re: <sometimes it's just plain obvious just what they're after and why they're after it>
"If the Court refrains from structural measures, it should consider measures to reduce Microsoft’s excess cash in any case" (page 55)
econ.yale.edu
A quotation from one of the many outrageous remedies proposed by Microsoft's competitors and enemies.
"5. Microsoft currently has substantial cash assets (approximately $17 billion as of June 1999). Division of the cash assets is problematic to the extent that Microsoft’s deep pockets have financed its predatory actions. In whatever structure the Court finally decides, therefore, care should be taken to ensure that the vast cash resources of the company are not lodged in an entity that can use them for anti-competitive purposes, such as financing predatory innovation or predatory pricing. One possibility would be to have a substantial part of the reserves set aside for a decade for any private liability damages determinations.”
”It might also be necessary to use the cash reserves to liquidate employee stock options as a means of promoting inter-firm mobility of labor. To the extent that the cash reserves pose an anti-competitive danger, they should be returned to shareholders either through a substantial forced dividend or as stock buybacks."
"If the Court refrains from structural measures, it should consider measures to reduce Microsoft’s excess cash in any case" (page 55)
econ.yale.edu
The above are excerpts one of the remedies given to Jackson in a Friends of the Court Brief submitted in April 2000 by Robert Litan, Roger G. Noll, William D. Nordhaus, Frederic Scherer. Robert Litan was the Deputy Assistant Attorney General from the DOJ who negotiated the 1995 consent decree with microsoft. . Litan is now the VP at the Brookings Institution.
Litan et al recommended breaking Microsoft into four companies, or "baby Bills," with three devoted to the Windows family. Judge Jackson praised brief as excellent but then rubber stamped the DOJ remedies.
Another quote from Litan et al’s brief:
“Even if Microsoft's applications and operating systems programmers are placed in separate buildings and their e-mails monitored ex post, there is no effective way of preventing these individuals from talking with each other over the telephone or meeting after work.”pg 33. Tsk tsk tsk
These guys are nuts, imo. Any sane person who actually reads any of the Amici curae briefs submitted by the CCIA or the SIIA or Litan et al or Henderson in the DOJ vs MSFT trial would be shocked at the hatred expressed and the outrageous and extreme solutions proposed. The CCIA or SIIA or ProComp are organizations that are funded largely by Microsoft’s competitors - Sun, Oracle, AOL and others - who are responsible for bringing this case to the DOJ.
What makes them think that Microsoft’s operating system is theirs to break up? Karl Marx believed in the forceful redistribution of wealth too. This is not the former Soviet Union. One would not expect to hear comments like these in a capitalist society from government officials. “These alleged "solutions" amount to naked wealth redistribution, selfish and unethical attempts to resolve make-believe consumer harm.”
cei.org
Listening to the judges yesterday, there is no way they will agree to any of the remedies proposed. I think they will find overturn Jackson’s Conclusions of Law, especially since Chief Justice Edwards said at least 3 or 4 times and Judge Williams said once, that the prosecution provided no support for their strong findings of fact.
In today's hearings: Judge Randolph questioned the gov lawyer “This charge of attempted monopolization rested on a prediction by the District Court of what would happen when the contract expired? (AOL's contract with MSFT to be included in Windows 98 in exchange for using the IE browser)
Judge Randolph: If the District court was wrong, doesn’t that require us to Reverse?
I hope they also rule that Jackson’s Findings of Fact were clearly erroneous; since more than one commented that there was no support for many FF, which is what the Conclusions of Law are based on. Hopefully they will reverse everthing. These judges are aware that the government is representing Microsoft's competitors, not fighting for consumers.
It’s pretty obvious that all the State's Attorney Generals and the class action trial lawyers care about is money; not about encouraging competition or innovation or preventing consumer harm. The State’s Attorney Generals submitted huge bills for their so called “legal work” The AGs and the trial lawyers are waiting to proceed with their class action lawsuits in California and can’t wait to get their dirty hands on Microsoft’s cash assets. This new “Microsoft tax” added to their state’s coffers will make it unnecessary to raise state taxes. The class action trial lawyers will get their huge legal fees. Consumers supposedly harmed by Microsoft will be lucky to get a $50 coupon for their next purchase of a Microsoft product.
Fifty State Attorney Generals formed an alliance with private trial lawyers and were successful in milking the tobacco companies of $250 billion dollars, to be paid over 25 years. None of that money is going to smokers. It is not even being used to pay back Medicare for the health costs of smokers; the supposed reason for the lawsuit. In Virginia 40% will be used to build new roads; 40% to provide employment for former tobacco farmers; 10 % to prevent teens from smoking. Private trial lawyers received billions in legal fees.
I don't even the stock anymore, but this lawsuit smells; like Clinton’s pardons of Rich, Vignali, Braswell etc. Is it any surprise that Joe Lockhart, former Clinton Aide is now on Oracle’s Board. Or the rumors till the recent pardon furor that Clinton (Bill not Hillary) will be on Oracle’s Board….
I thought Republicans don’t believe in excessive government intervention and regulation. How can Hatch or Starr justify their support? Starr's presence has a contrarian effect on the prosecutions case, because so many detest him.
DAVID COURSEY "MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT: DON'T BREAK UP MICROSOFT"
cgi.zdnet.com
"If Ken Starr can be a friend of the court and tell the
appeal judges to go ahead and bust up Microsoft, then the justices need a real friend--me. So I've come up with a brief of my own. Here's my case for doing the right thing: Overturn Judge Jackson and leave Microsoft alone." (cont'd) |
