As the case moves forward, Kollar-Kotelly will have to juggle the two separate tracks of the case so as to avoid a catastrophic collision on appeal. Besides the second version of Windows, the states also want Microsoft to give away for free the source code -- or blueprint -- to Internet Explorer, licence through auction its Office software for use on competing operating systems and carry Sun Microsystem's version of Java for 10 years. In terms of the settlement, "the judge is pretty limited in what she can do," said Andy Gavil, an antitrust professor with Howard University's School of Law. "Basically she can approve or reject." Kollar-Kotelly could signal to the parties that she will not grant her approval without certain changes. But the more she ventures down the road of asking for changes that could position one track of the case against the other, the more problems she could face on appeal, legal experts said. Technically, the settlement and remedy are separate, but the judge is in the unique position of being able to weigh one against the other. She could, for example, simply approve the settlement and end matters there if she believes that the states did not make their case for stiffer sanctions. "But I think things have gone on too far for her to do that," said Rich Gray, an attorney who has closely followed the trial. "I would expect her to approve the settlement and also issue a harsher remedy, but maybe not as severe as the states are asking for." Throughout the remedy proceeding, Microsoft scored one courtroom success against the states after another, which the company positioned as a victory in the case. But Iowa's Miller took a different view. "This is a remedy proceeding," he said. "The courts already have determined that Microsoft broke the antitrust law by taking illegal action to maintain and extend its monopoly. Now the issue is what the court will order to unfetter competition, deny Microsoft the fruits of the violations and prevent further violations." For Kollar-Kotelly, the issue won't be whether Microsoft violated antitrust laws but whether the separate settlement is enough or a remedy required to meet the mandate of last June's Court of Appeals ruling. Kollar-Kotelly will have to sift through nearly two months of testimony, proposed "findings of fact" and "conclusions of law," and the Court of Appeals ruling in deciding what kind of remedy she will impose, if any. She is expected to issue her ruling as early as late summer. California, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Utah and West Virginia -- and the District of Columbia -- are continuing the litigation. Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin signed onto the settlement.
Think it's all over? The antitrust case against Microsoft can still go back the to Court of Appeals, and then there's the European Commission's investigation... See ZDNet UK's DoJ/Microsoft News Section for the latest headlines.
Have your say instantly, and see what others have said. Go to the Microsoft forum.
Let the editors know what you think in the Mailroom.
