WASHINGTON – Last April after Thomas Penfield Jackson ruled that the company
had violated several provisions of federal antitrust law The Justice
Department called for splitting Microsoft into two competing companies.
During the 78-day trial, Jackson gave attorneys for both sides great leeway
to conduct their examinations. He rarely overruled objections and only
occasionally prodded them to speed things up.
Some critics contended Jackson’s handling of the case revealed a
pro-government slant, but some disagreed. He noted that the judge could have
been much harsher toward Microsoft in several instances, particularly when
the company was questioned about the credibility of videotaped evidence that
it introduced – and ultimately yanked.
To help speed the nonjury Microsoft trial, Jackson limited each side to 12
witnesses and had those witnesses submit their direct testimony in writing.
He has tried to move the case along even though some earlier antitrust cases
have taken years to complete.
No case has matched the visibility of the current one: the government’s push
to break up software giant Microsoft.
Microsoft spokesman Jim Cullinan said Tuesday that the company’s filing will
address the substance of the Justice Department’s revised breakup plan that
was filed at Jackson’s request. He declined to go into further detail.
