The cyber-soap opera continues
By MIKE BERMAN
Scripps Howard News Service
November 06, 2002

Another chapter was written in the cyber the cyber-soap opera involving the Justice Department and Microsoft Corp. when U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly essentially approved a settlement allowing computer manufacturers to install competitive products such as those from AOL, Netscape and RealOne on the Windows desktop without fear of reprisal.

She basically approved the agreement that was reached a year ago, declaring that Microsoft would open up its Windows operating system, allowing computer manufacturers to install competitors' software - making them available as default applications on the desktop.

Microsoft had basically complied with the agreement when it released its first service pack for Windows XP, giving users of the operating system and PC manufacturers several options they never had before. This allows them to change the default settings to competing Web browsers, e-mail programs and media players and can be found by going into All Programs and clicking on "Set Program Access Defaults."

When the settlement was originally announced, nine of 18 states that were part of the original complaint also came on board, agreeing that a slap on the wrist was better than no action at all. But nine others and the District of Columbia wanted more, appealing the settlement and extending the battle for another year. And they're still not pleased!

According to ZDNet News, Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller referred to the decision as the "latest chapter" in the case, but would not comment on whether plaintiff states would appeal the judge's decision. "We have to analyze the decision and talk to our colleagues" first, he said.

Also, Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal described the decision as "historic" because the plaintiff states "achieved more than the federal government. We sought more and we got more." But he emphasized that "the last chapter has not been written."

Blumenthal also said that, based on the judge's ruling, the costs of litigation "will be borne by Microsoft. We will seek them promptly."

Kollar-Kotelly did make a few adjustments, requiring that Microsoft disclose communications protocols in Windows six months earlier than the company or the DOJ had specified and modifying the oversight of Microsoft's compliance with the settlement.

According to ZDNews, the proposal originally included a technical committee and an internal compliance officer, both potentially influenced by Microsoft. In Friday's ruling, the judge combined the two into a compliance committee made up of Microsoft board members. In turn, the committee must hire a compliance officer, to report to the committee and to Microsoft's CEO. As corporate officers and non-Microsoft employees, the compliance committee in theory would be more likely to appropriately enforce the settlement in this era of renewed corporate responsibility.

Does this story have an ending? Will the nine non-complying states and D.C. fall into step supporting the latest ruling? Judging from the grumbling, probably not.

The saga continues.

Feedback Form