Law & Courts

Antitrust Suits Yield Windfall in Tech Funds

By Rhea R. Borja — August 29, 2006 4 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

Public schools in 12 states and the District of Columbia are starting to reap a windfall of up to $865.6 million for educational technology from the settlements of state lawsuits alleging that the Microsoft Corp. violated state antitrust laws. And in the next few years, schools in additional states will see millions of dollars more from similar settlements.

For example, Minnesota gave out $55.2 million in educational technology vouchers in January to eligible public schools, while Vermont began sending $4.7 million in vouchers to schools this summer.

Technology Transfer

Public schools in 12 states and the District of Columbia have received or will soon receive funds for educational technology from the settlement of state antitrust lawsuits against Microsoft Corp., including:

*Click image to see the full chart.

Click to enlarge: Technology Transfer

SOURCE: Microsoft Corp.; State Education Departments

California, which is expecting to get $400 million to $600 million in settlement funds for schools, and Florida, with at least $80 million, plan to start their voucher processes for schools this fall. Arizona, the District of Columbia, Kansas, Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and West Virginia also have distributed vouchers, Microsoft officials say.

School technology experts say the Microsoft money provides a needed infusion for districts, as state funding for such technology has been cut or zeroed out. Federal funding for educational technology has been slashed by 60 percent since 2004, and may be eliminated, noted Mary Ann Wolf, the executive director of the State Education Technology Association, based in Glen Burnie, Md.

“With the dramatic cut in federal funds for technology, this will help fill that gap,” she said.

In California, state aid for education technology has been eliminated. So the settlement money is critical and timely, said Barbara E. Thalacker, the state’s administrator for school technology. “These funds are the only technology funds going to schools if [federal funding] goes away,” she said.

The windfall for schools is the result of state class actions alleging that Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft illegally monopolized the market for personal-computer operating systems and other software, and consequently overcharged consumers for its products.

Rich Wallis, an associate general counsel for litigation for Microsoft, said that because the claims rate for such lawsuits varies widely, the company wanted to ensure the money would be used. “If we were going to resolve these [lawsuits], we wanted to make sure that some benefit came out of it,” he said. “It was Microsoft’s idea to have the benefit go to poor schools. And the plaintiffs agreed to that.”

New Mexico, North Carolina, Tennessee, and New York have settled their suits, but not yet disclosed when schools will benefit, according to Microsoft.

The amount available to the 17 states and the District of Columbia that have settled their suits totals more than $2.14 billion, Mr. Wallis said. Four states still have class actions pending against the software giant: Arkansas, Iowa, Mississippi, and Wisconsin.

Long Legal Road

The jackpot for schools comes at the end of a long legal road. In all of the settlements, which are for lawsuits filed by states between 1998 and 2002, consumers and businesses must first be paid. After they are reimbursed, schools get their share. The amount going to schools in Florida, Minnesota, and Vermont is 50 percent of the remaining settlement money. In California, it’s two-thirds of the remaining funds.

In the case of Minnesota, consumers could have received up to $174.5 million. But they claimed only $64 million. As a result, half the remaining $110.5 million benefited schools. And the other $55.2 million? That went back to Microsoft.

The definition of eligible schools varies by state. In California and Vermont, eligible schools are public schools, including charter schools, in which 40 percent of the student populations qualified for subsidized lunches in the 2004-05 school year. The schools must also have state-approved technology plans.

In Florida, at least half of a school’s students must come from low-income families. And in Minnesota, virtually all public schools qualify, as they must have a minimum of one low-income student.

Schools can use the one-time money for both hardware, such as computers, printers, and evaluation tools, and for software and professional development, according to state documents. Schools can buy products from various companies, not just Microsoft. For instance, Minnesota schools can choose from more than 1,500 products from many companies.

Minnesota sent vouchers to 467 school districts, for amounts ranging from about $300 to $6.3 million. The $6.1 million that Minneapolis received has already made a difference, said Coleen Kosloski, the executive director of technology for the 39,000-student district.

More than half the classroom computers in Minneapolis schools were at least 4 years old, and other technology was also quickly aging. So the district spent $3 million on new equipment and the rest on instructional software.

“This settlement is extremely important to our school district,” Ms. Kosloski wrote in an e-mail. “With so many online applications and processes that our teachers and staff need, … it’s more imperative than ever to have up-to-date computers.”

In Florida, 1,790 schools with more than 1.1 million students will be able to cash in on the settlement. The state department of education is creating a Web site about the funds, and schools will be able to sign up for the vouchers this fall. Districts will likely get the money in April, said Cathy Schroeder, a department spokeswoman. “The school districts are very excited to hear about this new money for technology,” she said.

A version of this article appeared in the August 30, 2006 edition of Education Week as Antitrust Suits Yield Windfall In Tech Funds

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
College & Workforce Readiness Webinar
Smarter Tools, Stronger Outcomes: Empowering CTE Educators With Future-Ready Solutions
Open doors to meaningful, hands-on careers with research-backed insights, ideas, and examples of successful CTE programs.
Content provided by Pearson
Recruitment & Retention Webinar EdRecruiter 2026 Survey Results: How School Districts are Finding and Keeping Talent
Discover the latest K-12 hiring trends from EdWeek’s nationwide survey of job seekers and district HR professionals.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Professional Development Webinar
Recalibrating PLCs for Student Growth in the New Year
Get advice from K-12 leaders on resetting your PLCs for spring by utilizing winter assessment data and aligning PLC work with MTSS cycles.
Content provided by Otus

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Parents Ask Supreme Court to Restore Ruling on Gender Disclosure
Parents asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene over school gender-identity policies in California.
4 min read
A group of California parents has asked the nation's highest court to reinstate a federal district court decision that said parents have a federal constitutional right to be informed by schools of any gender nonconformity and social transitions by their children. The Supreme Court building is seen on Jan. 13, 2026, in Washington.
A group of California parents has asked the nation's highest court, whose building is shown on Jan. 13, 2026, to reinstate a federal district court decision that said parents have a federal constitutional right to be informed by schools of any gender nonconformity or social transition by their children.
Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP
Law & Courts Supreme Court Signals Support for State Bans on Trans Girls in Sports
The U.S. Supreme Court weighed Idaho and West Virginia laws that bar transgender girls from sports.
7 min read
Becky Pepper-Jackson holds hands with her mother Heather Jackson outside the Supreme Court after arguments over state laws barring transgender girls and women from playing on school athletic teams on Jan. 13, 2026, in Washington.
Becky Pepper-Jackson holds hands with her mother, Heather Jackson, outside the U.S. Supreme Court after arguments over state laws barring transgender girls and women from playing on female athletic teams on Jan. 13, 2026, in Washington.
Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP
Law & Courts After 60 Years, a Louisiana District Fights to Exit Federal Desegregation Order
St. Mary Parish is on the frontlines of a legal battle to end ongoing school desegregation cases dating back to the civil rights era.
Patrick Wall, The Advocate, Baton Rouge, La.
6 min read
School bus outside Patterson High School in St. Mary Parish, in Louisiana.
School bus outside Patterson High School in St. Mary Parish, in Louisiana.
Brad Kemp/The Advocate
Law & Courts School Sports Case Reaches the Supreme Court at a Fraught Time for Trans Rights
The justices will consider state laws that bar transgender girls from participating in female sports.
8 min read
Fifteen year-old Becky Pepper-Jackson tosses a discus at home in West Virginia.
Fifteen-year-old Becky Pepper-Jackson tosses a discus at home in West Virginia. Her challenge to the state’s ban on transgender girls in school sports is now before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Scout Tufankjian/ACLU