Kollar-Kotelly is optimistic that, provided the two parties act
reasonably and in good faith, they will be able to reach an
agreement before 2nd November and ordered that they “make all
efforts, seven days a week around the clock” in order to do so. It
was implied that a quick settlement would liberate the millions of
dollars in costs of a long-running case to be better spent in
rebuilding the damaged US economy.
The two sides are free to negotiate an agreement independently
until 12th October at which point, in the absence of settlement,
the judge will appoint a mediator to oversee talks. Previously,
both parties have been reluctant to enter mandatory mediation but a
similar process came close to a successful conclusion before
falling apart in April 2000.
If no settlement proposals are reached by 2nd November then
hearings to decide on Microsoft’s fate commence on 11th March
2002.
Microsoft had asked the new judge to narrow the scope of
penalties sought by the government in light of the decision of the
court of appeal in June. The court found Microsoft guilty of
abusing its monopoly position by illegally shielding Windows from
competition, but threw out an order to break the company up and
dismissed one of the other charges in the case.
However, Judge Kollar-Kotelly underlined that Supreme Court
authority allowed her to consider any punishments including those
that might not be directly tied to the violations Microsoft was
found guilty of. It is within her power to deal with both past
antitrust violations and potential ones in order to restore
competition and prevent future illegality.
In the absence of settlement therefore, the consequences for
Microsoft could be far-reaching and as Kollar-Kotelly pointed out,
the first allegations of anti-competitive conduct by Microsoft go
back as far as six years and “the various related cases have
spanned an eternity in the computer industry.”
