- - - - - - - - - -

T A B L E__T A L K

Riven and Myst fans discuss their passion in the Digital Culture area of Table Talk

- - - - - - - - - -

R E C E N T L Y

A doctorate in "Doom"
By Moira Muldoon
For students at the world's first video game university, it's all math and little play
(02/25/98)

Let's Get This Straight
By Scott Rosenberg
The case of the hijacked haiku
(02/24/98)

Schools of hard knocks
By Andrew Leonard
"Lock ups" for "defiant teens" use questionable tactics -- on the Web and off
(02/23/98)

21st Challenge
By Charlie Varon and Jim Rosenau
Challenge No. 6: Find-and-replace goofs
Plus: results of our "Ticklers" challenge
(02/20/98)

Caught in the headlights
By Aaron Weiss
What if we were as paranoid about cars as we are of the Net?
(02/19/98)

BROWSE THE
21ST ARCHIVES

- - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Is Gates confirmed to attend? Netscape says its president, Jim Barksdale, won't testify without Gates in the room.

Yes, Gates will be there. You have to have both sides at a hearing like this. But I must say, it wasn't certain we would have all sides. We originally invited Gates, Barksdale and Scott McNealy, the president of Sun Microsystems. Barksdale and McNealy are big rivals of Microsoft. Well, Bill Gates called and complained that he felt the hearing seemed unbalanced. I said fine, we'll balance it up. And Bill suggested we also have these other two people speaking on behalf of Microsoft. I said fine. I don't care. In fact, it's probably better to have it overbalanced his way, since he's the one that is being looked at by Justice.

What makes Microsoft different in your view from, say, any other company -- an oil company, for example? Or is there no real difference?

Well, of course, there's a considerable difference, business-wise. But from an antitrust standpoint, there's no reason for anybody to have unlawful tie-ins or predatory conduct or to use a monopoly to interfere with freedom of competition. So if, in fact, Microsoft is doing that, then something has to be done to stop that. And that's what the Justice Department is looking into. And that's what we, too, as part of our oversight responsibility, are trying to figure out. We want to figure out what's going on here for ourselves.

You've been quite outspoken in your criticisms of Microsoft's methods of marketing its software. You've called for the formation of an Internet Commerce Commission to regulate the software industry if Microsoft doesn't change its marketing methods. Is there any doubt in your mind what's going on?

I haven't made any judgments. I'm just saying we have plenty of complaints from many other companies about Microsoft. Microsoft complains back. In this hearing, we'll let the two sides vent their feelings.

OK, but why hold a hearing now? The Justice Department has been looking into these allegations for nearly a year. You've got some Microsoft rivals in your district, in Utah. They've been urging you to hold a hearing like this for a while now. Why haven't you, as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, acted sooner?

I have to say that it's true -- I've been late looking into this. We should have looked into this a long time ago. We've been getting increasing numbers of complaints from competitors of Microsoft. I'm personally concerned about hundreds of such companies in my district. We, in Utah, have one of the three software valleys -- in addition to Silicon Valley and the software valley in Massachusetts. I'm a strong supporter of our industries and businesses in Utah. But we're also getting an equal number of complaints from companies in the other two software valleys, in Massachusetts and California. And a lot of the complaints are by people who are afraid to speak out because they're afraid that Microsoft would use its monopoly power to hurt them. I don't think there's any one company that has caused us to look into this.

What is the exact nature of these complaints, and how will you focus your inquiry during the hearing?

We plan to detail all of this at the hearing, and not before. Our committee has been investigating some of these complaints for weeks, and we plan to issue a report on our findings, probably the morning of the hearing, on March 3.

You just said the Judiciary Committee is late looking into these allegations against Microsoft. Why is that?

It's something that deserves being looked into. The question is, has there been any violation of the antitrust laws? Some say yes. Microsoft says no. Netscape is concerned about it, and Sun Microsystems is concerned about it, but they're competitors, and you have to look at both sides. We've had complaints for a long time, rightly or wrongly, and I have to say that we didn't jump right on them.

But why is that? There's been intense interest among those in the high-tech industry in the antitrust investigation of Microsoft. But Republican Sen. Slade Gorton, Washington state's senior senator and a defender of Microsoft, said your Judiciary Committee hearing next week isn't even on the radar screens of most of the nation's senators. Is that true -- is that why it hasn't been a higher priority for you?

Partly. I think part of the problem is that antitrust law is difficult to understand. It takes a lot of work to fully understand it, and the senators are relying on us on the Judiciary Committee to do proper oversight. That's what we're here for. It's become clear that if we didn't look into this, perhaps no other Senate committee would have. So we're having this hearing.
SALON | Feb. 26, 1998

Marcia Stepanek is a national affairs correspondent for Hearst Newspapers and a regular contributor to Salon.