In June 2000, the Court of Appeal overturned Judge thomas jackson's ruling on the browser case, and Microsoft escaped the fate of being split.
In August, 2000, Judge Jackson was dismissed for violating judicial procedures and leaking the inside story of the case to the media, and Coulcolin was appointed to replace Jackson and take charge of the trial of Microsoft's antitrust case.
In June+1October 2000, 5438+065438+1early October, Microsoft and the US Department of Justice reached a compromise at the urging of Judge Coulektlin. The compromise condition is that Microsoft agrees that PC manufacturers can freely choose the Windows desktop, and make part of the source code of Windows software public, so that Microsoft competitors can also write applications on this operating system. ?
Extended data:
Microsoft's monopoly is different from traditional monopoly, belonging to natural monopoly, which is very different from traditional monopoly. The twists and turns here are very complicated, and Microsoft's success is largely due to the early establishment of industry standards.
In fact, Microsoft has occupied the monopoly position of related industries and caused bad influence within its power.
The reason for this result is Microsoft's innovation in technology, operation and management and its good service to consumers. Or is Microsoft stealing technology, bundling and playing with consumers? The difference between them is no longer significant. What is really important is to overthrow hegemony and restore the market structure of free competition.