[63173] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Annoying dynamic DNS updates (was Re: someone from attbi please
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Sep 29 13:12:58 2003
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 10:07:21 -0700
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
To: Michael.Dillon@radianz.com, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <OF7D8888D0.EDE068C4-ON80256DB0.005C2A5F-80256DB0.005C5D47@radianz.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Micahel,
I think class action is a less effective approach here. Micr0$0ft has
vast resources ready to take on any large single lawsuit and make it a very
expensive and resource intensive process for their opposition. On the other
hand, with a low (around $25 last I looked) filing fee and virtually no
other
real costs involved, and, and expidited calendar (usually around 2-6 months
from filing to hearing), the small claims process looks much more attractive
as a method for dealing with this.
Think about Micr0$0ft trying to fight off thousands or better millions
of small claims cases all over the country. Even if Micr0$0ft wins every
one, they lose.
Owen
--On Monday, September 29, 2003 5:48 PM +0100 Michael.Dillon@radianz.com
wrote:
>
>>> It reminds me of the Netgear and U of Wisconsin time server SNAFU.
>>> http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~plonka/netgear-sntp/
>
>> The difference is that Netgear admitted responsibility and worked with
>> UW to cope with the issue. Further, Netgear has funded UW in it's
>> cleanup efforts and generally stepped up to the plate. As much as I
> don't
>> care for Netgear's products, they did show decent corporate
> responsibility
>> when UW was able to escalate to the appropriate management at Netgear.
>
> Sounds like a great example to put
> before the judge when you sue Microsoft.
> Can anyone say "class action"?
>
> --Michael Dillon
>
>
>
