SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: techtonicbull who wrote (30272)4/7/2000 4:07:00 PM
From: Tecinvestor  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 64865
 
Microsoft Now Faces Slew Of Civil Lawsuits

By Joe Wilcox
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
April 7, 2000, 8:50 a.m. PT
URL: news.cnet.com
While Microsoft prepares for the final stages of its landmark antitrust trial, lawyers are readying the first stages of about 115 civil lawsuits that could expose the software giant to more than $7 billion in damages, according to some legal experts.

Private attorneys started filing the bulk of the civil lawsuits against Microsoft in November, soon after U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson issued his findings of fact in the trial.

Many of these suits have lain virtually dormant while lawyers sorted through preliminary preparations and waited for Jackson's judgment, which was delivered on Monday.

The reason the suits may become active again is that Jackson has said he wants to see the penalty phase of the trial completed within 60 days. If Jackson issues a final ruling on penalties, private lawyers will be able to use the trial record and Jackson's findings as evidence in their lawsuits, according to legal experts. If Microsoft settles before the final ruling--which remains a distinct possibility--private lawyers will find themselves back at square one as far as evidence is concerned.

Aside from private suits, companies Jackson cited as wronged by Microsoft's business practices--such as Sun Microsystems--are also considering their own lawsuits.

These corporate suits could be even more damaging to Microsoft than the private cases, at least in terms of monetary awards, according to the laywers filing them and coordinating the actions. The fines Microsoft might have to pay in the DOJ case are limited. The same limits don't apply in these civil cases, which could eventually include a vast sea of plaintiffs.

"Now that Judge Jackson has issued a judgment on the findings of fact, they potentially become legally significant in our case," said Dan Small, a partner with Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll in Washington, D.C. Small's firm has worked to coordinate lawsuits and consolidate them as larger class-action suits.

Jackson's final ruling, which could come within 60 days, potentially would give attorneys access to loads of evidence gathered by the government, as well as the use of Jackson's findings of fact. That document concluded Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior harmed consumers and many Microsoft competitors and customers.

"For many of these lawsuits, the government has already done 90 percent of the legwork," said University of Baltimore School of Law professor Bob Lande.

With the government having done the heavy lifting, more civil suits are likely to follow, say legal experts.

Yet lawyers will still have to dig up new evidence for their cases, experts say. Some have asserted that the government's case did not go far enough, especially in proving financial damages against consumers.

"If their charge is (that) Microsoft overcharges for Windows, they have to prove Microsoft has monopoly power in the form of extracting monopoly rents on Windows--over what it would have been in a competitive market, and that they're entitled to a refund," said Glenn Manishin, an antitrust attorney with Patton Boggs in McLean, Va.

During testimony at the antitrust trial, government witnesses estimated consumers conceivably paid $40 more for Windows than they would have in a competitive market.

While Jackson deliberated his ruling, Microsoft has been acting aggressively against civil lawsuits, requesting many state suits be remanded to federal court and many others be dismissed. Microsoft is especially fearful of cases filed in state courts, where antitrust laws make it easier for consumers to recover big damages, say legal experts.

Initially, more than two-thirds of the cases were filed in state courts, but Microsoft has successfully remanded many cases to the federal level. Of about 115 pending suits, 70 are now in federal court.

Robert Hall, an economist with the Hoover Institute at Stanford University, developed a formula that could be used for calculating damages against Microsoft. Hall's formula puts Microsoft exposure conservatively at $7 billion, but Microsoft's liability could be more than three times that when accounting for the breadth of the violations. That sum could grow if more companies sue the software maker.

Manishin dismissed the pending civil suits as "coupon cases. But the private lawsuits are where the big money is going to be involved. Then it's just not the potential overcharge, if any. There are damages to what the company would have been worth and what their profits would have been (without) being foreclosed by an anti-competitive market."

IBM, Intel, Netscape and Sun are among the firms Jackson said were wronged by Microsoft. All could sue Microsoft for damages and rely heavily on the government's case to prove their own case, Manishin said.

Even if Microsoft appeals, it's still open season on suing the software maker, said Rich Gray, an intellectual property attorney with Outside General Counsel Silicon Valley in Menlo Park, Calif.

"Once Jackson decides on a remedy and issues his final judgment, that judgment can be used to great advantage in these civil lawsuits, even while Microsoft appeals the ruling."



To: techtonicbull who wrote (30272)4/7/2000 4:22:00 PM
From: Tecinvestor  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 64865
 
Microsoft Works On Image With Ads

By Reuters
Special to CNET News.com
April 5, 2000, 4:55 p.m. PT
URL: news.cnet.com
SEATTLE--Having suffered a blow in a U.S. federal court, which ruled it was a bullying monopoly, Microsoft is taking its case to the court of public opinion.

The software giant took out full-page advertisements today in U.S. newspapers such as the New York Times and USA Today, running a letter from co-founder Bill Gates and chief executive Steve Ballmer defending the company and touting its successes.

"We respectfully disagree with the court's ruling, and ultimately believe the American justice system will affirm--as it has in the past--that Microsoft's actions have been both lawful and good for consumers," the letter read.

"We will continue to run our business based on a set of core values that have evolved over the last quarter century: integrity, innovation, customer focus and partnership," the letter said.

While their text mostly repeated statements Gates and Ballmer made in the wake of the ruling on Monday, the ads underscored Microsoft's attempts to polish its image in the mind of a suspicious public.

Microsoft spokesman Rick Miller noted the company regularly publishes such "advertorials" laying out positions on hot policy issues such as trade with China or Internet privacy, but confirmed today's letter was special.

"This is more an attempt to reach customers, partners and shareholders ... so they understand we worked really hard to settle the case and that we think we have a strong message on appeal," Miller said.

"Our job is to keep focused on the good job Microsoft does. Our job is to, as loudly as possible, keep telling the values of this company and what this company stands for," he said.

The letter briefly mentioned that Microsoft also had "responsibilities" as an industry leader, but fell short of striking the humble tone that some public relations experts believe is needed to win over critics.

"My first reaction to the ad would be that it is a small step in the right direction," said Paul Holmes, publisher and editor of Reputation Management, a public relations industry magazine.

"I think they've changed a lot of superficial things. They presented a very haughty face, a very sort of arrogant face, to the world, and I think they've tried to be less conspicuously arrogant in the last six months or so," Holmes said.

Other signs that Microsoft is trying to buff up its image include a make-over of a once-disheveled Gates, who has usually preferred a sweater and khakis to a suit and tie.

Immediately after Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson ruled on Monday that the company broke antitrust laws, Gates donned more serious attire, appearing at a news briefing in a dark suit and tie, with his hair neatly parted.

Observers have said among the worst moments for Microsoft in the trial was when Gates, in videotaped testimony last year, came across as annoyed and defensive and repeatedly claimed he did not remember key discussions or documents.

Since then, he has become more animated and amicable in his public appearances, smiling and gesturing to his audiences and cracking self-deprecating jokes.

Gates--the world's richest man with holdings in Microsoft worth about $68 billion as of today--has also stepped up the pace of his charitable donations in recent months.

Contributions to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, set up by Gates and his wife, top $20 billion. Coincidentally or not, yesterday, as the dust from the ruling was settling, the United Nations said the foundation was giving $57 million to help fight AIDS in four African countries.

Even though Gates seems to be truly convinced that he has committed no wrong, Holmes and other experts said he needed to at least appear to listen to his critics.

"I get very little sense that Microsoft is interested in engaging in dialogue with those people," Holmes said. "I think that's a huge mistake and continues to cement the impression that this is an arrogant, insolent company."

"It's not some huge compromise they have to make, but they have to appear to listen. Communication is not just what you say, it's what you listen to, and one gets the impression that Microsoft doesn't listen," Holmes said.