(Attorney General Miller is head of the 19-State Microsoft Working Group executive committee.)
Our first reading indicates that on almost every important point, the Court has very largely accepted the evidence and factual record put forward by the States and U.S. Justice.
These findings are crucial. The States and US Justice alleged that Microsoft has a monopoly, has illegally abused and extended its monopoly, and has harmed consumers. Now these facts are no longer only allegations by the plaintiffs, but soundly documented findings of the Court. The facts and the findings speak for themselves.
With other State Attorneys General, I am most gratified by the Court's finding of harm to consumers. That's the bottom line for State Attorneys General, who fight every day to protect the interest of consumers throughout the nation. Judge Jackson found that many of Microsoft's actions "harmed consumers in ways that are immediate and easily discernible." (Par. 409.)
The Court has found that Microsoft practices have harmed consumers by undermining and distorting competition, choking off innovation, causing higher consumer prices, and reducing consumer choice. Now the Court's strong findings keep open a full range of possible means to remedy the harm to consumers and competition.
The Court's findings in this case affirm that consumers and competitors in the digital age are not left without protection of the Nation's antitrust laws. This is a decisive win for competition, consumers and innovation.
- 30 -