Jan. 26 2002

MSFT  $63.86 B.G.  $41.6B 02.01.25. Thanks to BillG Networth.

ABCNews Tech
BetaNews.Com
CNN Computing
Infoworld
LinuxNews
MacOS Rumors
NewsNow UK
News.com
The Register
Slashdot
SJ Mercury
Techweb
Wired News
ZDNet News

SPONSORED BY:

COURT NOTES: Over the last seven months, Microsoft has pulled victory from the jaws of defeat in the antitrust trial. Back in June, you may recall, the U.S. Court of Appeals panel in Washington, D.C. threw out half of Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's original ruling in the case [see Jun. 30, 2001]. The half they dismissed was the conclusion of law, basically the part of his ruling that determined what laws Microsoft had broken through its behavior. The behavior part of the ruling, wherein Jackson ruled on what Microsoft had actually done, was left alone.
The case was then returned to the district court level in order to find a new conclusion of law. A new judge, 5 year district court veteran Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, was appointed to oversee the retrial since Jackson had already stepped down from the case and was all but disqualified by the appeals court ruling. The new judge wasted no time and shortly after her appointment to the case demanded that the two sides again go behind closed doors and work "24 hours a day, seven days a week" until a settlement could be reached.
Only hours before the judge's November 2nd deadline, the Department of Justice and Microsoft finally did reach a settlement - but not one that will satisfy many people, particularly the ones reading this report. The proposed settlement, which Microsoft and the government both agreed on to end the case, will overall do little (at best) to change anything about Microsoft's dominant position over the computer industry. The proposal calls for The Behemoth to disclose several protocols that make its own servers work better with Windows than with other systems, to stop retaliating against computer manufacturers who support competing products, to license Windows evenly to every company, and "refrain from contracts that force other companies to do its bidding." These are all good ideas, of course, but it will be toothless once Microsoft's lawyers have picked it apart like they did with one signed in 1994. Several of the corrected issues are no longer relevant to the industry anyway and do nothing to correct the damage Microsoft did to competitors like Netscape by using those tactics in the past.
However, having the plaintiff and defendant agreeing on a settlement does not inherently mean the case is over. The deal still has to be approved by Judge Kollar-Kotelly, who is legally required by the Tunney Act to give the general public a 60 day period of comment before agreeing to the settlement agreement. That gets us down to the purpose of this update - that 60 day period ends on Monday, January 28, and we need to contact the Department of Justice to make sure this weak, toothless, useless deal never gets approval.

We apologize for not sending this out earlier, but this alert can still be effective if you send a comment in by early Monday morning. We realize some subscribers who get the newsletter at their workplace won't see this until the time is up, but some of you will get it before then so we're taking the chance. It is of course too late to send anything through traditional mail, so you have to e-mail the DoJ to voice your opinion. We don't have a sample message here for you to use as a template, but there are several examples in the Slashdot link below under 'Also See' if you need any help.
Please e-mail your comments to microsoft.atr@usdoj.gov with the subject 'Microsoft Settlement'. Thanks in advance for your help, efforts that hopefully will make an impact and not be for naught.
ALSO SEE: News.com, News.com, News.com, Slashdot