Tweet
Microsoft Lawyer to Be on Antitrust Panel
From: Yahoo
By TED BRIDIS, AP Technology Writer
WASHINGTON - Stung by earlier court rulings, Microsoft Corp. has positioned one of its top lawyers to run a legal committee to influence how much oversight U.S. courts exercise in antitrust settlements like the one the company negotiated with the Bush administration.
The debate over how aggressively federal judges should scrutinize these settlements is pivotal in the next major ruling in Microsoft's long-running antitrust case, a decision that could come as early as Friday.
Microsoft's effort in the legal community illustrates how the world's largest software company is moving to protect its interests in venues where it has found itself challenged. It also has increasingly participated in the political process in Washington and in technology standards organizations.
A U.S. appeals court is considering whether the landmark settlement Microsoft negotiated with the Justice Department (news - web sites) in late 2001 was tough enough. The ruling could force fundamental changes to Microsoft's profitable Windows software, the engine for hundreds of millions of personal computers worldwide.
Microsoft associate general counsel Richard J. Wallis takes over as chairman this summer of the American Bar Association's antitrust section, an unusual role for a corporate lawyer. Even before Wallis' arrival, the panel is already organizing opposition to a congressional plan requiring more aggressive oversight by the courts of such antitrust settlements.
Microsoft said Wallis was traveling Thursday and could not be reached for comment.
The bar association's antitrust group is "extremely influential in terms of development of antitrust policy and law," said Glenn B. Manishin, a Washington antitrust lawyer. But Manishin said Wallis will not be able to advance Microsoft's interests as head of the group. "I don't think the chair provides Microsoft any tactical or strategic advantage," Manishin said.
The bar association's antitrust section warned lawyers last month against legislation that would block judges from approving antitrust settlements without "reasonable belief" and "substantial evidence" that such a deal is in the public's interest.
The lawyers' group said the proposal was "unnecessary and could complicate a procedure where speed and certainty are critical factors." The criticisms were published after they were unanimously approved by officers of the antitrust section.
It cautioned that the bill — by Sens. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, and Herb Kohl, D-Wis. — "may be close to enactment." DeWine is chairman of the Senate Judiciary antitrust subcommittee; Kohl is the ranking Democrat.
Andrew Gavil, a law professor at Howard University, said the congressional proposal "seemed to be a clear response to the Microsoft experience."
The lawyers' group said it was "not aware of any problems" with the current antitrust procedures. But the dispute over adequate judicial oversight is central to an important ruling expected imminently from the U.S. Court for the District of Columbia Circuit, which is considering its role overseeing the Microsoft antitrust settlement.
Massachusetts, the only holdout state that continues to press for tougher sanctions against Microsoft, has argued the settlement was so profoundly flawed that it represented an abuse of the trial judge's discretion. It wants the appeals court to review the settlement to determine whether the sanctions against Microsoft were adequate.
The U.S. appeals ruling precedes a decision this spring by European antitrust regulators, which are expected to conclude that Microsoft unfairly hurt rivals by building its multimedia software into Windows.
By TED BRIDIS, AP Technology Writer
WASHINGTON - Stung by earlier court rulings, Microsoft Corp. has positioned one of its top lawyers to run a legal committee to influence how much oversight U.S. courts exercise in antitrust settlements like the one the company negotiated with the Bush administration.
The debate over how aggressively federal judges should scrutinize these settlements is pivotal in the next major ruling in Microsoft's long-running antitrust case, a decision that could come as early as Friday.
Microsoft's effort in the legal community illustrates how the world's largest software company is moving to protect its interests in venues where it has found itself challenged. It also has increasingly participated in the political process in Washington and in technology standards organizations.
A U.S. appeals court is considering whether the landmark settlement Microsoft negotiated with the Justice Department (news - web sites) in late 2001 was tough enough. The ruling could force fundamental changes to Microsoft's profitable Windows software, the engine for hundreds of millions of personal computers worldwide.
Microsoft associate general counsel Richard J. Wallis takes over as chairman this summer of the American Bar Association's antitrust section, an unusual role for a corporate lawyer. Even before Wallis' arrival, the panel is already organizing opposition to a congressional plan requiring more aggressive oversight by the courts of such antitrust settlements.
Microsoft said Wallis was traveling Thursday and could not be reached for comment.
The bar association's antitrust group is "extremely influential in terms of development of antitrust policy and law," said Glenn B. Manishin, a Washington antitrust lawyer. But Manishin said Wallis will not be able to advance Microsoft's interests as head of the group. "I don't think the chair provides Microsoft any tactical or strategic advantage," Manishin said.
The bar association's antitrust section warned lawyers last month against legislation that would block judges from approving antitrust settlements without "reasonable belief" and "substantial evidence" that such a deal is in the public's interest.
The lawyers' group said the proposal was "unnecessary and could complicate a procedure where speed and certainty are critical factors." The criticisms were published after they were unanimously approved by officers of the antitrust section.
It cautioned that the bill — by Sens. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, and Herb Kohl, D-Wis. — "may be close to enactment." DeWine is chairman of the Senate Judiciary antitrust subcommittee; Kohl is the ranking Democrat.
Andrew Gavil, a law professor at Howard University, said the congressional proposal "seemed to be a clear response to the Microsoft experience."
The lawyers' group said it was "not aware of any problems" with the current antitrust procedures. But the dispute over adequate judicial oversight is central to an important ruling expected imminently from the U.S. Court for the District of Columbia Circuit, which is considering its role overseeing the Microsoft antitrust settlement.
Massachusetts, the only holdout state that continues to press for tougher sanctions against Microsoft, has argued the settlement was so profoundly flawed that it represented an abuse of the trial judge's discretion. It wants the appeals court to review the settlement to determine whether the sanctions against Microsoft were adequate.
The U.S. appeals ruling precedes a decision this spring by European antitrust regulators, which are expected to conclude that Microsoft unfairly hurt rivals by building its multimedia software into Windows.
Comment