microsoft appeal result
summary: the appeals court in the microsoft case has agreed with parts of the trial court judgement and disagreed with part of it. the appeals court rejected the contention that microsoft illegally attempted to monopolize the browser market and remanded the contention that it spuriously tied two products (the OS and the browser) to gain a monopoly. the court also used judge jackson's crazy behaviour to set aside the remedies proposed by him and sent the case back to trial court for remedies, particularly noting that it go to a different judge. rather than attach the 500k PDF file to this message i have put it up on my web server: http://www.streamcenter.com/~ravi/MSAppealResult.pdf please do not distribute this message to others or pass on the URL since i do not want my internet link brought down by downloads. i will remove the file at the URL above after a short period of seeing this message appear on the list. --ravi
Re: microsoft appeal result
I have to say, having read over the decision, the Court decision is a pretty harsh loss for Microsoft given the hopes in the MS camp for complete reversal. On substantive factual and most law, the Court found that Microsoft had engaged in illegal actions to maintain its Microsoft monopoly in everything from agreements with ISPs, computer makers, and messing with Java. Where the Court was more skeptical was on the charge of MS illegally taking over the browser market itself, largely because of the unclarity of that market - not an unreasonable position - but even there, the Court did not rule for Microsoft but only remanded the case for rehearing because the district court had not provided full evidence of its effects on the market but had engaged in flat per se liability based on the tying of the browser to the operating system, rather than on its effects. But on the findings of fact that Microsoft committed illegal acts, the decision was really extremely harsh on Microsoft. So no one in Redmond should be pulling out the party hats. In any case, I never thought the breakup of Microsoft was a great result, since more competition won't help consumers get stable computing. Better tailored conduct remedies may be far better for consumers and the computer industry, so the end result of the Appeals Court decision may be superior to if they had upheld Jackson's breakup remedy. Nathan Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nathannewman.org - Original Message - From: ravi narayan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pen-L Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 12:36 PM Subject: [PEN-L:14235] microsoft appeal result summary: the appeals court in the microsoft case has agreed with parts of the trial court judgement and disagreed with part of it. the appeals court rejected the contention that microsoft illegally attempted to monopolize the browser market and remanded the contention that it spuriously tied two products (the OS and the browser) to gain a monopoly. the court also used judge jackson's crazy behaviour to set aside the remedies proposed by him and sent the case back to trial court for remedies, particularly noting that it go to a different judge. rather than attach the 500k PDF file to this message i have put it up on my web server: http://www.streamcenter.com/~ravi/MSAppealResult.pdf please do not distribute this message to others or pass on the URL since i do not want my internet link brought down by downloads. i will remove the file at the URL above after a short period of seeing this message appear on the list. --ravi
Re: Re: microsoft appeal result
Nathan Newman wrote: I have to say, having read over the decision, the Court decision is a pretty harsh loss for Microsoft given the hopes in the MS camp for complete reversal. snip happens But on the findings of fact that Microsoft committed illegal acts, the decision was really extremely harsh on Microsoft. So no one in Redmond should be pulling out the party hats. conspiracy could it be that (sinister tone) this whole thing is being orchestrated towards a result that will be gained outside the courts? after microsoft and gates present what many consider a weak defense (to the point of lacking credibility) and the govt (govts) put forth a very strong well reasoned set of charges, the judge acts in the craziest manner possible introducing an element of judicial conduct question into what should have ended a clean cut indictment of microsoft. rather suspicious! the judge's actions seem to provide microsoft, which had completely lost in their defense, an unexpected avenue of appeal! the appeals court then seizes on this issue and sends the case back to trial. in the meantime bush jr and the justice dept start talking about reviewing the appeals court verdict and now there is talk of the justice dept seeking an out of court settlement with microsoft in light of the appeals court decision. /conspiracy of course there are the state attorney generals who are also involved in the law suit... In any case, I never thought the breakup of Microsoft was a great result, since more competition won't help consumers get stable computing. i must admit that my primary concern is not so much consumer benefit as it is in retaining a particular computing/networking lifestyle that i have grown comfortable with and am a part of. to generalize from my personal motivations, richard stallman has defended this lifestyle elsewhere as i am sure the members of this list are aware. thanks for your comments on the judgement, which help me understand the contents better, --ravi
Re: Re: Re: microsoft appeal result
- Original Message - From: ravi narayan [EMAIL PROTECTED] could it be that (sinister tone) this whole thing is being orchestrated towards a result that will be gained outside the courts? after microsoft and gates present what many consider a weak defense (to the point of lacking credibility) and the govt (govts) put forth a very strong well reasoned set of charges, the judge acts in the craziest manner possible introducing an element of judicial conduct question into what should have ended a clean cut indictment of microsoft. rather suspicious! The remedy was not set aside just because of the judges newspaper interviews. It was put aside because he failed to hold a hearing on remedy and because the Appeals Court did change liability standards on a few points, sending them back for remand, that it may have changed the need for the remedy proposed by the district court. While Microsoft lost badly on the facts and law, they won enough that remand was probably necessary in any case. Breakup was always an odd remedy for a company that had not grown based on horizontal mergers. Hopefully, the conduct remedies approved or negotiated will do enough to restrain Microsoft and allow new innovations to eventually marginalize them. I've argued in other places that we already won based on the MS lawsuit, since Microsoft curtailed much of its worst behavior for fear of encouraging worse judicial sanctions. The threat of antitrust action is probably more useful than the remedy itself, which is why winning on the facts and the law is far more important than winning on the specific remedy. -- Nathan Newman
