Microsoft holds out antitrust olive branch

Microsoft has offered to prolong a program that licenses some Windows communications standards to rivals, aiming to address criticism that the program has taken too long to get working.

The protocol licensing agreement is one of the key components of Microsoft's landmark 2001 settlement with the Department of Justice and several states. However, regulators have repeatedly expressed concerns over the terms of the licensing program. Microsoft, in turn, has adjusted the program several times.

In a status conference before a federal judge in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, Microsoft lawyers said the company would be willing to extend the program until November 2009, two years later than called for by the original terms of the deal.

"The Department of Justice and states did express some concerns over the program, about the amount of time it has taken to address some concerns," Microsoft spokeswoman Stacy Drake said. "Given that, we offered to extend the protocol licensing program for two years."

In court, the Justice Department indicated that it was pleased with the two-year extension. The department had expressed concern that the length of time it had taken to address concerns in the program was cutting into the five years that the technology was supposed to be widely available. It also noted that Microsoft also plans to make more protocols available for licensing--those for Longhorn Server, the next version of its server operating system.

Microsoft has modified the program several times in recent months, most recently in January, but also last August.

"We've made a number of substantive changes to the program, as well as numerous refinements and adjustments that really underscore our commitment to making the program as attractive to licensees as possible," Drake said.

So far, 14 companies have signed up for the program. Microsoft said last week that Sun Microsystems and Time Warner were among the latest companies to have joined it. Both signed up after settling their own legal disputes with the software maker. In addition, Microsoft said that digital certificate firm GeoTrust had signed on as a licensee of the Windows protocols.

Robert Lande, a law professor at the University of Baltimore, said Microsoft's move may have been aimed as much at regulators in Europe as at those here. Lande said that, through its actions, Microsoft was trying to bolster American regulators' case that the EU action is unnecessary.

"It sounds like Microsoft is just trying to throw a bone to the DOJ to reinforce the DOJ's contention that they've handled every problem in their magnificent consent order," Lande said.

Last month, the European Union imposed a record $613 million fine on Microsoft and ordered the company to disclose more Windows details to rivals and to offer a version of Windows without a bundled media player. Microsoft plans to appeal the ruling.

Lande said he does not expect the extension of the protocol licensing program will have much sway on European authorities.

"I don't think it is going to have any deterrent effect," he said. "But it is logical for them to try this."

The next quarterly status conference in the case is scheduled for July 19, with both sides due to submit a status report on July 9.

[David Mohring]

Microsoft hiding Sun's MCPP Deal from DOJ?Continued Anti-competitive tactic

Sun' s James Gosling claims, in some "slashdot flamage"
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=103964&cid=8856364
... ,that though the new settlement, Sun has gained the right to selectively access Microsoft's Communications Protocol Program (MCPP).
http://today.java.net/jag/page7.html#60
QUOTE
[i]While it is true that as a part of it we did sign up for Microsoft's Communications Protocol Program that is a part of the US v. Microsoft case, our full agreement both modifies and expands on it to give us a much more broad and useful agreement. It is important to understand that in no way does this lock Sun or Sun customers into interoperating with any Microsoft system on Microsoft's strict terms. Right now, most of our interoperability is achieved through reverse-engineering. We have the option, entirely at our discretion, to access Microsoft's specifications through the collaboration agreement. But before we do so, on a case-by-case basis, we will do an analysis of the business case for the entanglements that such access implies (principally confidentiality and royalties). Right now, the vast majority of the software that we (Sun) produce has free and open specifications and we provide the implementations of a large and growing fraction of it as open source. We are not going to slow down our involvement in the open source community. Right now we have launched no projects that will access any Microsoft specifications under the agreement - we simply have the option to, if we decide that the benefits outweigh the costs.[/i]
UNQUOTE

This makes the agreement between Sun and Microsoft, competitors in the desktop file/print/domain server market, wholly different than the current Microsoft Communications Protocol Program being offered as an "olive branch".

This ablity to selectively pick and choose and other "flexabilities" was a detail left out of Sun's press release, and more interestingly, the recent joint status report on Microsoft's complicance with the US DOJ final antitrust judgement.
http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2004-04/sunflash.20040402.3.html
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f203200/203264.htm

[systemcleaner]

Bush Republican DOJ is the great pretender and MS benefits.

"The Department of Justice and states did express some concerns over the program, about the amount of time it has taken to address some concerns," Microsoft spokeswoman Stacy Drake said. "Given that, we offered to extend the protocol licensing program for two years."

Microsoft is supposed to comply at most 6 months from the date of the 'faked settlement' dated in 2001 between the sold-out Bush Republicans and Microsoft. NOw it is 2004 which is 3 years later and Microsoft says it 'is trying to comply'
or 'trying to improve the compliance'. Wow, there is only 2 years left. So Microsoft is going to run out the clock (the 2 years left) and continue to say sorry suckers our 'settlement' is expired. Therefore, we Microsoft, are free to do whatever we want because it is expired, suckers.

Microsoft spokesman Stacy Drake did not say 'we will comply right now' after the sold out Bush Republicans DOJ pretend to complain about how long it will take for full compliance. She said Microsoft offer to extend for 2 more years for the full compliance. The competitions were asking for full licensing of the protocols 'now'. Not manhana or mas tarde, Microsoft ***holes. And you Bush Republicans ***holes stop pretending, will you! We know how much you Bush Republicans appreciate mob protection money from Microsoft in exchange for non-enforcement. The competitions are not asking for extension now. When the time is near, they will ask for extension. They want compliance now.

[systemcleaner]

Microsoft, the great deceiver and Bush Rep DOJ, the great pretender.

"Microsoft has offered to prolong a program that licenses some Windows communications standards to rivals, aiming to address criticism that the program has taken too long to get working. "

Hey, the problem is not about prolonging a program that licenses Windows communications protocols. The problem is Microsoft is playing the stalling tactic of licensing as required.

Real nice spin!

Give the competitors the protocols now! Yes, all the protocols allowing rival servers to connect to Windows desktops.

Stop the half-ass game!

Hand the protocols over right now.
Send the protocols by Fedex to competitors who wants to license them for compliance. It will get there the next business day (1 day).

Don't tell us handling over takes 7 years (5 years settlement + 2 years MS disguised voluntary extension).

And you Bush Republicans stop playing games with the IT industry. And for you Microsoft fans, if you don't agree with the word IT industry then let us have a referendum on whether Microsoft should be stopped from playing games and whether hurts the IT industry. Forget it! We know the Microsoft people will oppose such referendums. The only recourse is for the IT industry excluding Microsoft and its really 'closed' business partners to vote the Bush Republicans out of office this coming election.

:)