The Department of Justice reached a settlement today with Microsoft Corporation that imposes a broad range of restrictions that will stop Microsoft's unlawful conduct, prevent recurrence of similar conduct in the future and restore competition in the software market, achieving prompt, effective and certain relief for consumers and businesses. The settlement reached today accomplishes this by: creating the opportunity for independent software vendors to develop products that will be competitive with Microsoft's middleware products on a function-by-function basis; giving computer manufacturers the flexibility to contract with competing software developers and place their middleware products on Microsoft's operating system; preventing retaliation against computer manufacturers, software developers, and other industry participants who choose to develop or use competing middleware products; and ensuring full compliance with the proposed Final Judgment and providing for swift resolution of technical disputes.

Upon the written request of the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice, or the Attorney General of a Plaintiff State, as the case may be, made to Microsoft at its principal offices, Microsoft shall submit such written reports, under oath if requested, as may be requested with respect to any matter contained in this Final Judgment.

The revised proposed Final Judgment, filed November 6, 2001, will stop recurrence of Microsoft's unlawful conduct, prevent recurrence of similar conduct in the future and restore competitive conditions in the personal computer operating system market by, among other things, prohibiting actions by Microsoft to prevent computer manufacturers and others from developing, distributing or featuring middlewear products that are threats to Microsoft's operating system monopoly; creating the opportunity for independent software vendors to develop products that will be competitive with Microsoft's middleware products; requiring Microsoft to disclose interfaces in order to ensure that competing middlewear and server software can interoperate with Microsoft's operating systems; ensuring full compliance with the revised proposed Final Judgment; and providing for swift resolution of technical disputes.

On November 6, 2001, the United States and Microsoft tentatively agreed to the entry of a revised proposed Final Judgment to resolve the United States' civil antitrust case against Microsoft. This page provides: Links to documents related to the settlement. Information about the Tunney Act. The Department of Justice recommends that you review the following documents before you submit comments about the settlement: Complaint (May 18, 1998); Stipulation and Revised Proposed Final Judgment (November 6, 2001); Competitive Impact Statement (November 15, 2001).

REDMOND, Wash., Nov. 2, 2001 — Microsoft Corp. today announced that it has reached a settlement with the United States government in its three-year antitrust case. The settlement, which must be approved by the federal judge overseeing the case, would impose restrictions and regulations for a five-year period on how the company develops and licenses software, works with independent software vendors, and communicates about the inner workings of its software with partners and competitors.

On November 1, 2001, the DOJ reached an agreement with Microsoft to settle the case. The proposed settlement required Microsoft to share its application programming interfaces with third-party companies and appoint a panel of three investigators who would have full access to Microsoft's systems, records, and source code for five years in order to ensure compliance. The two parties later reached a settlement in which Microsoft agreed to modify some of its business practices.

The settlement proposes a five-year consent decree forcing Microsoft to disclose middleware programming interfaces (APIs), permit computer manufacturers to substitute non-Microsoft middleware products, and license software to OEMs on uniform, non-exclusive terms. At the parties' recommendation, Judge Kollar-Kotelly named Boston University School of Law Professor Eric D. Green to mediate among Microsoft, the Justice Department, and the plaintiff states.

Under the controversial November 2 settlement, Microsoft has agreed to give computer makers more freedom to run software on their machines that is made by Microsoft rivals; in addition, Microsoft will share the inner workings of its Windows operating system with other software makers. The proposed five-year settlement focuses primarily on giving computer makers more power to offer consumers non-Microsoft products such as rival Internet browsers, Internet service providers and media players. The settlement also gives software developers increased ability to create rival products by requiring Microsoft to reveal technological secrets about the inner workings of Windows so competitors can ensure that their products will work as well as Microsoft's own.

The Government sued, claiming that Microsoft's tie between IE and the OS violated the 1996 consent decree. Microsoft defended by claiming that IE and the OS were integrated prod- ucts and that consequently its licensing arrangement should be seen as an exception to the 1995 consent decree.

Microsoft appealed the case and later they reached a settlement with the Department of Justice. They agreed that Microsoft would share its programming interfaces with other companies to allow them to produce applications that work compatible with Windows. Microsoft also agreed not to make exclusive deals with computer producers that would allow them to bundle Windows with other software services like Internet Explorer.

Microsoft would be required to share technical information without discrimination among the potential recipients of this information. Microsoft would be required to disclose the application interfaces (APIs) that link applications to Windows.