07.26.09
Mississippi Paid up to $60 Million in Vouchers After Microsoft’s Violations of the Law
Summary: Another timely reminder of Microsoft’s anti-competitive behaviour and the toll it entails after proceedings at the court of law
AN ACTUAL CONVICTION of Microsoft is a rare sight because Microsoft tends to settle out of court and hide its embarrassments this way.
A month ago, Microsoft paid $100 million to settle in Mississippi (more in [1, 2]), but that’s not the end of it. Here is a new press release about another $40 million settlement, which was followed by extensive news coverage, e.g.:
i. Miss. cashes in on Microsoft settlement
The $40 million is the state government’s share of national anti-trust settlement with Microsoft. Another $60 million will come to the state in the vouchers to residents, businesses, governments and public schools.
ii. Hood signs $40M over to state treasury
Up to $60 million in vouchers will be provided to consumers, businesses, local governments and public schools to buy software and computers throughh Microsoft.
iii. State receives $40M Microsoft settlement
The Attorney General’s website will be updated as more information on the reimbursement becomes available.
It contains more information about the settlement and who is eligible. To review the most frequently asked questions in regard to the Microsoft settlement, go to www.agjimhood.com <http://www.agjimhood.com, look under “about” on the main page, and click on “Microsoft Settlement.”
At least it is not redeemable as software only. Such compensation would only help Microsoft rather than penalise. █
“Cash-strapped libraries that accept the millions Gates is waving at them may find themselves acting out the Microsoft billionaire’s dim vision of our electronic future. … Before they take anything from the chief executive, they’d better examine the gift very carefully for strings. After all, what sort of public libraries can we expect from a man who calls people ‘users’ and to whom War and Peace and Gilligan’s Island are both ‘content?’”
–Margie Wylie, C|Net
Yuhong Bao said,
July 29, 2009 at 10:00 pm
“At least it is not redeemable as software only. Such compensation would only help Microsoft rather than penalise.”
If MS was competing with proprietary software, the coupon being only redeemable as software would be OK, but MS is competing with free software, which has no licensing costs, which makes this kind of coupons unnecessary. Shades of RAND, don’t you think? And Apple is not an excuse because other than upgrades Mac OS X is usually bought bundled with hardware.