Two States Appeal Microsoft Decree

Both states' attorneys general filed appeals to the court-approved consent decree by the Dec. 2 deadline, arguing that the final remedies do not go far enough to curb Microsoft's monopoly power.

Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly wouldn't disclose what remedies he will be seeking this time around but claimed that politics prevailed over common sense when the consent decree was approved Nov. 1.

"One year ago, after a change in administrations, the Department of Justice negotiated a deal with Microsoft. The deal ignored Microsoft's ill-gotten gains, did nothing about safeguarding competition in new technologies, and was filled with loopholes and exceptions," Reilly said in a statement about the consent decree approved by U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. "There was nothing in the deal that would change Microsoft's business practices in any substantial way."

West Virginia, which filed its appeal on the Dec. 2 deadline, is pushing again for remedies requiring the unbundling of Internet Explorer and other middleware from Windows, the open sourcing of IE and for Microsoft "to carry a nonpolluted version of Java with their OS," said Douglas Davis, a spokesman for West Virginia Attorney General Darrell McGraw.

Davis said the court may not hear the appeals but if it does agree to hear them, the appeals most likely will be consolidated into one, he added.

Sun Microsystems and Red Hat cheered the appeals. A Sun spokeswoman said it is appropriate that the consent decree be reviewed vigorously. Red Hat CEO and Chairman Matthew Szulik said he is pleased to see Reilly fighting for stricter remedies, but he acknowledged that the deal is pretty much over.