MS slams DOJ over delay debate
Microsoft Corp. (msft) also defended its earlier request to delay the appeal for five months laying blame on the government. The company told the Court of Appeals that if the government hadn't tried to game the appeals process by going directly to the Supreme Court, the legal paper wars could be over next month, instead of next year. (MSNBC is a joint venture of Microsoft and NBC.)
Microsoft's filing came 5 days earlier than required and was in response to the government's proposed schedule for submitting legal arguments to the appeals court.
On Tuesday government lawyers mocked Microsoft's request that all parties be given five months to file legal briefs outlining their case to the appeals court. "This is an appeal, not a retrial," government lawyers wrote. Instead, government lawyers proposed to finish up filing all briefs by year's end.
"Of course, if it were not for the three-month delay engendered by [the government's] strenuous effort to avoid this Court's review, briefing would have been completed in November of this year," Microsoft said in its filing Thursday. And then in its own mocking tone, added: "It is truly remarkable that [the government] now seeks to shift to Microsoft the blame for, and the burden of, the delay that resulted from their tactical decision" to appeal directly to the Supreme Court.
In June District Court Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson found Microsoft guilty of violating antitrust laws because it unfairly sought to maintain its monopoly in the PC operating system market. As a result, Jackson ruled that the company should be split into two companies. And while that plan was being implemented, Jackson ruled that the company must operate under harsh "conduct" rules; legal handcuffs restricting many of their business practices.
However, Jackson ordered his complete ruling delayed until all appeals have been exhausted. Given that move, the Justice Department argued in its filing Tuesday, a speedy appeals court proceeding is even more important, making delay into next year harmful to the economy and competition.
Microsoft also defended its request that the appeals court allow legal briefs that are four times as long - 56,000 words - as normal. That length is needed to present the full scope of the its case, Microsoft said, which ranges from 19 substantial trial issues to essentially putting Jackson's own conduct on trial before the appeals court.
The Justice Department and Microsoft each argue that the case holds "compelling public interest," but Microsoft says that is exactly why its requests should be given special consideration with regard to the length of its briefs and the time in which to file them.
Since the outcome of the case "threatens Microsoft's very existence, Microsoft has a responsibility to its employees, shareholders, business partners and customers, as well as to this Court, to propose an appellate process that is adequate to resolve the many issues presented," Microsoft said in defending its requests.
The Court of Appeals will shortly rule on the schedule.