Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Business, general

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Business, general

Microsoft antitrust pact rejected by federal judge; agreement called lenient; ruling raises specter of tougher U.S. action

Article Abstract:

Federal District Court Judge Stanley Sporkin has decided to reject an antitrust consent decree that the US Justice Dept had negotiated with Microsoft in Jul 1994. In his his 45-page decision handed down on Feb 14, 1995, Judge Sporkin criticized the Justice Dept for not taking a tougher stand against Microsoft, the world's largest software vendor. The proposed consent decree from the Justice Dept centered on Microsoft's licensing of operating systems, but failed to address other issues such as vaporware and the company's control in the applications market. Legal analysts report that the government has four actions it can take in light of the Federal District Court's decision. The Justice Dept could appeal Judge Sporkin's ruling; renegotiate a new, more stringent settlement with Microsoft; institute an antitrust lawsuit against the company or simply drop the matter entirely. A status hearing on the matter is scheduled in front of Judge Sporkin on Mar 16, 1995. The instant ruling is expected to have a negative effect on Microsoft stock. In Nasdaq trading for Feb 14, 1994, Microsoft's shares were down 12.5 cents to end the day at $61.875 per share.

Author: Clark, Don, Novak, Viveca
Publisher: Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Publication Name: The Wall Street Journal Western Edition
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0193-2241
Year: 1995
Industry legal issue, Lawsuit Litigation

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Judge invites oral arguments on Microsoft

Article Abstract:

US District Judge Stanley Sporkin invited public comment from Microsoft competitors and customers as friends of the court concerning a consent decree reached by Microsoft and the Justice Department. The case involves an agreement made by Microsoft and the Justice Department concerning anticompetitive behavior. Sporkin will allow the public comment to provide the court more information concerning the case. The lawyer for I.D.E. Corp will explain to the court how the agreement will not cover royalties prepaid to Microsoft for minimum commitments to purchase Microsoft operating systems. The other invited group represents Microsoft competitors, who will argue that the decree does not increase competition. Under the agreement, Microsoft must end its requirement for PC makers to pay royalties, prohibit licensing agreements of over one year and provide less restrictive nondisclosure agreements.

Author: Novak, Viveca
Publisher: Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Publication Name: The Wall Street Journal Western Edition
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0193-2241
Year: 1995

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA



Subjects list: Computer software industry, Software industry, Software, Cases, Microsoft Corp., Antitrust law, United States. Department of Justice, MSFT, Antitrust Issue
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Microsoft and Hewlett win ruling over Apple. Federal judge reverses ruling on Ashton-Tate
  • Abstracts: US West to offer names of callers via new service. Cellular phone alliance is set in U.S., Canada
  • Abstracts: Debiasing the curse of knowledge in audit judgment. A perspective on cognitive research in accounting. Auditors' evaluation of test-of-control strength
  • Abstracts: Businessland Inc. rejects proposal by ComputerLand. JWP completes its tender offer for Businessland. JWP to buy Businessland for cash, stock; purchaser to pay $42 million for retailer's shares; debt will be assumed
  • Abstracts: AT&T's board faces many twists and turns in search for new CEO; if directors pick an outsider the company may lose its popular Mr. Inside: Hughes chief in one scenario
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.