Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Final Arguments in MS vs. the States

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the sergeants-major dept.

Bistronaut writes "Reports are in today on the final arguments between the 9 State Attorneys General and Microsoft (articles from eWeek). CNN also has a summary. Spoiler: States say, "Here are our priorities for reforming MS." - MS says, "We don't need no stinkin' remedy.""

2 of 310 comments (clear)

  1. Show them the letter from Peru... by Svartalf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Congressman Villanueva's response to MS' letter opposing the law up for a vote in Peru's Congress is telling.

    http://www.pimientolinux.com/peru2ms/villanueva_ to _ms.html

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  2. "Reconstructs Microsoft's Business" - normal by Animats · · Score: 5, Informative
    "Reconstructing" an antitrust violator's business is normal operating procedure in antitrust cases. When IBM lost an antitrust case, they had to disclose the specs for mainframe peripherals, which created a whole plug-compatible industry, and eventually plug-compatible non-IBM mainframes.

    When AT&T lost an antitrust case, the whole phone system had to be rearchitected. That was a massive technical effort of enormous complexity. Supporting multiple long distance carriers was a huge job. But, by court order, it was done.

    The sanctions proposed for Microsoft are mild by comparison. A comparable remedy for Microsoft would be to force Microsoft to separate into an applications business unit and an OS business unit, with a requirement for published APIs.

    Since all the antitrust lawyers and the judge know the history of antitrust law, they know all this, and Microsoft is just grandstanding.