Showing content from https://www.wired.com/2002/11/u-s-v-microsoft-timeline/ below:
U.S. v. Microsoft: Timeline | WIRED
A little hazy on events? For those who snuck out in the middle, or have simply forgotten about things during the hiatus, here's a cheat sheet of key moments in the antitrust trial of U.S. v. Microsoft.
- November 4, 2002: The European Commission reaffirms its intention to uphold European Union law in its own separate probe into the company, which a spokesperson says is factually and legally different from the U.S. case.
- November 1, 2002: Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly rules that a proposed settlement serves the public's interest as required under the Tunney Act, which sets standards of review for antitrust settlements.
- September 6, 2001: U.S. Justice Department says it no longer seeks the breakup of Microsoft and wants to find a quick remedy in the antitrust case.
- August 29, 2001: New judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly orders the parties to report on the remaining issues in the legal battle by Sept. 14 and schedules a meeting on the status of the case for Sept. 21.
- June 28, 2001: A federal appeals court reverses the breakup order.
- February 27, 2001: A federal appeals court hears Microsoft's appeal of Judge Jackson's decision.
- February 21, 2001: Microsoft and Bristol Technology announce a settlement of litigation between the two companies.
- September 26, 2000: The Supreme Court refuses to hear the case.
- June 7, 2000: Judge Jackson orders the break up of Microsoft into two companies.
- June 6, 2000: Microsoft submits final brief.
- June 1, 2000: Judge Jackson grants government deadline extension to June 5.
- May 25, 2000: Judge Jackson sets deadline for government lawyers' final breakup proposal.
- May 24, 2000: Judge Jackson will hear arguments in the penalty phase of the case.
- May 10, 2000: Deadline for Microsoft to respond to the government proposals for sanctions.
- April 28, 2000: Government attorneys file their proposed punishment, urging Judge Jackson to split Microsoft into two separate companies as penalty for breaking antitrust laws.
- April 5, 2000: The judge sets May 24 for an expedited hearing on the penalty phase of the case in an effort to move quickly to the appeal promised by the software giant.
- April 3, 2000: Two days after settlement talks collapse, the judge rules that the software giant violated antitrust laws and consistently acted to hold onto its power over industry competitors. Microsoft appeals the ruling immediately.
- April 1, 2000: U.S. Court of Appeals Chief Judge Richard Posner ends efforts to mediate the trial.
- February 22, 2000: Oral arguments are held before Judge Jackson.
- February 1, 2000: Microsoft files its final brief, pointing to the AOL-Time Warner merger as the main reason why the antitrust case should be thrown out.
- January 25, 2000: Federal and state prosecutors file a rebuttal to Microsoft's brief, saying the software maker evaded monopoly charges.
- January 19, 2000: Microsoft officially responds to Judge Jackson's ruling, saying that widespread competition precludes it from holding monopoly power.
- __November 30, 1999: __ Mediation begins as both sides meet with Judge Richard Posner to see if they can settle the ongoing antitrust lawsuit.
- November 5, 1999: Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson issues his initial findings of fact, finding that Microsoft held monopoly power and used it to harm consumers, rivals, and other companies.
- September 21, 1999: The government and Microsoft accuse each other of foul play in their closing arguments.
- June 24, 1999: The trial adjourns after 76 days of testimony spread over more than eight months.
- June 7, 1999: IBM executive Gary Norris testifies to Microsoft's attempts to bully Big Blue.
- June 1, 1999: Round two of the antitrust trial begins.
- May 28, 1999: Former Symantec CEO Gordon Eubanks, a Microsoft witness, deposed.
- May 21, 1999: America Online CEO Steve Case says in a deposition that his company purchased Netscape without having much interest in its Web browser.
- May 18, 1999: Netscape executive Peter Currie testifies in a deposition that he once wondered if America Online's fear of Microsoft might scotch its purchase of Netscape.
- March 30, 1999: Attorneys from both sides meet for settlement talks.
- March 10, 1999: A leaked Microsoft memo blames the press for focusing on Bill Gates rather than the facts of the trial.
- March 4, 1999: Senator Slade Gorton, a Republican from Microsoft's home state of Washington, says the Justice Department has gone too far and should drop the case against his constituent.
- February 26, 1999: The trial breaks for recess.
- February 2, 1999: A government lawyer accuses Microsoft of manipulating videotaped evidence in a courtroom demo.
- January 13, 1999: The defense phase of the trial begins.
- January 12, 1999: The final day of the government's case. In a climactic turn, the government's top economic witness admits that Microsoft has done nothing so far that would harm consumers.
- November 17, 1998: Sun Microsystems wins a crucial ruling when a federal court tells Microsoft to stop selling products that contain an incompatible version of Java. Meanwhile, South Carolina drops out of the antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft, saying there was sufficient competition in the Internet market.
- November 9, 1998: Microsoft chairman Bill Gates testifies in a videotaped deposition that he never intended to keep Intel out of the software business.
- October 20, 1998: Netscape CEO Jim Barksdale takes the witness stand.
- October 19, 1998: The court hears opening arguments in the first day of the antitrust trial.
- September 22, 1998: According to a study by a market researcher, Netscape finally cedes its browser-share lead to Microsoft's Internet Explorer.
- May 18, 1998: The big day. The U.S. Justice Department and 20 state attorneys general file an antitrust suit against Microsoft, charging the company with abusing its market power to thwart competition, including Netscape.
- May 12, 1998: An appeals court rules that the injunction against Microsoft should not apply to Windows 98, allowing Microsoft to proceed with the launch of its new product. A 2-1 majority rules that Microsoft can integrate whatever it wants into the OS as long as it benefits consumers and can't be replicated.
- January 22, 1998: Facing a contempt citation, Microsoft signs an agreement giving computer makers freedom to install Windows 95 without an Internet Explorer icon.
- January 13, 1998: A contempt-of-court hearing opens in Washington. A government witness argues that it is easy to uninstall Internet Explorer, while a Microsoft witness argues how hard it is. Jackson rebukes Microsoft attorneys repeatedly over statements made in court.
- December 19, 1997: In a demonstration held in his own courtroom, Jackson uninstalls the desktop icon for Internet Explorer.
- December 15, 1997: Microsoft appeals a ruling that temporarily bars it from requiring PC makers to use its Internet Explorer Web browser if they use the Windows 95 operating system.
- December 11, 1997: In a preliminary injunction, Jackson orders Microsoft to stop requiring PC makers to ship Internet Explorer along with Windows 95. But he rejects the government's request for a contempt-of-court citation and a $1-million-a-day fine for alleged violations of his 1995 court order. That order sought to restrain how the company leverages its marketplace dominance in desktop operating systems.
- December 5, 1997: Jackson hears opening arguments in the case.
- October 27, 1997: The Justice Department files a complaint demanding a $1-million-a-day fine against Microsoft for its alleged violation of the 1995 consent decree. The complaint claims that Microsoft overstepped its bounds by demanding PC manufacturers bundle the Internet Explorer Web browser with their hardware products before being able to obtain a Windows 95 license.
- August 19, 1997: The Justice Department once again has Microsoft in its sights. This time, the government wants to determine whether the software maker's $150 million investment in Apple Computer, or its equity stakes in three companies that develop Internet streaming technologies, would squelch competition.
- August 1995: After months of legal wrangling, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson officially approves the 1994 consent decree.
- April 1995: The Justice Department files suit to block a proposed merger between Microsoft and Intuit, claiming the marriage would quash competition in the electronic checkbook market. Within weeks, Microsoft scraps its merger plan.
- July 1994: Microsoft settles antitrust charges with the Justice Department, signing on to a consent decree that forbids the company from using its operating system dominance to squelch competition.
- August 1993: Frustrated by two Federal Trade Commission deadlocks in the investigation, the Justice Department takes over, focusing on Microsoft's DOS marketing practices.
- June 1990: The Federal Trade Commission launches a probe into possible collusion between Microsoft and IBM in the PC software market.
Read ongoing U.S. v. Microsoft coverage
DOJ: Microsoft Stays in One Piece
The Ruling: Break MS in Two
The Reaction: It Figures
U.S. Says: 'Break Up Microsoft'
MS Fails to Enliven Tech Stocks
So, Judge, What's the Call?
Read ongoing U.S. v. Microsoft coverage
Breakup Good for MS?
Microsoft: And Now, the Appeal
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo
| Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.3