Re: Microsoft anti-trust perceptions (was: Is IBM listening?)

[Chris Rehm <javadisciple@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

MacWheel99@aol.com wrote:

>You repeated the oft stated view that because DoJ gave in to Microsoft, that
>it is all over, while other articles, like my recent passing on of major
>headlines in this week's eWeek, paint a somewhat different view.
>
>There is the Tunny process where any setttlement needs public comment period
>before it is finalized & as part of that process there were Congressional
>hearings in which Congress critters called for much more severe sanctions
>against Microsoft than anything DoJ ever suggested.
>
This process didn't seem all that effective during the first Microsoft
anti-trust case.

>There were a bunch of US states in the anti-trust action against Microsoft.
>It was not just Federal DoJ.
>Nine of those US states did not agree to the DoJ settlement & they are
>continuing their battle.  So long as the parties in power remain so, those
>states stand firm at least until their next elections.
>
The problem is that this process costs money. Right now, Microsoft has
money and the states are all going broke.I don't think the number of
dissenting states would have dwindled to nine if the economy hadn't been
shaky.

>The Europeans also have legal action pending against Microsoft & even though
>DoJ caved in, the US court process did in fact declare Microsoft to be an
>illegal monopoly conducting illegal practices against its competition & this
>declaration has strengthened the European case against Microsoft.
>
It is doubtful that the EU will be any more effective against Microsoft
than the DOJ was. I've watched that off and on, but I don't see any
significant outcome of that case affecting Microsoft's behavior.

>There is also a private class action suit against Microsoft & I have seen
>practically no coverage of this in the media.
>
Because the private suits really rely on the findings of the DOJ
criminal suit for a precedent to use as evidence of harm. But the issue
of harm done to Netscape through monopoly practice was unhooked by the
appellate court and the DOJ has decided not to reprove it in lower
court. So when John Ashcroft bent over for Microsoft, he really did it
in behalf of a lot of people.

>MacWheel99@aol.com (Alister Wm Macintyre) (Al Mac)
>

--
Chris Rehm
javadisciple@earthlink.net

Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one
that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. 1 John 4:7