The question is not whether Microsoft broke the law ... It did. The question
is whether consumers, at least those that use computers, are better off today
because of it. They are!
So where does that leave Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly? It is not an enviable
position the Judge is facing. Clearly, any decision she makes will have vast
implications for the future of the computer industry. Does she accept the
slap-on-the-wrist agreement Microsoft and the Bush Administration quickly worked
out when the economy hit the skids last fall? Or does she slap tough sanctions
on a stubborn and persistent law-breaker that could end up hurting consumers and
the economy?
Clearly, the volumes of evidence from the initial trial and the additional
data presented by the nine States amount to enough evidence to show Microsoft
continues to live by its own monopolistic adage
"what's-good-for-Microsoft-is-good-for-consumers." Kollar-Kotelly has
a history of siding with the interests of consumers.
While that may be good news for the States who are supposedly battling
Microsoft on behalf of consumers, the judge could also conclude that consumers
may not be served by putting all sorts of restrictions on Microsoft.
So the outcome is anybody's guess. My gut feeling tells me the Judge will
deny the States' request for additional sanctions or impose some very mild ones
in an attempt to allow both sides to claim victory. Of course Microsoft will
appeal just about anything short of a congratulatory note with from the judge.
So while a verdict is near, the end of this mouse's tail is probably still quite
a ways away.