NEW HAVEN, Conn., Nov. 6 /PRNewswire/ -- George Priest, antitrust expert
and John M. Olin Professor of Law and Economics at Yale Law School, offers the
following analysis of today's developments in U.S. v. Microsoft:
"The Settlement Agreement between the Justice Department and Microsoft is
in the public interest because it tracks almost exactly the June 28th legal
ruling of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. In fact, the Agreement
goes beyond the Court's ruling so the Justice Department obtained more in the
settlement than might have been possible in court.
"In addition to the D.C. Circuit's prohibitions, the Agreement requires
Microsoft to disclose middleware interfaces and to publish communications
protocols to allow server interoperability, neither of which issues was a part
of the original case.
"Most importantly, the Agreement vastly enhances enforcement by the
creation of a full-time Technical Committee to move into Microsoft
headquarters and review and examine all of Microsoft's behavior.
"The states that have refused to join the Agreement have complaints not
with the Justice Department, but with the ruling of the Court of Appeals.
Their complaint is no different from a Yankee fan complaining about giving the
trophy to Arizona on the grounds that the Yankees were ahead in the 8th
inning. The remedies they still want, they lost when the Court vacated Judge
Jackson's Interim Order."
MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here
SOURCE White House Writers Group