Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Business, general

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Business, general

Microsoft's settlement talks hinge on PC makers

Article Abstract:

Microsoft's agreements with computer makers to supply them with operating systems are considered to be at the heart of any settlement negotiated in the Justice Department's antitrust suit. In preparation, the Justice Department is trying to persuade the heads of some computer makers, including Theodore W. Waitt of Gateway, to testify for the government. Microsoft's first move has been to submit a framework document for an agreement offering concessions to computer manufacturers which it has already largely made. The government is expected to seek structural reform of Microsoft involving either break-up of the company or compulsory licensing of the code for the Windows operating system. The middle ground between those extremes could involve an agreement by Microsoft to publish the pricing of its systems and offer discounts to computer makers solely on volume purchased. Microsoft would not be able to offer discounts to makers who agreed to bundle the operating system with other Microsoft applications. Another option would be for Microsoft to publish, without licensing, it's operating system code, placing software applications developers on an equal footing with the giant. Microsoft's incorporation of the Internet Explorer browser into Windows remains a bone of contention.

Author: Lohr, Steve
Publisher: The New York Times Company
Publication Name: The New York Times
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0362-4331
Year: 1999
Legal issues & crime, Systems Software Pkgs (Micro), Operating systems (Software), United States. Department of Justice, Contracts

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Ruling backs release of Microsoft trial material

Article Abstract:

The United States Court for the District of Columbia Circuit has ruled that the entire videotaped deposition of Bill Gates recorded for use in the government's antitrust trial must be released to the public. Portions of the tape have been presented into evidence by both parties to the litigation and have already been broadcast by news organizations. Public access to the deposition became an issue when the Judge presiding over the antirust case, Thomas Penfield Jackson, ruled the deposition open to the public. Microsoft appealed the decision to the appellate court. The ruling is based on a little-used and possibly outdated law, the Publicity in Taking of Evidence Act of 1913, passed during the antitrust litigations of the early part of the century.

Author: Lohr, Steve
Publisher: The New York Times Company
Publication Name: The New York Times
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0362-4331
Year: 1999
Computer Software, Software, Laws, regulations and rules, Gates, Bill, Testimony, Public and closed trials, Right to public trial, Video tapes in courtroom proceedings, Video evidence

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA



Subjects list: United States, Computer software industry, Computer industry, Software industry, Cases, Microsoft Corp., Antitrust law, MSFT, Antitrust issue
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Microsoft serves subpoenas on 5 computer companies. U.S. attacks a Microsoft videotape as misleading. Microsoft winner in appeal to keep software intact
  • Abstracts: Microsoft delays release of Windows NT revamp. Microsoft offers home buyers on-line site
  • Abstracts: 'Melissa' shows it's harder to hide in cyberspace. Intel wins delay for trial with FTC until January 5
  • Abstracts: News Corp. holds talks with Kirch on buying stake in German media firm. News Corp. reports $233 million profit as nearly all units show improvement
  • Abstracts: NEC plans to eliminate 11,600 jobs. Tire makers combine as mergers rise in Japan. Sanyo buys access to technology from IBM
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.