WASHINGTON – The Justice Department is poised to apply for expedited high
court review once Microsoft formally files for appeal.
Justice Department antitrust chief Joel Klein said Thursday it is important
that the Supreme Court agree quickly to hear any appeal in the Microsoft
Corp. case so that key issues for the high-tech industry and the public can
be resolved. Klein, speaking the day after a lower court ordered that the
software giant be split in two to promote competition, also set a high bar
for any talks to settle the case.
It was imperative “that a settlement meaningfully address the harm that’s
occurred to this market,” Klein told reporters as he joined Attorney
General Janet Reno at her weekly news conference. Previous settlement
efforts have failed. Klein said the pace of enormous changes in the
marketplace would be directly affected by Microsoft’s willingness to either
live by the law or to continue to abuse its monopoly power.
“It’s very important to get a final ruling before the United States Supreme
Court,” Klein said.
A rarely invoked law permits appeals directly to the Supreme Court for
antitrust cases involving major national companies, if four of the nine
justices agree.
Microsoft took a preliminary step in that direction Thursday by filing a
request with District Court Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson to prevent any
part of his order from taking effect as scheduled. If that is denied, as
expected, Microsoft will go to the U.S. Court of Appeals.
“We believe the court’s order should be stayed in its entirety,” said Mark
Murray, a spokesman for Microsoft. Murray said there are many “elements
that would impose severe costs and disruptions on consumers and Microsoft
immediately.”
Judge Jackson Wednesday ordered Microsoft split in two, but stayed the
decision until the appeals process is exhausted.
In the meantime, Jackson ordered stringent restrictions on the company’s
behavior, set to take effect in 90 days. The restrictions would disappear
three years after the company was split. Microsoft said it will seek a stay
of the restrictions pending appeal.
Microsoft has focused its protests on a requirement that other software
makers who design such products as word processors get the same opportunity
as Microsoft designers to look at the code behind its Windows operating
system for personal computers. Microsoft says that amounts to confiscation
of its intellectual property.
The government argues there should be a level playing field, as Microsoft
already allows some companies to see its code. Klein called the restrictions
straightforward and fundamental, saying they prevented Microsoft from
intimidating computer manufacturers who chose other companies’ products and
from illegally tying two products together as a way to force them on
consumers.
“During the time of the appeal, it’s very important that further harm to
the market, much of which has been thoroughly documented by the court, not
take place,” said Klein. Klein expressed optimism that Microsoft Chairman
Bill Gates might share his views on a direct appeal to the high court, but
Microsoft’s Murray said that the company wants to follow the normal route to
the U.S. Court of Appeals.
