Microsoft Derides Latest Action by U.S. Regulators

Firing the latest salvo in its battle with antitrust regulators, Microsoft Corp. said Tuesday that a “breathtaking reversal” by the government threatened to turn its Internet software case into a farce.

In a federal court filing, the software giant said the latest demands by Justice Department regulators confirmed Microsoft’s contention that its Internet Explorer browser is an integral part of the Windows 95 operating system.

Last week, the Justice Department asked U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson to find Microsoft in civil contempt for violating a court order that barred the software maker from tying Windows 95 to the Web browser.

The government also asked Jackson to order Microsoft to offer “the most current version of Windows 95” with Internet Explorer removed. Microsoft contends such a solution, which eliminates the Explorer icon from the computer desktop, represents “a truly breathtaking reversal of positions” by the department because it would leave most of the browser code in the operating system.

“The [department] has belatedly recognized that the relief it seeks is totally unworkable because Windows 95 and Internet Explorer are not separate products . . . but rather are integral parts of a whole,” Microsoft said.

A Justice Department spokesman said the government’s position has not changed and government filings due Monday will reflect that.

“Microsoft should not be tying together Internet Explorer to Windows 95, and they still need to untie the two products to comply with the judge’s order,” said one department official, who asked not to be identified.

Microsoft also said it was improper to ask Jackson to modify an order currently on appeal.

In a separate appeals court filing, Microsoft also objected to Jackson’s revelation in open court last week that he had successfully deleted the Internet browser without apparent injury to the Windows 95 system.

The company said previous court cases have held that such “extrajudicial fact-finding” by a judge is improper.

Microsoft also rejected what it called an unprecedented demand that the company be required to give at least 30 days’ notice before releasing any new operating system software.