[ Thanks to Douglas
D. Darnold for this link. ]
In addition to the Final Judgement, U.S. District Judge Thomas
Penfield Jackson issued a Memorandum & Order.
From the document:
“The Court is convinced for several reasons that a final and
appealable judgment should be entered quickly. It has also
reluctantly come to the conclusion, for the same reasons, that a
structural remedy has become imperative: Microsoft as it is
presently organized and led is unwilling to accept the notion that
it broke the law or accede to an order amending its conduct.”
“First, despite the Court’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law, Microsoft does not yet concede that any of its business
practices violated the Sherman Act. Microsoft officials have
recently been quoted publicly to the effect that the company has
“done nothing wrong” and that it will be vindicated on appeal. The
Court is well aware that there is a substantial body of public
opinion, some of it rational, that holds to a similar view. It is
time to put that assertion to the test. If true, then an appellate
tribunal should be given early opportunity to confirm it as
promptly as possible, and to abort any remedial measures before
they have become irreversible as a practical matter.”
“Second, there is credible evidence in the record to suggest
that Microsoft, convinced of its innocence, continues to do
business as it has in the past, and may yet do to other markets
what it has already done in the PC operating system and browser
markets. Microsoft has shown no disposition to voluntarily
alter its business protocol in any significant respect. Indeed, it
has announced its intention to appeal even the imposition of the
modest conduct remedies it has itself proposed as an alternative to
the non-structural remedies sought by the plaintiffs.”
“Third, Microsoft has proved untrustworthy in the past. In
earlier proceedings in which a preliminary injunction was entered,
Microsoft’s purported compliance with that injunction while it was
on appeal was illusory and its explanation disingenuous. If it
responds in similar fashion to an injunctive remedy in this case,
the earlier the need for enforcement measures becomes apparent the
more effective they are likely to be.”