Posted on 12/23/2002 2:41:35 PM PST by dfwgator
BALTIMORE - Microsoft must include rival Sun Microsystem's Java programming language in its Windows operating system, a federal judge ruled Monday, handing Sun a victory as it pursues its private antitrust case.
Sun had argued during a three-day hearing earlier this month before U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz that Microsoft has gained an unfair advantage by shipping Windows used by more than 90 percent of the world's personal computers with an outdated version of Java that's inconsistent for its users.
"In the final analysis, the public interest in this case rests in assuring that free enterprise be genuinely free, untainted by the effects of antitrust violations," Motz said in his ruling.
Software developers are turning to Microsoft's .NET platform instead of gambling on Microsoft's spotty distribution of Java, Sun attorneys told Motz during the hearing.
Microsoft attorneys countered that at least half the world's software developers already use Java, which was designed to run small applications independent of any particular operating system.
"Competition is not only about winning the prize; its deeper value lies in giving all those who choose to compete an opportunity to demonstrate their worth," Motz wrote. "If .NET proves itself to be a better product than Java, it should and will predominate in the market."
Motz wrote that if Microsoft's system was to remain dominant, "it should be because of .NET's superior qualities, not because Microsoft leveraged its PC monopoly to create market conditions in which it is unfairly advantaged."
In asking for the injunction, Sun said that if it waited until its $1 billion antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft was settled, it would be too far behind to compete.
In the antitrust suit, Sun accuses Microsoft of intentionally creating incompatibilities with competitors' products. It also charges that Microsoft forced other companies to distribute or use products incompatible with Java.
The case is one of four private antitrust lawsuits that followed a federal judge's ruling in a lawsuit filed by the Justice Department (news - web sites) and 18 states. The court had found that Microsoft acted as an illegal monopoly based on its dominance in desktop operating systems.
In November, U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly approved a settlement in that case barring Microsoft from retaliating against or threatening computer manufacturers. The settlement, which two states are appealing, also compels Microsoft to share key technical data with competitors that allow their programs to run more smoothly with Microsoft operating systems.
First I was told that "bundling" was bad and evil and that Bill Gates was a "bundler" and therefore Satan
AND NOW, I see people trying to force Microsoft to "bundle" and be evil like satan..
Someone needs to make up their F$^%&*@ mind on this one way or the other.
I thought all this was BAAAAD..
I mean, it was yesterday.. Right?
Should True Basic, Inc.
sue Microsoft to force them
to ship True Basic?
What about ParcPlace?
Should ParcPlace sue Microsoft
for Cincom Smalltalk?
Should Microsoft ship
everything that everyone
has ever coded?
It looks to me like Sun is trying to get MS to carry their water here.
I thought about manufacturing cars in my spare time.. Maybe I can find a court to force local FORD dealers to carry my brand.
Microsoft should retaliate by including swing.
I wouldn't bet the mortgage money on either assumption.
Q: How can you tell the 9th Circuit Judge on the BART?
A: He's the one reading Constitutional Law for Dummies.
Q: How can you tell the 9th Circuit Judge's clerk on the BART?
A: He's the one reading Dick and Jane Go to the Courthouse.
Ouch!!!
If Joe Six-Pack wants it, he can download it from Sun and install it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.