The 70 page document filed with the Court said the company’s
proposal to curb its business practices would do nothing to undo
the damage to competition caused by its past illegal conduct.
Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson decided on 3rd April this year
that Microsoft had broken US antitrust law by abusing its monopoly
in operating systems for personal computers.
Under a plan submitted last month by the Department of Justice
and 17 of the states that brought the antitrust case against
Microsoft, the company would be broken into two companies. One
would develop the Windows operating system; the other would deal
with all other services. The two companies would stay independent
for at least 10 years.
Microsoft objected to this plan and offered what it saw as more
realistic concessions, including removing restrictive clauses from
its contracts with PC manufacturers.
Yesterday’s document said, “Microsoft’s proposed remedy would
leave it free to continue the very practices which the evidence at
trial showed, and this court found, to be unlawful and would do
nothing to restore competition.” It reiterated that its proposal to
split the company would stimulate competition and innovation.
Jim Cullinan, a spokesman for Microsoft, said: “It’s unfortunate
but not surprising that the government is attempting to defend its
extreme remedy proposal. We don’t believe there’s any kind of basis
in law or in the case to warrant such a remedy.”
Judge Jackson will next hold a hearing of the case on 24th May
to consider what remedies he should impose.
