DoJ to propose MS breakup next week

Yesterday's denial spawns widespread disbelief


MS on Trial The Department of Justice has given up on rumour-swatting, after a partial rebuttal of yesterday's claims that it was pushing for a breakup of Microsoft. The "inaccurate in several important aspects" story published in yesterday's US Today was promptly followed up by a clutch of claims that the DoJ and the states were indeed reaching a consensus, and intended to push for a breakup. And backing this up, an IDC report published last month, and arguing that it was in Microsoft's interest to split into several companies, started hitting the headlines too. Faced with this little lot the DoJ is taking the view that it's not going to comment on every single press report that appears, while Microsoft spokesman Mark Murray described the breakup solution as "extreme and radical," and not justified by the facts of the case. But it's now possible to piece together what's happening, with a reasonable probability of accuracy. AP writer Ted Bridis reports that last week the DoJ and the 19 states who're partnering it in the antitrust action held a secret meeting in Washington where the DoJ laid out a plan to break up Microsoft into three parts. This plan, says Bridis, is now being considered by the states' attorneys general, and if accepted will be put forward at the next round of mediator Judge Richard Posner's settlement talks next week. These claims fit into the picture nicely. The US Today story leaned towards the conclusion that the proposal was for Microsoft to be broken into two parts, not three, and said that a consensus had already been reached - so we've got two possible areas which could justify a DoJ claim of "inaccurate in several important aspects." Meanwhile it will have been entirely impossible to plug all possible leaks from a DoJ-states summit. The states attorneys general have been a lot leakier than the DoJ anyway, and The Register therefore reckons the mouthier ones have let the proposal escape this time. Faced with this yesterday, and the likely wrath of Judge Posner, the DoJ rebutted a little, but did not specifically deny that breakup was being considered. But whether or not the DoJ and states unite to propose a break up in the mediation talks matters not one jot, if Microsoft itself won't go for it. Murray's soundbites certainly indicate that it won't - or do they? Remember that the very busy Mr Murray is a rapid rebuttal facility whose role is to shoot first and do the reality check later. If a week ago anybody had suggested to him that Microsoft was going to pay up to settle the Caldera antitrust action out of court, it's quite likely he'd have insisted that Microsoft was entirely confident in its case, and expected to be completely vindicated. Likewise, Murray now says that a breakup "is not justified by anything in this case or in this industry." But what, friends, was he supposed to say? As Microsoft spokesman it's his job to keep saying Microsoft hasn't done anything wrong, in which case he's got to keep saying any remedies are unjustified, right up until a deal is agreed or the judge (Jackson, the other one) throws them all in the slammer. If Microsoft did cut a deal Murray would then still be saying the company hadn't done anything wrong, but that in order to move forward and get back to 'writing great software' it had magnanimously agreed a settlement. That leaves the big question of whether Microsoft could bring itself to deal. As we said yesterday, and as IDC recommends, a split into three companies wouldn't necessarily hurt the company, and it might even help. It seems pretty likely now that breakup will be the DoJ-states proposal for the mediation talks, and given the difficulty in getting the prosecution alliance to face in the one direction, and keep facing that way, it will be tricky to change the proposal radically later. Which puts the ball into Microsoft's court. If the company says no, then the trial looks like going to the wire. But it'll come under increasing pressure from analysts, commentators and quite possibly its own shareholders to say yes - the breadheads must be starting to note the advantages of leaving the antitrust actions behind, speculating on the AT&T precedent, and musing on how much more their stock might be worth if it were invested in three Microsofts instead of just the one. ® See also: DoJ will demand breakup of Microsoft - report


Other stories you might like

  • Apple's latest security feature could literally save lives
    Cupertino is so sure of Lockdown Mode it's offering $2m to bug hunters to break it

    Apple's latest security feature won't be used by most of its customers, but those who need Lockdown Mode could find it to be a literal life saver.

    The functionality, coming with iOS/iPadOS 16 and macOS Ventura, dramatically shrinks an iDevice's attack surface by disabling many of its features. It's designed to protect the small number of Apple users who, "because of who they are or what they do, may be personally targeted by some of the most sophisticated digital threats, such as those from NSO Group and other private companies developing state-sponsored mercenary spyware," Apple said in a statement. 

    Lockdown, thus, effectively reduces the number of potential vulnerabilities spyware could exploit to compromise a device, cutting the possible routes into surveillance targets' kit.

    Continue reading
  • Has Intel gone too far with its Ohio fab 'delay' stunt?
    With construction unceremoniously underway, x86 giant may have overplayed its hand

    COMMENT The way Intel has been talking about the status of its $20 billion Ohio fab project, you would be forgiven if you assumed that construction on the Midwest mega-site has been delayed in light of Congress struggling to pass a large subsidies package that would support new American chip factories.

    When Intel delayed a groundbreaking ceremony for the Ohio manufacturing site two weeks ago out of frustration over the subsidies inaction, some headlines may have given you the impression the semiconductor giant was putting off construction entirely.

    However, an Intel spokesperson made it clear to The Register and others at the time that the start date for construction had not changed.

    Continue reading
  • Hive ransomware gang rapidly evolves with complex encryption, Rust code
    RaaS malware devs have been busy bees

    The Hive group, which has become one of the most prolific ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) operators, has significantly overhauled its malware, including migrating the code to the Rust programming language and using a more complex file encryption process.

    Researchers at the Microsoft Threat Intelligence Center (MSTIC) uncovered the Hive variant while analyzing a change in the group's methods.

    "With its latest variant carrying several major upgrades, Hive also proves it's one of the fastest evolving ransomware families, exemplifying the continuously changing ransomware ecosystem," the researchers said in a write-up this week.

    Continue reading
  • What do you mean your exaflop is better than mine?
    Gaming the system was fine for a while, now it's time to get precise about precision

    Comment A multi-exaflop supercomputer the size of your mini-fridge? Sure, but read the fine print and you may discover those performance figures have been a bit … stretched.

    As more chipmakers bake support for 8-bit floating point (FP8) math into next-gen silicon, we can expect an era of increasingly wild AI performance claims that differ dramatically from the standard way of measuring large system performance, using double-precision 64-bit floating point or FP64.

    When vendors shout about exascale performance, be aware that some will use FP8 and some FP64, and it's important to know which is being used as a metric. A computer system that can achieve (say) 200 peta-FLOPS of FP64 is a much more powerful beast than a system capable of 200 peta-FLOPS at just FP8.

    Continue reading
  • Meta's AI translation breaks 200 language barrier
    Open source model improves translation of rarer spoken languages by 70%

    Meta's quest to translate underserved languages is marking its first victory with the open source release of a language model able to decipher 202 languages.

    Named after Meta's No Language Left Behind initiative and dubbed NLLB-200, the model is the first able to translate so many languages, according to its makers, all with the goal to improve translation for languages overlooked by similar projects. 

    "The vast majority of improvements made in machine translation in the last decades have been for high-resource languages," Meta researchers wrote in a paper [PDF]. "While machine translation continues to grow, the fruits it bears are unevenly distributed," they said. 

    Continue reading
  • Tracking cookies found in more than half of G20 government websites
    Sorry, conspiracy theorists, it's more likely sloppy webdev work rather than spying

    We expect a certain amount of cookie-based tracking on retail websites and social networks, but in some countries up to 90 percent of government sites have implemented trackers – and serve them seemingly without user consent. 

    A study evaluated more than 118,000 URLs of 5,500 government websites – think .gov, .gov.uk. .gov.au, .gc.ca, etc – hosted in the twenty largest global economies – the G20 – and discovered a surprising tracking cookie problem, even among countries party to Europe's GDPR and those who have their own data privacy regulations.

    On average, the study found, more than half of cookies created on G20 government websites were third-party cookies, meaning they were created by outside entities typically to collect information on the user. At least 10 percent, going up to 90 percent, come from known third party cookies or trackers, we're told.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022