Now that the U.S. appeals court has reaffirmed its unanimous decision that Microsoft abused its monopoly and stifled innovation, and now that it’s abundantly clear that Microsoft has no intention of modifying its behavior, it’s time for a difficult but necessary step.
The Justice Department and states must quickly seek an injunction blocking the release of Windows XP, at least the version Microsoft is planning to ship.
This sounds like an extreme move, and in a way it is. But it’s vital. Otherwise we’ll face even more extreme behavior from a company that keeps demonstrating, in word and deed, utter contempt for the law and fair competition.
Eight federal judges, most appointed by conservative Republicans, all agree that the company is a lawbreaker and that there need to be remedies to prevent further lawbreaking. Stepping up its malfeasance, Microsoft is spitting in their faces — and doing its best to prevent the re-emergence of genuine competition.
Oh, Microsoft did bow to public pressure in removing — only from Windows XP, but not from Office XP, which is now shipping — the invasive Smart Tags feature that gave it the ability to mark up and put its own advertising on other people’s Web pages. Just how long do you believe the tags will stay absent from the operating system? I predict it will take less than a year before customers are encouraged, with punitive results if they don’t comply, to accept them in a ”Windows update” session.
On one level, an injunction against Windows XP is a regrettable idea, because XP does offer some genuine improvements. It finally brings a crash-resistant OS to everyday folks. And the user interface is better in several ways.
But Windows XP is the linchpin of Microsoft’s plain-as-day attempt to control the Internet just as it now controls desktop computing — and to put itself at the center of all manner of future commerce and communications. It’s wrong to allow this unrepentant monopolist to ignore the law and keep on its predatory path.
A company that had any respect for the law or fair competition would have taken to heart the appeals court’s unanimous June ruling. Such a company would have realized by now that it couldn’t insist on business as usual, or at least that business as usual had been found to be a criminal act.
The chairman and chief executive, respectively, of a company that respected the law and fair competition would not have insisted immediately after the ruling a) that the court’s judgement would have no impact on XP or other future products and b) that the company hadn’t done anything wrong in the first place. Yet that’s what Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer did say, even as they said they’d like to settle the case.
Face it. There is no reasoning with Microsoft. This is a company that understands only one thing. Force.
Microsoft will surely pursue its best legal strategy — stalling for time. It understands that justice delayed in this situation is truly justice denied.
Do the lawyers who filed the antitrust case in the first place — the men and women who have done excellent work in pursuit of preserving competition — understand that it may be too late once Windows XP is on 100 million computers and Microsoft has put another $10 billion in its checking account?
Do they have the spine to do the right thing?
Let’s hope so.