Fresh on the heels of an overwhelming victory in federal court, Microsoft is ready to play nice.
In a speech this week at a Washington think tank, Chief Executive Steve Ballmer said the world’s largest software company is “working to become a more responsible leader.”
A five-year antitrust battle taught the company important lessons, he said. Yet Ballmer never admitted in his speech that Microsoft had done anything wrong.
“We have an important leadership role to play, and there are new rules that apply–both legally and dictated by industry trends and needs,” Ballmer said to a packed audience at the Brookings Institution.
An appeals court in June 2001 unanimously ruled that Microsoft had violated antitrust laws by illegally abusing its monopoly in the PC operating-system market.
The court rejected a breakup of the company as a solution and ordered a new trial to decide an appropriate remedy.
Last November, the federal government and nine states reached a settlement agreement with Microsoft, but nine other states continued to fight, arguing that the deal was full of loopholes.
Two weeks ago U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly approved the settlement and largely rejected efforts by the nine holdout states to impose tougher sanctions.
The states have not decided whether to appeal.
“I can personally assure you that Microsoft will commit all the time, energy and resources necessary to follow through on our responsibilities,” Ballmer said.
But competitors remained skeptical that the settlement would make any difference in the marketplace, whether or not Microsoft fully complies.
“I don’t know anybody who has seen a change in their behavior,” said Ed Black, president of the Computer and Communications Industry Association.
Competitors have filed complaints with the Justice Department alleging that Microsoft already is violating the agreement.
Under the settlement, Microsoft is required to license certain technical information to rivals so that their server computers and other products work well with Microsoft’s dominant Windows operating system.
But some competitors say the terms required by Microsoft for the licenses are so onerous that they are essentially useless.
In talks with Justice Department lawyers, Sun Microsystems Inc. officials have alleged that the terms of the licenses are not economically viable.
“Our analysis of the royalty structure persuaded us that there’s no way you could ever utilize those communications protocols in a commercially practical way,” Sun general counsel Michael Morris said recently.
Ballmer defended the company’s actions. “The level of care and thought and concern … that went into making that offer was very high,” he said in response to a question about the licensing terms.
More Top Picks Best Premium Weighted Blankets