Comments on the Microsoft antitrust settlement also drew interest from academics. Here are two excerpts.

Nicholas Economides

Professor of economics

New York University

Stern School of Business

"... I conclude that this is a fair settlement that imposes appropriate remedies for the violations for which Microsoft was found liable. The (settlement) contains some terms that may be seen as favorable to Microsoft, while, in most of its terms, it is favorable to the plaintiffs. Overall, in my opinion, the settlement is more favorable to the plaintiffs than what the final result of a remedies hearing would have been, given the Appellate Court decision.

"... (T)he added uncertainty of an extended remedies trial would affect adversely not only Microsoft, but also the rest of the computing industry.

Rebecca Henderson

Professor of management

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Sloan School of Business

"The proposed settlement falls short in two critically important respects. Not only does it do almost nothing to redress the harm caused by Microsoft's illegal conduct with respect to Netscape, leaving Microsoft with all the fruits of its illegal victory, but the provisions that it includes in an attempt to prevent a repetition of Microsoft's conduct in the browser case are limited and incomplete.

"... Microsoft's victory in the browser war leaves it in a significantly stronger position to protect its operating systems monopoly and to block threats from any competition that might emerge to challenge it. The settlement does very little to remedy this situation and is instead rife with the potential for significant consumer harm."

Copyright [copyright] Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved. You must get permission before you reproduce any part of this material.