The DOJ: no referral for the Microsoft case
Microsoft's new demands on the illegal monopoly exercise would cause unacceptable delays in defining the case and ultimately harm consumers and therefore must be rejected. With this argument, the Department of Justice opposed last Friday the maneuvers of Redmond who, in fact, had submitted a request to the court of appeal for the case to be referred directly to the highest degree of judgment instead of returning to the district court and in the meantime to block any other judgment and the effects of the provisions that would be imposed by the district court where the case was sent back.The document of the Department of Justice, presented last Friday, requests that the freezing of the case until approval of the appeal to the Supreme Court be rejected and The proceeding continues. The DOJ makes explicit reference to the launch of Windows XP whose "protection" would be one of the reasons why Microsoft would have adopted what in the opinion of many legal experts is nothing more than a delusional technique. According to US government lawyers, in fact, ?Microsoft has announced that it will soon introduce Windows XP, the next generation of its monopolistic operating system. The sooner a case definition is reached, the sooner competitive conditions will be determined. Until a remedy has been put in place every day of delay, it contributes to adding damage to the public interest in the competition. ?Reporting the case to the court of appeal considered essential to request a measure against XP which according to many consumer organizations and the same DOJ uses the same anti-competitive techniques used in Windows 95 and Windows 98. At the moment the opinions as to why such an injunction may have a real possibility of being accepted diverge. According to some sources, the DOJ, consumer organizations and states that oppose Microsoft have little chance because the Internet messaging system and the reproduction of media that would be integrated into XP are not "platform technologies", that is, they do not compete directly with the operating system (as it could have happened with Netscape) and therefore their integration does not aim to destroy a direct competitor. According to other sources, the request could be accepted because in any case their potentially destructive inclusion of competition in other markets.