Microsoft suffers big set back in Java case

Microsoft was dealt another legal blow when San Jose’s Federal District

Court Judge Ronald Whyte re-instated his 1998 ban to prevent Microsoft from

distributing any version of Sun Microsystems’ Java programming language unless

it is fully in compliance with Sun’s Java license agreement.

The decision is the latest twist in the two-year legal battle that started

when Sun sued Microsoft for breaching the Java licensing agreement. The company

accused Microsoft of deliberately trying to split the Java developer community

by introducing a version of Java for its Windows OS that was incompatible with

Sun’s Java standard.

"Microsoft's unauthorized distribution of incompatible implementations

of Sun's Java Technology threatens to undermine Sun's goal of cross-platform and

cross-implementation compatibility,'' Whyte wrote in his order that was released

this week. "Microsoft's unparalleled market power and distribution

channels relating to computer operating systems pose a significant risk that

an incompatible and unauthorized version of the Java Technology will become the

de facto standard,'' Whyte said.

Microsoft spokesman Jim Cullinan said ruling would have little actual affect,

as Microsoft has operated within the limits set by Whyte’s original decree

even after an Appeals Court threw out Whyte’s original injunction in 1999. The

Sun-Microsoft case is important in more ways than forcing Microsoft to abandon

its effort to battle any competitive threat from Java. The issue has also played

a key role in the federal antitrust case where Microsoft has been accused of

undermining Java to protect Windows from competition.

In this week’s ruling, Whyte ordered Microsoft to stop distributing any

version of the Java technology that doesn't pass Sun’s tests to determine if

it's compatible with Java. Whyte also barred Microsoft from advertising that its

developer kits were compatible with Sun's Java. "As we have said from the

start of this case, Microsoft's misconduct with respect to Sun's Java technology

has harmed competition as well as those who use and rely on the Java

technology,'' said Michael Morris, Sun's general counsel.

Whyte agreed with Sun that Microsoft’s version of Java’s

"native-method interface'' isn’t supported by Microsoft, therefore making

Microsoft's implementation of Java incompatible with Sun standards.

"Microsoft's past conduct demonstrates an ongoing strategy to compete with

Sun's standard Java programming environment that includes injecting key points

of incompatibility and failing to warn software developers of the nature and

consequences of the changes," Whyte wrote.

Whyte did agree with the Appeals court that Sun had failed to show that

Microsoft was violating its copyrights, and he dropped any such language from

his final ruling. But, Whyte said there was plenty of evidence to show Microsoft

breached the license agreement and intended to cause harm to Sun. While the

ruling is a clear victory for Sun, Microsoft’s public relations spin masters

were still able to turn the defeat into something positive, saying the ruling

proved Microsoft had merely a contract dispute, rather than a violation of

copyrights. "It's a great sign for Microsoft and other parties that

competition on the merits of technology is still acceptable. Sun is trying to

prevent and limit competition, trying to control Java," said Microsoft

spokesman Jim Cullinan. The case now moves into its next phase in an eventual

court-room trial battle. In the mean time, Microsoft will be forced to abide by

Whyte’s ruling.