Close
  • Latest News
  • Cybersecurity
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Mobile
  • Networking
  • Storage
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
Read Down
Sign in
Close
Welcome!Log into your account
Forgot your password?
Read Down
Password recovery
Recover your password
Close
Search
Menu
Search
  • Latest News
  • Cybersecurity
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Mobile
  • Networking
  • Storage
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
More
    Home Latest News

      Microsoft, Opponents Roll Out Big Names in Tunney Act

      By
      Caron Carlson
      -
      January 28, 2002
      Share
      Facebook
      Twitter
      Linkedin

        Although the cast is made primarily of well-known characters, mostly uttering already familiar lines, the latest scene in Microsoft Corp.s antitrust wrangling consists of thousands of pages of public comments, including some from renowned economists and politicians. After reviewing the comments in what is known as the Tunney Act proceeding, the court will determine whether the settlement is in the public interest.

        The Association for Competitive Technology in Washington, one of dozens of parties filing in support of the settlement, introduced some new faces into the debate with a letter from former attorneys general Griffin Bell and Edwin Meese III, and former White House Counsel Boyden Gray. Bell, Meese and Gray bolstered ACTs position that the proposed settlement addresses the liabilities found by the Court of Appeals and that alternative remedies proposed by nine states pursuing litigation exceed the scope of the courts findings.

        ACT contends that the litigating states remedies would be harmful to consumers by not allowing Microsoft to continue selling the Windows unified operating system, on which many software developers depend. The settlement proponents also maintain that the states plan for a Special Master to oversee the implementation of remedies would require the federal courts to assume a regulatory role.

        Criticizing settlement opponents for siding with “very wealthy and successful” Microsoft competitors, ACT President Jonathan Zuck told reporters that his association represents the majority view. “I think it is very easy for us to turn this into an intellectual arms race in Washington,” Zuck said. “But the time for Sun and Oracle to get back to producing products and not lobbyists is now.”

        Getting a jump-start on the debate, late last week the Project to Promote Competition in the Digital Age in Washington, one of dozens of parties opposing the settlement, filed arguments from renowned economists Joseph Stiglitz and Kenneth Arrow–both Nobel Prize winners. ProComp argued that the court should not rule on the Department of Justice settlement until after the litigating states hearing, which begins in mid-March. Among other flaws, the settlements provisions regarding API disclosure and manufacturer flexibility are insufficient to create competition in the middleware market, they said.

        The American Antitrust Institute filed a complaint within a complaint, charging that Microsoft has not complied with the requirements of the Tunney Act itself and has kept the public from getting all required information. Like ProComp, AAI maintains that the settlement is ambiguous and would be difficult to implement. Calling it a “mockery of judicial power, since it fails to satisfy any of the remedial goals established by the Court of Appeals,” AAI said, “The lack of clarity will almost certainly compound the delay already present in the PFJ, since the inevitable difference of opinion cannot be resolved without extended litigation to determine the intent of the parties according to the rules of contract law,” AAI said in its comments.

        The Department of Justice has 30 days to review and summarize the comments for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. But as both sides contend that the others proposal would be difficult to implement, it is clear that whether the settlement is approved or not, the litigation will not be settled for a long time to come.

        Avatar
        Caron Carlson

        MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

        Android

        Samsung Galaxy XCover Pro: Durability for Tough...

        Chris Preimesberger - December 5, 2020 0
        Have you ever dropped your phone, winced and felt the pain as it hit the sidewalk? Either the screen splintered like a windshield being...
        Read more
        Cloud

        Why Data Security Will Face Even Harsher...

        Chris Preimesberger - December 1, 2020 0
        Who would know more about details of the hacking process than an actual former career hacker? And who wants to understand all they can...
        Read more
        Cybersecurity

        How Veritas Is Shining a Light Into...

        eWEEK EDITORS - September 25, 2020 0
        Protecting data has always been one of the most important tasks in all of IT, yet as more companies become data companies at the...
        Read more
        Big Data and Analytics

        How NVIDIA A100 Station Brings Data Center...

        Zeus Kerravala - November 18, 2020 0
        There’s little debate that graphics processor unit manufacturer NVIDIA is the de facto standard when it comes to providing silicon to power machine learning...
        Read more
        Apple

        Why iPhone 12 Pro Makes Sense for...

        Wayne Rash - November 26, 2020 0
        If you’ve been watching the Apple commercials for the past three weeks, you already know what the company thinks will happen if you buy...
        Read more
        eWeek


        Contact Us | About | Sitemap

        Facebook
        Linkedin
        RSS
        Twitter
        Youtube

        Property of TechnologyAdvice.
        Terms of Service | Privacy Notice | Advertise | California - Do Not Sell My Information

        © 2021 TechnologyAdvice. All Rights Reserved

        Advertiser Disclosure: Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which TechnologyAdvice receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. TechnologyAdvice does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.

        ×