Povestea unei mici Afaceri Microsoft în Rusia cîștigă Premiul Pulizer

În anul 2010 doi reporteri americani au calatorit de mai multe ori in Rusia si au scris mai multe articole despre abuzurile extreme pe care Microsoft le facea în asociere cu avocați corupti și cu Poliția din Rusia, împotriva ONG urilor care se opuneau politicilor și metodelor folosite de Putin și în general de administrația sa.

Abuzurile facute de Microsoft in Rusia reprezinta un fel de glumă în comparație cu abuzurile făcute de Microsoft în România în asociere cu MAI – SRI – DNA și companiile ’protejate’ de către Maior, Coldea, Ghiță, Koveși și mulți alții.

Cei doi jurnaliști de investigații au primit în anul 2011 rîvnitul premiu Pulitzer, în timp ce în România toată lumea ridica osanale companiei Microsoft și asociaților acesteia (Irina Socol, Sebastian Ghiță, Claudiu Florică, Dinu Pescariu, Gabriel Sandu, etc.).

Iată ce articole, care au devenit carte premiată Pulitzer, scriau cei doi jurnaliști americani Clifford J. Levy și Ellen Barry de la The New York Times în anul 2010 :

May 17, 2010 In Culture of Graft and Impunity, Russian Journalists Pay in Blood
June 3, 2010 A Killing Cries Out for Justice, And Russia Turns a Deaf Ear
July 3, 2010 Russian Mayor Irks Security Agency, and Suffers
July 27, 2010 Videos Rouse Russian Anger Toward Police
September 11, 2010 Using Microsoft, Russia Suppresses Dissent
November 15, 2010 In Russian Justice, the Jury Is Something to Work Around
December 10, 2010 In Siberia Race, Ruling Party Uses Clenched Fist
December 22, 2010 After Death in Russian Prison, Inquiry Doors Open and Shut
December 27, 2010 In Murder of Rights Advocate, Russia Goes in Pursuit of Critic

Președintele Microsoft Brad Smith a reacționat la primul articol din NYT

13 Septembrie 2009 – Brad Smith, Vicepresedinte Microsoft, scrie pe blog: “O relatare in editia de ieri a New York Times[1] prezinta actiuni de lupta antipiraterie din Rusia, care au fost desfasurate cu scopuri regretabile, altele decat protectia drepturilor de proprietate intelectuala. In calitate de consilier general (juridic, n.n.) al Microsoft, nu a fost genul de articol care sa ma faca sa ma simt bine. Descrie cazuri in care autoritatile au folosit acuzele de piraterie a software-ului Microsoft pentru a confisca calculatoare si a hartui organizatii neguvernamentale si alte entitati care desfasoara activitati pe scena politica. Este de asemenea sugerat ca au existat cazuri in care implicarea propriilor nostri consilieri din firme de avocatura a inrautatit, mai degraba, situatia, in loc sa rezolve problemele. Oricare ar fi circumstantele cazurilor particulare prezentate in New York Times, vrem sa fie clar ca respingem in mod categoric orice încercare de a folosi drepturile de proprietate intelectuală în scop de susţinere politică sau pentru câştig individual. Încercăm să eliminăm orice îndemnuri şi capabilităţi de a ne angaja într-un astfel de comportament. Primul nostru pas este foarte clar. Trebuie să acceptăm responsabilitatea şi să ne asumăm răspunderea pentru eforturile noastre anti-piraterie, incluzând cele bune şi cele rele. Respingem fără echivoc orice încercare de a folosi drepturile de proprietate intelectuală în scop de susţinere politică sau pentru câştig individual. Încercăm să eliminăm orice îndemnuri şi capabilităţi de a ne angaja într-un astfel de comportament.”[2]

ATENȚIE JURNALIȘTI ROMÂNI !

 Avînd în vedere că pentru Premiul Pulitzer nu trebuie să fiți cetățeni americani, puteți lua la cunoștință probele legal constituite la dosarul cauzei 85/P/2011, și puteți lucra în echipă pentru a scrie cartea Afacerea Microsoft (Fujitsu Siemes – EADS).

 

Premiul Pulitzer este GARANTAT !

“Since citizenship is not required in the Journalism competition and in the History category, the Pulitzer board does not require disclosure of citizenship status in those categories (see form: http://www.pulitzer.org/files/en… ).”

“For the Journalism competition, entrants may be of any nationality but work must have appeared in a U.S. newspaper published at least once a week, on a newspaper’s Web site” or on an online news organization’s Web site.” https://www.quora.com/How-many-non-Americans-have-won-a-Pulitzer-prize-in-journalism

Pentru început – Cît tupeu are Microsoft și Comisia UE… fără număr

Microsoft Total Deceive – 13 September 2009 – Microsoft President Brad Smith: “A story in yesterday’s New York Times[3] reports on anti-piracy enforcement actions in Russia that have been used for more nefarious purposes than protecting intellectual property rights. As General Counsel for Microsoft, it was not the type of story that felt good to read. It described instances in which authorities had used piracy charges concerning Microsoft software to confiscate computers and harass non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and others engaged in public advocacy.

It suggested that there had been cases when our own counsel at law firms had failed to help clear things up and had made matters worse instead. Whatever the circumstances of the particular cases the New York Times described, we want to be clear that we unequivocally abhor any attempt to leverage intellectual property rights to stifle political advocacy or pursue improper personal gain. We are moving swiftly to seek to remove any incentive or ability to engage in such behavior. Our first step is clear-cut. We must accept responsibility and assume accountability for our anti-piracy work, including the good and the bad. At this point some of the specific facts are less clear than we would like. We will retain an international law firm that has not been involved in the anti-piracy work to conduct an independent investigation, report on its conclusions, and advise us of new measures we should take.”[4]

OLAF Final Report OF/2010/0068 of 25 August 2014 “Indeed, in the context of the judicial investigations initiated in Romania (2004), RSC argued for its defense that the delivered softwares had been designed autonomously by RSC, in particular on the basis of source codes and applications provided for free by MICROSOFT CORPORATION, owner of NAVISION 3.60.” […](II) MICROSOFT never had legal, commercial or professional relations with RSC as from 2000 (cf. annex No 2: letter of 31 January 2014 received by OLAF from MICROSOFT CORPORATION);”

OLAF did not have the competence to investigate Microsoft regarding their relationships with RSC as long as the competence to investigate laid with the national DNA.

On 29 March 2016 at DNA, Microsoft General Director for South-Eastern Europe Silviu Hotaran declares in front of Mihaiela Moraru Iorga “I asked Ovidiu Artpolescu (Director General Microsoft Romania) to take measures (28 June 2005) with regards to the participation of Ionuț Lopătan (Microsoft Evangelist) in the said procedures[5] (regarding the criminal investigations in the Case 85/P/2011 and OF/2005/0417 – OF/2010/0068)”.

It took DNA more than 11 (eleven) years in order to ask Microsoft whether they knew that they have been participating in their own frauds and to thus contradict the OLAF’s findings based on the false statements made by Microsoft, Police of Bucharest, SRI, DNA, DG ELARG, DG COMP, DG MARKT, others.

NB – Companies and people who did not participate during the Barroso tenure in the massive and extensive networks of fraud of billions of euro of the Union’s funds and projects, thus conducted and enforced by Microsoft in our specific cases, were judicially framed up and exterminated by means of denigration, terror and economic attrition in close association with corrupt and/or incompetent high level Commission officials. Discreet torture, terror and assassination have been the means employed by the Romanian authorities in order to comply with the Commission – OLAF and Microsoft expectations.

 

 

 

 

 

[1] http://www.windowsitpro.com/article/paul-thurrotts-wininfo/New-York-Times-Accuses-Microsoft-of-Colluding-with-Russian-Government-125933

[2] http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_blog/archive/2010/09/13/anti-piracy-enforcement-and-ngos.aspx

[3] http://www.windowsitpro.com/article/paul-thurrotts-wininfo/New-York-Times-Accuses-Microsoft-of-Colluding-with-Russian-Government-125933

[4] http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_blog/archive/2010/09/13/anti-piracy-enforcement-and-ngos.aspx

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/world/series/abovethelaw/index.html

[5] Dragos Riscanu at DNA in confrontation with Silviu Hotaran: „From Şerban Ghenea (Omnis General Director) I understood that Ionuț Lopătan is the technical director at Microsoft and because I considered that he is in a conflict of interests, I asked him to refrain from representing RSC in this procedure. I asked him this, because following the signing of the protocol, Mr. Ionuț Lopătan would have received unrestricted access to the source code of Omnis Grup SRL and to the technological secrets, in the context that at that time Microsoft was in competition with Omnis Group SRL on the software platforms market for the business applications (SaaS/CLOUD/EAS/ERP) and ISIS.NET and Navision 3.60 respectively.  Ionuț Lopătan refused to retire and signed the protocol. Given that Omnis Group SRL was under a contractual engagement with Microsoft with regards to the RNT project (the national traumatology network) and there were 2 contracts, of which one was a confidential contract signed with Microsoft, represented by Ovidiu Artopolescu, submitted with the case file, in order to avoid a possible confrontation with Microsoft, given the general situation caused by ORDA and the Bucharest Police, I phoned Ovidiu Artopolescu General Manager of Microsoft Romania several times , that day. Because Ovidiu Artopolescu did not answer my call, I called Hotăran Silviu, with whom I had and still have very good communication relationships, who at that moment was Director at Microsoft for the Southeast Europe. Hotăran Silviu answered my call and I informed him of the situation and he promised me he would talk to Ovidiu Artopolescu to solve the problem.”