*burying the lede (it’s a term from old press printing)
Comment on Welcome to the new world of risk: Microsoft cuts off services to energy company without notice
SheeEttin@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
In this instance, the cutoff was sought by the European Union (EU), in an attempt to pressure Russia to back off its assaults on Ukraine.
Really burying the lead there. They were shut off due to government sanctions, not arbitrarily by Microsoft.
PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
suigenerix@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Most style guides and standards accept either spelling, especially when writing for general audiences.
For strict, formal writing, “lede” is still preferred.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Most style guides and standards accept either spelling, especially when writing for general audiences.
Not everywhere is America.
PlutoniumAcid@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I agree with your statement and simultaneously find it hilarious thrt it is in response to a comment with an Australian link.
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
It’s burying the lead. As in, you put metal in the ground.
Empricorn@feddit.nl 3 weeks ago
Really, really dishonest to demonize Microsoft who are in the middle of this. And I say that as someone who hates Microsoft and most of what they do! But this was intentionally painful sanctions decided on by the governments of 27 member countries. 🤷♂️ Don’t sell to Russia…
Dreaming_Novaling@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
I think the main thing to focus on is govs should realize they need to ditch Windows, cause what’s stopping dumbass America (Tr*mp) from filling a sanction against a country he doesn’t like that week?
Bjonay@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Enforcing sanctions is not Microsoft’s purview though. Unless their TOS specifically cover rhis scenario, which I doubt.
The article implies Microsoft is prepared to admit breach of contract terms, rather than risk EU distrust (or further distrust, after the Khan/ICC debacle).
onslaught545@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
It is if they want to operate in the country imposing the sanctions.
Empricorn@feddit.nl 3 weeks ago
*27 countries
FooBarrington@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
“Sorry government, I can’t enforce your sanctions, my ToS don’t allow me”
Do you really think this works?
Bjonay@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
It’s the way it should work. A private company can only be compelled to enforce a government demand under due process of the applicable jurisdiction. Ensures trust through transparency.
If both US and EU foreign policy can dictate who suddenly gets cut off from Microsoft services, trust in those services will erode.
After denying Outlook access to Khan due to (non-judicial) US sanctions against the ICC, multiple European public and private orgs are implementing exit strategies from Microsoft and all providers with a US presence.
The reason leveraging Microsoft as a foreign policy weapon works is because they dominate the market, and Eorope have grown complacent since end of WW2. All thta seems to now be changing.
FooBarrington@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
It’s the way it should work. A private company can only be compelled to enforce a government demand under due process of the applicable jurisdiction. Ensures trust through transparency.
They are compelled to enforce a government demand under due process of the applicable jurisdiction. For a multinational corporation, the applicable jurisdiction are all the jurisdictions they operate in. Since multinational corporations exist to funnel profits into their host country, that country has the ability to compel them under due process in other countries.
You might argue that it’s not good for companies to be this large, and I’d agree. You might also argue that specific sanctions aren’t good, and I’d agree. But the idea that a companies ToS should supercede jurisdictions and that they shouldn’t be curtailed by the governments under which they operate is fundamentally corrosive to the concept of statehood.
Sanctions exist to restrict trade with other countries. This can’t work if companies can just ignore sanctions, and I don’t want e.g. european companies to ignore sanctions against Russia.
HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Which hits them harder it’s always just about the money. They won’t stop supporting genocide in other countries so fuck the capitalist pigs.
HelloHotel@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Enforcing sanctions is not Microsoft’s purview though.
that should be true, but for some reason, these companies are hiding their glee behind governments as they go above and beyond what the sanctions require.
fodor@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Your framing is inconsistent with the information provided in the story. Actually, I think your version is more deceptive than the original, although both could be made more transparent, too.
ByteJunk@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
49% owned by Rosneft while another 49% are owned by “UCP” (Russia’s United Capital partners). Basically a 100% russian refinery in India…