The people have spoken-- and the people don't like it. We speak, of course, of the latest development in "Redmond Justice," which, at 412 years and counting, is the longest-running antitrust drama still on the air. You may recall that the last time we checked in, despite having proven repeatedly that Microsoft illegally abused its monopoly power, the Justice Department came under new management and subsequently folded like a cheap card table among a stampede of elephants. Microsoft and the DoJ came up with a settlement proposal so toothless it made your average Elmo and Ernie look like Marie frickin' Osmond.

As it turns out, though, according to a provision in the Tunney Act, no such settlement could be approved by the judge until after a sixty-day period of public comment; the idea is to help ensure that any such settlement be in the best interest of the public at large. Well, that 60-day period has come and gone, the comments were counted, and the numbers are pretty much what we expected: according to a CNET report, the DoJ received approximately 15,000 comments against the proposed settlement, and a mere 7,500 in favor of it. That's two to one looking for a real remedy, among people who cared enough to write in.

Strangely enough, CNET reports that the DoJ also received 1,250 responses "unrelated to the case" and another 7,000 that "expressed no sentiment either way." The unrelated messages we understand, since spam is rampant, but why would 7,000 people bother to write in just to say, "Ah, whatever"? Faithful viewer Bill Lisowski got to the bottom of that, though, by noticing that CNN reports that the messages that allegedly "expressed no sentiment" generally expressed strong sentiment, but were actually "dismissed as opinion, like 'I hate Microsoft.'" (Personally, we'd think that 7,000 "I hate Microsoft" letters might actually say something pretty important about the case, but hey, it's not our show.)

Anyway, apparently Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has hinted that Microsoft and the DoJ should consider reworking that settlement a little bit in light of the fact that so many people are opposed to it in its current form. She's supposed to meet with both sides tomorrow, at which point we may get some indication as to whether or not she plans to accept the proposal in a month or two. In the meantime, those of you who took time out to send your comments to the DoJ-- whether for or against the settlement proposal-- should give yourselves a pat on the back for doing that whole civic duty thing. (That sounded appropriately impartial, right?)