Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Flouting DOJ Settlement?
An anonymous reader writes "According to the Washington Post, Microsoft is not adhering to the terms of its deal with the DOJ. Specifically, there are allegations that it is "trying to license key pieces of its technology at inflated rates" and "thwarting its antitrust settlement with the federal government". They're charging $100,000 just to see technical info about their communication protocols, and you only get $50,000 back if you decide you don't want to license them. Whoda thunk?"
Except of course that part of their settlement for abusing their monopoly position was a court order that they open all the information on their protocols to the general public.
In a market with actual competition that would work. Unfortunately Microsoft is a convicted monopolist, which puts it out of the supply/demand argument as they supply what they want, to whom they want, under whatever terms they want, to the detriment of an open market.
This should not come as a surprise Judge CK and Justice both bent over backwards to please Billy since Ashcroft and others could only recuse themselves from direct involvement because of the contributions they received. This does not mean they did not have a hand in giving Microsoft the power to act as though there was no settlement, it merely means that the settlement was thus: Microsoft is free to be a monopoly and self-enforcing monopolies never can do anything wrong (or at least they SEE no evil, HEAR no evil, and SPEAK of no evil that they are involved in).
Really, who won the case? Not the people, well they did, but the newly elected administration had that overturned and gave Microsoft everything they ever wanted and then some.
Crash, bang, pow! The sound of companies being crushed, jobs being lost, and consumers losing more and more to the power of a global monopoly that is in fact a de facto government taxing American citizens on a national basis every time our government (once elected - now paid) buys from the Nation of Microsoft.
Do we really want more media consolidation - must be, someone in the government says its cool for one company to own everything and offer us the same crappy meals every day.
To borrow a line we might have to get used to""You will work harder with a gun in your back for a bowl of rice a day."
Thanks to Justice and Judge CK the animal is free to prowl and kill whatever it wants. Nice, real nice.
All Ad hominem replies happily ignored as the sender shall be deemed to lack the faculties to comprehend the equation.
Usually, I'm an anti-MS zealot, but this time I agree with you. It's not a fee, it's a deterrent. I would love to get a copy of MS's protocols so I could write a proper exchange connector for unix. But I don't have a hundred grand to pony up, so it ain't gonna happen.
This isn't unfair competitive practices, this is competitive practices designed to protect their trade secrets. They are essentially showing the holy grail of linux computing, so why shouldn't they charge an admission fee?
You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
Ah stuff it, you whiny bastard. They are a *convicted* monopolist. The opening of the protocols is part of the *verdict*. Ponder this quote:
"There is something fundamentally wrong with requiring Novell to pay large sums of money to access information that the court determined Microsoft illegally withheld," said Ryan Richards, a Novell vice president and deputy general counsel. "Microsoft breaks the law and Novell pays for the remedy."
So no, $100.000 is not reasonable, it's extortion.
My biggest worry isn't the "Nyah - so we'll show you our stuff as required by law but charge so much for it - nyah", but the way they've gone back to buying/threatening anybody who might compete with them.
Take the whole Virtual PC thing. I switch from Linux to OS X on the desktop, and get all excited about Virtual PC - now for those few Windows Apps I *need* to run (like Sharkport for my PS2, Ultima VII in DOS mode - you know, the important stuff), I can have that.
Then - Microsoft buys Connectix. OK, I say. Then RealPC announces "We're comin' back - and better!" I see light at the end of the tunnel. If RealPC can do its "direct hardware technology" right, I could even play Half-Life I (and hope that HL2 gets ported to OS X) in a Virtual Window (yes, I'm sure I'd have to grab more RAM, but it's the *potential* of the idea).
Nope - MS is sueing them now too.
That's the part that worries me - the buyiing/sueing of companies who even *look* like they might do something that MS wants (remember how they tried to buy Quicken, and at least that one was nixed?). At least during the DOJ trial they *tried* to act nice - but now that it's over, it back to the Bad Old Days of either buying somebody out, locking them out, or sueing them into oblivion.
Patience, I tell myself. Someday, maybe 50 years from now when MS is just another fair player in the market, this will all be looked backed upon and laughed, like Standard Oil and AT&T. Patience.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
I don't think they will ever realize that.. mostly because for the most part I am pretty sure it's not true.
And just look to the Linux distros for proof.. I don't see a lot of them that come as just an OS.. It's OS, X, gcc and friends, web browsers, pims, media players, etc etc etc. And all wrapped up in one nice little bundle that can be installed all at once.
I am guessing most normal (non-geek) users of windows do use IE, why spend the time to download when you have a browser already there.. And I think a lot of geek type may as well, since soo many web sites are designed to work with IE and look like crap in Moz.
Why go out looking for a media player if you have one that works? People new to pcs would not know about winamp unless someone told them it rocked, so why would they go looking in the first place, not to mention winamp doesn't do video..
The long and short is, if they just sold windows without IE, Outlook Express, WMP, etc etc it would be harder to justify the cost, make microsoft apps less obvious, and make it so people had to CHOOSE to get their software instead of someone elses. Why would they want to do that??