Will the government never learn? The latest developments in the "Redmond Justice" case are startling, to say the least, and frankly, we're wondering where the writers are going with this. Faithful viewer Stuart Carlton alerted us to a CNNfn article about the increasing likelihood of an out-of-court settlement; you'll recall that, until now, settlement talks between Microsoft and the government were about as productive as a fish with a typewriter. And the typewriter's got no ribbon. But now a settlement is reportedly "near," and get this-- "the settlement push now focuses on developing restrictions on Microsoft's conduct, rather than restructuring or breaking up" the company.

"Restrictions on Microsoft's conduct"? Oh, puh-lease. Evidently the government's forgotten what happened the last time it issued restrictions on Microsoft's conduct. Does anyone remember the 1995 consent decree? The one in which Microsoft agreed never to use its operating system monopoly as leverage to extend the company's grasp into other markets? So let's get this straight, now; the last time Microsoft got into antitrust hot water with the federal government, the government basically let them off with a "promise you'll never do it again." Then, three years later-- that's scarcely enough time to towel off-- Microsoft's right back in the hot water again. And after a profusely entertaining trial which the government is obviously very likely to win, suddenly the government's talking about a settlement that, once again, may amount to yet another promise from Microsoft to play fair.

All we can say is, if the government accepts a settlement that's little more than the same consent decree with "1995" scratched out and "2000" written above it in ball-point pen, then it's time to sack the "Redmond Justice" writers. Nobody with six functioning brain cells would toss away such a commanding advantage in a lawsuit for a warmed over promise that's already been broken umpteen times. Will somebody please remind the government that the judge has openly laughed at Microsoft's defense in court? The government has no reason to accept a settlement without teeth. Hopefully the writers will remember that.