Comments on: Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC): Got Microsoft? http://techrights.org/2009/03/19/epic-microsoft-ray-ozzie/ Free Software Sentry – watching and reporting maneuvers of those threatened by software freedom Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:00:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2009/03/19/epic-microsoft-ray-ozzie/comment-page-1/#comment-60706 Roy Schestowitz Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:04:39 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2009/03/19/epic-microsoft-ray-ozzie/#comment-60706 I never really thought that Microsoft was the motor here, unlike, for example, the report cited at the beginning of this post (coalition created by Microsoft). That's why I chose the heading with a question mark. I still worry somewhat about Microsoft's Chris Wilson in W3C. Nokia and Apple have not helped OGG so much, either. Microsoft's Window Snyder recently left Firefox, which is generally doing great work to promote OGG. I think Christopher Blizzard is the reason for this. I never really thought that Microsoft was the motor here, unlike, for example, the report cited at the beginning of this post (coalition created by Microsoft). That’s why I chose the heading with a question mark.

I still worry somewhat about Microsoft’s Chris Wilson in W3C. Nokia and Apple have not helped OGG so much, either. Microsoft’s Window Snyder recently left Firefox, which is generally doing great work to promote OGG. I think Christopher Blizzard is the reason for this.

]]> By: Michael Tiemann http://techrights.org/2009/03/19/epic-microsoft-ray-ozzie/comment-page-1/#comment-60705 Michael Tiemann Fri, 20 Mar 2009 12:24:43 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2009/03/19/epic-microsoft-ray-ozzie/#comment-60705 I hope I don't regret saying this, but I don't believe that EPIC has been corrupted by Microsoft to be an anti-Google entity. EPIC (and the EFF) both have a very clear and strong privacy-rights platform, and I don't think that either are anti-Google per se. Google's sheer size and influence can create the privacy-rights equivalent of a gravitational black-hole whereby what would be acceptable practice by a smaller organization becomes unacceptable when practiced on Google-scale, but I believe that EPIC (and the EFF) are positioned to protect people against *behaviors*, not *companies*. I see this as quite different than pure proxy plays, where an organization is so obviously beholden to advocate for a sponsor's policy position that they will advocate against the interests of the public in order to serve their private masters. I am not convinced that EPIC is even close to reaching that point with respect to their stance on Google or their dependence on Microsoft. But you are right to point out that we should watch for it, and you are right to point out that Microsoft's history of extreme self-interest is such that without rehabilitation, *any* association with *any* Microsoft executive or initiative is to be treated with the utmost suspicion. And certainly the daily examples you provide of Microsoft's continued bad behavior delays the day we can all mark the beginning of Microsoft's rehabilitation, so EPIC would do best to keep Microsoft at arms length. I hope I don’t regret saying this, but I don’t believe that EPIC has been corrupted by Microsoft to be an anti-Google entity. EPIC (and the EFF) both have a very clear and strong privacy-rights platform, and I don’t think that either are anti-Google per se. Google’s sheer size and influence can create the privacy-rights equivalent of a gravitational black-hole whereby what would be acceptable practice by a smaller organization becomes unacceptable when practiced on Google-scale, but I believe that EPIC (and the EFF) are positioned to protect people against *behaviors*, not *companies*.

I see this as quite different than pure proxy plays, where an organization is so obviously beholden to advocate for a sponsor’s policy position that they will advocate against the interests of the public in order to serve their private masters. I am not convinced that EPIC is even close to reaching that point with respect to their stance on Google or their dependence on Microsoft.

But you are right to point out that we should watch for it, and you are right to point out that Microsoft’s history of extreme self-interest is such that without rehabilitation, *any* association with *any* Microsoft executive or initiative is to be treated with the utmost suspicion. And certainly the daily examples you provide of Microsoft’s continued bad behavior delays the day we can all mark the beginning of Microsoft’s rehabilitation, so EPIC would do best to keep Microsoft at arms length.

]]>