The june 28 decision in the Microsoft antitrust case by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ripped like a Hank Aaron line drive through Washington, landing in Redmond and Silicon Valley, where the electronics industry was left to ponder its meaning and ultimate impact.
A curious phenomenon occurs every time there is a pivotal ruling in the Microsoft antitrust saga: A growing number of supposedly independent, unbiased lobbying outfits jam the fax machines of the nation's newsrooms with instant analysis of the decision that nearly always contains a distinct point of view.
This is fine. We want to know what all sides in this case are thinking, and they are entitled to their view just as we are entitled to hear it. But let's be honest. Some of these self-styled "independent" and "nonpoliticized" groups have strong ties to both sides in the antitrust fight.
In fact, these spin campaigns illustrate the public relations tactic know as "Astro-Turfing." In other words, a supposedly grass-roots movement springing from the deeply held views of citizens around the nation is in fact an orchestrated campaign to bring the public around to a particular company's or group's point of view.
The pervasiveness of AstroTurfing in the high-tech sector is challenging the BS detectors of reporters and editors like never before. Leading the PR charge was Microsoft itself, which instantly declared the appeals court ruling a victory when in fact-and in law-the court affirmed the trial judge's ruling that Microsoft is a monopolist. The company posted the appeals court decision on its Web site minutes after it was issued and portrayed it as a slam-dunk win and a significant narrowing of the issues in the antitrust case.
The spin out of Redmond and from the long list of pro-Microsoft groups was the first step in the kabuki dance between the company and the Justice Department's Antitrust Division aimed at settling the case before it goes back to a new trial judge. Some legal experts think a settlement could be achieved by summer's end. And despite the manufactured consensus that Microsoft has already won, the government's case remains far stronger than Gates and Co. would have you believe.
The D.C. appeals court ruling means it's highly unlikely Microsoft will be broken into separate operating system and applications businesses. But the court has also affirmed that the company has violated federal law and did not rule out a structural remedy.
Every politician and regulator in Washington embraces competition like motherhood and apple pie. The Microsoft settlement negotiations present a golden opportunity for the government to back up this talk with action that would restore a measure of competition to the operating system and Internet markets.
George Leopold is Washington Bureau Chief for EE Times.
RSS
RSS| 
Digital| 
Mobile
