Seeing as I covered Microsoft’s antitrust trial for about five years, when I worked as a reporter, new developments interest me. According to a Computerworld story, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly cracked the whip across Microsoft’s back.
Biggest problem: Compliance with a portion of the antitrust settlement for disclosing communications protocols, which have been a contentious issue since Microsoft agreed to disclose them; and it seems to me the company really doesn’t really want to comply with this portion of the settlement. I should point out that inclusion of the protocol licensing in the settlement wooed as many as half the 18 state litigants to join the Justice Department’s agreement.
According to the Computerworld story, Judge Kollar-Kotelly balked at Microsoft’s plan to delay full compliance for another year, until October 2006. I guess software (how’s Windows Vista) isn’t the only thing Microsoft can’t finish on time. Of course, Microsoft has plenty of reason to drag out the process. The consent decree is for five years. Microsoft and the Justice Department settled the case in November 2001 and the judge approved the deal a year later. Funny how close October 2006 would be to the end of the deal. I find it hard to believe there’s any coincidence in that.
Meanwhile, the judge rapped Microsoft for tentatively telling portable music player manufacturers that they could only ship (and presumably support) Windows Media Player with their products. That kind of exclusive agreement isn’t just blatant violation of the settlement but one of the major reasons trustbusters went after Microsoft in the first place. Exclusive deals hurting Netscape were major pillars of the government’s case against Microsoft.
I don’t believe in coincidence, and anyone with kids should know how they’ll test boundaries and feign innocence. Maybe there’s too much petulance here?
Photo Credit: Microsoft