ignoring politicians is not good for your health, is it any wonder that Microsoft is lobbying as hard as it can?

    Good luck to them. I'll be happy to see them take their lumps when they screw up their technology badly enough that the world moves en masse to something better. Meanwhile, I'm smirking at the do-gooders and busybodies who are being hoisted on their own petards.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 04 2006, @01:48PM (#17102284)
      I'll be happy to see them take their lumps when they screw up their technology badly enough that the world moves en masse to something better.


      I hope you're prepared for disappointment, because it's on the way. No matter what Microsoft does, they always win. Even the worst of their worst (WinME?) or the EU fines didn't even put a dent in their operations and profits.

      It's like the dreamers claiming that "Nobody wants Vista" or "MS miscalculated this time!", and "Who needs to 'upgrade' to Vista?"...the same shit was said about every other Windows release, yet each very quickly became the new standard.

      If Microsoft shipped shrink wrapped boxes of horse shit they'd still dominate. Yay.
        • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward
          If Microsoft shipped shrink wrapped boxes of horse shit they'd still dominate. Yay.
          When Microsoft ships shrink wrapped boxes of horse shit they still dominate. Yay.
          There, I fixed that for you.

          Microsoft ships shrink wrapped boxes of horse shit and they still dominate. Yay.

          It needed still more fixing.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Meanwhile, I'm smirking at the do-gooders and busybodies who are being hoisted on their own petards.

      And ultimately, the taxpayers of Massachusetts may be hoisted along with them.

    • The legal front is another and more dangerous front in the war against MS. Overall it was a great front to open up and they have been steadly loosing there. Company after company has gotten hundreds of millions of dollars from MS. This is a war that MS doesn't know how to fight very well as evidenced by their steady stream of losses.

      Every penny MS spends paying lawyers and paying penalties is a penny they are not spending on engineering, design, or bribing politicians.

      In the long run opening up the legal fr
      • Wow! (Score:3, Insightful)

        If I have the right take on you, you're from a country famed in the past for its tolerance.

        I see now that your new Muslim Overlords are changing the tenor of discourse in the Netherlands. Instead of live and let live, it's a slit throat and knife in the chest for Theo van Gogh, and nukes for Microsoft.

        Nice.
  • by Guppy06 (410832) on Monday December 04 2006, @01:46PM (#17102264) Journal
    " Microsoft lobbyist Brian Burke was spearheading an effort to bring pressure on the state's Information Technology Division (ITD) by promoting an amendment that would have taken away much of the ITD's power to make technology policy."

    So, instead of spending time and money on making a better product, Microsoft decides to spend it on removing the power of choice from potential consumers? It's beginning to seem like the only products actually available in a free market here are the legislators themselves.

    If Office is so good, why is Microsoft so afraid?
    • by tokul (682258) on Monday December 04 2006, @01:57PM (#17102458)
      If Office is so good, why is Microsoft so afraid?
      OpenOffice might be good enough and has lower price tag.
    • by tbradshaw (569563) on Monday December 04 2006, @03:33PM (#17103882) Homepage
      So perhaps it's futile, but I have to mention that this isn't capitalism. It's corporatism or "crony capitalism". Capitalism doesn't involve lobbying for government assistance. Lobbying could be seen as a "short cut" to avoid having to deal with the market pressures of capitalism.
    • It never fails that those who criticize "Capitalism" are always actually criticizing the lack of Capitalism. Monopolization is the opposite of Capitalism.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        "It never fails that those who criticize "Capitalism" are always actually criticizing the lack of Capitalism. Monopolization is the opposite of Capitalism."

        First off, you're assuming that I didn't recognize this, even though I pointed out the lack of any sort of free market thanks to lobbying.

        However, beyond that, you're assuming that monopolization has nothing to do with capitalism, denying that a monopoly (or at least an oligopoly) might simply be the natural outcome of a capitalistic market with no stat
    • Yeah, but Bill Gates is giving all his money to charity, so that makes it okay.
  • I remember there was a lot of effort put into ODF, then there was a change of political leaders in Massachusetts, and then .. I can't remember - did they scrap whole project, or not?

    What is the current state of Massachusetts switch?
  • Fourteenth! (After half an hour on Slashdot). Woot!

    Seriously, is this really surprising to anyone? I guess I'd be more interested to know who's pimping the blogger who spends so much valuable free time following this minutiae. (I only wish someone followed FEDERAL requisition contracts with as much interest.)
  • Wasn't there an article recently about Gates for President??? I think MSFT is attacking on several fronts now...
  • by arthurpaliden (939626) on Monday December 04 2006, @02:02PM (#17102552)
    Why do tech companies that work with OSS not insist on resumes only in ODF. Gently force the issue. After all other companies only accept DOC.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Why not skip all this formatting crud and simply ask for ASCII. That way, the document is already in an easily parsed format and allows the employer to use search functions and keywords to identify potential interviewees.
      • They won't go back to just ASCII because PHBs like to read pretty paper resumes, and print them out for interviews. Not that writing a parser to make a pretty, readable resume would be that difficult, but switching to ASCII might end up being too big of a "shock" for the people who do the hiring process.
    • Well, they can all take PDFs whether they say it or not. If they say they can't open the files (and they're valid PDFs), they're probably not worth working for (HR is bad enough at its best).
  • I agree! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Darlantan (130471) on Monday December 04 2006, @02:20PM (#17102790)
    We can't possibly let these "information technology" people decide what to do with our inter-nets resources. They obviously don't understand the critical nature of how this technology works. Why, just this Friday I sent an email to one of my contacts in the state government there, and their internets were so clogged that it still hasn't arrived. If they can't keep their system of tubes clean, how can we possibly expect them to make good decisions about what prograpplications are wise to run on their computers?

    Sincerely,
    Sen. Stevens.
  • At least groklaw claims it's related.

    http://groklaw.net/ [groklaw.net]
  • ...between 2 warring states, not what ends up being a feature request from a customer to their vendor.

    This is why Microsoft must be crushed, for no other reason than the "we know better what you need than you do" mentality that this just exemplifies. You do not continue doing business with clients being a jackass in any other position than that of MONOPOLY.
    • Re:Usability???? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by arthurpaliden (939626) on Monday December 04 2006, @01:57PM (#17102436)
      ODF is a data format definition not an application. It does not have usabilitiy issues, applications do.
    • by tjwhaynes (114792) on Monday December 04 2006, @01:57PM (#17102440)
      I am more interested to see if the ODF have addressed the usability issues which were raised.

      ODF (Open Document) does not have usability issues. Period. It is a document format, nothing more. Now if you are talking about OpenOffice.org, AbiWord, KOffice, the next version of Wordperfect or any of the word processes/document systems that support ODF, then you might have a point. All the talk of ODF having usability issues is just the sound of FUD smacking the media around. Accessibility for the disabled should ultimately be superior with the ODF format because it is a completely open, machine readable format and therefore should be easily transformed into what ever media is required for disabled access (Large Print, audio - speech and speech recognition, braille, etc.).

      Cheers,
      Toby Haynes

      • by Mateo_LeFou (859634) on Monday December 04 2006, @02:00PM (#17102496) Homepage
        heh. you took the words out of my mouth.

        In related news, has anyone fixed the usability issues that Dvorak discovered for us in CSS?
        • You're right, there is a problem with macros embedded in documents. They should be taken out and shot at dawn, the corpses thrown to the dogs, and the offal from the dogs buried in the deepest pit in Hell.

          Separation of code from content is a key component of sound security. Not to mention that it's just good design practice.

          It's not that hard to grasp, is it?
    • Re:haha (Score:4, Insightful)

      by MaWeiTao (908546) on Monday December 04 2006, @02:20PM (#17102796)
      Why does M$ think they can mess with everything? Or do they just want are money?

      What? You mean unlike every other major corporation on Earth?

      Companies want to do whatever they like unimpeded and what they like to do is earn as much of our money as possible and control as much of their respective markets as they can. But to disparage Microsoft like this is somehow unique to them is a bit foolish. Right now Microsoft draws all the ire. Someday it will be someone like Google or Apple.

      I'm not necessarily defending Microsoft. I'm just trying to point out what I feel are childish perceptions some people have of companies. How people can go to absurd lengths to put one company on a pedestal, Apple is one of the first examples to come to mind, and then go to the most absurd lengths to bash a company Microsoft. Look at Sony. Imagine what people would think about Apple if they had 80% or 90% marketshare. Would Apple also be sued by various nations for including Quicktime, Mail and Safari with OS X? And lets see how people feel about Google in 10 years.
    • by theshowmecanuck (703852) on Monday December 04 2006, @02:24PM (#17102860) Journal

      So lobbying isn't new. So what. Just because the article lambastes Microsoft for lobbying doesn't mean it is flamebait, nor does it mean that the article is wrong. I could understand your angst if you were complaining that there are no articles on the net attacking other companies' lobbying efforts as being bad (like for instance, when you google for 'haliburton and lobbying'). I could also understand you being angry if perhaps you had previously, in this forum, tried to point our attention to lobbyists from other companies who were trying to create vendor lock-in in public/government sectors and were rebuffed.

      Lobbying is shite pure and simple. This story is an example of lobbying and conflict of interest in the technical/computer world. Seeing as how this is a forum on technical and computer related topics, it works here. So maybe you should have titled your post "This post is flamebait"... and I shouldn't have bit. Ahh well... can't help my nature.

      • Damn Straight (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Greyfox (87712) on Monday December 04 2006, @03:55PM (#17104206) Homepage Journal
        Companies lobbying the government subvert democracy. That works when the taxpayers aren't paying attention but the country seems to be getting irritable about all the corruption at this point. I'm thinking news story about any law being made should mention how much money the sponsoring Congessmen get from the industry lobbies the bill helps out. Then you could say something like "Ted Stevens tried to attach a rider to the budget bill to the budget proposal again. Sen. Stevens has received $372,140 from oil and gas companies over the course of his career (According to opensecrets.org. [opensecrets.org])" I think there'd be far fewer shennanigans if news stories took that tone. I think it'd be better still if lobbying and riders were outlawed outright but then Congress wouldn't be able to get their piggy fingers on any of that pie. And Congress does like their pie...
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      The model corporation for leftists? It seems to me that they might have been considered a triumph of capitalism and the free market before all these anti-trust issues. Now they're a perfect case for people who want government intervention in the market.

      The unfortunate thing is that, whenever the current US government gets into managing things, they seem to go wherever the money is. Lobbyists have too much influence, and they're good at what they do, so whoever is paying the most for lobbyists is likely

      • The unfortunate thing is that, whenever the current US government gets into managing things, they seem to go wherever the money is. Lobbyists have too much influence, and they're good at what they do, so whoever is paying the most for lobbyists is likely to come out on top. Therefore, government intervention tends to take the form of things like the DMCA instead of meaningful anti-trust actions.

        I know people are still going for all it's worth to try to assign charges of corruption to the US government, Bush, Republicans, and/or the US population in general, but pointed qualifiers such as "the current US government" are unnecessarily restrictive. Your statement holds true for all governments, everywhere, always. To claim otherwise is disingenuous and only exposes your blinders.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      The anti-trust case was not about companies "moaning about getting their asses kicked", it was about Microsoft breaking the law. If other companies had been permitted to ignore competition law, Microsoft would be long dead; Gates was a successful criminal but a mediocre businessman.

      > Now, congratulations, people. You've awakened a sleeping giant.

      Sorry, I don't see what basis a software vendor has to lobby against a document format chosen in the public interest. Microsoft are free to support ODF or not, a
      • You know what the most ironic thing you have assumed about me is?

        I despise Microsoft. Not because it is "the cool thing to do." Because I think they make a shitty product.

        Just because the other team scores a touchdown doesn't mean that I cannot say it was a good play.
        • I know what youa re going to say, How can I say it was a good play if I think they make a shitty product?

          Because a vast majority of people obviously DO NOT CARE that microsoft does what it does. If they did care, Macs would have a larger market share. Linux would have a larger market share. Microsoft is very slowly losing ground, but again, they didn't put themselves there. The public did. Now, the public didn't tell them to break laws, but the public did indeed make them big enough to become the monop
          • And they did that how?

            Explain your analogy to me. How has Microsoft's shady buisness practices DIRECTLY affected Mac, or Linux, or OS/2, or any of the other OS choices out there? If anything, those companies should be HAPPY! Microsoft's greed is starting to bite them in the ass, and more people are shifting to OSX and to Linux. Apple and co. should be ENCOURAGING microsoft to continue shooting themselvse in the foot.

            If you are going to say that it harmed them because it made it harder to gain traction i