02.15.09
Gemini version available ♊︎Australian Government Probably Colludes with Microsoft
Thank Microsoft for all the “savings”
Microsoft appears to have just practiced what it internally calls “Project Marshall”, better known to many as “MOU”. This is a strategy which Microsoft uses to exclude competition from government contracts and it is arguably illegal. There was very scarce coverage of this in the press (such deals are intended to be kept largely secret), so we could only find this one article.
THE federal Government hopes to save at least $15 million per annum over four years through a new whole-of-government arrangement with Microsoft Australia.
The chorus here is similar to the one from Microsoft and BECTA [1, 2]. They only crow about how much they “save”, not how much of taxpayers’ money is spent on a convicted monopolist that further ties up national assets to itself. Australia is far from the only victim of such tactics, which may sometimes be assisted by shells like the Gates Foundation. █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
ram said,
February 15, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Ask any Australian businessman: How many government officials have you met that did NOT solicit for a backhander (bribe) on a procurement they controlled?
In most cases, after decades in business, most businessmen here can count the examples of noncorrupt officials on one hand.
I’ve done business all over Asia and West Africa, and the corruption level in Australia has definitely reached the Nigerian level. Nobody does anything without grease.
Linux will go nowhere in the Australian government until a big company that supplies ‘lots of grease’ lubricates the way in. Technical and performance arguments carry no weight here. It is strictly a ‘How can I help you if you do not help me?’ situation, particularly at the levels of Federal and State government procurements.
Roy Schestowitz said,
February 15, 2009 at 7:15 pm
Follow Quebec’s example and organise legal action against the culprits.
Chris Lees said,
February 17, 2009 at 4:01 am
Prove that there is anything wrong with this “arrangement”. You can’t. You don’t even know anything about the nature of the arrangement, but you’re still happy to claim that it’s illegal, monopolistic, and a waste of taxpayer’s money.
We have a saying on the Internet: Put up, or STFU.
Karsten said,
February 17, 2009 at 5:37 am
An American company gets into legal trouble when it bribes on foreign markets. Can you help me to find the link?