On March 24th of this year, the Wall street journal reported that Microsoft sent a detailed proposal to the government?s attorneys in an effort to settle the case. It was expected that the proposal contained price changes, separation of the Internet Explorer browser from the Windows OS, as well as some access to parts of the source code. It is believed that the proposal was brought about after weeks of talks because Judge Penfield Jackson said that if a deal wasn?t reached soon, he would issue his findings of law. After ripping Microsoft in November (?99), it seems that the Judge will find for the DOJ (WSJ, Microsoft).
There are questions as to how effective any of this antitrust litigation will be. If one looks back to some previous cases, it looks to be rather unnecessary. In 1969 the government went after IBM for allegedly violating antitrust laws. That case was dropped thirteen years later when their market share started to drop with emerging companies (including a young Microsoft) gaining. Schwinn Bicycle actually lost an antitrust suit in 1967, but foreign competition relegated the firm to bankruptcy in 1992. RCA, a once dominant radio and television producer was made to license products. They followed the Justice Department mandate and directly licensed to Japan, who now is the leader in the electronics industry. (Schmidt, Lawyers)
There are going to be very definite repercussions to the Microsoft case, no matter what the verdict. We have to weigh the cost of these trials against what usually ends up being short term dominance by a powerful firm. If Microsoft is broken up, Bill Gates isn?t going to be the only one that is affected. If they?re not broken up, it seems Netscape will have to suffer only moving 160 million units of their browser. It seems to me that the majority of consumers have benefited from Microsoft?s dominance and progress in software. Government intervention just doesn?t seem to do anything but hinder that benefit.
Work Cited
Clausing, Jeri?Senator Takes on Microsoft in Antitrust Hearings? New York Times, 11/05/97, http://www.newyorktimes.org
?Microsoft Counters Justice Department?s Lawsuit?
New York Times, 11/11/97, http://www.newyorktimes.org
Cooper, Charles?MSN surpasses half-million point as rivals stew?
PCWeek, 11/20/95 http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/news/1120/omsn20.html
Labaton, Stephen?Government Accuses Microsoft of Violating Antitrust Agreement? New York Times, 10/21/97, http://www.newyorktimes.org
Lohr, Steve?Justice Department Examining Microsoft?s Internet Strategy?
New York Times, 9/20/96, http://www.newyorktimes.org
?US Requests Documents Concerning Microsoft Purchase of WebTV? New York Times, 5/20/97, http://www.newyorktimes.org
Markoff, John?Gates says His Company is not Violating Antitrust Agreement?
New York Times, 10/22/97, http://www.newyorktimes.org
Martinez, Michael?Government Sues Microsoft? ABC News, 05/18/98
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/business/DailyNews/Mirosoft980513.html
Ramsted, Evan?Judge approves Microsoft antitrust settlement?
The Detroit News, 8/22/95, http://detnews.com/menu/stories/14207.htm
Schmidt, Mark?Lawyers Playing Lawmakers?
National Taxpayers Union, 9/9/99,http://www.ntu.org/issues/taxes/tech/pp119.htm
Unknown Author?Microsoft: An Unprincipled, Rapacious Company?
The Ethical Spectacle, April 1995, http://www.spectacle.org
Unknown Author?The Justice Department v Microsoft: The Evidence and the Answers? New York Times, 10/27/97, http://www.newyorktimes.org
Unknown Author?Microsoft offers a proposal to settle antitrust charges?
Wall Street Journal,3/24/00http://www.msnbc.com/news/386566.asp