----- Original Message ----- 
From: Institute for Public Accuracy 
To: [log in to unmask] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2000 9:37 PM
Subject: Microsoft Decision


Institute for Public Accuracy
915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045
(202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * [log in to unmask]
___________________________________________________

Tuesday, April 4, 2000

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, [log in to unmask]
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, [log in to unmask]
Professor of Law at New York University and co-author of the case book
"Antitrust Law," Fox said: "This is a dramatic option. 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, http://www.cptech.org/ms
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, [log in to unmask], http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu
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."

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