USA Today
WASHINGTON — The federal government’s antitrust case against Microsoft Corp. got a bit bloodied yesterday with tough questions from a tech-savvy appeals court that cast doubt on key parts of its trial court victory last June.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia pointedly questioned Microsoft about its tactics as it fought off challenges to its Windows monopoly. But the seven-judge panel also seemed skeptical that the threats to the giant were viable, questioning whether they were simply demons in executives’ minds.
"If we have a paranoid monopolist who shoots at anything," how is that an antitrust violation? asked chief Judge Harry Edwards, a Democratic appointee. Edwards and other judges also questioned some of lower court Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson’s factual findings, an unusual tack. Edwards said he didn’t feel obliged to "defer to them" if they are not supported by evidence.
The court is weighing Microsoft’s appeal of Jackson’s ruling that it illegally quashed competition. A main claim is that it crippled Netscape Communications Inc. by embedding its Web browser in its Windows software. The appeals court could take several months to rule.
Lawyers today will debate Jackson’s ruling that the firm tried to monopolize the browser market, his decision to split it in two and his court procedures and media comments. The panel is made up of four Republicans, two of whom backed Microsoft in a related 1998 case, and three Democrats.
[back to top] |
