"Microsoft Finds a Formidable Foe In the New Antitrust Chief James" by JOHN R. WILKE, WALL STREET JOURNAL, August 9, 2001
interactive.wsj.com requires subscription
This article was in last Thursday's WSJ. It doesn't look like Charles James is a friend of MSFT, nor is this Republican administration, IMO.
"Microsoft lobbyists didn't want the Bush administration to nominate Charles James as antitrust chief, and quietly backed other candidates. Their concerns were well-founded." Mr. James has continued the government's aggressive prosecution of its antitrust case against the software company." To no one's surprise, the DOJ responded MSFT's motion for a stay by urging the Appeals Court to deny the stay while the Supreme Court considers petition for certiorari. ecfp.cadc.uscourts.gov
I didn’t think it was a good sign that the new antitrust chief filed his first motion in the MSFT case less than a week after he was unanimously confirmed by the Senate; another bad sign.) Jame's motion urged the Appeals Court to rush this case back to the District Court for a trial on remedies long before Microsoft’s right of appeal had expired-trying to deny them their due procedure. It took Microsoft's competitors years of complaining, years of contributing to politicians, years to form PACS, hire lobbyists and PR firms, plus "other" large financial outlays to finally convince Joel Klein to bring this antitrust case. James didn't need much time to examine the antitrust merits of this case. One week.
"We want the appeals-court process to run its course and move this case to a final resolution," Mr. James said.
Sure...but the DOJ does not want the appeals process itself to run its course.
"What about the argument that a tough remedy could derail a rebound in technology markets?
Mr. James doesn't buy it. Not at all."
James says: "This case will be decided strictly on the antitrust merits by the court, and pursued on those merits by this division. Period." " yeah right
This chief doesn't look that different from Joel Klein or Mario Monti, maybe even worse than Klein and on a par with Monti - hypocritical, naive, or just ignorant. He also righteously claims that politics is not involved in antitrust actions.
Charles James said: "The politics and the public relations are of no consequence to us -- we're making law-enforcement decisions on the facts and the evidence. Once you decide that, everything gets a lot simpler."
What rubbish... Then why is Senator Schumer involved? Why would the Senate consider holding hearings about Windows XP, in response to complaints from Microsoft's competitors, who are constituents in Schumer’s district?
The big question: Will James include Windows XP in any possible remedy?
Although he claims he won't get involved in the issue, it looks like he has already decided that remedies will apply to Windows XP, from this statement quoted in the article.
"If the case goes back to a new district-court judge this fall, as the appeals court ordered, "there will be a remedy, and it will apply to the products Microsoft is selling," Mr. James said. "That's the law."
“Mr. James rejects the label of regulator. "What we're doing is the antithesis of regulation," he said. "It's law enforcement. We don't look at a market and say, 'This is the way it should be.' We go in only when there's been a market failure." When competition fails, he says, "we will not be reluctant to intervene, and to be aggressive."
Spoken like a true politician. James gives lip service to a broad statement that market forces produce the best results for consumers and business; yet he doesn't really believe that. He really believes only government intervention and regulation can correct market failures; not market forces. He believes that the government must intervene and regulate aggressively to 'fix' the free market. And who tells him when the markets have failed? Competitors, of course.
James admits they listen to what competitors tell them:
"The company that we investigate this month invariably will be in here a year later as an affected party, or a witness with a complaint." |
