[Am-info] Billie's propaganda machine in Massachusetts

[Erick Andrews]

The spin doctors are hard at work again.
See:
http://www.businesstoday.com/business/business/soft03142002.htm

-- 
Erick Andrews

=======================================
Reilly's plan for Microsoft gets panned:  Group:
Penalties would backfire on Mass.  , Thursday,
March 14, 2002

Attorney General Tom Reilly's proposed penalties
for Microsoft Corp.  (Chart)'s anti-competitive
behavior could cost the state's software makers
and consumers more than $3 billion over three
years, an industry group claimed yesterday.

The Association for Competitive Technology in
Washington - which has steadfastly supported
Microsoft in its epic antitrust battle with state
and federal regulators - claims that software
developers and buyers would be hurt by penalties
sought by Reilly and eight other state attorneys
general.

Most of the $3 billion cost would be born by Bay
State software firms that produce programs to be
used with Microsoft's Windows personal computer
operating system, the group claims.  It argues
that nearly $800 million in extra costs would come
out of the pockets of Massachusetts consumers.

The states that refused to go along with a
proposed settlement of the Microsoft antitrust
case will take their proposal to a federal judge
on Monday.  The states rejected a proposed
settlement, arguing it was too easy on the
Redmond, Wash., software giant and failed to
protect consumers in the future.

The U.S.  Justice Department and a clutch of other
states proposed the settlement to resolve claims
that Microsoft regularly used anti-competitive
practices to protect and extend its monopoly in
desktop computer operating systems.

Among other things, the states' proposed penalties
would require Microsoft to sell versions of
Windows stripped of applications such as Internet
browsers and messaging systems.

Yesterday, the competitive technology group
claimed sales of stripped-down versions of Windows
would force software developers to create many
different flavors of their own products.

Citing a study released last month by University
of Texas economist Stan Leibowitz, the group
claimed the added burden of creating many versions
of the same application would cost the nation's
software developers and consumers $80 billion by
2005.  The technology group said Massachusetts
software firms would have to absorb about $2.4
billion of those costs, while consumers would
shoulder $778 million in higher software prices.

Reilly defended the proposed sanctions yesterday.
He said the remedies will "create opportunities
for innovative software developers, not stymie
it.''

In his prepared statement, Reilly noted that the
nine states "are asking the federal court to order
remedies that will restore competition in the PC
operating system market and curb Microsoft's
unlawful practices.  The free market, not
Microsoft, should decide the fate of new products
and emerging technologies.''

As far as Howard Diamond is concened, the proposal
would be just a glancing blow to Microsoft but
would cream smaller firms like his Corporate
Software Inc.

"For most software developers, you are talking
about dramatically increasing the burden on
them,'' said Diamond, the chief executive of the
Norwood company.  Worse, Diamond said, "nothing in
their proposal does anything for consumers.''

=======================================