Search EFFWA Site:

EFF's Election Report ·  
Gonzales Letter ·  
Welfare Reform ·  
Boeing Contract ·  
Budget & Taxes ·  
Business Climate ·  
K-12 Fact Sheet ·  
EFF Health Study ·  
Paycheck Protection ·  
Transportation ·  
Unemployment Ins. ·  

Receive Updates ·  
Bookmark EFF ·  
Contribute ·  
EFF in the News ·  
How Can I Help? ·  
Join EFF ·  
Media Center ·  

PRESS RELEASE
June 28, 2001

Washingtonians win, Microsoft won’t be split

Court of appeals throws out Judge Penfield’s “seriously tainted” decision

Today a federal appeals court overturned a district court judge’s earlier decision to penalize the Microsoft corporation by splitting it into two companies. The appeals court said Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson “seriously tainted” trial proceedings by acting inappropriately and offensively before he ruled that Microsoft was maintaining an illegal monopoly in the software market.

“The appeals court decision in favor of Microsoft is a huge victory for Washington state consumers, taxpayers and stockholders,” said Bob Williams, president of the Olympia-based Evergreen Freedom Foundation. “Stockholders in our state lost billions of dollars as a result of this frivolous and vindictive case.”

State attorneys general are now gearing up for more appeals against Microsoft. Williams said a continued battle against the software giant will hit Washington state the hardest.

“We hope these state attorneys general will drop any other lawsuit plans,” said Williams. “Washington citizens cannot afford the ‘taxation through litigation’ strategy the AGs are pursuing against Microsoft.”

Williams notes that antitrust laws were originally set up to protect consumers, not attack successful companies on behalf of their competitors. Consumers did not launch the complaints that led to the suit against Microsoft. In its deliberations, the district court did not consider the fact that Microsoft was responding to consumer demand when the company “tied” its internet browser to its operating system.

“It’s time to stop harassing Microsoft and move on,” said Williams. “Consumers are in trouble when the government sees improved quality and lower prices as evidence of a monopoly. If Microsoft had a monopoly, it would have no incentive to develop new technology as rapidly as it does to meet market demands and compete with other software providers.”

Microsoft has never been accused of price-gouging or offering a shoddy product. No evidence has been presented to show how Microsoft’s actions have hurt consumers.

Contact: Marsha Richards, Communications Director, (360) 956-3482


Evergreen Freedom Foundation
P.O. Box 552, Olympia, WA 98507
Phone: (360) 956-3482, Fax: (360) 352-1874
Email: effwa@effwa.org


Election Reform


Grassroots Washington

Performance Audit Pledge
View pledge results

Health Plan 4 Life

Ten-Minute Citizen

WashingtonVotes.org

ChoosingLiberty.org

1 Part Honesty; 2 Parts Arrogance

At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question:

"Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?"

- Rep. Jim McIntire (D - 46)
(360) 786-7886

Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..."

Court of Appeals Ruling AG's WEA Appeal What is the WEA Hiding? Determining Government's Core Functions Priorities of Government Stewardship Series School Directors' Handbook Professional Choices For WA Educators Congressional Testimony (6/20/02) Agency Rule Change Request Social Security Calculator Tax Dividend Calculator Public Records Requests