[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Judge issues order against Microsoft
>Before everyone jumps to high for joy some additional information:
>1) The judge turned down the request for fining MS 1Million/day during
> non-compliance with his order
True. But this has not been ruled out, either:
"In the 19-page ruling, Jackson denied for the moment the request,
saying the government has yet to prove its case. But he went on to
say that the government "appears to have a substantial likelihood
of success" in the case and issued the preliminary injunction
pending a resolution in the case, which isn't likely for at least six
"But in a boost to the government, Jackson was quick to note that
Microsoft is clearly not out of the woods yet. "Although the
government has not satisfied the evidentiary burden necessary to
sustain a finding of contempt, it does not necessarily follow that
Microsoft's licensing practices are, in fact, in compliance with the
terms of the [consent decree]," Jackson wrote."
"Jackson agreed with arguments the Justice Department has made in
its court papers, writing that "adopting Microsoft's interpretation
would appear to render [the decree] essentially meaningless." "
>2) There has been no announcement of timelines
"Jackson's appointee Lawrence Lessig, a visiting professor at
Harvard Law School, is to gather further evidence in the case and
report back by May 31. The judge will then make a final decision."
>3) MS will invariably appeal
>This is a good first step though
"Yes, it certainly is, Ollie."
"Jackson barred Microsoft from requiring
computer makers to install its Internet Explorer browser as a
condition for licensing operating systems "including Windows 95
or any successor version thereof." "
How that last sentence might play out will be interesting.