The time-hallowed American system of jurisprudence is intended to ensure that justice is not only done but is seen to be done but the traditional way of doing things no longer satisfies two of the parties most interested in the 1956 anti-trust consent decree that governs the way in which IBM is constrained to operate in the mainframe market. In separate behind-the-scenes lobbying initiatives, IBM and the Computer Dealers & Lessors Association are seeking to persuade the US Department of Justice to see the consent decree their way, Hesh Wiener reveals in the January edition of Infoperspectives International. Because of the consent decree, IBM has to sell as well as rent its mainframes, enabling today’s independent leasing industry; IBM is required to sell spare parts for its machines, making possible the third party maintenance business; and it bars IBM from refusing maintenance if alien devices are attached to IBM mainframes – creating the framework for a plug-compatible equipment industry. Never far from the surface in the endless battles between IBM and third parties, the consent decree sprang into prominence again in September when Judge Thomas O’Neill ruled that although small computer refurbishing house Allen-Myland Inc infringed IBM copyrights by duplicating IBM microcode tapes, IBM was not entitled to assert its full claim for damages, because he found that some IBM actions in its dealings with Allen-Myland were in contravention of elements in the consent decree. IBM is now lobbying the Justice Department in an attempt to persuade it to put pressure on the judge to reverse his ruling. From the other side of the fence, the Computer Dealers & Lessors Association is behaving in a less than open manner even with its own members by secretly briefing a law firm to lobby what it sees as an indifferent antitrust division at Justice to wake up and show its teeth to IBM in other areas covered by the 1956 anti-trust consent decree.
