Herbert Stein in Slate

[James Love <love@cptech.org>]

I have seen two articles in Slate about the Microsoft Trial, and I just signed
up for the free 30 day trial subscription to Slate so I can get more.  These are
excerpts from Herbert stein's coverage of November 9th.

Jamie


http://www.slate.com/code/DDD/DDD.asp?file=mstrial

Message #8: Nov. 10, 1998

From:     Herbert Stein
To:       Slate - dispatch

Herbert Stein, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute,
was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under Presidents
Nixon and Ford. 

(Michael Lewis couldn't take any more.) 
Day 13 of the Trial 

       On Nov. 9, the 13th day in court in its suit against Microsoft, the
Department of Justice marched down the field without much
resistance. It gained lots of yards and made lots of first downs.
Whether it scored enough points, or any points, remains to be seen.
We are still, I would guess, in the first quarter. The DOJ had the ball
almost all the time, and it made, in my opinion, effective use of its time
of possession. Microsoft had the ball for only a few minutes, but--also
in my opinion--it fumbled it. 

   [snip]

   
       In the Apple case, the claim was that Microsoft used the threat of
not making a new version of its Office software usable for Apple if
Apple did not agree to make Microsoft's browser the default browser
on Apple's computers (meaning the browser that could be used
without any further effort by the customer). In fact, a deal to that
effect was made. The Microsoft team tried to argue that the deal was
not forced upon Apple by Microsoft but rather was the byproduct of a
mutually agreed upon settlement of a patent dispute. 
       To support its position, the Microsoft team showed a video of the
president of Apple explaining the agreement to a conference of
computer industry people and describing the agreement as evolving
from the patent dispute. Unfortunately for Microsoft, the video also
showed the audience of computer experts booing and jeering at this
explanation, leaving me and others in the courtroom with the
impression that well-informed people did not accept his--and
Microsoft's--explanation. I think the video presentation backfired
against Microsoft. 
       This incident raises a puzzling question. The members of this
unseen audience booing and jeering were not sworn witnesses in the
case. Should the judge pay any attention to their reaction, and can he
help doing so? A similar, and more important, question can be raised
about Bill Gates' video testimony, a little of which was also shown this
morning. Gates surely seemed, through his manner of speech and
body movements, not to have been entirely candid. Is the judge
supposed to pay attention to this behavior or only to what was actually
said? I don't know. 
   
    [snip]


       These companies, such as Microsoft, Intel, Apple, and America
Online, are in a peculiar relationship with each other. That comes out
clearly in the testimony. They are at the same time each other's
suppliers, customers, and competitors. One of these executives said
that they all live in the same ecology, and they have to get along with
each other. That is an interesting metaphor. The grass, the gazelle,
and the lion all live in the same ecology. The gazelle eats the grass and
the lion eats the gazelle. That is a way of getting along together. And,
you can say that there will always be grass, gazelles, and lions. But
individual gazelles may not be so happy with the balanced equilibrium
of this ecosystem. 
      
   [snip]
-- 
James Love, Director, Consumer Project on Technology
P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036, v202.386.8030 f202.234.5176
http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love@cptech.org