[Am-info] Old Microsoft DNA and brown stuff

[Gene Gaines]

Old Microsoft DNA still at work?
March 5, 2004, 6:47 AM PT
By Charles Cooper

(Note: Charles Cooper is Executive Editor of CNET News.
I am pleased that Mr. Cooper has the good horse sense and
courage to begin to call piles of steaming brown stuff in
the barn by the right name. -Gene Gaines)

See:
http://news.com.com/2010-1014-5170509.html?part=dht&tag=npro

In July 1994, the Justice Department and Microsoft settled
charges that the software maker violated the Sherman Antitrust
Act. A judge criticized the agreement as toothless and briefly
held up deal, but the government ultimately had its way.

You doubtless recall how the story turned out: Left free to
pursue its bliss, Microsoft landed back in hot water four years
later. The government then complained the software maker had
exploited its market dominance to drive competitors out of
business and the sides headed to trial.

After an appellate court voided most of a harsh lower-court
ruling, the subsequent deal once again left Microsoft free to go
about its business with little more than a slap on the wrist.
The lesson for smaller software makers was clear: Why stick your
neck out when even the might of the United States government was
not enough to force Microsoft to cry uncle? In the business
argot of our day, the potential return on investment is not
worth the effort.

I was reminded of all this when CEO Michael Robertson came to
town to talk up his company, Lindows.com. Robertson, the
impresario who created MP3.com, is still tussling with Microsoft
over the name of his company's flagship product, Lindows.

Microsoft, which has obvious incentive to block any would-be
rival desktop operating system, is suing for trademark
infringement. The argument centers on whether the term "windows"
should be classified a generic term. Given that his company
markets a Linux-based operating system, Robertson had to know
that his naming convention would attract Microsoft's attention.
But let's leave that issue for another day.

There is potentially a more explosive item on the agenda:
Robertson claims that Microsoft has used its muscle to steer
would-be business partners away from doing business with
Lindows.com. If true, certain folks in Washington will want to
know the details. So far, however, Robertson refuses to name
names--at least not for the record. And he doubts any of the
parties concerned will make a beeline for the microphones
either.

Microsoft says the allegations are bunk but the timing of
Robertson's charge comes only a few months after RealNetworks
filed a $1 billion lawsuit accusing Microsoft of illegally using
its Windows monopoly to limit consumer choice in digital media.

Among other things, Real claims Microsoft used contractual
restrictions and monetary incentives to "force PC makers to
accept Windows PC operating systems with the bundled Windows
Media Player and to restrict the ability of PC makers to
preinstall or promote competing digital media players."

Substitute "Internet browser" for "Windows Media Player" and the
complaint sounds eerily familiar to the government accusation
that Microsoft sought to choke off Netscape's access to
distributors.

No doubt, RealNetworks CEO Rob Glaser, an ex-Microsoft employee,
has a score to settle with his old company and former mentor
Bill Gates. Still, he's a not a goof and neither is Robertson.
Glaser may have an ax to grind but he remains a serious business
executive.

That's why I'd like know whether all this is simply a
forgettable case of the usual hardball habits at Microsoft--or
something more. The question remains open for investigation