- Related Stories
-
Court upholds Microsoft-Justice Dept. settlement
June 30, 2004 -
Appeals court: Don't break up Microsoft
June 28, 2001 -
Antitrust case's big loser: The judge
June 28, 2001 -
Judge: Microsoft must be broken in two
June 7, 2000 -
Boldness, pace define Jackson's rule
June 7, 2000 -
Judge rules Microsoft violated antitrust laws
April 3, 2000 -
Judge calls Microsoft a "monopoly"
November 5, 1999 -
Lessig defends himself in filing
January 19, 1998
Thomas Penfield
Jackson
In a speech here Tuesday before the American Antitrust Institute, Jackson said that the "Microsoft persona I had been shown throughout the trial was one of militant defiance, unapologetic for its past behavior and determined to continue as before."
"Windows is an operating system monopoly, and the company's business strategy was to leverage Windows to achieve a comparable dominion of all software markets," Jackson said. "Nothing has changed, to my observation, in the five years that have elapsed since my decision...Microsoft has won the browser war in the United States. Netscape Navigator, if it is still available at all, has only a small fraction of the browser market."
In June 2000, Jackson ruled that Microsoft should be split into two companies: one that would sell office software and the browser, and another that would be responsible for everything else.
Even at the time the trial began, Jackson had become unusually vocal in his public and private criticisms of Microsoft, which had been sued by the U.S. Justice Department and state attorneys general on antitrust charges. Jackson likened Microsoft executives to gangland killers and stubborn mules who should be walloped with a 2-by-4, and appointed Microsoft critic Larry Lessig as a special master in the case. A special master is a neutral expert with quasi-judicial powers who evaluates factual disputes.
But what alarmed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit most was Jackson's habit of inviting favored reporters into his chambers for private conversations that involved trash-talking about the world's most famous antitrust defendant while court proceedings were under way. "The system would be a sham if all judges went around doing this," Chief Judge Harry Edwards warned at the time.
As a result, Jackson was given the boot from the case. The D.C. circuit court ruled unanimously that Jackson "seriously tainted the proceedings," and a new judge, Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, was appointed. The appeals court also overruled Jackson's decision to carve up Microsoft, which led to the case being settled in November 2001.
Jackson, who is now an attorney at the Jackson and Campbell firm, used Tuesday's appearance to fire back at the appeals court. "When the reversal of my consent-decree case rulings on the contempt petition finally came down, it became apparent to me that I faced a very real prospect of reliving the 'trench warfare' experiences of my colleagues who had handled the AT&T and the IBM antitrust cases."
He also complained that his "creativity" in appointing Lessig was not seen favorably: "Again my creativity was unappreciated by the court of appeals--the consent decree was clear enough to them; a special master was unnecessary."
See more CNET content tagged:
Thomas Penfield Jackson, Larry Lessig, antitrust, master, creativity
Unless Linux and/or OSX make a significant dent in the Windows market share, it's hard to see how anyone will truly undermine Microsoft in any market segment it chooses to attack.
or not Netscape is still available and obviously has never heard
of Mozilla or Firefox,"
Nonsense! He is not out of touch at all. IE is still the dominant
browser despite Firefox inroads, and IE 7 was just released with
Tabs as a direct result of encroachment by FF.
Jackson;s referral to the current state of Browsers is accurate, It's
called hyperbole. From the dictionary: "A figure of speech in
which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect"
or not Netscape is still available and obviously has never heard
of Mozilla or Firefox,"
Nonsense! He is not out of touch at all. IE is still the dominant
browser despite Firefox inroads, and IE 7 was just released with
Tabs as a direct result of encroachment by FF.
Jackson;s referral to the current state of Browsers is accurate, It's
called hyperbole. From the dictionary: "A figure of speech in
which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect"
would be a lot better off today if Microsoft were not able to use
its domination of the desktop to pry its way into markets that
others create.
When Micosoft seizes dominance, it stops innovating. Look at
what happened to Internet Explorer after it hit 90% of desktops:
stagnation. No built-in pop-up blocking, no tabs, nothing
except security problems. With the success of Firefox, Micosoft
was finally forced to change plans and upgrade Explorer.
Office could be a lot better if it faced real competition. So could
Windows for that matter. For this reason, I hope Linux and the
Mac OS get at least 15% of the desktop marketshare. Much
more, I hope. Keep Microsoft on its toes.
Linux is still way too complicated for the average user and despite their best efforts to copy the user-friendliness of the Windows and OS X desktops, they have a long way to go. Not to mention that device support has rather large gaps.
NOT competing fairly and was ultimately found GUILTY.
Unfortunately the US remedy was simply a slap on the hand and a
BIG loss for consumers.
It is still going on at the same time the EU is "punishing" them.
Isn't every company, corporataion and organization out for themsevles. If they weren't, they wouldn't be in business.
The problem is how Microsoft handles competition. They either buy-and-bury a company or give a product away for free that their competition charges for. Microsoft has enough money to take a loss in one category to kill a competitor and make it up in another.
>Posted by: Nick Letica
>Posted on: June 21, 2005, 7:22 PM PDT
>Story: Former judge defends his bid to break up Microsoft
>Netscape played a sleight of hand by not coming down on the
>Silicon Graphics workstation. They were out for themselves,
>nevertheless. Judge Jackson appears to believe the govt prints
>money straight into people's bank accounts as he doesn't
>mention unionisation. Nothing wrong with extending the www
>or cordoning the extension off which is at the root of the
>problem. Nothing free in this world, not even ancient history. :)
>:) :) Looking at Google's $3oo... they have to do a web browser
>to justify or at least try to justify the price.
Talk about rambling...
IE was developed "just enough" to beat Netscape. It then languished, security holes and all, as MS faced no competition. Only when the open source-based Firefox started making inroads did MS make any changes of note to IE and then only to emulate FF.
How long before MS leverages its OS-tie-in again to swat the pesky FF?
Its pretty sad when you stop to think about how far we could have come in technology today if the market wasnt dominated by a company that only grudgingly moves forward by copying the innovations of organizations with a research and development budget of $0.
- Jackson Was a Terrible Judge
- by William Squire June 22, 2005 2:19 PM PDT
- No doubt, CNet is once again taking advantage of the anti-Microsoft sentiment that whips open-source hackers into frenzy and drives the news.com hit-counter through the roof. Certainly, Jackson?s ignorant ramblings are hardly worth reporting. Nearly everything he says aloud demonstrates his lack of judicial qualifications.
- Reply to this comment
-
-
- Of course
- by Fray9 June 22, 2005 4:53 PM PDT
- Of course.. why do you think the MS shills in the judicial branch put him in charge of the case?
- View reply
Processing -
(48 Comments)http://www.inaniloquent.com/PermaLink.aspx?guid=549e1750-6d81-4ee7-b850-af8b9700df55