California Takes Issue With Microsoft Settlement Idea

Deepfoo writes: "Note from CNet on the California challenge to Microsoft's attempt to settle the 100 civil cases on file against it by donating equipment. The dissenters will argue that those harmed in the lawsuit aren't getting compensated directly in this way, and that the ploy of donating equipment to schools is a transparent effort to further extend its monopoly. The dissenting California lawyers estimate the actual damages due to Californians alone could be on the order of 3 to 9 billion (wide range, but that's what they've said). Is Microsoft a do-gooder, or up to no good?"

Comments

RedHat's take

[mughi]

I think it's quite interesting that under RedHat's proposal (where Microsoft puts all that money to hardware, and RedHat gives all the software for free) that was mentioned here the other day things change the settlement from giving 200,000 computers to giving over a million.

That alone should make one pause at the "stink test". At the very least it should point out the valuation of Microsoft's software in their proposal.

A vile strategy

[nsample]

I'm a Windows user at home, a Solaris user at the University, and about the farthest thing from a linux zealot that there is. I can't say that I have much passion about my OSes. It's just not something I can get riled up about.

However, this decision sets a new standard for abuse and irony. My wife's a worker's compensation attorney, so I get stories of liars and shenanigans in courts every day. It's never anything close to this, however.

The settlement is supposed to punish Microsoft for abusive practices, but actually rewards them greatly:

1. No real cash payment - they "charge themselves" for software, rather than paying penalties. win.

2. Cash from the US government - that same self-charge comes as a business expense and a loss against an MS business division, thus it is treated as a TAX WRITE-OFF. The write-off value is far greater than the charge, thus they MAKE money on balance.

3. The schools - Schools are one place alternatives still ahve penetration. (They used to be the bastion of Apple...)

4. The children - Lo', the children! In the silliest irony of all, the sacrifice one monopoly for bringing MS products to the schools. These guys make Big Tobacco look good.

5. Perception - The public will see this as an overture to help those same children, thus improving the MS image.

In the end, Microsoft wins at every turn. How could this settlement possibly have come about? There is literally no aspect of punishment at all. Microsoft even makes money on the deal.

This is a sad day for our courts.

Re:A vile strategy

[Rothfuss]

I agree with Mr. Ample.

In addition:

Microsoft said it would take a $550 million charge before taxes against earnings in the current fiscal quarter if the court approves the pact.

So the company also counts this as a loss from earnings, despite the fact that it is softmoney, resulting in stock holders getting less earnings per share for the quarter. I suspect in response the stockholders will file a class action suit against MS for earnings shortcomings in an ironic display of legal recursion.

-Rothfuss

Re:I think...

[TomServo]

It's not really all that different, except for what is, in my mind, a pretty major factor.

Apple and Sun weren't doing this as part of a supposed "punishment". Apple and Sun did this for a competitive advantage, but they were in a position where they should try to do that. Giving Microsoft an opportunity for a competitive advantage somehow just doesn't seem like punishment to me.

i volunteer at a school

[BlueboyX]

I do volunteer work in several elementary schools in a middle-of-nowhere city. I have worked in about a half dozen schools now, and the best one at fighting illiteracy is the one with the most computers (that are actually used). The majority of the computers in this school are all rather old, many of them running on ancient macs or win3.1 machines. However, they are well used in the 'Accelerated Reader' program. I have seen this program make a sharp difference in the children's willingness to actually pick up a book with this program. Getting a child willing to read is a big part of fighting illiteracy. This isn't someone else's rhetoric I am regurgitating; I have seen this myself.

Then I have seen other schools where the 'Clinton computers' just get stuck in a corner and get occasional use from teachers and teachers' aids only. That sure helps...

Ironically, the other schools in this area get more funding than this one because they have a higher percentage of low-income students (90% is the average, the one I am praising has 'only' 30-60%). However, the extra money doesn't seem to be well spent. Just throwing money at the problem doesn't even make a dent. All of the problems you listed will not be affected at all by putting more money in the system; it all depends on how the local government apportions it and handles it. For example, it doesn't matter if $X of extra money gets apportioned to schools if it takes > 6 months to get anything approved. 'Need a new boiler? No problem! You just have to call a long list of people and then wait another 6 months and hope for no additional delays. Yes, you will get that new boiler; it is guaranteed by law... just not when you get it.' This is the real trouble I have been dealing with.

So what we really need are local responsive governments (including school boards), sane teachers (You wont believe some of the oddities I have seen; Well, maybe you might. Your childhood memories probably weren't exaggerated...) and good school equipment that actually gets incorporated into the curriculum. Meet these three needs, and our schools will actually be pretty good despite other problems. As long as these needs aren't met, throwing money or books at the problem won't cause much change at all.