Microsoft, DoJ ask judge for settlement approval

The US Justice Department told a federal judge that the settlement it has

negotiated with Microsoft is better than what it reasonably could have expected

if it had gone back to court to seek tougher penalties. "Getting more would

have been an uphill battle that likely would have been resolved against

us," said DoJ attorney Philip Beck during a court hearing before US

District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. He added that the settlement extends

beyond what the Appeals Court decided was Microsoft's legal liability.

The settlement is designed to prevent Microsoft from retaliating against

partners for using non-Microsoft products; require the company to disclose some

of its software blueprints so software developers can make compatible products;

and make it easier for consumers to remove extra Windows features.

Microsoft lawyer John Warden took an aggressive position in support of the

settlement, saying the opposition to the merger was driven from behind the

scenes by a group of Microsoft competitors who are trying to use the settlement

to advance their competitive positions against Microsoft. "They seek a grab

bag of personal advantages for Microsoft competitors. They 'would redesign

Microsoft's products, confiscate Microsoft's intellectual property and extend

this case into markets that it has nothing to do with.''

But Kollar-Kotelly made it clear that Microsoft and the DoJ would not get the

quick approval of the settlement they asked for. She asked the government to

clarify several portions of the settlement that she indicated were vague.

She also questioned whether Microsoft had adequately disclosed all of its

lobbying contacts with the government, as required by federal law. She concluded

the hearing saying that she would not likely make a ruling any time soon. ''I

have a lot of work ahead of me before I make this decision."

That means opponents of the merger will almost certainly have the opportunity

to argue their case for tougher sanctions before the judge announces her

decision to either accept the agreement or toss it out. In case of the latter,

Kollar-Kotelly will be in position to decide the appropriate punishment

following the court hearings in which the nine opposing states will argue for

tougher sanctions.