Appeals Court Denies Microsoft Request for Rehearing

An anonymous reader writes "CNN is reporting that Microsoft's request for a rehearing has been denied. The court will not reconsider if Microsoft acted illegally by commingling its software. The appeals court also rejected the government's request to speed up the hearing." I love the word "Commingling". I wish it meant something cooler then it does.

Comments

Re:I wonder if the injunction on XP is behind it a

[Masem]

There is as of yet no injunction for XP's release. Both the DOJ, the remaining 18 states, and EPIC are trying to get one placed before mid-late August, at which point MS is due to ship the XP master disks off to the OEMs for inclusions on new machines. No word yet on if any of these injunctions have been granted or denied yet.

There's a couple of thingsthat they can't dodge...

[Svartalf]

Being required to ship a functional version of Windows without IE commingled would be one.

They can't evade an injunction if the appeals court upholds it. It appears that the appeals court feels that MS is as guilty as a cat caught in a goldfish bowl and if Jackson hadn't acted the way he did and didn't hand down such an extreme remedy we'd be seeing them uphold all of the decision.

If they attempt to ship Windows with any injunctions against that act in place, the parties that did the act (from the decision makers all the way to the people carrying out the act) could face, at minimum, Contempt of Court charges, winning at least several months in Club Fed.

Remedy suggestions?

[bungalow]

Now that we have had some of the findings validated, but TPJ's remedies thrown out, What should the Remedy / Punishment be?

1) Big whoppin' fine. It'll be paid, there may be shareholder lawsuits, and the lesser - paid (and lesser-empowered) MS employees will be laid off. Executives' current holdings will be impacted somewhat, but the greatest pain will be felt on their wrist. Any further Econonic Downturns will be blamed on that Evil Justice Department's clearly misguded antagonistic attitude regarding the Freedom to Innovate.

2) Limitations on future behavior, (consent decrees) - we all know how well they worked the last time.

3) Strict government oversight - this sounds a bit too Big - Brotherish to me, even if Microsoft wants to become Big Brother.

4) Require MS to open - Source Hailstorm - MS will respond by killing it in favor of MS - Tornado, a similar, but Legally Different Innovation, with identical, transparent, but unstated goals.

Re:I wonder if the injunction on XP is behind it a

[donutello]

I remember reading here (correct me if I'm wrong) that M.S. has an injunction placed on their XP release of Windows.

There is currently no injunction on the XP release. Certain senators and state attorneys want one but it isn't there yet.

Suddenly, they seem willing to settle out of court or at least want to hurry the process. Looks like they are getting to know what it feels like when you get dragged through court. I'm just wondering if all this effort to end this case on M.S.'s end is because they are afraid they won't be able to release XP as it is or when they want.

Huhh?? Maybe you're in a different world from the rest of us. Microsoft is actually the one who wanted this to be revisited and not fast-tracked. They want this to go on as long as possible. It's the government on the other hand that wanted this case to be fast-tracked.

"Insightful"? How about "Totally Wrong"

Court Denies Microsoft Request for Rehearing

[NTSwerver]

Was it anything to do with this?

------------------------

Re:There's a couple of thingsthat they can't dodge

[_xeno_]

Yeah, right. They can't remove Internet Explorer anymore - that would break WinAmp, the lasted AOL Instant Messenger, the help system...

The latest versions of WinAmp include a "minibrowser" that is... the IE HTML control. All the latest "help" files (think texinfo pages, man pages, what have you) are done via HTML ... rendered in ... the IE HTML control. The latest IM, released today, starts up with this "AIM Today" screen... which is a webpage... rendered via the IE HTML control.

For added fun, the home addition of WinXP contains at least the following functions handled via the IE HTML control (at least as of the last beta before RC1 - I'll be able to test RC1 later this month, but not now):

• The Login Screen (no, really)
• Windows Explorer (the file manager - it would seem that the "web view" is now permentantly part of the thing and can't be disabled, but I haven't played around with it much)
• User Control Panel (really! you control it via an HTML page, although it's set up like a control pane)

The bottom line is that while it could be demonstrated that IE wasn't really comminglinged with Windows 98, it is so throughly mixed up in WinXP (and in many apps that run on Win98+), that it can no longer effectively be removed. It wouldn't just break Microsoft software, it would break third party software.

(Personally, I believe that modern GUI kits should have an HTML control, but that it should be as tied down as possible - no JavaScript, image loading only via the app, etc. so as to make it that much more "secure.")

(And I most point out the irony that IM, which is currently bundled with Navigator (I kid you not), apparently now uses IE to render it's little "IM Today" screen.)

--

PR weasles, etc.

[Alien54]

It is going to be interesting to see how the PR Weasles at MS worm out of this one.

This decision is consistent with the reuling that the original judge screwed up badly by mouthing off. The original findings of FACT remain, and someone else has to redo the penalities.

In this case, if there is no breakup, then a huge fine, say equal to most of their cash reserves, and a prohibition from releasing any new versions of Windows or other similar platform programs, such as their .NET effort for 4 or 5 years should be adequate. (one or two would not be enough) I might include Passport in this as well.

We need to drive home that they screwed up. They need the thousand watt lightbulb experience on this. They need to get it. Wrist slap penalties do not do this.

The primary target has to be the PR weasles, who have promoted a certain vision and way of doing business. The dev crew buys off on the vision, but they are kept in the dark on the PR wealse inner secrets on how to do business. The result is that the Dev crew maintains its loyalty, and doesn't realize their inadvertant complicity with the destructiveness of the PR Weasles.

The PR Weasles have grown a destructive culture in Microsoft.

They don't know you have to let your competitors breath.

peering into my crystal ball

[Chundra]

The appeals court also rejected the government's request to speed up the hearing.

It is believed that the issue should be resolved by 2025, when the United States of Microsoft Supreme Court dismisses the case.
--

Strategy

[Derkec]

I'm willing to bet that Mircrosoft will appeal this to the Supremem Court, if only to slow down the process. Microsoft won the browser with the tactics no being declared illegal and is looking to win instant messanging, multimedia delivery and a few other items this way as well. WinXP is the key to this, and it has to ship soon, and with all the 'features' in place. Microsoft is just playing the game to prevent the gov. from stopping the release of XP. Once XP is out there, it can't be taken back. If Mircrosoft is forced to play fairly only after XP is released, it's more bad news for the rest of us.