American History 1988
Chapter 408 - 397: Dethroning the Deity

Chapter 408: Chapter 397: Dethroning the Deity

The Department of Justice, joined by nineteen states, launched an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft, and the tasks of evidence collection and investigation would be the responsibility of the Prosecuting Attorney.

From a procedural standpoint, Netscape and its legal team had completed their task, but this did not mean they were now without anything to do.

At the end of September, the Federal Supreme Court announced that it would hold a hearing on the Microsoft antitrust case one week later.

Even though the case had entered the public prosecution phase, the hearing was still an indispensable part for the sake of procedural justice and further evidence collection.

The first to be summoned at this hearing was Michael Dell, the Chairman of Dell Inc.

Because he kneeled too quickly in Microsoft’s aggressive strategy to promote its own browser, Michael Dell had the "honor" of becoming one of the witnesses.

At the hearing, Senator Orrin Hatch asked him why, although Dell promised to fulfill any customer need, it would not even offer Netscape’s browser.

In response, Michael Dell beat around the bush, citing agreements with suppliers and the like.

But Hatch clearly had no intention of letting him off the hook so easily and continued his questioning.

"So, please explain, when the committee staff called Dell’s 1-800 number."

Different sales representatives—George, Brad, Jason, Bobby, and Jeff—all told our staff members.

That Dell Inc. could not provide Netscape’s browser because of a licensing agreement with Microsoft, correct?"

Speaking without waiting for a response, Senator Hatch played the recorded phone call right there at the hearing.

Just as he said, the conversation included Dell employees mentioning their badge numbers and explicitly denying the staff members’ requests.

Michael Dell hesitated, not knowing how to answer, because it was the truth.

Later, under the senator’s pressing, he simply shrugged his shoulders and tried to explain vaguely.

"We have been actively negotiating with our suppliers, but the fundamental goal is to secure the best terms for our company, users, and shareholders."

"Do these best terms include accepting Microsoft’s agreement, refusing to offer Netscape’s browser, right?" Hatch continued his questioning.

Michael Dell remained silent; he could not give a definite response to this.

"OK, thank you for your cooperation, Mr. Dell." The truth was now plainly apparent to everyone at the hearing.

After that, the Senator began questioning representatives from Compaq, Hewlett-Packard, and other companies who had direct experience of the incident.

Without a doubt, their testimonies were extremely unfavorable for Microsoft’s defense.

But no one else could be blamed; who’d let Seattle pay so little heed to computer manufacturers at that time?

However, the matter was far from over. Aside from the computer manufacturers, representatives from Sun Microsystems, Apple Inc., Lotus, Real Networks, Novell, and others all attended the hearing.

Yes, these were the allies Dean had rounded up, and each one of them had conflicts and disputes with Microsoft.

The bone of contention for Sun Microsystems was mainly about Java, as previously mentioned.

Microsoft, looking to halt the spread of Java, purposefully misled developers and failed to clearly explain Java’s specific functionalities.

They even created compatibility obstacles between Windows systems and Java, undoubtedly infuriating Scott McNealy.

Not to mention that Java was one of Sun Microsystems’ crowning achievements, McNealy himself was also a staunch libertarian.

He abhorred Microsoft’s Godzilla-like trampling behavior in the industry and thus became one of the loudest critics of Microsoft at the hearing.

There was also Robert Glaser, the founder of Real Networks, who eventually accepted Dean’s invitation.

As Dean anticipated, Microsoft was imposing more and more restrictions on Real Player.

Then, Robert Glaser sent an email to Gates as a private individual, hoping for a reconciliation between the two.

But Gates’s reply was brutally curt, "I have decided it is unnecessary for us to meet, and I don’t view our relationship as being very close."

Robert Glaser was shocked by the response; he had been one of Microsoft’s vice presidents, and Gates had even hosted his bachelor party.

Now, however, he was being told that they did not need to meet and weren’t even considered acquainted?

Gates’s sudden turn of face and denial of their relationship pushed Real Networks to Dean’s side.

The others like Apple, Lotus, and Novell were even less of an issue, as they all were established competitors of Microsoft.

The one-sided situation at the hearing caused Gates much concern.

He stood up and argued loudly, "The Navigator browser is just a feature of the Windows system; it does not constitute tying."

If he could stick to this point, then Microsoft would not be considered in violation of the settlement agreement previously signed with the Department of Justice.

"You are lying, Navigator is an independent application software.

It doesn’t need to be tied to the Windows system because it can run independently on a Mac system as well."

Clark immediately stood up to refute. If the browser was a feature of Microsoft’s system, how would one explain its functioning on Apple’s machines?

"That’s not the point. The root of the issue is that even if Microsoft engaged in tying, that does not constitute illegal activity.

We’re merely acting in accordance with the terms of the agreements signed previously with computer manufacturers, what’s wrong with that?"

Gates’s counterquestion caused an uproar in the room, and Dean in the back row almost laughed aloud.

Our Mr. Gates seemed to have no sense of moral boundaries and seemed to think everything he did was perfectly justifiable.

"He’s done for!" The attorney Lübeck sitting next to Dean immediately clenched his fist in excitement.

"Gates still hasn’t realized that Microsoft’s practice is limiting users’ choice and also constitutes control over the sales channels,"

"His matter-of-fact attitude will only infuriate the prosecuting attorney."

However, our Gates seemed truly unaware of everyone’s expressions, and he continued to express his objections at the meeting incessantly.

"Microsoft follows the rules, and Microsoft is also bound by rules. What is being done to Microsoft today is just like what happened to IBM ten years ago.

The fact has proven that those who feared IBM were wrong, as technology develops rapidly every day.

Furthermore, they accuse Microsoft of monopolizing the market, but in reality, Netscape has always been leading in the browser market.

We even have reasons to suspect that our adversaries have used inferior tactics, continuously attacking the Navigator browser."

"The real person who should be under investigation is sitting right now in the audience, and he should be the target of anti-monopoly action," Gates said, his eyes darting toward Dean.

Hey, speaking here comes with responsibility, be careful, or I might sue you for defamation.

Dean crossed his legs and shook them casually, preferring to watch the excitement without speaking.

There was no need for him to stand up and retort; Barksdale had already taken the initiative.

"Ladies and gentlemen, please allow me to pose a question," he said, standing up to face the many participants of the meeting.

"I’d like to ask everyone present who has never used a Microsoft product to raise their hand."

The room was deadly silent, with nobody raising their hands, prompting Barksdale to emphasize once more.

"Please do as I say."

Yet still, no one raised their hand, as Microsoft’s products had long since infiltrated every aspect of everyone’s life.

"Gentlemen, you see. One hundred percent, that is a monopoly, and that fact alone speaks volumes," Barksdale declared.

The senators whispered among themselves, the reporters flashed their cameras, and Microsoft’s side kept trying to raise their hands to object.

But just like Barksdale said, it was enough to make the point.

The spectacle of the hearing satisfied Dean immensely.

There’s a saying: success has many fathers, while failure is an orphan, and Microsoft had been too arrogant and overbearing previously.

Moreover, Dean had already reached a tacit understanding with the old masters in Congress.

So, the outcome of the hearing was a foregone conclusion, and three months later, in January 1997, the official trial of the Microsoft antitrust case began.

...

Yahoo broadcasted the whole process of this hearing live online.

Although most people’s slow internet couldn’t buffer the video stream.

For convenience, Yahoo uploaded the complete recorded video.

"Bill Gates may be a talented engineer, but he is not familiar with business ethics.

He has yet to realize that once Microsoft became a monopolistic giant, it should no longer employ the same competitive tactics it once did," was one of the top-liked comments under Yahoo news, clearly showing that Microsoft’s tactics, legal or not, definitely violated ethics.

Especially Gates’s matter-of-fact counterquestion at the meeting shattered many people’s illusions about him.

As one of the world’s richest men and given Seattle’s years of public relations packaging for him,

the public, the media, and the upper echelons of society he moved in, often had expectations of social responsibility and public image.

However, the hearing proved that Gates found it difficult to internalize and externalize these principles.

During his long tenure as Microsoft’s CEO, his PR team conducted a series of image management and polish to cover up this vulnerability.

But the hearing undoubtedly exposed the flaws in Gates, and the public began to question whether Gates was indeed as flawless as reported.

In the meantime, an interview with Gates conducted months earlier by bestselling author Robert Cringely was also revealed.

The latter was working on a series of books about the development of the internet titled "Nerds 2.0", for which he would interview executives of various companies to enrich his material.

They met in Seattle when Microsoft was not yet embroiled in an antitrust lawsuit.

Gates was very relaxed during the interview, and when Cringely asked him if the browser strategy had caused any loss to Microsoft,

he paused for a moment, smiled, and then replied in a tone tinged with dry humor,

"Well, nobody has ever accused Microsoft of not knowing how to make money; we don’t do business at a loss."

So does this mean that the free bundling policy of Microsoft’s browser didn’t actually offer any real benefits to users,

and that it indirectly collected costs from users for using the Navigator browser in some invisible way?

This suspicion further made the public skeptical about Microsoft’s practices, as it’s a fact that Windows 95 was the highest-priced operating system in history.

Why did the version with the browser cost $210 when the previous Windows 3.0 series sold for only $145?

The explanation from Microsoft did not convince the public.

Meanwhile, Gates’s trouble wasn’t over yet; in October, he had to face a separate deposition by the Federal Court.