State AGs Listen Only to Microsoft Competitors, Not Consumers
Several newspapers this week turned their attention to the close ties between non-settling state attorneys general and Microsoft's competitors.
Syndicated columnist Robert Novak followed the money trail in the Microsoft case and found several examples of Microsoft's rivals contributing to state AGs in California, Kansas and Utah - all of whom are among the states who are refused to join the DoJ settlement and are still suing. http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak01.html
The Wall Street Journal editorializes that new evidence introduced in court in the last few weeks suggests that "the road to the federal antitrust case looks like it was paved by Microsoft's rivals." The WSJ goes on to say that settlement would be good for "taxpayers and computer users" and "even help Microsoft's rivals, or at least those still able to innovate." www.microsoft.com/freedomtoinnovate/default.aspx
The Wichita Eagle editorial board faults Kansas Attorney General Carla Stovall for joining the case in the first place, for refusing to join the settlement and now for taking campaign contributions from Microsoft's rivals. http://www.kansas.com/mld/eagle/news/editorial/2999670.htm
Courtroom Update
This week in U.S. District Court, the non-settling states presented more of Microsoft's rivals who are looking to help themselves, not consumers or the greater technology industry.
The state AGs continue to ignore the costs that consumers and software developers will incur if the states' proposed sanctions are implemented -- a conservatively estimated $80 billion price tag over the next three years, according to University of Texas economist Stan Liebowitz - as well as the chaos that would ensue from fragmenting Windows into thousands of versions, each with a different array of compatible and incompatible applications and other equipment. http://www.actonline.org/getIT/
Click here to join the FIN!