Keeping Software Giant on Watch
The Justice Department on Friday asked a federal court to extend its antitrust oversight of Microsoft Corp. by two years but handed the software giant a victory by rejecting Google Inc.’s claims of anti-competitive behavior.
Government lawyers said the extension, to November 2009, was needed because of Microsoft’s “disappointing” production of technical data about its flagship Windows operating system. Microsoft agreed to extend the oversight, required as part of the 2002 settlement of the government’s landmark antitrust case against it.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who oversees Microsoft’s compliance with the agreement, must approve the extension. The government also held out the possibility of seeking another extension to 2012.
The extended oversight will be a distraction for Microsoft, said Joe Wilcox, a senior analyst at Jupiter Research.
“The oversight is serious,” he said. “These status reports are regular, and the Justice Department scrutinizes what Microsoft does.”
But in the same 25-page brief, the Justice Department dismissed concerns by Internet search leader Google, which raised objections to some aspect of Microsoft’s new version of Internet Explorer. Specifically, Google pointed to a search box that is preset to Microsoft’s own search engine.
The Justice Department, though, determined that the search box posed no legal problems because it could be easily changed to link to another search engine -- and when customers upgrade to Explorer 7, it automatically uses their existing search engine as the default.
“Changing the search engine may be simple by Microsoft’s standards,” Google spokesman Steve Langdon said. “But if it were truly simple, users would be able to change the default with one click -- and that change would be sticky. Microsoft could have easily designed it that way. Instead, they’ve built it so users have to go through multiple steps to choose a search engine.”
Google also has expressed concerns about the search box to European Union antitrust officials, who fined Microsoft about $600 million in 2004.
In October, Kollar-Kotelly criticized Microsoft for delays in producing detailed technical descriptions of communication protocols for its operating system. The data allow companies to make products compatible with Windows, such as media players or security firewalls.
The Justice Department said Friday that it did not believe Microsoft had intentionally produced poor technical data. But the court brief, filed by the department, 17 states and the District of Columbia, said Microsoft’s attempts to resolve problems with the data were “disappointing” and “a new approach is needed.”
J. Bruce McDonald, deputy assistant attorney general for the antitrust division, said the extension would ensure that companies that want to license Microsoft’s communication protocols “receive the benefit of complete and accurate” data to make their products.
The data are not the source code -- the sequence of ones and zeros that make Windows work. Instead, they are detailed, technical descriptions of the operating system that allow products to function seamlessly with it. Companies that agree to licenses with Microsoft also have the ability to see the source code, but only as a reference tool during product development.
Microsoft has assigned Robert Muglia, senior vice president of its server and tools business, to oversee the project, according to the court filing.
Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith said that the company had agreed to make the data available after the government oversight ends and would create a new “interoperability lab,” where companies could test their products and get help from Microsoft engineers.
Smith said the steps “should enhance the quality and comprehensiveness” of the technical data.
