Judge favors Microsoft search agreement
609432
A U.S. judge said Tuesday she will likely defer to an agreement on desktop search forged between Microsoft and the plaintiffs in the U.S. government's antitrust lawsuit against the software vendor, instead of responding toÂ a complaint from rival Google.
140239
Blog: Microsoft's proposed changes to search functions in Windows Vista, per a pact last week with regulators, don't go far enough to promote "user choice," search giant tells antitrust judge in new filing.
293018
US District Judge Kathleen Kollar-Kotelly - who nearly five years ago was at the center of the spotlight as the second district judge in the Microsoft antitrust trial - stated Google is not a party to that case, rejecting Google's plea to consider extending the settlement term that would enable its objections to be remedied.
155567
A San Francisco judge ordered Microsoft Corp. (MSFT.O: Quote, Profile, Research) to pay lawyers involved in its $1.1 billion class action settlement $100 million in legal fees, less than
201560
A European Court judge today pressed Microsoft to explain how it would suffer irreparable harm if it follows EU orders to share technology with competitors, but offered no clues as to how he'll rule.
373574
(InfoWorld) - Google still hopes to influence changes that Microsoft plans to make in Vista's desktop search function, even after the parties involved in Microsoft's 2002 antitrust settlement agreed to alterations to the search system. On Monday, in response to Microsoft's opposition to an earlier request, Google asked that the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia allow it to weigh in as an interested party regarding the way the search function should be changed. The filing comes two weeks after Microsoft and the plaintiffs in the antitrust suit said that they had worked together and agreed to changes. The concerns about the desktop search function initially arose after Google complained to the plaintiffs and state attorney generals late last year that Microsoft's desktop search put third-party desktop search providers at a disadvantage. According to the terms of Microsoft's antitrust settlement, third parties like Google must address their complaints about Microsoft's compliance with the settlement to the plaintiffs and the states. In their quarterly report to the court on June 19, Microsoft and the plaintiffs told the judge that based on Google's complaint, they had agreed on a way for Microsoft to change Vista desktop search to satisfy third party concerns. However, on June 25, the night before the judge was set to meet with the parties to discuss the quarterly report, Google made a filing to the court asking to weigh in on the case. In addition to the request, Google included the comments that it wanted to file as a third party. In a response filing, Microsoft called the move an attempt at an "end-run" around the terms of the settlement agreement, which require third parties to work with the plaintiffs, not directly with the court. Microsoft also argued that the matter is settled already, so there's no issue for Google to participate in resolving. It also argued that Google isn't qualified to participate because it isn't a party involved in the antitrust case. During the discussion of the quarterly report last week, the judge appeared to agree with Microsoft. Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly remarked then that the plaintiffs serve as representatives of the consumer and that Google isn't a party in the case. Google's filing on Monday is in response to Microsoft's filing. Google argues that it can offer an important and useful perspective to the situation because it is a developer of a desktop search product and because it initially drew the attention of the plaintiffs to the Vista desktop search issue. Google is also asking for more information about the agreed changes so that it may determine whether they go far enough. If Google thinks the changes aren't enough, it wants to have the opportunity to offer its opinions to the court, according to the filing. The next step is for the judge to decide whether to allow Google's participation.
390923
The federal judge overseeing  Microsoft Corp.'s  antitrust compliance said on Tuesday  that she will rely on the Justice Department and state  attorneys general in deciding how to handle Google Inc.'s   concerns about Microsoft's Vista operating system.
513800
The federal judge overseeing  Microsoft Corp.'s  antitrust settlement said on Tuesday  she would leave it up to government lawyers to determine how  best to handle Google Inc.'s  concerns about  Microsoft's Vista operating system.
513733
Google's claims that Microsof's Vista desktop search violates its antitrust agreement could be difficult to prove.
656241
A federal court hearing today is set to review the terms of Microsoft's five-year-old settlement order, which ended the Justice Department's antitrust case against the software giant. A brief filed by Google argues the order should remain in force, because of anticompetitive features in Windows Vista.
496319
PARIS - IT industry watchers and legal observers were skeptical Wednesday of the significance of a ruling by a European court that MicrosoftÂ must comply with antitrust remedies imposed by the European Commission. Analysts doubted the power of the remedies to achieve their stated goal of boosting competition in two key software markets: workgroup servers and media players.
134935
(InfoWorld) - A group of state plaintiffs in the U.S. Microsoft antitrust case will ask for a five-year extension of a large portion of the 2002 judgment against the company, the group's lawyer said Tuesday. California, Connecticut, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia -- known as the "California group" -- want an extension of most of the middleware portions of the judgment, said Stephen Houck, a lawyer for the group. Microsoft still retains a huge lead in the operating system and Web browser markets, he said. "Microsoft continues to have a stranglehold over the two products ... that nearly all consumers use," Houck said during an antitrust compliance hearing in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. "Very little has happened in five years ... in those markets." The California group of states -- the larger of two groups of states that sued Microsoft for antitrust violations -- will ask for an extension of all the middleware portions of the antitrust judgement, except for a section that governs the royalties Microsoft can charge PC manufacturers for the Windows operating system. Most of the antitrust judgment was scheduled to expire in November. Microsoft lawyer Rick Rule said the company would need time to respond to Houck's proposal. Microsoft first heard of the plan to ask for an extension on Friday, he said, and the California group plans to file a formal extension request with the court in mid-October. Rule seemed to suggest Microsoft would fight the five-year extension. U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly declined to impose a 10-year judgment in 2002, he said. "We think the picture of the computer industry is much rosier," Rule added. "We think it's clear that the decree has done its job." Microsoft spokesman Jack Evans said the company will respond in more detail after it has seen the extension request. "We're a bit surprised that a few states are now requestingÂ an extension of the consent decree because they indicated just last month that they're not too fond of it," Evans said. In August 2006, Microsoft already agreed to an extension of the section of the judgment requiring it to make its communications protocols available to other software vendors. Microsoft's efforts to fix technical documentation for the protocols have run into several delays. Houck on Tuesday asked Kollar-Kotelly to extend the communications protocol section of the judgment until 2012. The California group does not "have any confidence" Microsoft will continue to improve the communications protocol program without oversight, Houck said. An independent auditor's report just issued questions whether Microsoft has released all the protocols mandated in the judgment, he added. The California group's extension proposal comes afterÂ the U.S. Department of Justice and the New York group of states filed briefs last month saying the antitrust judgment has done its job. "There have been a number of developments in the competitive landscape ... that suggest that the Final Judgments are accomplishing their stated goal of fostering competitive conditions among middleware products, unimpeded by anticompetitive exclusionary obstacles erected by Microsoft," said the report from the DOJ and New York group, which includes five states. But Houck disputed that assessment on Tuesday. At the time of the judgment, a handful of PC vendors were preinstalling a competing Web browser on PCs, he said. Today, no major ones are, he said. In addition, the communications protocol program was supposed to be finished early in the judgment's life, and its delays have kept software vendors from fully using the program, Houck said. "The whole thing ... doesn't have an opportunity to work as the court intended," he said. "It's very clear that the product markets at issue in this case have not moved rapidly at all." Kollar-Kotelly said she would delay final reports on the judgment while she considers the California group's request. Microsoft and the plaintiffs were scheduled to meet with her Nov. 6 to discuss the final reports, but she will now consider the extension request on that date. Before Houck made his request, the judge said she was opposed to extending the judgment without a good reason. It was hard to predict the impact the judgment would have, she added. "The final chapter of the final judgment has not been written," Kollar-Kotelly said. The California group wants Kollar-Kotelly to extend all of section 3 of the judgment except for section 3B, dealing with manufacturer royalties. The extended provision would include: *Â A prohibition against Microsoft retaliating against PC vendors for including competing software on PCs; *Â A prohibition against Microsoft restricting PC vendors from putting competing middleware in the start menu or making them defaults; *Â A requirement that Microsoft give APIs for its middleware to PC vendors and independent software vendors.
449505
The European judge deciding whether to suspend the European Union's landmark antitrust ruling against Microsoft Corp. pushed the EU to justify its sweeping order &#151; questioning Friday whether the move would rein in the U.S. software giant or raise costs for others.
175930
Microsoft Corp. said in court Thursday that it had been prepared during settlement talks to share more software code with its rivals than the European Union demanded.
457113
(InfoWorld) - A U.S. judge said Tuesday she will likely defer to an agreement on desktop search forged between Microsoft and the plaintiffs in the U.S. government's antitrust lawsuit against the software vendor, instead of responding toÂ a complaint from rival Google. Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, said she relies on the plaintiffs, including the U.S. Department of Justice and several states, to suggest solutions for complaints related to a 2002 antitrust settlement governing Microsoft. "The plaintiffs, as far as I'm concerned, stand in the shoes of the consumer," Kollar-Kotelly said during a status hearing on Microsoft's compliance with the settlement. "Google is not a party in this case." This month, Google filed an antitrust complaint against Microsoft, saying it was difficult for computer users to change the default desktop search program in Windows Vista. Google protested the proposed desktop search agreement between Microsoft and the antitrust plaintiffs, saying it didn't go far enough. Google on Monday filed a motion asking Kollar-Kotelly to extend her oversight of changes to desktop search. (More to come.)
681256
(InfoWorld) - Microsoft will make changes to its desktop search program following aÂ complaint to the U.S. Department of JusticeÂ (DOJ) by Google. Google suggested in a white paper submitted to the DOJ earlier this year that Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system puts other search software companies at a disadvantage, making it difficult for users to utilize non-Microsoft desktop-search software. Microsoft has reached an agreement with the DOJ to make it easier for end users to employ desktop search programs made by rival software developers, The Wall Street Journal reported. Microsoft will also provide more documentation and information to developers about how to make those search programs run smoothly, it said. The changes will be included in Microsoft's firstÂ Vista update, called Service Pack 1, slated to be released later this year, the report said. California Attorney General Jerry Brown said Microsoft had agreed to make the "significant changes" in Vista operating system to stay in compliance with a U.S. court agreement in Microsoft's antitrust case. Brown's office intervened in the wake of reports that Microsoft's new operating system included a desktop search function called "Instant Search" that violated terms of its agreement to open its products to more competition. Google, which offers the most popular search engine on the Internet, said "Instant Search" is a "Microsoft middleware product," which is subject to the federal agreement in the antitrust case. The State of California contended that Vistaâs desktop search feature is a functionality that did not exist in prior Windows operating systems and is therefore covered under the agreement. Brown said Microsoft will provide users and computer manufacturers, such as Hewlett-Packard and Dell, with greater flexibility to choose and access competing desktop search products. The agreement was included in a joint status report that was filed Wednesday with federal District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in Washington, D.C., who presided over the 2002 agreement in the case. "This agreement -- while not perfect -- is a positive step towards greater competition in the software industry," said Brown. "It will enhance the ability of consumers to select the desktop search tool of their choice." "Microsoft believes that Google's complaint is without merit," Microsoft's lawyers wrote in the status report. "Nevertheless, Microsoft worked with the Plaintiffs in a spirit of cooperation to resolve any issues the complaint may raise." Google said the search changes are welcome but more needs to be done. "Microsoft's current approach to Vista desktop search clearly violates the consent decree and limits consumer choice," said David Drummond, Google's senior vice president and chief legal officer. "These remedies are a step in the right direction, but they should be improved further to give consumers greater access to alternate desktop search providers." Microsoft was found to be operating an illegal monopoly in software by another U.S. District Judge in Washington. Microsoft entered into a settlement agreement with the federal government and attorneys general for several U.S. states to abide by certain rules to allow more competition. Microsoft had originally denied that its own desktop search interfered with non-Microsoft indexing software, noting that its search indexing could be turned off, although with some difficulty. The Redmond company also seemed to have the DOJ, its former antitrust foe, on its side: Thomas O. Barnett, now the DOJ's top-ranking antitrust official,Â recommended that the DOJ and state attorneys general rejectÂ Google's complaint, according to a New York Times report earlier this month. As part of the desktop search agreement, software vendors will be able to register their products as alternatives for the Vista search. The default search selected by the computer user or OEM will launch whenever Vista launches a search result window, and the default search will have space in Vista's start menu. Microsoft will also tell software vendors and OEMs that the desktop search index in Vista is designed to run in the background and "cede precedence over computing resources to any other software product, including third-party search products," the DOJ said in its portion of the status report. "Microsoft will emphasize that there is no technical reason why OEMs and end-users cannot, if they choose to, install additional desktop search products on their systems." The plaintiffs in the case, including 17 states that sued Microsoft for antitrust, are "collectively satisfied that this agreement will resolve any issues" in the Google complaint, the DOJ said. Elsewhere in the status report, the DOJ said a technical committee overseeing Microsoft's compliance has hired two consulting firms to check Microsoft's procedures for identifying communications protocols that it is required to disclose to independent software vendors who want to make their products interoperable with Microsoft's. In March, Microsoft and the plaintiffs reached an agreement to address concerns over the belated discovery of protocols that plaintiffs believed needed to be disclosed. The technical committee will extend a royalty-free program for software vendors to receive the protocols, the DOJ said. The royalty-free program will continue 18 months after the date the committee decides the protocol documentation is substantially complete, and the technical committee can extend the program if it believe Microsoft isn't making progress on the documentation, the DOJ said. But Microsoft is on schedule with a plan to fix technical documentation used by other software vendors, the DOJ said. Errors in the technical documentation have prompted repeated complaints from the antitrust plaintiffs in recent months, but the DOJ said Microsoft has been able "to keep up with the flow of new technical documentation issues." This story was updated on June 20, 2007
552517
The U.S. government asked a federal judge Wednesday to extend its oversight of Microsoft by an additional two years, with the option to further extend it through 2012 if necessary. Both parties have come to an agreement that progress on portions of the deal has come too slowly.