Judge Says Microsoft Does Not Have to Disclose Antitrust Lobbying Contacts With

The 1974 Tunney Act, which makes sure that a company settling federal charges doesn't get improper favors from government employees, calls for a company to disclose its lobbying contacts with "any officer or employee of the United States."

Microsoft listed only a handful of meetings with Justice Department officials, drawing the ire of critics who said the company should disclose its considerable contacts with members of Congress and their aides. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly disagreed.

"Neither party has identified any case in which the...disclosure has included contacts beyond those with the executive branch, nor has the court located any such case," Kollar-Kotelly wrote, also citing legal precedent in the D.C. federal circuit.

The American Antitrust Institute, a group of legal scholars, initially made the disclosure complaint. AAI president Albert Foer says he is "very disappointed."

"Perhaps it's now time for Congress to take another look at a law that was intended to bring transparency to the antitrust settlement process but which has been consistently undermined by narrow interpretations," Foer says.

Former Sen. John Tunney, who wrote the law, also supported the antitrust lawyers' view that Microsoft should have to account for its congressional lobbying.

In its twice-a-year reports to Congress on lobbying activities, Microsoft reported spending $300,000 on lobbying related to the antitrust case in the first half of 2001.

Both Microsoft spokesman Jim Desler and Justice Department spokeswoman Gina Talamona say they are pleased by the decision.

Kollar-Kotelly's ruling came as part of a procedural order in which she certified that Microsoft and the Justice Department have fulfilled the steps required by the Tunney Act. She will now decide whether the federal settlement is in the public interest, the last requirement before the settlement goes into effect.

The federal deal, made in November, would force Microsoft to disclose more technical information to its competitors and stop the company from making exclusive deals to shut out smaller rivals.

A decision on the settlement, as well as the suit brought by nine states that want harsher penalties against the company, is expected in late summer.