Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Faults Microsoft Licensing Compliance
An anonymous reader writes "In a written report card on how well Microsoft is complying with its 2001 antitrust deal with state and federal prosecutors, Justice Department lawyers said they might need the court to force Microsoft to act more quickly." The DOJ's court filing is online if you want to wade through it.
What is a second lawsuit going to produce? Another slap on the wrist? If so, I will begin to think that the judges were... easily persuaded.
What happens if Microsoft doesn't do what they settlement says? Will they face harsher penalties?
Their answer as seen from the settlement, and the lack of compliance is "Not very much."
Translation:
Microsoft's substantial contributions to George W. Bush's 2000 campaign fund were very helpful in getting him into the White House. Bush returned the favor by allowing Microsoft to escape unscathed from the big antitrust suit.
Now, Mr. Bush has begun the process of raising funds for his 2004 campaign, and it's time for Microsoft to pay up again.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Who cares. They will not force MS to act in a manner that fosters competition. They won't enforce a penalty on MS. It just isn't going to happen in the US.
Normal people think MS Windows and MS Office are what makes the computer industry, by that logic any action against MS would be an attack agains the industry, so they don't want to do anything.
Remeber, having a monopoly is not illegal, having a monopoly and abusing your influence, such as the case of Microsoft, is illegal. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised for the courts to find that Microsoft has "pierced the corporate shield" with all of the tactics and tricks hey use.
Then again, the republicans are in power ... ;/
--LordKaT
John Ashcroft, do your fscking job!
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
Your US government is trying to appease Microsoft. Appeasement never works. It only buys short term security. It doesn't work in diplomacy with countries, corporations or any relationship..
Though drawing parallels between brutal dictators and Bill Gates may seem harsh, the principle is the same. If people think they're safe now from Microsoft's monopolistic practices, they've bought into a false sense of security.
Ruby on Rails Screencast
Bobby to criminal: Stop!! Or I'll say 'stop' again!!
Except here we have:
DOJ to MS: Comply!! Or we'll say 'comply' again!
Sad, yes. Surprising, no.
Blockwars: new features & bug fixes! All multiplayer. Go play.
"They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
People would nolonger aspire to become as rich and successful as possible? Is being greedy a crime?
Guess what? Not everyone wants to have so much money that they could never spend it within their lifetime. I have no idea how someone could ever use 40 million dollars in their lifetime, let alone 40 billion. Personally, all I need is food, clothing, shelter, and something to do with my time that I enjoy. I don't need a fast/expensive sports car, an automated do-everything house, or my own aircraft.
I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
Not only is Microsoft not complying, they are in fact way in excess of the monopoly position that they were in when they started.
They have been busy leveraging their monopoly into new markets (cell phones and games consoles to name but two) and reverse-leveraging their new market share in these industries back into the PC market for greater lock in (Outlook integration that is closer than 3rd parties can obtain for example).
They have been investigating hardware lock in techniques (palladium style) and trialling them on consumers (Xbox) to prepare for the next wave of monoplising efforts. They are busy fundng other companies attacking their competators (SCO). They are proping up Bush econmic policy (share dividend at an advantageous moment) in return for special consideration (legal proglems decrease).
Lets hope to God this triggers another investigation - there is such a huge increase in their deliberatly destructive antics now that even a half blind judge would break them up.
Except that they will prbably buy him off too.
Beep beep.
Antitrust law is a good thing, but if it's not used quickly enough, a monopoly can get so big, rich, and powerful, that laws no longer apply to it. It can afford to buy its way out of any problems it may face. Microsoft is just such a monopoly. It should have been broken up around the time of Windows 3.1. But it was left alone for years after that, and now it can fart in the faces of the justice department and there's not a single thing they can do about it (other than whine to the press).
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
A day when we celebrate victory in a civil war that began as a protest about taxation without representation.
Say, how much representation do your taxes buy you? Wouldn't it be neat if we could all choose to pay "campaign contributions" to buy laws and fat federal contracts, instead of paying taxes to whoever we decided was probably the least bad of two candidates?
I'm in agreement with George W that the only way to deal with oppressive unelected regimes is to replace them forcibly. I just think we should clean house at home before building any more aircraft carriers.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Antitrust law is a good thing, but if it's not used quickly enough, a monopoly can get so big, rich, and powerful, that laws no longer apply to it. It can afford to buy its way out of any problems it may face. Microsoft is just such a monopoly. It should have been broken up around the time of Windows 3.1. But it was left alone for years after that, and now it can fart in the faces of the justice department and there's not a single thing they can do about it (other than whine to the press).
Your theory also requires that the judicial system and administration be corrupt.
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
Here's your all of the OEM Training that the sales force needs, courtesy of Microsoft's chief sales executive Orlando Ayala.
-B
Like This?
It takes time for the OEMs to jump on board. You need to find a good distro, negotiate with the company, test it with your machines to make sure everything works properly, train your staff so they know what to do when some customer calls with problems about it, then finally decide how to market the thing! You also need to wait to make sure that MicroSoft is actually playing nice before you risk seriously screwing yourself by ticking off the supplier of the OS for every machine you sell. Remeber the story about the scorpion and the frog? If I were an OEM I would eb damm careful before messing with M$. Still as we've just seen they are coming out, it's just a matter of how long and what kind of response HP gets from both the comsumer and M$ to see if more machines come out with linux pre-installed
I stole this Sig
Not corrupt. Just powerless. It's quite possible to be full of honor and completely ineffectual at the same time. I'm not accusing anyone of being corrupt (other than MS of course). Lazy, yes. Corrupt, no.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
Unfortunately while what you said is true, it doesn't really invalidate what he said. Supports it more, actually. They're #34 in the top 100 - $10 million or so is nothing to sneeze at, and you can't deny that Microsoft has a lot of clout politically given their position in the IT marketplace.
The donors in the top 100 above MS are interesting in and among themselves, but they're not software companies (possible exceptions of AOL and AT&T).
Do you have an opinion yourself on why the DOJ backed down?
SB
I disagree.
You could just as easily say that laws that force companies not to lie to investors are state intervention, and befitting of a command economy.
A free market requires certain things to work: Educated consumers that can make rational choices about products, and the possibility of even making a choice.
The average person faced with buying an Intel compatible computer has little choice, and generally lacks the education to make a rational choice about the products.
Then, once they get the computer, all the little things MS does to lock out other software competitors bite them. They might try an alternate to Office, but when they realize they can't easily exchange files with peers, they will probably see no choice other than to buy MS office.
I hope that government intervention isn't necessary to break the MS monopoly, I think we are making great progress toward those ends with only technical means. That said, even as a Libertarian, I am not totally opposed to the government compelling MS to stop engaging in anti-competitive behaviours.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Not really.
Its not illegal to hire very very good laywers.
Its not illegal to convince, through media, private conversations, arguments, that a politition should think in a certain way.
Its not illegal to use all the resources available to you to its fullest extent.
All of this can be done without relying on corruption. Just playing by the fullest extent of the rules.
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
What do you expect them to do? It's not like they're going to get an anti-trust suit filed against them anytime soon...
-EB
Do you ever walk alone like a drifter in the dark?
1) The US Constitution itself gives congress the power to regulate the economy. This was written into the body of the document, not as an amendment. One of the first fruits of that was the 1800s Interstate Commerce Act. A number of institutions were formed directly from this clause of the constitution. Most failed, but many survived, such as our federal reserve system, which is a model for central banks for nations the world over.
2) The 1860s act which preceded the explosion of immigration to the west, established agricultural universities, required every state to map out its land and to make property public records, and the extension services farmers use today is a farm subsidy.
3) Some states, like Oklahoma for example, allows kids as young as 14 to be licensed to use the country wide road system during the summer for the purpose of farming. Our very school system which gives kids summers off is intended to give farmers use of their kids. All of these things can be considered farm subsidies, but they are not.
4) A 1790s law passed by congress gives publications a break in postal rates is considered to be a subsidy for the press, in a nation where getting news to the participants of a representative republic essential.
Most of these laws and policies were established before Marx was sperm rolling around in his daddy's sacs, and are so old, so well considered, and so well put to use that no one even thinks of calling them antithetical to a capitalist country.
This is the 4th of July. If you are an American try having a litle pride. It won't hurt, I promise.
By the way: The depression of the 30s was a deflationary period for the world. It was a problem of glut, such as what we have right now. Government regulation didn't cause it. It made it far worse than it had to be and extended the recession for years longer than it had to be.
Read the history: the federal reserve board's immediate reaction to the stock market crashes of the late 20s was the constrict the money supply. Hoover was rightly blamed for failing to exert any kind of influence over the Federal Reserve.
The proper reaction for government of that era should have been to cut taxes and spending, sort of what has been done now except for the spending part. It appears that as long as government spending continues to remain at historical highs, we won't be out of this stagnation any time soon.
But to give FDR credit for helping the nation out with his spending and his tax policies is like telling someone who sells a drunk who is still drinking an aspirin, he is now the drunk's personal physician.
Dawn of the Dead
However, the whole POINT of putting the selection in the start menu is for Joe 6-pack to figure it out, not the computer savvy.
It is by no means simple for the majority, and Microsoft knows it.