Print

Mail

wiki links

Microsoft asks judge to delay hearings

Microsoft Corp asked a federal judge for a four-month delay in hearings on antitrust penalties, calling a proposal by nine states a "dramatic expansion" of the case.

The nine states are seeking restrictions on Microsoft's business practices that go beyond a proposed settlement signed by the Bush administration and nine other states. Among other changes, the states want Microsoft to forfeit control of its Internet Explorer browser.

"Microsoft cannot prepare for a hearing on the extraordinarily broad `relief' proposed by the non-settling states within the time now provided," said Microsoft, whose Windows operating system powers 95 percent of the world's personal computers.

The states said they will oppose the Microsoft bid. It's the latest in a series of requests the Redmond, Washington, company has made for additional time since the case was filed in 1998.

"If there is one thing that characterizes Microsoft's conduct in this case even more than denial, it is delay, delay, delay," said Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, a leader of a group that also includes California and Connecticut. "The states are ready to move ahead."

US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has been planning to hold a hearing in March on the state penalty plan. Under the schedule proposed by Microsoft, that session wouldn't take place until July or August.

The extension request affects only the proposal by the nine non-settling states, not a separate hearing planned so that Kollar-Kotelly can assess whether the settlement is in the public interest.

"From Microsoft's point of view, the more time goes by the better," said Mark Schechter, a Washington antitrust lawyer who negotiated a settlement with Microsoft as a Justice Department attorney in 1994.

"Whatever evidence that exists becomes staler, and there are more opportunities to develop their position both legally and factually."

Microsoft says it has already begun to comply with the settlement, which would give computer makers more freedom to promote rival software and would require Microsoft to disclose the necessary code so that competing programs can run smoothly on Windows.

"Microsoft cannot be accused of seeking to delay the imposition of a remedy in this case," the company said. "The fault for any delay instead lies with the non-settling states, which have effectively initiated an entirely new case."

A federal appeals court in June upheld findings that Microsoft illegally protected its Windows monopoly by squelching competition from a rival Web browser made by Netscape Communications Corp, now part of AOL Time Warner Inc.

The unanimous ruling overturned a court-ordered breakup and sent the case back to the lower court for more hearings on remedies.

Critics of the settlement say the Justice Department didn't demand nearly as much as the appeals court ruling warranted.

The states would force Microsoft to put its Web browsing source code in the public domain. That would give competitors a better chance to write programs that run on Internet Explorer in competition with Microsoft applications.

Microsoft also would have to offer a version of Windows that doesn't bundle such software as Internet Explorer, Microsoft Office and the Windows Media Player.

A special master appointed by the judge would oversee the company's compliance instead of a technical committee proposed in the settlement.
This story has been viewed 1846 times.