※ [本文轉錄自 SYSOP 看板]
發信人: [email protected] (weiwei), 看板: hardware
標 題: Re: 法官判定 微軟 MICROSOFT 壟斷罪名成立...
發信站: 台大計中椰林風情站 (Sat Nov 6 15:30:08 1999)
轉信站: Zamenhof!news.nthu!news.cs.nthu!freebsd.ntu!bbs.ee.ntu!Palmarama
==> [email protected] (pual) 提到:
> ptrhua <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> 哪裡有詳情? POST出來源好嗎? 我想看仔細一點
http://cnnfn.com/1999/11/05/technology/microsoft_finding/
NEW YORK (CNNfn) - A federal judge declared
Friday that Microsoft Corp. possesses monopoly
power in the market for PC operating systems and
harmed consumers through its anti-competitive
behavior, giving the government a pivotal victory in the
long-running antitrust trial.
The findings represent a major setback to
Microsoft, largely because U.S. District Judge
Thomas Penfield Jackson rejected the company's
defense that its actions have not harmed consumers.
In his findings of fact, Jackson said Microsoft
(MSFT), which holds more than 90 percent of the
market share for PC operating systems, caused
"consumer harm by distorting competition."
"Three main facts indicate that Microsoft enjoys
monopoly power," Jackson wrote. "First, Microsoft's
share of the market for Intel-compatible PC operating
systems is extremely large and stable. Second,
Microsoft's dominant market share is protected by a
high barrier to entry. Third, and largely as a result of
that barrier, Microsoft's customers lack a
commercially viable alternative to Windows.
"Microsoft has demonstrated that it will use its
prodigious market power and immense profits to
harm any firm that insists on pursuing initiatives that
could intensify competition against one of Microsoft's
core products," Jackson added.
"The ultimate result is that some innovations that
would truly benefit consumers never occur for the
sole reason that they do not coincide with Microsoft's
self-interest."
Justice Department officials hailed Jackson's
findings as a major victory.
"This fully supports the [Justice] Department's
view that this case is about protecting consumers,"
U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno said.
Joel Klein, head of the Justice Department's
antitrust bureau, said the evidence proved that
"Microsoft is a monopolist and it engaged in massive
anti-competitive practices that harmed innovation and
limited consumer choice."
For their part, Microsoft officials attempted to
downplay Jackson's findings, noting that Friday's
statements marked just the latest step in an ongoing
process.
"We continue to be confident about our legal
position," said William Neukom, Microsoft senior vice
president for legal affairs. "We think the law is very
much on our side in all the major issues of this
case."
Microsoft shares fell 3/16 to close at 91-9/16 in
Friday trade. Its shares tumbled to 87-1/16 in
after-hours trade on the Instinet system after the
findings were issued.
The findings could have an effect on the broader
market when trading resumes Monday, especially
since Microsoft became a member of the Dow Jones
industrial average earlier this week.
Microsoft harmed consumers
The Justice Department and 19 states sued
Microsoft in May 1998 for a broad range of antitrust
violations, particularly using its alleged monopoly in
the PC operating system market to stifle competition
in other segments of the computer industry.
Microsoft has countered that it is merely a
vigorous but fair competitor, and that the government
has failed to show any evidence of consumer harm,
arguing that the government's case is intended
merely to protect the company's rivals.
But Jackson noted that by engaging in illegal
tactics to thwart its competitors, Microsoft also
harmed consumers.
"Many of the tactics that Microsoft has employed
have also harmed consumers indirectly by
unjustifiably distorting competition," Jackson wrote.
Tom Pilla, a Microsoft spokesman, said despite
Jackson's findings, the company still expects to
emerge victorious.
"While we disagree with many of today's findings,
we're still confident that the law supports us on these
points, and that the American legal system will
ultimately rule that Microsoft's actions were fair, legal
and good for consumers," Pilla said.
Microsoft officials also noted that the company
faces numerous competitive threats in an
ever-changing technology landscape. Neukom cited
companies such as Sun Microsystems Inc. (SUNW)
and Oracle Corp. (ORCL), and technologies such as
the Linux operating system and handheld computing
devices as evidence that competition is healthy in the
computer industry.
"Everyone can see that Microsoft does not live
the quiet life of a so-called monopolist," Neukom
said.
Settlement or sweeping remedies?
Jackson's findings, in which he determined which
facts were proven during the 76-day courtroom
proceedings, will serve as a road map for his final
decision.
The government will present their proposed
conclusions of law in early December; Microsoft will
follow with its findings of law in mid-January. Jackson
will then deliver his conclusions of law -- his final
decision in the case -- which isn't expected until
early 2000.
Should Jackson rule in favor of the government,
which is likely in light of his findings of fact, the
Justice Department and the 19 states involved in the
case then will determine what legal remedies
Jackson should enact.
Those remedies could be structural -- that is,
breaking up Microsoft in a fashion similar to the
famed AT&T (T) breakup -- or behavioral, which could
include barring Microsoft from engaging in
exclusionary deals.
Antitrust experts believe the findings will spark
another round of settlement talks between Microsoft
and the government, since the two sides are now
aware of how the judge is inclined to make his final
decision.
However, Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut
attorney general, indicated that the government may
pursue sweeping remedies after the final decision is
handed down.
"These are serious and far-reaching violations that
should lead to serious and far-reaching remedies," he
said.
--
☆ [Origin:椰林風情] [From: dial-119-37.ots.utexas.edu] [Login: **] [Post: 20]
--
Origin: 柴門霍夫 IPA.twbbs.org (140.114.47.245)