For Microsoft, humbled may not mean defeated; Legal issues count more than many miscues
Article Abstract:
In the midst of a six week recess in the Department of Justice's anti-trust suit against the Microsoft Corporation, legal scholars offer opinions on the substantive issues in the trial. Despite the skill and success lead prosecutor David Boies has shown in undermining the credibility of Microsoft's witnesses, the outcome of the trial is still in doubt. The government's case hinges on the assertation that Microsoft illegally stifled competition and innovation in the Internet browser market by bundling its own Explorer browser into its ubiquitous Windows operating system. Additionally, the government contends that Microsoft used a long list of illegal business tactics to pressure computer makers and Internet service providers into signing exclusionary contracts with the software giant. However, Microsoft contends that Explorer and Windows is a single product, and that it has the right to put anything it wants into its own products. Lower court rulings and the prevailing trend of recent anti-trust decisions seem to favor Microsoft's view. Last June, in a seperate case, a lower court ruled that Microsoft could bundle its browser with its operating system as long as it could make a "plausible claim" of consumer benefit. Legal scholars also see the trend in recent anti-trust suits to be pro-defendant, as courts have shied away from interfering in what they see as internal business decisions. The majority of the government's case rest on internal notes and e-mails from meetings between Microsoft executives and their rivals at competing software companies. These meetings, the Department of Justice alleges, show a consistent pattern of collusion on the part of Microsoft. The legal standard for collusion is high and some scholars think Microsoft's actions fall far short of that threshold. Microsoft contends that there was nothing sinister in these meetings and that is just the way business is conducted in the computer software industry. The closely watched case is set to resume in April with a decision expected sometime this summer.
Publication Name: The New York Times
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0362-4331
Year: 1999
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
U.S. judge declares Microsoft a monopoly stifling a market; Gates dissents, favoring talks
Article Abstract:
In a 207-page finding of facts, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson accepted the Justice Dept.'s arguments in the joint federal-state antitrust case against computer software giant Microsoft Corp. Judge Jackson ruled Microsoft had bundled its Internet Web browser software with its Windows operating system in an effort to put down competition and do harm to consumers by behaving in a monopolistic manner. Microsoft claimed it had been making product design and marketing decisions. Some legal experts believe Microsoft will appeal the judge's decision, while others feel that a settlement is more likely.
Publication Name: The New York Times
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0362-4331
Year: 1999
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: For Microsoft, ruling carries fateful tones; Windows delay could curb power and profit
- Abstracts: Unbundling Microsoft: U.S. judge rules the issue is marketing, and for that, old antitrust laws apply. U.S. reviews a bid made by Microsoft; competition an issue in offer to buy WebTV
- Abstracts: Microsoft and ICL of Britain in 'enterprise computing.' (Company Business and Marketing) Why Microsoft should be left alone
- Abstracts: In analysts' eyes, Microsoft is still a giant with legs. Microsoft logs gain of 28% in earnings; reports Windows 98 'is off to a flying start.' (4th qtr 1998) (Company Financial Information)