FYI: Proposed Microsoft settlement (in case nobody has seenthis yet)

[David P. Schwartz]

Yesterday or today AOL jumped into the fray filing an action against MS on behalf of Netscape claiming something like "unfair
enrichment" on MS' part citing damages already upheld by the courts.  They're only claiming a billion dollars' of damage -- an amount
which can be trebled under Federal guidelines!  Their argument sides more closely with the nine states that have broken from the DOJ and
other states.

While you're at it, you might drop a letter to Qwest's HQ in Denver asking what their corporate policy is when it comes to engaging in
business deals with known felons and entities convicted of criminal acts.  Most companies will say it's against their company's policy.
Yet, Qwest managed to see clear to hand-off their entire residential DSL customer base to the largest company in history ever to be
convicted of violating the Sherman Anti-Trust act.  If I were a Qwest shareholder, I might be contemplating filing a class-action suit
against the company for breach of fiduciary duty and endangering corporate assets -- I mean, what if Qwest is somehow sucked into this
fray and charged with complicity?  I sent a letter a while back and even got a phone call from a woman in their Executive Offices saying
she considered what I said to be very serious and that they were going to take it up in their next whatever meeting.

-David

Rusty Carruth wrote:

> >>>>> Thus spake <a dude>
>
> Monday 28th (5 days time) is the deadline for public comment on the proposed
> US vs. Microsoft settlement.
>
> Sources indicate that current feedback is significantly pro-Microsoft, and
> concerns have been raised that interested parties have lobbied their
> employees to respond in support of the proposed settlement, whereas
> grass-roots & individuals have not been as organised.
>
> If you have any concerns that the proposed settlement is either ineffectual
> or overreaching, you should send an email TODAY with a subject such as
> 'Microsoft Settlement', to:
>
>         microsoft.atr@usdoj.gov
>
> Additionally, you might want to print it off and mail it TONIGHT to:
>
>         Renata B. Hesse
>         Antitrust Division
>         U.S. Department of Justice
>         601 D Street NW
>         Suite 1200
>         Washington, DC  20530-0001
>
> The proposed settlement itself is here:
> http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms-settle.htm
>
> A fairly comprehensive examination of the settlement's shortfalls is at:
> http://www.kegel.com/remedy/remedy2.html
>
> I have read many documents about this, but have yet to find a similar
> analysis of the settlement which counter-argues that it punishes or
> restricts Microsoft too much. ...
>
> <<  End forwarded message
>
> rc
>
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
> PLUG-discuss mailing list  -  PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss