Judge Examines Microsoft Settlement Progress 374
Infonaut writes "The judge who presided over the settlement between Microsoft and the federal government may be starting to realize what a lot of people already know about Microsoft. The settlement was predicated on the belief that competitors would be able to license technology from Microsoft in order to get some relief from Microsoft's desktop OS monopoly. As Kollar-Kelly admitted, 'I think all of us had hoped for more agreements.' Now the judge is asking federal prosecutors to examine specifically why more licensing agreements have not been reached. I'm truly shocked that the settlement isn't turning out as planned, after the Justice Department so shrewdly rolled over when they had Microsoft over a barrel."
What was the judge thinking? (Score:1, Interesting)
Ignorance (Score:5, Interesting)
The main problem is out judicial system is not setup to deal adequately with technology lawsuits. We have lawyers with barely a clue trying to explain to judges with practically no clue what the technology does nor what the ramifications are.
The idea of 3 more years of school might turn you off, but for the out-of-work CompSci degree holders, law school might be a great choice. The world needs lawyers who intimately understand technology to be able to try these cases, and those lawyers need to go on to become the judges who preside over such cases. Without such people in the legal system, we will keep seeing ridiculous judgements.
Knunov
Re:.."offering to license its software technology" (Score:4, Interesting)
And who selected the president? [cnn.com]
Re:Must be working SCO took out a license (Score:3, Interesting)
Note, that that's a thoroughly pissed off kook (he's a lawyer as a hobby), who has been banned from every bulletin board he tried to post on after pissing off the moderators, and eventually had to set up his own website to peddle his bullshit because no-one would put up with it any more.
Lewis A. Mettler, Esq. (in Bullshit) please take a bow. What was the last one he was banned from? ZDNet? MSNBC? OSOpinion? CNET?
9 Samurai (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's not forget that 9 states are objecting to the flimsy DOJ ruling and may overturn it locally. Additionally, the market may readjust in the coming 24 months or so, and rearrange Microsoft's dominance without the DOJ's assistance.
Today, the combined state of RedHat/Enterprise, SuSE/IBM, and OpenOffice, have started a huge push which will steamroll, garnering support (and dollars) from both small business and corporate end users. Steve Ballmer has become publicly shrill and irrational. Samba v3 tested faster than Win2k/AD.
Progress on this is like the minute hand- you can't really see it moving, but it's moving.
Microsoft exploits the loophole again (Score:5, Interesting)
I visited the "licensing" site a few weeks back, and the whole thing is "fill in this form and we'll get back to you about your payment". Sorry, that's not what they were supposed to do.
Let's hope the judge realises that for competition to occur, the main player cannot levy a fee against its competitors.
Why is everyone here against freedom? (Score:0, Interesting)
So what do we do about it? (Score:5, Interesting)
Let me repeat that. No amount of finger pointing is going to help anyone. Shocking but true. Bitching doesn't solve problems. So what do we do now that it's clear that the government isn't going to come to our "rescue" and slay the Evil Microsoft?
First, we need to throw away all our myths about being powerless. Microsoft is a natural market monopoly. They don't have any laws preventing competition with them (like the USPO does). Nor do they own the infrastructure (like the telco monopolies). As big as they are, they are still at the whim of the marketplace.
So use the market against them. Sell off any Microsoft stock you own. Don't buy any Microsoft products. Don't buy systems that have a Microsoft "tax". That's step one. It might not be easy, but it can be done. Stop buying your systems at BestBuy or CompUSA, and start buying them at the small mom-and-pop shops who will build you a custom system. Or build them yourself. Or buy a Mac. Then when you do, write to Dell, HP, Gateway, etc., and tell them why you didn't choose them.
Next step is to support the non-Windows operating systems, even the proprietary ones. You don't have to run them all, but you can certainly stop denigrating them. Stop bitching at the price of Macs and Sparcs. Even if they're too expensive for you personally, you don't want to discourage the people for whom they aren't too expensive.
Funny thing is, despite the Microsoft monopoly, there are others out there. Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris, OSX, etc. Since this is Slashdot, odds are you probably use one of these already. Let your friends know you don't use Windows. Help your friends use another OS. Contribute to the Open Source project of your choice, even if it's writing docs or testing alpha and beta releases.
We gave Microsoft their monopoly. That's right, "we" did it. Despite their shady business tactics, it was ultimately we the consumer who chose to purchase Windows. Now it's time for us to take that monopoly away from them.
Re:I think there is a huge misunderstanding... (Score:5, Interesting)
Hopefully, She will keep brutally silent as MS plays its games with her. Like Teddy Roosevelt said, "speak softly, and carry a big stick" if she maintains absolute silence now, her smack down will be un-appealable! The Appeals court thought Jackson was HARSH, not WRONG! Also remember that MS made a fool of a Federal Judge...when they attempt to do it again, the Appeals court will be watching...and won't like what they see from MS at all! The appeals court didn't seem inclined to deal with any of the facts of the case, only the judge's behavior. Unlike poor judge Jackson, they don't have to discuss publicly their choices...only the final rulings. Stunts like MS's make for very bitter judges, but they only have to produce a neat ruling draft, and not the very sarcastic comments they are known to make while debating it! [read Supreme Court docs sometime to see that the higher courts don't take bull...or play "pretty" about it! They can be vicious even by /. standards.]
MS is too big and stuck on itself to learn to play nice at this stage of the game. They will screw even this joke of a settlemen up. Not IF, but WHEN!
MS BulletProof 2000 (w/ SP4) (Score:5, Interesting)
From the page:
"
During 2000 - 2002 election cycle, Bill and Co. gave about $5M to Rep., nearly $4M to Dem., which are nothing significant for their bank account. Under the current administration, no one will ever come to harm Microsoft's monopoly. Period.
Re:From the article (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:OH (Score:4, Interesting)
Microsoft Revenue: $52 Billion
Wal Mart Revenue: $244 Billion
Microsoft is big. They aren't that big though.
I think it would be a wise business plan for Wal Mart to purchase every outstanding share of Microsoft. MS' profit margin alone(74% in the Office business, according to B. Gates) should make Wal Mart jealous.
Re:Microsoft exploits the loophole again (Score:5, Interesting)
That means Microsoft is allowed to charge royalties for the protocols, but the royalty schedule is the same whether you are Sun or IBM or somebody else.
But the thing is, and what I think the original poster was saying, that doesn't seem to be the case. Microsoft appears to have a form that you fill out saying that you want to license something, and then they "get back to you" about the fees. That doesn't sound like the behavior of an entity that intends to use the same royalty schedule for IBM and SCO. In fact, it sounds suspiciously like an entity that's trying to avoid licensing its technology at all, except to carefully-chosen partners. (As "proof" that its complying)
Also convenient that you have to sign an NDA to look at the protocol list. This prevents you from telling the public, for example, that there are no protocols on the list. Or that Microsoft wanted to know what you'd use it for before giving you pricing information. Or any one of a dozen other violations.
Face it. Microsoft's violating the spirit and intent of the agreement while they try to look like they're adhering to its text. The wrist-slap just made their violations of the antitrust laws even bolder and more blatant, as they know the Cheney/Ashcroft/Rove administration won't touch them.
Remember this next time it comes time to vote or purchase software. Microsoft's a convicted felon. Yet they have more influence in your nation than you do, and recieved a smaller punishment than a 12-year-old girl who downloaded an MP3 off Kazaa.
Genetic pressures for morality (Score:5, Interesting)
However, you neglect the other side of that coin: a society (or genetic population) where pro-social behavior is the norm is itself an environment with genetic pressures towards anti-social behavior. A big network of bonds of trust is a network of opportunity for one willing to abuse those bonds.
It's just as inevitable as evolution itself, I'm afraid: if genetic pressures can and do push for cooperation, they can push back for defection. As Jack Handey said: "I can imagine a world without war, a world without fighting, a world without weapons. Then I can imagine us attacking that world, cause they'd never see it coming."
Re:What was the judge thinking? (Score:3, Interesting)
..."under the election system of the US"... (Score:3, Interesting)
No, it was NOT under the election system of the US. It was a selection by the SC. They stopped recounts mandated by the Florida Constitution and recognized by the Florida Supreme Court, declared W to be the winner and stated that any further recounts would cast doubts on their selection. While he may be in office, all I'm doing is noting that he is the Selected President*. Why does ignoring Republican spin and pointing out the reality of the situation irk some folks?
As for your second paragraph, it made a huge difference. The "Justice" Department, after winning the civil case under the previous administration and holding all the cards, suddenly decides "Let's Settle" under the current administration. And then they set the terms so lax and pathetic that calling it a slap on the wrist is an insult to slaps on the wrist everywhere.
Re:From the article (Score:4, Interesting)
Please. You may agree with Democratic politics, and dislike Republicans, but that doesn't mean Democrats are some sort of beacon of light in a corrupt world controlled by suits.
This is why I hate partisan politics. It makes people think all the problems we have are cause by The Other Side (TM), rather than both sides being equally foobared.
Corporations are a good thing. They provide plenty of jobs and stimulate progress on all fronts. The problem comes when corporations get big enough to screw people, in which case the Republican solution is to give them tax cuts, and the Democrat solution is to tax them so high they have to pack their bags and move their plants to Mexico, India, and China. And then Democrats have the balls to say "look how evil they are! They're moving away from the US, firing Americans, and hiring children."
It's time consumers got their minds off of autopilot and excersized their right to demonstrate and boycott corporations that screw the little guys, 'cause if you tell the Government to do it, you're giving an already overgrown, mutated mouse a very large, tasty cookie...
Microsoft will be beaten by people not buying Microsoft products, not convincing others that they should do the same; not imposing your values on the rest of America.
Re:From the article (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft will be beaten by people not buying Microsoft products, and convincing others that they should do the same; not imposing your values on the rest of America through legislating through the Judicial branch.