Doing the Math in the Microsoft Anti-Trust Cases 407
coupland writes "Bob Cringely has posted this week's column and has made some interesting comments. He says that regardless of what happens in the EU, DOJ, and class-action proceedings, Microsoft can't lose. Why? Because they make more money by paying lip-service to the law and accepting the occasional fine than by complying. He even does some simple math to prove his point. Fascinating stuff."
"Oh, I'll just pay the fine..." (Score:5, Interesting)
I did the math (Score:4, Interesting)
Funny -- of course the offices all run on Linux (and/or Netware to this day, thank you
There something wrong with this guys equations
It sure seems that with EVERY major computer type company you look at they're all going one Unix or the other. IBM is Linux. Redhat Linux (obviously
Microsoft obviously has enough money to be a around for a long while. Even while their markets are being eaten left and right. Windows is, well, a technological JOKE at best -- comparing it personally to any of the Unix's out there. OpenOffice sure isn't going away. Who knows WordPerfect may decently re-appear and there's always -X- company out there to come along. What else does Microsoft make money at? Not much.
I see their bottom line continueing to be eaten away -- left and right. Mean while their costs will continue to sky rocket and things will be, well, fun to watch...
Well, Duh! (Score:5, Interesting)
Back during the Watergate scandals, a big corp got caught making illegal contributions to a Republican slush fund. They had to pay a fine, of course. A reporter, noticing the paltry size of the fine, remarked to one of the lawyers, "I'll bet your fee was higher than that." The lawyer responded heatedly, "I should hope so!"
But don't respond with a round of lawyer bashing. That's like blaming garbagemen for pollution. Instead, go out and elect a President who will appoint an Attorney General who thinks that anti-trust laws need penalities that actually hurt.
Nothing you can do... (Score:3, Interesting)
Even a forced break-up, splitting up the OS and Office divisions, would probably not slow them down too much. Then you would just have 2 monopolies instead of 1.
The forced open-sourcing of Windows is the way to go!
Old news... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What a suprise (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, they may have wanted it that way since it requires less labor to process the ticket than it does to haul away all those coins.
Macs are Mach-based (Score:2, Interesting)
They run on a Mach kernel with some BSD userland tools.
Microsoft obviously has enough money to be a around for a long while. Even while their markets are being eaten left and right.
Heh, only on Slashdot do you see statements like this. "Microsoft's market is being eaten left and right!" I've been hearing that since 1998. Linux makes gains here and there, but it's mostly in markets in which UNIX has traditionally existed. Nobody's market is really being eaten except for UNIX. Windows is so fine-grained in the populace, it's become synonymous with computing for most of the world. Contrary to the "frustration" stories you always here, most people are happy with Windows. I can't imagine their frustration stories if given a copy of Linux...
This happens.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:"Oh, I'll just pay the fine..." (Score:4, Interesting)
True, my comment wasn't especially relevant, except in the sense of it being an example of a powerful person who broke the law repeatedly and was content to shrug it off and "simply pay the fine."
It's especially egregious in the case of politicians, because they routinely exempt themselves from justice.
It's outrageous that a person ran through a stop signal, and killed someone. It's more outrageous that they were a persistent violator of traffic laws. It's even more outrageous that this was someone who makes laws and is sworn to uphold them.
Prison (Score:1, Interesting)
Can you imagine Bill Gates doing 7-10 in prison?
But Microsoft will lose. (Score:2, Interesting)
Linux adoption continues to increase.
Microsoft has a bad quarter.
Microsoft panics.
Microsoft digs through their 100s of patents, and find something that IBM unwittingly violated.
They sue IBM for say, 3 billion dollars.
IBM digs through its much larger patent portfolio and finds several that MS inadvertently vioplated.
IBM sues MS for 60 billion dollars.
MS wins its suit against IBM and nets 3 billion.
IBM wins its suit against MS and nets 60 billion.
And Microsoft is broke.
Re:bah... (Score:5, Interesting)
Basically Cringely is arguing that the court system, whose timetables are based on pre-industrial information flows (i.e. the time it takes a man on horse and buggy to get the handwritten documents from the lawyer's office to a court house), cannot keep up with the hijinks MS is pulling in the relatively fast-paced digital age. By the time this particular case goes through appeals, etc., the story will be ancient in computer terms. MS will have screwed consumers 50 ways from Sunday in the meantime.
As far as USPS, or European postal systems having to do with MS legal difficulties -- how do you think the documents were presented to the courts? Fax? Email? ;) Now, reflect and understand why the courts can't keep up with MS-BS.
Re:"Oh, I'll just pay the fine..." (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:"Oh, I'll just pay the fine..." (Score:2, Interesting)
And if a truck or something had hit and killed Janklow when Janklow was driving recklessly, you can bet that his family would have the driver declared a terrorist and dragged off to Guantamo Bay.
Re:"Oh, I'll just pay the fine..." (Score:3, Interesting)
On that same note, Microsoft needs to have an appropriate punishment as well for their continued and blatent disregard for the laws of every country in the world. They need to be given a chance to comply with the laws and the slap-on-the-wrist fine they received. However, if they still fail to comply with anti-monopoly rulings and change the way they do business... after all the chances they've been awarded then they need to REALLY be punished. I'm thinking something along the lines of having their intellectual property right to collect money for use of their product needs to be revoked until such time as they can comply. Basically, if they don't sell a product that complies, then they should be restricted from selling any product at all. And to prevent them from holding out by simply not letting people have windows, their right to the exclusive distribution should be revoked, and users should be allowed to use a "communal, free" license to their software until such time as Microsoft can provide a copy of it that complies with rulings.
Jamon
Re:Happens in other companies (Score:3, Interesting)
Something even scarier is that businesses can buy "permits to pollute" & barter, buy & sell those permits within their respective industries.
Why have fines? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I did the math (Score:1, Interesting)
Corporate 3 Strikes... ph34r M3!!!1! (Score:3, Interesting)
A little sauce for the goose [corporate3strikes.org], my friend.
l /main552270.shtml [cbsnews.com]
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/05/nationa
This is such a fantastically good idea. Imagine watching our congressppl(on both sides of the isle) try to explain why they can't quite support it.
Hours of entertainment ensue.
At your expense.
Finland has a way (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I did the math (Score:1, Interesting)
I think it is the drivers. Microsoft also calls some of these drivers, "services", if you're interested. Get the service controller [microsoft.com] command line tool. A command of
will tell you all you need to know about suspicious drivers. Then read some of the sc documentation to find what to do next to rid your system of those drivers.Re:Total BS (Score:3, Interesting)
Fines are a cost of business (Score:2, Interesting)
So fines are essentially permits after the fact , and they're often avoided and appealed. As has been said , make it a punishment rather than merely a tax-deductable fee for doing business , and things may change. Otherwise it goes on the balance sheet under pens , paper and lawyer fees.
Continuing Criminal Enterprise? (Score:3, Interesting)
Close. But you missed the point of part of the wind: That complying with the rulings COSTS Microsoft more than the fines.
So it itsn't just that the fines are too little to matter. It's that COMPLIANCE is TOO EXPENSIVE, and the fines are too small to shift that balance.
Just like alcohol prohibition and the "War on Drugs", it's explicitly PROFITABLE to DISOBEY the rulings.
Of course this brings up a question:
Does this behavior make Microsoft a "Continuing Criminal Enterprise"?
If so, it could be VERY interesting if that's brought up the NEXT time somebody brings Microsoft in for antitrust or other violations.
I wonder if the RICO laws could be applied, too.
Re:Postponing trials and appealing... (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm surprised that Janklow even got 100 days. Tennessee Senator Koella was drunk, hit a motorcyclist and left him to die on the road. Koella served no time. And then they named the road after Koella when he died of natural causes.
Martha Stewart is going to prison because she's not politically connected, and probably because she's female. If only she was in Skull & Bones...
Or go the other direction (Score:3, Interesting)
How do you put a corporation in jail for 90 days?
How do you give a corporation the death penalty?
Once upon a time, the king could revoke your corporate charter, and your company went away. That's the closest thing to a 'death penalty' for corporations that I've ever encountered, but even modern trust busting practices don't go that far (Ma Bell was dismembered, but not actually destroyed).
Similarly, the punishment for some crimes allows for any goods that were acquired in the process of breaking the law to be seized. If you have a product that violates the law egregiously, why shouldn't the benefits (profits) of that product be seized, and funneled back toward the public good?
Fining a company that has $60B in the bank 600 million dollars is chump change. They can take that out of interest payments on their liquid assets. You really want to hurt them, you seize all of their profits (or source code) for that product. Anything less is merely an annoyance.
Divide and Conquer (Score:3, Interesting)
Remember that the original judgement order would have split Microsoft up. Remember also that they fought it tooth and nail because they knew that if it happened - then they really would have had problems.
Remember AT&T was split up and we got better phone service. IBM had to split up and we now have microcomputers that are so cheap you could work at MacDonald's and still buy one. Microsoft should be split up so software can evolve the way it should.
But then, Microsoft has enough money to buy anything and anyone. So the guy is right. When you are making so much money that you can thumb your nose at the law - who's laws do you live by? The answer is - no one's but your own. Someone giving you a hard time? Buy them off or buy someone who will remove the problem. And that doesn't mean you have to hire a hit man. You just need to hire/buy/create another company to put pressure on legislators, or do letter writing campaigns, or even just visit these people and hint that your company which brings vast wealth into the U.S. would leave and...well, I'm sure you get the picture.
So did the DOJ of Utah. If you have forgotten, remember that Microsoft was in big trouble with the State of Utah [internetnews.com] for creating a company which wrote ficticious letters to them asking for leniency in their case against Microsoft. IMHO - that is a $10,000.00 fine for each and every letter written and a 5-10 in jail for each offense. Since there were litterally thousands of letters we should never see Mr. Gates or anyone else who was in charge of Microsoft at the time ever again. Yet - there have been no arrests even though Microsoft admitted they had done this.
I think Mr. Roosevelt said it best:"...So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself--nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory."
We need victory. True victory and not hollow lapdog lickings. But all we have gotten so far is a pat on the head.
Later.
Re:Total BS (Score:1, Interesting)
The result was that some cities have started to allow meter maids to issue an additional citation for each additional hour or so a car stayed past it's limit. In other words, say a car gets a ticket at 10am, and still there at noon, would get a second ticket. And a third at 2pm, and so on....
Go ahead, ask me how I know.......
Re:Postponing trials and appealing... (Score:3, Interesting)
There needs to be a bill passed into law such that ANY PRODUCTS THAT HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BE MONOPOLISTIC IN BEHAVIOUR, or SIMILARLY CONTROVERISAL SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY INJUNCTIONED AND WITHDRAWN FROM PUBLIC SALE UNTIL SAID CASE IS COMPLETED IN ITS ENTIRETY.
A subclause stating that the above could only apply if the manufacturer was FOUND GUILTY ON MULTIPLE COUNTS OF ANTI-COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR AND IN MULTIPLE COUNTRIES / CONTIENTS would easily put a limiting factor on potential "abuses" of this new law.
Anyone want to help me get it passed?
Corp Death Penalty (Score:3, Interesting)
1. seize all of its assets and auction it ASAP.
2. put all managers, middle-management and up in jail.
3. declare all of its rights in contracts invalid.
4. watch.
Re:Postponing trials and appealing... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Fines are not Punishment (Score:3, Interesting)
how to take on Dagobert Duck (Score:3, Interesting)
Easy : never ever put financial sanctions on them. Only put regulatory sanctions on such Corporations. For instance take the EU vs. Microsoft case : a $600.= million fine is pocket money.
So demand Microsoft to remove the Media Player with the sanction , that if Microsoft fails to do so in time, Microsoft would just loose their commercial chamber registration and license, and thus would be forced to stop doing business in Europe. Easy as it gets.
Robert
Re:Or go the other direction (Score:3, Interesting)
How do you put a corporation in jail for 90 days?
You freeze the companies assets for the 90 days, not allowing them to make any sort of financial transaction, while allowing stock market trading to commence as normal. The company is not allowed to make any sort of income during this time, all its products are removed from shelves for this duration, and the company is only allowed to work toward a resolution imposed by the court at the beginning of the "jail" period. In this case, MS would only be allowed to work toward removing WMP from windows, wouldnt be allowed to conduct any development in the EU, no sales of products in the EU.
How do you give a corporation the death penalty?
The court replaces the entire board of directors and upper echelon of the business with appointed people, who will run it for a period of time no less than 10 years. The old directors will not be allowed to work together for a period of 2 years. This should remove any top level influence that has caused the issue that is forcing the action. Remember, more often than not, a corporation is no more than the dicision makers. and under different guidance, it should become a different company.
--Of course, the first solution above is damaging to the consumer. No sales of MS Windows for 90 days! No sales of Office for 90 days! No third party could ramp it up enough to support linux, and by my estimates, full linux support would only occur 1 to 2 years after such an order was imposed on MS.
Just to make my views clear, I dont think this EU case is correct. MS didnt prevent any consumer from installing what they want on their desktop, they jsut followed progress and included a multimedia player, which I hope you agree is expected of a computer today. Should they be sued by third parties because they included a TCP/IP stack, which is arguably a lot harder to replace? What about the shell, as there are third party shells out there.
Boxing Day fines (Score:2, Interesting)