Slashdot Mirror
Government Responds To Microsoft's Appeal Process
AftanGustur writes: "Just a day after Microsoft proposed a lengthy appeal process, the government has responded. The article has a lot of info on how [such] things are normally carried out. Saying that the government is not at all happy with Microsoft's idea is an understatement."
The government said Microsoft's proposal "is excessive and would delay resolution of this appeal unnecessarily."
Microsoft's proposal also far exceeds what would be considered standard procedure with the appeals court, say legal experts. "The normal statutory period would be 40, 30 and 15 days," said Andy Gavil, an antitrust professor at Howard University Law School. "That's what's normal under the federal rules of appellate procedure."
This begs the following questions : If you make a contract and then break it and are taken to court is the court case thrown out if the other party no longer exists by the time you get through the appeals process?
If you make many changes AFTER said wrong doing does it change the original charge, and should you not be charged with anything?
Can your changes be introduced as new evidence in an appeal?
This is a typical tatic from Microsoft. They got caught doing something wrong, and by using massive delay tatics blunt the prosecution. Technology moves much faster than the court system, and MS has hinted that this case is no longer relevant and should be let go. With this logic if you killed somone 5 years ago you shouldn't be prosecuted.
The sad thing is that MS should have taken the higher ground. Large companies like Intel and Cisco to name a few have changed some of their practices that were considered "anti-competitive". They are still large and thriving companies.
Some of the business practices of MS are the SAME practices that caused many workers to unionize during the industrial age. Long hours with no compensation, lack of insurance etc. Companies like Cisco doesn't hire tons of workers for 364 days and then drop them when it's time to start paying for health insurance. I think that the biggest danger to MS is if it's low level employees unionize. We are in a tight labor market, and a strike of some type would really hurt. Of course that would force MS to start treating it's employees with a modicum of respect.
"Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
What can the government actually do?
Is there anything the US government can do that MS can't just say 'bog off' to? If MS refuse to do whatever the government 'tell' them to presumeably they'll have to slap sales embargos on MS products
You're way off base here.
What can the government do if MS just decides to ignore them? They can send federal marshalls in to put chains on the entrances to all MS facilities and pull the plug on their internet and telephone connections. They can declare that the stock is split up into several companies and stockholders will wake up the next day with several baby bills replacing their MS stock in their portfolio, after fining the company down to the last farthing. They can haul Microsoft's corporate officers off to jail.
This is not going to happen (though 'tis a consumation devoutly to be wished) because if the court does order a breakup MS will comply. They are arrogant, but not stupid. The legal, political and law enforcement establishments will close rank against them if they try anything so brazen, the public and other governments around the world will support them. What they will try to do is to win their case in a more friendly court (best case for them) or to drag this out as long as possible causing as much political damage to their enemies as possible.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Heh...as much as I want to M$ broken up, I realize that it isn't going to happen anytime soon. The lawyers involved are enjoying being in the spotlight too much. So here is what I predict happening:
The lawyers from the govt & M$ argue for the next 6 months about the appeals process, then they decide on a 5 month appeal process.
Doh!
According to this wire story.
Bob Brammer, a spokesman for the Iowa Attorney General, said. "We are full partners and have full status as plaintiffs in the case, and we will continue the case."
Regarding M$ attempt to extend the appeals process, the CT AG said "Prolonging the (appeals) process creates additional cost, uncertainty and harm to consumers."
Work for Change & GET PAID!
This thing reminds me of the old show, Name that Tune.
MS: We can name that legal issue in 56,000 words.
DOJ: We can name that legal issue in 24,000 words.
MS: We can name that legal issue in 40,000 words.
DOJ: Wait a minute, you are suppose to go lower than us!
MS files another appeal with the judges to study the matter!
...Microsoft will use Word to produce it's briefs... I just wonder if they fixed that 'feature' in the word count where it didn't count the footnotes/endnotes.
I remember seeing an article a while back about this, and how one Appeals circut court said briefs couldn't be filed if they were written with Word because of said incorrectness of the word count.
Apparantly, those judges are right anal about how long legal briefs can be; supposedly they've rejected briefs that were one word over...
NecroPuppy
---
Godot called. He said he'd be late.
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
If Microsoft is forced to take an agreement they don't like, they'll simply move to another country. Then won't the Americans be sorry!
Unless they were to choose China they might as well give up. The moment they cease to be a US company it won't be the DOJ who will be after them it will be (at best) the CIA.
I know this is an obvious troll, but I'm bored.
... and well, He gets it!)
I can't see how Microsoft is a monopoly. There are plenty of other operating systems, word processors, e-mail programs. Hell, they don't even have an instant messenger monopoly!
First of all, it is a monopoly. Everyone knows that, everyone knew it, and everyone's fine with it. You're allowed to have monopolies in this country. The law allows it. What the law doesn't allow for (which the entire case is about, if you were following along?) is using your monopoly in one field to create a monopoly in another field. In Microsoft's case, they were using their Operating System monopoly (which is fine and good) to create a web browser monopoly.
Now, if they created a web browser monopoly through fair business practices, there would be no problem. If they just bided their time, and let Netscape vs. IE war on, until one was the winner, that'd be no problem. But once you start pushing your product to people, and not give them a choice, is when the DOJ steps in, and we have what we had here today (which is the way He wants it
The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure set forth in great detail the timetables for filing notices of appeal, serving demands for records, filing of initial, answer and reply briefs -- the whole smack. They spell out page limits to the word length (and no special treatment is made for the bug in Word that doesn't count words in footnotes).
While the Court may vary the rules on motion of the parties, such motions are highly disfavored, even when they are joinly made by the parties, and are generally denied.
It is strange that Microsoft feels it needs so much time to prepare, or that this case would be so unusual, after going to great lengths to deny the specialness of this case to the Supreme Court.