MS Settlement: Six States (And Samba) Say "Stop!"

Masem writes "The BBC is reporting that because 6 states have refused to agree to the settlement between Microsoft and the DOJ, Microsoft is conceeding that a settlement adjustment will not be possible, opening the door for Judge Kollar-Kotelly to begin rapid remedy hearings. There is a slim chance that negotiations might happen before the end of business today (Tuesday) that will allow the settlement to go after several refinements over the last few nights, but few expect any success. While Judge Kollar-Kotelly is promising to resolve the issue as fast as possible, legal experts are projecting a drawn out battle, with the additional time no longer on Microsoft's side. No word on which states were on which side, beyond MA being very much against the settlement and IL being for it." Besides the states, the Samba team has its own objections, below.

Jeremy Allison and Andrew Tridgell of the Samba team have posted a brief analysis of what the current settlement proposal would mean to that project. (Thanks, jdfox.) Considering that Samba is one of the most important links between open and closed software, it's worth mulling over.

Comments

MS Security?

[Anonymous Coward]

We would hope that a more reasonable interpretation would allow Microsoft to ensure the security of its products, whilst still being forced to fully disclose the fundamental protocols that are needed to create interoperable products.

MS can't even keep security sorted out in a closed source fashion, just imagine the 'sploits if they did disclose some source. :)

MS Wants the Internet

[wambly]

Most of the web pages I visit are designed using microsoft software. I can tell because of all the question marks (netscape) and little boxes (konqueror and opera) that appear where apostophes, comments, etc. should appear. This is because microsoft software uses their proprietary font system to generate certain html characters which cannot be rendered by web-standard browsers using ISO or Unicode compliant systems (see http://www.fourmilab.ch/webtools/demoroniser/).

There is no technical reason for microsoft to use non-standard characters in ms-generated webpages. The real reason I suspect is that it forces people to use ms browsers if they want to see web pages without errors.

Its a little thing, but it shows one of microsoft's strategies in their blatantly obvious and shameful quest to control the internet.

Your brother

[matty]

Do you think he would donate his time to the cause to prepare the brief on behalf of the Samba team and submit it for them?

Harms the economy not helps

[codepunk]

Leaving MS to continue the same behavior seriously harms the economy not helps it. Of course harsh restrictions on MS would in the short term hurt but it would cause explosive growth in the industry. Right now a single company receives the earnings of most of the it industry budget and that is a harmful thing. Removing them from power would increase the job market and diversify spending.

Re:this isn't necessarily good

[sheldon]

I can think of two other valuable lessons learned:

#1. Delete email after 90 days and don't save tape backups.

#2. If your competitors are lining the pockets of politicians, then you should throw even more cash their way.

Re:Again?

[maeglin]

"Bad company!" "No we aren't" "Yes you are" "No we aren't"... etc, while it's business as usual for microsoft.

Actually it's more like:

DOJ: Bad company!
MS: No we aren't.
DOJ: Yes you are.
MS: No we aren't.
Judge: Yes you are.
MS: Well, maybe, but not that bad.
Appeals Court: Actually, you were, but so was the Judge.
MS: Ah ha!! So the trail was unfair.
Appeals: Well, not quite. You're still bad.
DOJ: We can't tell who's bad anymore.
MS: Definitely not us.
DOJ: Hmm.. You're not? Ok, then. Maybe it's us that's bad?
State AG's: Excuse me?


And here we are...

Different story from MCP Magazine

[bobdehnhardt]

As I was reading this article, the following showed up in my email, from the MCP mailing list:

In this issue of MCP Magazine News:

** Microsoft, DOJ Reach Settlement

One of the biggest and highest-profile antitrust cases in U.S. history was brought nearly to a close Friday when Microsoft Corp. and the federal government reached a settlement in the four-year old lawsuit. The settlement was praised by Microsoft and the government, but a number of industry analysts said the feds were too lenient on Microsoft.

Far from the breakup of Microsoft into two separate companies that the government initially sought, the settlement places some safeguards on several Microsoft practices judged to be anti-competitive. The final resolution hasn't come yet, however. There are still 18 states that have yet to sign on to the settlement, and one has said it won't.

Microsoft Chairman and Chief Software Architect Bill Gates, at a press conference announcing the settlement, said it "represents a fair compromise on all sides. We hope the state attorneys general will also agree it's a good settlement."

Regarding some of the restrictions placed on Microsoft, Gates said his company fully intends to comply. "The agreement contains significant rules and regulations on how we develop and license our software, but it allows Microsoft to keep innovating on behalf of consumers."
Changes in Redmond's behavior required by the proposal include:

The company has to disclose server protocols to make sure that Windows desktops don't work better with Microsoft OSs like Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows .NET than they do with competing OSs like Linux or Unix.

For at least five years (with an option to extend the time frame two more years), Microsoft must offer uniform licensing to OEMs. No more special deals for some computer makers over others.

Microsoft is forbidden from entering into exclusive contracts that keep software developers or computer manufacturers from using competing products.

Those and other terms of the settlement didn't satisfy many.

"The reported settlement agreement, stunningly, will not change either Microsoft's business practices nor its software implementations one iota," Ken Wasch, president of the Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA), a trade association for the software and digital content industry, said in a statement.

"Remarkably, the purported settlement appears to be less than the interim remedies ordered by Judge Jackson prior to the unanimous Court of Appeals ruling. And it appears to be weaker than the last offer in the previous round of mediation led by Judge Posner," Wasch said.

Some states are making noises that the settlement doesn't go far enough, and will press ahead with separate litigation. Massachusetts on Monday became the first to confirm that it isn't satisfied, and is moving forward in the courts. So while Redmond is done, at least for now, with Uncle Sam, some of his cousins still want to mix it up with Bill & Co.

Keith Ward

Either they're just not up on the times (very likely), or they're trying to spin this (also very likely)....

Re:Protests

[rkent]

2. Divest MSN, and X-Box divisions.

Ahh! No! Don't make them get rid of X-Box! It sucks so bad, it's sure to lead to their eventual downfall if you let 'em keep it!

Re:Public Comment Period

[njdj]

As a general rule, an anticompetitive monopolist should never be granted extra power to prevent competition through patent and copyright. To the contrary, a market entity's access to legalized monopoly protection should be inversely proportional to its size.

Clueless. Absolutely clueless. This suggestion is (1) sensible and (2) imaginative. Totally inappropriate to any proceedings in a US court of law, and likely to antagonize the bureaurats who are ostensibly representing the public interest.

Re:IANAL, but I play one on Slashdot...

[Flower]

And with a big enough bribe you can make a DIP switch.

Dennis Miller said it best..

[jcr]

"Bill Gates is just a white persian cat and a monocle away from being the villain in a James Bond flick."

-jcr

Ah, Slashdot...land of errant pedants

[melquiades]

This discussion reminds me of my favorite Winston Chruchill quote. Somebody corrected him on his ending a sentence with a preposition. He replied:

"That is exactly the sort of errant pedantry up with which I will not put."

Re:Seccession Silliness

[maxpublic]

Why on gods green earth would myself and my fellow Oregonians want to invade California? If anything, we'd fortify the border and shoot any of you silly yahoos who tried to come north.

Remember, Oregon has never tried to take anything from California. California, on the other hand, sued Oregon in federal court in an attempt to seize the Rogue River (yes, the *entire* river) because 'Oregon didn't need the water and southern California did'!

The idea of an independent California is not a happy one. An independent California might try to take little things like rivers from Oregon by force....

Max