Microsoft Rebuts Judge’s Order

Microsoft Corp. argued Monday that a judge’s order requiring it to offer its Windows 95 operating system without its Internet browser components is based on a legal interpretation that “does not make sense.”

In final written arguments to a federal appeals court, the computer software giant said the order should be vacated because it is based on a mistaken interpretation of its 1995 agreement settling federal antitrust charges.

“No pro-competitive purpose would be served by blocking Microsoft’s integration of Internet-related technologies into Windows 95,” Microsoft said in its 19-page brief filed with the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Washington.

Microsoft is asking the appeals court to vacate the Dec. 11 order issued by U.S. District Judge Thomas Jackson and to dismiss the U.S. Justice Department’s charges that the company is in violation of the antitrust settlement.

Microsoft contends the case should have ended when Jackson failed to find Microsoft in contempt for violating the consent decree, as the Justice Department had asked.

Instead, Jackson issued a preliminary injunction requiring that Microsoft offer computer manufacturers a version of Windows 95 without the Internet Explorer browser.

Jackson also appointed Harvard law Professor Lawrence Lessig as a special master to gather more facts in the case, but he has been sidelined pending Microsoft’s appeal.

Microsoft is scheduled to file a brief outlining its arguments against Lessig’s appointment as special master before the appeals court in Washington hears oral arguments April 21.