While state officials hail a judge's ruling Monday that software mammoth Microsoft has violated antitrust laws, it could be years before the ruling has any effect -- if ever.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson ruled that Microsoft violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by bundling its Web browser, Internet Explorer, with its Windows operating system"Microsoft placed an oppressive thumb on the scale of competitive fortune, thereby effectively guaranteeing its continued dominance," Jackson wrote.
"In general, the ruling means the antitrust laws do apply to high tech, and they have an obligation to play fairly and allow competition as much as anyone else," said Utah Assistant Attorney General Wayne Klein.
Utah was one of 19 states that joined the Justice Department in the lawsuit against Microsoft.
Klein predicted three benefits for consumers in Utah and elsewhere, starting with improved competition. "Innovations have not been brought to market because it was not in Microsoft's interests to allow it," he said, citing a case several years ago where Intel was not only denied the chance to market a 3D software program designed to run on its computer chip, but was also forced to close down its software group, which included some 600 employees.
That example is in line with a settlement Microsoft reached earlier this year with Utah County-based Caldera Inc., which sued the software giant, claiming it had torpedoed Caldera's DR-DOS, a product that competed directly with Microsoft's MS-DOS. Though the settlement was sealed, analysts say Microsoft agreed to pay between $200 million and $300 million.
Klein predicted that Jackson's ruling will translate into lower prices, more variety and innovation as "other companies now feel they can compete against Microsoft." Entrepreneurs, he predicted, will feel "an ability to develop their products and let the market decide whether there's a demand, rather than worry about whether Microsoft's upset."
But don't expect to reap benefits right away, warned David Politis, president of Politis Communications and a market consultant. If ever.
"The challenge with (Jackson's) ruling is that what's likely to happen in the end may be very different from what the judge recommended and found yesterday."
Politis said Microsoft founder and chairman Bill Gates is still holding out an olive branch toward the Justice Department, "with hopes of negotiating a kinder, gentler settlement. But don't be fooled. Microsoft has billions at its disposal to fight against yesterday's findings and appeal it all the way to the Supreme Court if it has to. That can literally take years.
"We may see no effect for a long, long time even if the judge comes out with a cease and desist order -- and that can be appealed, too. But nothing suggests to me that the presiding judge is going to do anything along that line. It's in Microsoft's best interests to move forward with business as usual as much as possible, while positioning itself as a kinder, gentler, more benevolent and more attuned-to-the-desires-of-society kind of company."
Politis said the Constitution doesn't ban aggressive behavior in the marketplace and "proving illegal behavior is a tough case. We're a long way from resolution."
Politis believes that, while it would be beneficial to force Microsoft to unbundle combinations of technology and stop forcing someone who wants to load Windows to also load Microsoft Office, the government may not be able to do that.
Following the judge's ruling, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, vowed that the Judiciary Committee, which he chairs, will publicly explore the ramifications of various remedies available, including breaking up the huge computer company.
"This is important to ensure that any action ultimately will be in the interest of consumers and the marketplace."
The Judiciary Committee plans to launch a Web site, judiciary.senate.gov, to solicit views from the public and experts.
Hatch said the ruling "comes as no surprise to anyone familiar with some of Microsoft's practices," noting that accusations Microsoft tried to kill off its competition were explored in several hearings by his committee. He called Jackson's ruling further validation of those hearings and said Microsoft made a mistake by not reaching an out-of-court settlement "to admit to its wrongdoings, recognize that the law does apply to Microsoft, and put its past behind" it.
Both Novell and Caldera, at various times competitors to Microsoft products, declined to comment on the ruling.
Deseret News Washington correspondent Lee Davidson contributed to this report.