Open Source, Closed Markets

Friday, April 13, 2007
John Berthoud of the National Taxpayers Union has a piece in today’s Washington Examiner about the battle between Microsoft and the European Commission. Berthoud writes that it is part of a larger “anti-American” program, and “another example of old-guard European protectionism.”

Berthoud writes, “The EC’s actions against Microsoft are not isolated. It has acted against other American businesses as well. For instance, in 2001 the EC blocked General Electric’s planned acquisition of Honeywell. Assistant U.S. Attorney General Charles A. James said at the time that the EC’s decision ‘reflects a significant point of diversion’ with U.S. American antitrust regulators.”

It’s true that Microsoft isn’t the only target, although it is the one of the biggest and perhaps the most significant in the digital realm. It seems that any American company that successfully innovates and offers a valuable product can be threatened by EU regulators. The Commission has launched an investigation against Apple for potential violations of EU law, by selling music for different prices in different countries.

Berthoud gives the following advice to the EU, “Rather than try to stifle American innovation, perhaps Europe should focus more on encouraging homegrown entrepreneurial advances to vie with U.S companies.”

But it seems pretty clear that in the case of operating systems and software, the EU has chosen its horse to favor: open source. Next week we’ll examine some of the claims of superiority that might be influencing the EU’s adoption of open source software.
Bookmark Open Source, Closed Markets  at del.icio.us Digg Open Source, Closed Markets Bloglines Open Source, Closed Markets Technorati Open Source, Closed Markets Bookmark Open Source, Closed Markets  at YahooMyWeb Bookmark Open Source, Closed Markets  at Furl.net Bookmark Open Source, Closed Markets  at reddit.com Bookmark Open Source, Closed Markets  with wists Bookmark using any bookmark manager!

The 100-Mile Suit

Friday, April 13, 2007
In the film The Pursuit of Happyness (review here), there’s a scene where Will Smith’s character arrives late for an interview with a stock brokerage firm and has no shirt on. The conversation goes like this:

Martin Frohm: What would you say if man walked in here with no shirt, and I hired him? What would you say?

Christopher Gardner: He must have had on some really nice pants.


Well, what would you say if you interviewed someone and they wore a suit looking like this?

Aaron Igler shows off the suit to thunderous applause. Photo: Paul Adams

This is the end result of a project undertaken by Kelly Cobb, an educator and designer at Drexel University. The task was to try and create a suit using only materials and workers within a 100-mile radius. Here’s the full story from Wired (HT: Mises Economics Blog).

As the piece relates, “Cobb’s locally made suit turned into a exhausting task. The suit took a team of 20 artisans several months to produce -- 500 man-hours of work in total -- and the finished product wears its rustic origins on its sleeve.”

Seriously, it looks like an Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer suit or something. The exercise is really an object lesson in “the massive manufacturing power of the global economy.”

For most of us, that’s a good thing. Others, though, might think that “how far removed we are from what we wear” is an overwhelmingly negative feature of modern existence.

But if nothing else, the 100-mile suit should offend your aesthetic, if not your moral, sensibilities.
Bookmark The 100-Mile Suit  at del.icio.us Digg The 100-Mile Suit Bloglines The 100-Mile Suit Technorati The 100-Mile Suit Bookmark The 100-Mile Suit  at YahooMyWeb Bookmark The 100-Mile Suit  at Furl.net Bookmark The 100-Mile Suit  at reddit.com Bookmark The 100-Mile Suit  with wists Bookmark using any bookmark manager!