U.S. Adds Years To Microsoft's 'Probation' 206
An anonymous reader writes "The U.S. Justice Department has added another two years to its agreement with Microsoft, extending the protocol licensing program that is part of the company's penance for anti-competitive activities. The organization feels Microsoft is providing documentation too slowly to its licensees." From the article: "At one time, the Justice Department and several state Attorneys General had sought a breakup of Microsoft in order to prevent it from abusing its Windows monopoly. Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson at one point ordered such a move, though his ruling was later reversed on appeal. Ultimately Microsoft settled with the Department of Justice, agreeing to far more modest restrictions, including the protocol licensing program." Relatedly, regulators have cleared Vista of anti-competitive elements. They examined the OS on concerns an added search box may have given the company a home-field advantage.
Probation? (Score:5, Insightful)
well... you know...
keeping you from doing the stuff you got in trouble for .
Re:Probation? (Score:2, Troll)
I
Re:Probation? (Score:2)
This is the beginning of the end of mediocrity ruling.
Re:They called Clinton crazy (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:They called Clinton crazy (Score:4, Insightful)
The equality was provided by Windows being so ubiquitous, certainly, but this would also be true with sufficient competition amongst several equal OS vendors (as opposed to one monopoly and two roughly equal bit players). If there weren't Microsoft to dictate APIs, vendors would use a set of standard, cross-platform APIs (e.g. QT, wxWidgets, OpenGL, SDL,) and open standards for drivers would likely also have come into existance and be well-established.
I would arge that the open standards were much more important . If each vendor had their own, proprietary slots instead of USB, firewire, ATA, PCI, etc. history would likely have turned out much, much, much differently. It was the open standards that let you buy an IBM today and a Gateway tomorrow and not have to throw away all of your hardware.
Re:They called Clinton crazy (Score:2)
I don't give MSWind, or anything associated with it, ANY credit for developing computers OR for making them cheaper. Those trends were both solidly in place before MS was even a company.
Re:They called Clinton crazy (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft is not being punished "for succeeding". Being a monopoly is never illegal. It is, however, illegal to use your monopoly status to leverage your way into new markets and to keep competitors out.
Thus, this anti-trust stuff is the middle ground you seek . It's perfectly fine to be a monopoly, but punishes abuse of the monopoly status (e.g. pushing OEMs to sign deals to exclude BeOS boy I wish that OEM licensing deals would see the light of day!).
Re:They called Clinton crazy (Score:2)
To sum up: Yes, Microsoft can be sued and convicted for something all their competitors are doing.
Re:They called Clinton crazy (Score:3, Informative)
Unless you literally translate 'being a monopoly' as being identical to 'being successful' then there is clearly a difference here. A monopoly can not be leveraged to gain more monopolies or to push out competition in another area. What everybody else is doing doesn't even come into the picture.
There is no shortag
Re:They called Clinton crazy (Score:2)
Re:They called Clinton crazy (Score:2)
If the poster had said early 80's I might have believed it.
Re:They called Clinton crazy (Score:2, Insightful)
harsh penalty (Score:5, Insightful)
two more years (Score:5, Insightful)
typo (Score:2)
They are being given two more beers!
So they can celebrate being able to violate federal law over and over [gpo.gov] with impunity.
Re:I am confused... (Score:3, Insightful)
In two years there will no longer be a need for Congress to look the other way at the Bush adminitration's looking the other way at big business's looking the other way at customer security and the NSA looking for every way to look at you!
A new concept in software design (Score:5, Insightful)
First software was designed to do stuff because it was needed.
Later, software was designed to do stuff that was cool.
Still later, software was designed to make money.
Then software was designed primarily by marketing departments
Now, software is designed by lawyers and the judicial system?
What a great world we live in.
Uh, no. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't approve of laws designing software, but I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with stopping people abusing laws to prevent software from being designed. I also have no problem with laws that enforce progress.
(The State of Oregon recently received some thinly-veiled threats from Microsoft's CEO over Oregon's active support for Open Source - both towards Oregon and towards all Microsoft shops in Oregon. Although not a part of the DoJ lawsuit, and therefore probably not a part of this review, I would feel a lot more comfortable if States receiving such threats reviewed their legality. Last I heard, "demands with menaces" was not considered an OK activity.)
Re:Uh, no. (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.oregonlive.com/newslogs/oregonian/index
An automotive precedent (Score:2)
Yeah, I know the market would have delievered it without Nader.
Xix
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re:An automotive precedent (Score:2)
FWIW, I think the best approach to cars, bikes, mountain climbing, smoking, drugs is to build in any costs to the public and let people do whatever they want to themselves. Not very likely I know.
Oh, and you *can* still get the car I describe, only it's called a HumVee.
Xix.
You are exactly right (Score:2, Offtopic)
Due to regulation, such cars will never make it in the US, which is a shame since they could get the same MPG as a hybrid car but with half the cost and twice the performance (like a motorcycle).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:You are exactly right (Score:2)
BTW, you'll probably find a 600 cc sportbike sufficient. Few sport bikers out there can or would really put the full liter to good use. The primary need for the bigger sportbikes is for guys that are, well, bigger. A large percentage of people buying the liter + sportbikes are the ones that want something to pose with. Let's face it. Where are you going to really be able to open up a Hayabusa?
If you
Re:A new concept in software design (Score:2)
You're more correct than you know.
Only it's usually not federal lawyers, it's now usually patent attorneys...
Slap On The Wrist: Part Deux (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Slap On The Wrist: Part Deux (Score:3, Informative)
If that's true then this new development must also be political. Who did Microsoft piss off this time?
Re:Slap On The Wrist: Part Deux (Score:2)
Then Bush got into the chicken coop and Microsoft started lobbying shortly therafter. The justice dept then did a complete switcheroo and settled with just a slap on the wrist.
Now whether the reason was due to a political change or Microsoft change in lobbying, who can say. But regardless, it is obvious in the stance of the justice dept that something
Ah ha! (Score:4, Funny)
Cheers!
Bureaucratic waste (Score:5, Insightful)
Has the State involvement in this issue achieved anything?
And how much did it COST?
We're all sitting here paying tax through our noses.
Who's spending this money?
What are we getting for it?
How many millions have been spent on this excercise which has had no significant impact on the MS monopoly?
What alternaative? (Score:2)
Perhaps there is too much corporate involvemeent in the State.
How much taxpayer money is being spent to create and maintain exclusive scarcity for MS and other IP claimants?
Xix.
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:3, Informative)
Mainly restrictions on MS's behavior with OEMs:
+ Dell and other OEMs can now load up their machines with RealPlayer, Firefox, Googlebar, etc without worrying about losing their Windows contract.
+ You can buy Linux or other alt-OS machines from major OEMs -- these were very scarse before the trial.
+ In theory, all OEMs have the same pricing, so MS can't threaten them with removing the special dicounts.
That's not very much, but it hits on the core issu
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:2)
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:2)
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:4, Informative)
This is the classic incorrect version of the story parroted by fools who get their information from Slashdot posts. In reality, the appeals court threw out much of the judgement againt Microsoft:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_antitrust_
they would do the next best thing and surrender via "a settlement".
The Clinton administration repeatedly tried to settle the case, and the Gore adminisration would have done likewise. Bush probably did go a little easier than the democrats would have however. I am absolutely not a Bush defender, just fighting against moronic conspiracy theories put forward by ignorant people.
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:2)
gov: slam Microsoft...
gov: slam Microsoft...
gov: slam Microsoft...
gov: slam Microsoft...
gov: slam Microsoft...
gov: slam Microsoft...
gov: slam Microsoft...
gov: We have them were we want them...this is going to hurt!
Bush comes into office
gov: Let's settle while you laugh at the silliness of it all...
Microsoft: *snickering* *wink* *wink* Ok...this is horrible! *wink* *wink*
gov: Oh you violated the agreement...we'll ignore that
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:3, Informative)
The appelate court basically threw the whole case out. It threw out the Section one claims. It upheld the bundling claims, but required the government to actually show net consumer harm -- recall that the DOJ and the states did have to concede that the bundling of IE into Windows had consumer benefits. The court set a high bar for accepting such a claim.
Basically, the US looked at the resulting mess, and said "Fooey. We can't get anything out of
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:2)
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:2)
Re:Bureaucratic waste (Score:2)
Links to findings (Score:5, Informative)
Penfield's remedies are here [gpo.gov]. The gutted final judgement produced by the DOJ cave-in and the Appeals court kowtowing to MS is here here [usdoj.gov]. It's a mere slap on the wrist. "Pretty please, play nice, now, or at least don't get caught flagrantly breaking the law." I wonder how much $jack the DOJ and US Appeals court judges cost. Less than an hour's profits, I'd bet. Ask your MS pals.
More on this and other MS litigation over here. [groklaw.net]
Links to EU situation (Score:5, Informative)
and the difficulty of providing it [groklaw.net].
Xix.
Re:Links to EU situation (Score:2)
Also, the problem obtaining it is coming from the Judge, John Cooke, in this instance - not Microsoft.
The larger problem is that people only get their news from sources that confirm what they wanted to believe in the first place. I'm not advocating either side in this issue, but your post is so anti-MS leaning that its not
Re:Links to EU situation (Score:2)
The larger problem is that the truth ends up being what we publicise as being the truth. The Samba PoV suits me better than MS's.
Microsoft and its so called standards (Score:5, Insightful)
Real question is why should we stick to just one application for any format. If every unique application made their own file format, nobody would be able to share anything, and why does Internet ever exists if we won't be able share our documents.
That's not an open source issue, or free market problem. It's the lack of mentality for sharing of information. People really suffer from these compatibility problems, and if someone made a research about the lost and or wasted time related to these issues, it would be easily seen that it's very huge problem that computer users experience. And with the growing trend of DRM and stuff we will just suffer this more and more.
People should convert, open, edit any format with any application coded for them. To let this, those willing to create a format, should clearly state specifications for these formats, or clearly state that this format is just for a specific application and should not be shared so that users won't use those files for sharing. A
Re:Microsoft and its so called standards (Score:2, Informative)
To let this, those willing to create a format, should clearly state specifications for these formats, or clearly state that this format is just for a specific application and should not be shared so that users won't use those files for sharing. A .doc file created with 200x version of Microsoft Word is just like the feces of this application.
In Office 12 (the next version of Office), Microsoft will use an XML-based, open standard for documents. The extensions will be .docx, .xlsx, etc.
From http://www.wi [winsupersite.com]
Re:Microsoft and its so called standards (Score:2)
If the spec is not open so that anyone can read it and produce a product that reads those files, it is NOT an OPEN
Re:Microsoft and its so called standards (Score:2)
The format is patented. Other applications cannot be fully compatible - they can't even reverse engineer it.
Noooo! (Score:5, Funny)
Nooooooo! That means the search box remains with MSN selected by default!
Why can't Microsoft be "fair" and set Google default like with the other browsers!
I'm devastated.
so, since the DOJ judgement (Score:5, Insightful)
What I don't understand is that since the DOJ judegement against Microsoft they've had time to rewrite their entire flagship OS from scratch, yet still haven't been able to document it? How naive does the government have to be?
One word... (Score:4, Insightful)
Real Issue (Score:4, Interesting)
I dont know if this issue has been looked at by the US or EU but it is much more of a concern to me that MS is activly releasing / selling software that is so insecure to the point that it seems to go out of its way to prevent techies and end users from properly securing it in order to keep (often confidential) data safe from malware, viruses etc.
There is also the wider issue of MS through their lack of a proper security model facilitating the creation and operation of botnets which are used to the detrement of users, businesses and the internet at large.
I use Windows and find it annoying that I need to apply 3rd party apps in an attept to minimise security risks to my computer when the OS maker should have secured the software before release.
Its not that I hate MS for their propriatory nature etc but I find myself trying a few Linux distos in an attmept to find a viable alternative although I am into the frame of mind that for my next computer purchase I will go for a mac depsite the high prices and the fact that I enjoy building my own systems.
If Windows worked properly and had a good security model then I would be happy; I think MS are wasting their time trying to fight the "pirates" and that their real problem (and as such priority) should be to make an OS that is suitable for widespread use. They should secure their software and if they feel the need add an "anti-piracy" function like activation, genuine advantage etc then whatever but make the software safe for people to use first.
(/rant mode)
What a bunch of Crap (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What a bunch of Crap (Score:4, Informative)
When the average person violates probation they are giving a probation violation hearing. The judge takes a look at the violation and can give prison time, but can also give community service, depending on the violation.
Settled (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Settled (Score:2)
Re:Settled (Score:2)
Just to review:
Criminal case: Prosecu
Re:Settled (Score:2)
Anti-trust is supposed to be a criminal matter. The DOJ has refined the law so that only three types of violations are considered criminal: price fixing, bid rigging, and market allocation schemes.
Microsoft has been found guilty of two of the three illegal activities.
Re:Settled (Score:3, Informative)
The most obvious type of case where a prosecutor would not follow the wishes of a victim is in a spousal abuse case where the abused spouse didn't want to press charges (for whatever reason). So long as the prosecutor has enough evidence to proceed, he or she would be required to press on with the case.
Re:Settled (Score:2)
When you settle in court, you settle with the person you wronged
What about plea bargaining?
Are you settling with the court there or with
the person you wronged?
Unjust (Score:4, Insightful)
The company should be disbanded, all its assets forfeited and sold at auction. Anyone on the executive committee of the company, and anyone else who knew or should have known that this violation would have occurred, should be sentenced to at least ten years in prison, and their personal assets forfeited and auctioned off.
Nothing less that that would happen to you or me and the company we controlled, if we purposely used our company to violate federal laws. The last thing we'd hear from a judge is "I see you are having trouble complying with the orders of this court. Perhaps if we give you a few more years to work on it you can get back to us on how you're coming with the whole court-mandated actions thing, okay?"
You and I wouldn't get that treatment. We would go to prison, our assets woudl be seized, and it wouldn't make the news.
Re:Unjust (Score:2)
In other news, Microsoft HQ moves to India, all the top execs are offered amnesty in India. US economy collapses. Microsoft CEO Bill Gates has more wealth than the bottom 45 percent of A
Re:Unjust (Score:3, Insightful)
There are bigger issues here to consider then a few people's hate
Re:Unjust (Score:2)
Re:Unjust (Score:2)
Voice in a desert. It's the same damn old discussion everytime an article about MS is posted. Maybe we should just ignore the little MS hater trolls.
Re:Unjust (Score:2)
So the tens of thousands of employees and their families should be punished because of the disregard of the law of a few people at the top of the company? Nice.
If a company flagrantly violates the law like this, those responsible should be brought to trial. The whole concept of incorporation protecting the individuals involved from responsibility for their actions is bullshit. However, destroying the entire company and thus punish
Re:Unjust (Score:2)
You forgot the part where Microsoft should give free mony and blonde chicks to anyone who stood for Linux and OSS throughout the years.
Why won't Slashdotters just grow up, damn it
campaign donations? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:campaign donations? (Score:2)
without even looking (Score:2)
instead of moaning about what people willingly spent their hard earned cash on offer a compelling alternative. Then you can have the moral high ground.
That might work... (Score:2)
Quick (no Googling), other that OO (which doesn't depend upon making a profit for survival), what other word processors or spreadsheets are available?
The issue is NOT bundling (Score:5, Interesting)
DOJ: dumb and dumber (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:DOJ: dumb and dumber (Score:2)
Netscape/AOL
"High-Priority Update" forces MS's Harshest EULA. (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, Ed Foster's Gripelog has a story about Microsoft's Harshest EULA [gripe2ed.com]. Windows users who download the "High-Priority Update" called Windows Genuine Advantage Notification are required to agree to a new contract. Ed says, "Not only does Microsoft place restrictions on your right to criticize the software, it won't allow you to uninstall the software or to test it in an operating environment."
EULAs are a unique kind of contract in that they supposedly allow one party to the contract to force new contract provisions on the other. Contract law has always held that forced contracts are illegal.
If you buy, agree to the terms of use, and install Windows for your company and train your staff to use it and applications you buy for it, your total cost is far greater than the cost of Windows. Yet EULAs supposedly allow the software provider to change the contract provisions at any time, with no restrictions whatsoever. Your only option if you don't agree to the new contract provisions is to lose all the money you have invested and stop doing business until you can get new software. This is especially severe when a company has a monopoly on the operating system your business software needs to run.
The concept of fairness is completely absent from EULAs. Those who write EULAs believe that they can do anything they like. If you go to your kitchen and find a Microsoft employee eating your ice cream, check your EULA; maybe Microsoft has decided that Microsoft employees can raid your refrigerator.
Re:"High-Priority Update" forces MS's Harshest EUL (Score:2)
I'm sure there's some ammendment out there that could be used.
Mod parent up: Informative (Score:2)
Re:"High-Priority Update" forces MS's Harshest EUL (Score:3, Informative)
Yes; we agree to a contract covering the WGAN tool, not Windows. The EULA for Windows XP is not affected.
it won't allow you to uninstall the software
The licence actually says "you will not be able to uninstall the software". That is not the same as you aren't allowed to uninstall it; MS are not denying you permission, they're saying that it isn't possible. In other word
who is being punished: us (Score:2)
But as it is, the punishment that Microsoft gets is nothing compaired to the punishment we get as Microsoft still has the nearly unlimited right and leverage to squeese and sue us using copy
Incompetent or Anticompetitive (Score:2)
Incompetent - Evidence: Vista has been being delayed again and again.
or
Anticompetitive - Evidence: Open Document Format plugin team had to use undocumented APIs to write the plugin.
Microsoft may be both, but I am leaning toward anticompetitive.
Double-dactyl summary (Score:2)
Microsoft protocol
Documentation is
Coming too slow.
Hurry it up, for your
Anticompetitive
Tactics sow hatred for
Your CEO.
I always wondered (Score:2, Interesting)
OK, now I'll stop pretending to be naive. I knew in 2000 that if Bush was elected, his administration would drop the ball on this case. Was I right?
As it turned out, that should have been one of my lesser worries about a Bush administrat
As a former MSFTie I can tell you why (Score:2)
Ineffective == Irrelevant (Score:2)
Re:Windows is fine in one piece, TYVM. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Windows is fine in one piece, TYVM. (Score:2)
Re:Windows is fine in one piece, TYVM. (Score:2, Funny)
I'm not going to quote your awesome explanation here because it would overload the server's bandwidth. Because it was that good.
Re:Windows is one fine piece of ... (Score:2)
Are you listening DOJ? Oh, Pretending not to hear. Sorry to bother you. Actually your beloved MS and its proprietary suck-buddies are a lot more likely to be going after one another, as there's more profit to be had by Symantec vs. MS, or MS vs. Oracle or Adobe vs. MS than MS vs. Puppy Linux, w
Re:Parent is right - but no one listens (Score:3)
Apple's not a monopoly.
Others will raise the fact that "it's different for Microsoft because they have a monopoly". Which is true - but they have a monopoly because their Operating System is designed to work on the most popular systems available. Almost anyon
Re:Parent is right - but no one listens (Score:5, Informative)
Um...are you sure? (Score:2)
I don't remember MS Word ever being bundled with the OS - it was always a separate program (and an expensive one) used to compete with WordPerfect. There was a small word processor called Wordpad
Re:Relatedly??? (Score:3, Informative)
I'm all for giving the editors a hard time when they fuck up the English language, but this isn't one of those times.
Although... (Score:2)
Re:Relatedly??? (Score:2)
They had their on 'MSN' network that rivalled AOL but didn't link to the wider internet.
They had 'Windows Mail' which was not SMTP or IMAP/POP based.
Bill gates himself said there would never be an MS internet division.
The internet, however, took over, and open standards won out. MSN was reduced to a mere portal and MS was forced to have an internet division. Windows mail few people remember (if you ever install a Win95 machine for testing though it's still there).
Not fair at all (Score:5, Funny)
Bill Clinton does the same thing and he gets impeached.
Re:Not fair at all (Score:2)
A president gives someone a blowjob. He gets thrown out of office.
A breast is seen on TV for 1/100th of a second. Whole country grinds to a halt for a week.
Vice president shoots someone in the face. He gets a laugh.
From this side of the pond it varies from being extremely funny to being extremely scary...
Re:confused.. (Score:2)
You don't understand the terminology. bundling is another word for tying [wikipedia.org].
If they are in fact being anticompetetive
They were, in fact, convicted of anticompetitive behavior. Web browsing was, at one time, exotic and unrelated to the function of a desktop operating system. Now, OEMs had - and need to have a lot of leeway with windows preinstalls on their PCs, and in the days when Microsoft was playing catchup to Netscape, th