Government lawyers oppose Microsoft’s request for a delay

Associated Press

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court should not delay in pursuing penalties against Microsoft, because dragging the case out would disrupt the computer market, the Justice Department said Friday.

"Granting a (delay) would further delay the public’s remedy and contribute to uncertainty in the market," Assistant Attorney General Charles James and other government lawyers wrote in a court filing.

The appeals judges, who have already ruled that Microsoft repeatedly violated antitrust laws, had planned to send the case to a new judge to decide what penalty the Redmond company should face. It was not clear when the court would act.

Lawyers for the Justice Department and 19 states that sued Microsoft for alleged monopoly practices asked the appeals court to deny Microsoft’s request to temporarily stop lower court proceedings in the case. Microsoft asked for the delay while it waits to hear whether the Supreme Court will step in to the 4-year-old case.

"Under the circumstances, Microsoft has little prospect of obtaining (Supreme Court) review, let alone winning a reversal" of the lower appeals court ruling, the government wrote.

Microsoft failed to show why it needed a delay, and going forward would not "injure Microsoft in any way," the government said.

The computer market continues to change, and Microsoft continues to develop new products, while the company remains unpunished for past monopoly behavior, the government lawyers wrote. They noted that Microsoft plans to release a new version of its computer operating system, Windows XP, this fall.

"Because of its monopoly position, Microsoft’s products and conduct overhang the market," the government filing said. "The sooner remedial proceedings begin, the sooner a resolution can be crafted to assure competitive conditions."

Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler said the company still hopes to resolve the case quickly through a settlement with the government. In the meantime, a delay would give the Supreme Court time to act, Desler said.

"We’ve asked the Supreme Court to review an important issue, and we believe the process is best served by waiting for the resolution of this matter before proceeding," Desler said.