Slashdot Mirror
Massachusetts Holds Out On MS Case
Cubase de Pilsen writes: "Massachusetts' attorney general said his state would not sign on to a proposed settlement in the antitrust case against Microsoft because it does not protect competing software makers." Several other state AGs as well are angling for more restrictions on Microsoft, but some are prepared to sign on to the current version of the settlement.
good for Mass to do that. I read that Sun was considering their own civil suit against MS if the current proposed settlement became reality. Not that that would do anything useful, IMO. Of course, MS still has to face Europe, and we all know how rough and tough they are gonna be.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
I did (Jim Ryan of Illinois 217-782-1090). I talked for about 5 minutes with a women there whose job was tallying constituent input. She said that *every single call* she had received was against the deal. Because these are elected officials, a concerted (unanimous?) message from their constituency could have a big effect.
In 1994, the feds signed a consent decree with Microsoft. This agreement did not alter MS's behavior, but it did give Microsoft unprecedented levels of information about the PC industry that NO ONE ELSE had access to. This gave them a strategic advantage that is still unmatched. This was the sole outcome of the 1994 consent devree.
Pre-1994, MS licensed their software based on how many units an OEM sold. Sell 100,000 PCs, pay for 100,000 licenses, even if 1,000 of those PCs has DR DOS on them. The consent decree outlawed this practice. Microsoft then (and now) licensed their software based on model lines. Sell 100,000 Model 50s, pay for 100,000 licenses. OEMs could sell PCs with other OSs without paying the licensing fee, as long as the PCs were in a model line that did not EVER have MS software installed. Naturally, such model lines were rare.
Pre-1994, Microsoft knew exactly how many PCs were sold by each OEM. Post-1994, they knew how many PCs were sold within each model line at each OEM. They could analyze pricing, advertising, hardware and software loads offered in each model line and determine what the public bought and how much they paid.
No one else can match this level of intelligence. No one else knows what people use their PCs for to the degree of detail that Microsoft knows. This resulted directly from the 1994 consent decree. I'm waiting to see what advantage MS will gain from this one. I'm glad at least one state AG gets it; without stringent behavioral guidelines, MS will alter their behavior in exactly the wrong direction.
actually, the appeal courts ruled that Judge Jackson's comments to the media indicated a bias against MS, hence they threw out his version of a breakup remedy. The appeal court didnt explicitly rule out that a breakup was the proper rememdy, just that Jackson appeared biased in his judgement and that nullified his proposed remedy. It was the Justice Dept that formally ruled out breakup a few weeks ago.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
Here is a list of states suing microsoft (courtesy of Microsoft's "freedom to Innovate Network"):
California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, New York, Ohio, Utah, Washington, D.C., West Virginia, Wisconsin
Here's what I sent to the Attorney General in my state:
"
I believe that any settlement that would have a chance of restoring competition to the computer industry would require at least the following:
1) All terms must be enforced by a non-Microsoft party with full access to all Microsoft resources, including source code. Microsoft cannot be trusted to voluntarily comply with any agreement.
2) All communication protocols used by all microsoft products must be fully documented. Such documents must be made available to any and all parties for any reason. Microsoft is not allowed to change their protocols until 90 days after documentation of such changes are made available to any parties requesting them.
3) The previous term must also apply to all Microsoft APIs (Application Programming Interfaces).
4) Microsoft may not keep agreements secret. In particular, the terms of the current OEM agreements, currently protected as "trade secrets" must be disclosed.
5) Microsoft may not use agreements with Computer OEMs to restrict in any way the addition of other software to the computers, along with Microsoft products. In particular, OEMs are not to be prohibited from selling "dual-boot" systems,
where the system can be booted into Windows or into some other operating system, such as Linux or a form of BSD or BeOS.
6) Microsoft may not use their licensing terms to stop users or developers from using Open Source software or Free Software.
7) Microsoft may not meddle in the the legislative processes of Fderal, State or local governemnts or bodies that make recommendations to them, with their work on UCITA being a prime model of behaviour that is prohibited to them as a
monopoly.
"
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
...not a state. Get it right.
(no, it doesn't really matter)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
derail the U.S. economy to the tune of several billion dollars a year
The GDP of the United States is 9.3 trillion dollars. May I inquire how a few billion dollars will derail the economy?
kill Windows XP WITHOUT a viable alternative of equal quality and support in both software and human support
Could that be due to a monopoly in said software field, I wonder?
put thousands of people out of work
Now, THAT's a good reason to keep Microsoft around... not!
You'd think that the antitrust suits against the steel industry, the railroad industry, AT&T, IBM, etc. would teach you something...
Bush Lies Watch
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Yes, call!!
If you're in Minnesota, your attorney general is Mike Hatch. His office is 651-296-3353. The person who answered was very courteous, and happy to hear my opinion.
sooner or later (i hope) the /. editors will post a review i wrote about a book that covers this case up through last January. I didnt mention this in the review, but the book mentions that Judge Jackson belief is that MS would be a lot better shape if Bill Gates had finished Harvard.
Going along with your leadership comments and what was in the book, it's my belief that Gates runs the company head to toe, rubbing off on his top execs, and collectively causing the problems that the company has had with the FTC and DOJ for the past 5-10 years.
my belief is that tossing out the leaders wont do anything, and it would make DoJ look bad. Assesing a fine that encompasses all of MS's gains that came as a result of their violation of the Sherman Act is a minimum (the current settlement lets MS off the hook financially), imposing guidelines on how the company should behave in the market concerning contracts (a consent decree of sorts), and mandating those leaders to take classes in business and legal ethics.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
Well now that we've had the FUD. Let's dish out a dose of reality, shall we?
XP doesn't have reduced support for MP3. It plays MP3s just fine, just like it has ever since Media Player came out. In fact it has enhanced support for MP3 over previous versions because you can buy a $10 plugin that'll let you encode in that format.
If you don't agree... Prove it. Show me an older version of Media Player which had better support for MP3 than what ships with XP.
Answer: You can't, because you are spreading FUD.
Just like the Netscape plugin issue, the JVM issue, etc. FUD FUD FUD.
According to the proposed settlement, there will be a public comment period. From the settlement:
---
5. The United States will publish a notice informing the public of the proposed Final Judgment and public comment period in the Washington Post and the San Jose Mercury News, for seven days over a period of two weeks commencing no later than November 15, 2001.
6. Members of the public may submit written comments about the proposed Final Judgment to a designated official of the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice for a period of 60 days after publication of the proposed Final Judgment and Competitive Impact Statement in the Federal Register.
---
For god sake, send in your comments! Mine run something like this:
1) Microsoft must offer all of its products at the same price to any customer that purchases over 1000 copies per year. Microsoft may offer another fixed price for single copies.
2) Microsoft shall not be allowed to enter into any market development programs of any kind that discriminate between volume customers.
3) Microsoft must document all of the API's, file formats, and protocols for all of its products.
4) Microsoft must license all of its API's, file formats, and protocols for all of its products under royalty free and non-discriminatory terms.
5) Microsoft may not retaliate against any customer or ISV that choses to sell or support a non-Microsoft platform.
6) Microsoft must bundle a conformant JVM will all of its operating system products.
7) Microsoft must bundle a Mozilla based browser with all of its operating systems products.
These remedies will remain in effect until such time that Microsoft has less than 75% of the desktop operating system market.API, file format, and protocol licences entered into during the remedy period must be continued under royalty free and non-discriminatory basis.
In actuality, they reversed breakup not on the merits, but for lack of hearings on remedy (one of two big mistakes that Judge Jackson made). They never took break-up off the table, just required a strong showing in hearings that break-up was justified, something they may have said was difficult, but allowed for.
Further, Read their rejection of MS' appeal on tying and motion to stay pending Supreme COurt action on Petition for Cert. They specificall said that NO REMEDIES WERE PRECLUDED from their June decision.
If you are a Californian, the contact info is here for California attorney general Bill Lockyer- you can phone (800) 952-5225 from inside California.
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
If you are a Californian, the contact info is here for California attorney general Bill Lockyer- you can call toll-free (800) 952-5225 inside California.
Given that MS has a history of astroturfing again and again pretending to have a grass-roots movement in its support, it would be a good idea to express bona fide concern about how fair the settlement is at a time when it might make some difference.
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
I believe he was referring to the fact that Microsoft is being forced to remove the JVM
As I understand it, this is not quite right. Microsoft is not being forced to remove a JVM because they never had one in the first place. There were selling something which was like Java, and largely compatible with it, but broke the standard in a number of respects. So the thing that came with IE was not Java, but Microsoft was calling it "Java" anyway. Since that's Sun's trademark, Sun demanded they stop.
I don't think anybody is stopping them from bundling Sun's JVM, or even their own implementation of a true JVM which implements Sun's Java standards. Help me out, folks, am I wrong here?
How to Contact the AG's Office
Mailing Address:
Office of the Attorney General
200 St. Paul Place
Baltimore, MD 21202 Phone:
(410) 576-6300
1 (888) 743-0023 toll-free
TDD: (410) 576-6372
E-mail:
OAG@oag.state.md.us
Public Information Office
Media only: (410) 576-6357
Consumer Protection Division
consumer@oag.state.md.us
(410) 528-8662 Consumer complaint hotline
(410) 528-1840 Medical billing complaints
1-877-261-8807 Health plan decision appeals
Branch Offices:
(301) 722-2000 Cumberland
(301) 694-1071 Frederick
(301) 791-4780 Hagerstown
(410) 543-6620 Salisbury
Securities Division
securities@oag.state.md.us
(410) 576-6360
Webmaster
webmaster@oag.state.md.us
The Business Software Alliance announced that it is beginning an investigation into possible software license violations within Massachussetts State government offices. The BSA was supposedly tipped off by a former employee who spoke about "rampant IP and copyright violations at all levels of government." The BSA has withheld judgement on this subject, but "will be performing a full audit of all licenses and computers in the government's possession."
Best. Comment. Ever. Enjoy!
If you live in Virginia (and many geeks do) your AG is Randolph Beales. Here is the contact information for his office:
Snail Mail:
Office of the Attorney General
900 East Main Street
Richmond, VA 23219
Website:
http://www.oag.state.va.us/
Phone:
(804)786-2071
(804) 371-8946 TDD
Email:
mail@oag.state.va.us
Cheers,
Segfault
In addition to contacting your state's Attorney General, I recommend sharing your thoughts directly with the DoJ's Antitrust Division:
From http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/contact/emails.htm:
If your comments relate specifically to the Antitrust Division's suit against Microsoft Corporation, please direct your correspondence to Microsoft.atr@usdoj.gov
Impress them with your eloquence. That's how democracy works.