Microsoft Settles Massachusetts Antitrust Suit

krog writes "Boston.com is reporting that Microsoft has settled its antitrust suit in Massachusetts. The state was one of the last holdouts in the class action suit. The bounty? About $34 million, distributed among individuals (as opposed to businesses and government users). Not such a bad payoff, even if it is the scraps from Billy's table..."

Comments

Re:34 Million is 34 Million

[justkarl]

I wonder, does Microsoft have a problem getting good employees? I would think that most developers worth their salt would work anywhere rather than for M$.

I would disagree. Just because a company has legal troubles,(What company doesn't) it doesn't mean they're a bad company to work for. In fact, I hear from people who have worked for MS that it's one of the better places to work, with good pay and superior benefits packages. Granted, MS should be punished appropriately for what they've done, but I don't think it makes them 100% Evil.

Last Holdout

[4of12]

IIRC, Massachusetts was the last state holding out for an appeal of the Justice Department's settlement with Microsoft.

How has that settlement been working in practice?

There seems to be simmering small changes and perturbations as the agreement is reviewed, such as protocol licensing (MCPP).

Quoting from the Infoworld article:

Microsoft still enjoys a 90 percent market share in the browser and desktop operating system markets, said Stephen Houck, representing the so-called California group of states that sued Microsoft in the antitrust case. The licensing program's effect on competition is difficult to find, he said.

Kollar-Kotelly agreed. "At this point, it's difficult to measure its impact on the marketplace," she said.

The changes to the program are largely cosmetic, Ed Black, president and chief executive officer of the Computer and Communications Industry Association, said after the hearing. The two-year extension of the licensing program is the equivalent of rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship, he said.

If Judge Kollar-Kotelly finds the agreement not to be working effectively, then perhaps it's time for the court to review the agreement to see what changes might be made in order to effectively rectify the ongoing illegal monopoly and to restore a competitive marketplace.

Re:Isn't it supposed to hurt?

[silicon not in the v]

I'm glad you haven't been modded up yet. You quote one line from the article, make a false assumption and apparently didn't read the VERY NEXT SENTENCE, which disproved what you ranted about. Let me quote those two sentences here with emphasis on the part you seem to have missed.

Under the settlement, Microsoft will give half the value of any unclaimed vouchers to Massachusetts' public schools. Those vouchers may be used to buy hardware, Microsoft software and non-Microsoft software, and professional development services.

Can we also look at this paragraph above that?

Qualifying Massachusetts consumers will receive vouchers used to buy any manufacturer's desktop, laptop and tablet computers; any software available for sale to the public and used with those products; and specified accessories for use with computers.

So these vouchers, claimed or unclaimed, can be used to buy barebones systems with no OS installed, or even PC's pre-installed with Linux? How about that? And it only took a little R'ing of TFA to find that out.