News Release

Microsoft Decision

Federal Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson ruled on Monday evening that Microsoft has violated antitrust law. The following analysts are available for interviews beginning Tuesday:

NORMAN HAWKER
A law professor at Western Michigan University, Hawker said: “Judge Jackson crossed the Rubicon in the antitrust case against Microsoft.” Hawker, who has published numerous articles on antitrust law and the Microsoft case, noted that “the verdict against Microsoft demonstrates both the vitality of antitrust law and the need for strong remedial steps to restore competition in markets threatened by Microsoft.”

ELEANOR FOX
Professor of Law at New York University and co-author of the case book Antitrust Law, Fox said: “This is a dramatic opinion. In the late 1980s there was a sentiment that a big monopoly case could not be won. This case has put the lie to that. Predatory behavior is difficult to prove, but Microsoft did not cover its tracks. With all the emails, as well as the arrogance of Microsoft, the government was able to prove a great many predatory practices.”

RALPH NADER
Consumer advocate Nader, who is available for a limited number of interviews, said: “Microsoft has illegally crushed innovative competitors and harmed consumers…. Its predatory and exclusionary practices have saddled consumers with inferior technologies and blocked innovations which would have otherwise occurred. Microsoft doesn’t respect the antitrust laws, and it has amply demonstrated that it can’t be trusted…. If the government ends the antitrust case by seeking changes in its conduct, but not in its structure, Microsoft can be expected to creatively evade the thrust of such agreements. The court must break up this monopoly corporation.”

EBEN MOGLEN
Professor of Law at Columbia Law School and General Counsel for the Free Software Foundation, Moglen said: “With clarity and care, Judge Jackson brought the Microsoft Era to a certain and devastating end…. The facts Judge Jackson found last November are now unquestionable by Microsoft in any other antitrust litigation brought by those who allege that they have been harmed by this or similar conduct…. The chances of reversal on appeal are comparatively low…. Regardless of the remedies Judge Jackson may ultimately decide to impose, private litigation will distract and dismember Microsoft, while the free software movement continues to replace the lower-quality higher-price goods provided by any monopolist, with superior software that anyone can get, improve and redistribute for nothing.”
More Information

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020