Feeds

Consumer activist Nader lashes MS at Remedies conference

Wide-range of axes heard grinding in Washington last week

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Bridging the IT gap between rising business demands and ageing tools

MS Remedies Ralph Nader, the legendary American consumer activist who came to fame in the 1960s for declaring war on General Motors and winning, has turned his attention to Microsoft's business practices. Nader's Which Remedies? meeting in Washington on Friday was the second in the Appraising Microsoft series that Nader had sponsored (the first was in November 1997). Microsoft had been invited to co-sponsor the meeting and to provide half the speakers, but had again declined to do so, although some speakers who reflected Microsoft's viewpoint had been suggested by Microsoft, and they accepted invitations to speak. The purpose of the meeting, at the Carnegie Institution in Washington, was to discuss appropriate remedies for dealing with Microsoft, should Judge Jackson find for the DoJ. Four groups expressed their views as to what remedies should be imposed on Microsoft: consumer advocates, economists, lawyers, and the industry players. A constant problem was any lack of agreement on terminology, so that, for example, when the breaking up of Microsoft into separate companies was discussed, this was variously referred to as creating Baby Bills, structural remedies, and vertical breaking. It proved easier to get general agreement about the goals for dealing with Microsoft than the means by which this could be achieved. Remedies directed specifically against Gates did not find much support. The more general feeling was that it was necessary to remove the ability of Gates to be able to use market power illegally. There was only one mention of decapitation as a solution, but a long-term ban, as in securities cases, on Microsoft conducting certain business practices, such as acquisitions, was thought to be appropriate. It was perhaps surprising that although the open source software (OSS) movement had gained a great deal of momentum, most speakers did not appear to have analysed in any detail how this might impact possible remedies for dealing with Microsoft. A practical aspect of getting to grips with Windows source code, as has been suggested if Windows were judicially declared to be an essential facility, was its formidable size. Unfortunately Richard Stallman, the originator of the GNU licence and viewed by many as the founder of the open source software movement, was unable to be present because he was in Australia. But there is a need for an OSS/Linux view to be taken into account during the formalisation of any proposed outcome. If there was any agreement, it seemed to be a common desire that the government should not be involved in technical line-drawing to define product boundaries: the judicial hacking of Windows was not on. There was also much cynicism as to whether the court could prove effective in the detailed supervision of Microsoft's conduct, and conduct remedies were not generally favoured by those present. The turnaround over the last 18 months was marked - the controversialists are now the Microsoft supporters, rather than those who considered that Microsoft's market power should be reduced. There was no agreement about whether IE should be unbundled, with some thinking it too late, and others believing that unbundling remedies were appropriate. Bundling was seen as a way by which Microsoft maintains its monopoly and prevents operating system from being commoditised. Arguments that the best product wins were regarded as spurious, as was the myth that funding could be found to develop alternatives to such products as Excel. All in all, there remains some disappointment that more radical and innovative solutions were not discussed. There is an implicit assumption that Windows 9x and NT should be allowed to continue, despite their considerable shortcomings. Perhaps there was a residual desire not to do that much harm to an American icon that was acting like a naughty child. Punishment was rarely considered - and the present case precludes any financial penalties, and almost no attention was paid to restitution for the [alleged] damage that Microsoft has inflicted on its competitors. Many times it has been asserted that technology is somehow different from other industries (for example in the speed of evolution, and the tendency for monopolies to develop), and that different remedies are required in technology situations). But on the showing in Washington last Friday, only the tired old remedies were trotted out, for the main part. Some serious new thinking is required, and possibly some new law. ®

Build a business case: developing custom apps

More from The Register

next story
BBC goes offline in MASSIVE COCKUP: Stephen Fry partly muzzled
Auntie tight-lipped as major outage rolls on
iPad? More like iFAD: We reveal why Apple ran off to IBM
But never fear fanbois, you're still lapping up iPhones, Macs
Nadella: Apps must run on ALL WINDOWS – PCs, slabs and mobes
Phone egg, meet desktop chicken - your mother
ITC: Seagate and LSI can infringe Realtek patents because Realtek isn't in the US
Land of the (get off scot) free, when it's a foreign owner
HP, Microsoft prove it again: Big Business doesn't create jobs
SMEs get lip service - what they need is dinner at the Club
Samsung threatens to cut ties with supplier over child labour allegations
Vows to uphold 'zero tolerance' policy on underage workers
Dude, you're getting a Dell – with BITCOIN: IT giant slurps cryptocash
1. Buy PC with Bitcoin. 2. Mine more coins. 3. Goto step 1
There's NOTHING on TV in Europe – American video DOMINATES
Even France's mega subsidies don't stop US content onslaught
You! Pirate! Stop pirating, or we shall admonish you politely. Repeatedly, if necessary
And we shall go about telling people you smell. No, not really
prev story

Whitepapers

Seven Steps to Software Security
Seven practical steps you can begin to take today to secure your applications and prevent the damages a successful cyber-attack can cause.
Consolidation: The Foundation for IT Business Transformation
In this whitepaper learn how effective consolidation of IT and business resources can enable multiple, meaningful business benefits.
Designing a Defense for Mobile Applications
Learn about the various considerations for defending mobile applications - from the application architecture itself to the myriad testing technologies.
Build a business case: developing custom apps
Learn how to maximize the value of custom applications by accelerating and simplifying their development.
Consolidation: the foundation for IT and business transformation
In this whitepaper learn how effective consolidation of IT and business resources can enable multiple, meaningful business benefits.