Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Evidence Surfaces That MS Violated 2002 Judgement

Posted by kdawson on from the rutroe dept.

whoever57 writes "In the Comes Vs. Microsoft case, the plaintiffs believe they have found evidence that Microsoft has failed to fully disclose APIs to competitors. If true, this would mean that Microsoft has violated the 2002 judgement. This information has become available since the plaintiffs have obtained an order allowing them to disclose Microsoft's alleged misbehavior to the DOJ ('appropriate enforcement and compliance authorities')."

8 of 204 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Does this suprise anyone? by Calinous · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A business this big doesn't need time to change - it needs desire to change. With all its (possible) evil implications, European Union seems to give Microsoft a desire to change.

  2. So... by styryx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If the allegations are true, and it turns out that MS might somehow not be the shining beacon of Justice and Honour that we've come to regard it as (okay, I'll cut the sarcasm now), what is the worst that will happen to MS? And are they really concerned...ever?

    I'd rather we skip the monetary fines that are becoming meaningless and go for revocation of patents. Can you imagine if MS had it's patents revoked and switched to a free-for-all? That would be nice... Ah, to dream.

    1. Re:So... by aaronl · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, that is really not the same at all. First off, the parking ticket would have occurred in a foreign country, and so you shouldn't be punished for it in the US. Second, the right to vote is guaranteed to all citizens by the US Constitution. A patent is temporary property; the right to vote is a basic right of all citizens.

      Revoking MS' patents would be more like issuing a very large fine, and forcing the company to pay it. Oh wait, that punishment might fit *exactly* to the crime! If we revoke any patents related to their violation, and begin to allow the free market to reassert itself, then MS may no longer fall afault of all the anti-trust laws that they are currently ignoring (and violating).

    2. Re:So... by gutnor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Monetary fine proposed by EU were nothing meaningless: 2 Millions EUR per Day just for a start for 1 violation.

      Anyway, revocation of patent would further discredit the patent system in the US. Taking a patent is supposed to be a service you gives to the state: you disclose your invention and in exchange you receive a patent and some rights attached to this patent.
      Now just imagine the shilling effect on US industry if you could have your patent revoked arbitrarily as a punishment in an *unrelated* crime ...

      Also in the current system, revoking patent for a company is not only giving its asset for free, it is opening the company to massive number of patents trials.

  3. Re:Does this suprise anyone? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It doesn't surprise me, but not for the reasons you might think.

    There's a difference between APIs internal to the operating system, and APIs intended to provide a userland interface. If Microsoft userland products are using the internal APIs, then those APIs ought to be released. Otherwise, I don't see the probelem.

    I'm no Microsoft apologist, but I'd be interested to see which APIs are being discussed here before I go off on an anti-Microsoft rant.

    --
    tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
  4. Re:Does this suprise anyone? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There's a difference between APIs internal to the operating system, and APIs intended to provide a userland interface. If Microsoft userland products are using the internal APIs, then those APIs ought to be released. Otherwise, I don't see the probelem.

    I think you're considering this a little too much from the programmer's point of view and not enough from the legal/economic point of view. The real distinction that needs to be determined is which APIs are being used by MS in conjunction with some offering that competes in a separate, existing market. For example, APIs that interoperate with MS's Web browser, virus detection, and allow for communication with their server offerings may be categorized as internal to the operating system, but they provide functionality for bundling and tying from an economic point of view.

    ...I'd be interested to see which APIs are being discussed here before I go off on an anti-Microsoft rant...

    Don't worry, even not knowing what APIs are being discussed we can always go off on anti-microsoft rants on other topics. That's the fun of it, they're doing so many things that are unethical and criminal that there is always something to rant about.

  5. Re:So what will really happen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'd love to believe this. But I don't recall anything of the sort happening when MS showed a deliberately fabricated video (of Win98 crippled by the removal of IE) in court during the antitrust trial.

  6. Re:If it weren't Microsoft...? by tkrotchko · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "One processor architecture (x86) is better than four completely different"

    Not at all. If there were lots and lots of CPU architectures, OS's would have to be written to run or be ported easily to another processor architecture. This would open up competition to the "best" processor, rather than the best implementation of the X86 command line.

    It probably would have forced OS vendor to be far more innovative in terms of virtualization and other technologies that we can't even dream of.

    --
    You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you