You'll have to excuse me on this one since you have to be registered to view news on this site so I have posted a copy of the article.
From technology.smcp.com :
http://technology.scmp.com/techinternet/ZZZYPQB8GZC.html
ASSOCIATED PRESS in Washington
Copyright © 2002. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.
Applications, information and other services delivered over the Internet could threaten Microsoft's desktop operating system monopoly and, therefore, are worthy of antitrust protections, a Sun Microsystems executive said.
Many companies, including Microsoft, are rushing to offer Internet services - from instant messaging programs to entire business software suites - online rather than through stores.
Microsoft wants penalties in the company's antitrust case to only cover the consumer desktop market. Nine states want the remedies extended to cellular phones, instant messaging and interactive television.
Jonathan Schwartz, a Sun senior vice-president, was scheduled Tuesday as the second person to testify against Microsoft in a federal hearing to determine the penalties Microsoft should face for breaking antitrust law.
After the Schwartz testimony, the states are expected to wrap up their case with the testimony of three expert witnesses who will discuss economic and legal issues related to the case.
Microsoft will present their witnesses, including Microsoft's chief executive Steve Ballmer and chairman Bill Gates, next week.
The states want US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly to force Microsoft to create a stripped-down version of its flagship Windows software that could incorporate competitors' features. The states also want Microsoft to divulge the blueprints for its Internet Explorer browser.
The federal government and nine other states settled their antitrust case against Microsoft last year for lesser penalties.
The original judge in the case, Thomas Penfield Jackson, ordered Microsoft broken into two companies after concluding that it illegally stifled competitors. An appeals court reversed the break-up order and appointed Judge Kollar-Kotelly to determine a new punishment.
A software engineer from telephone giant SBC Communications said on Monday that the penalties would protect emerging Internet communications products from interference by Microsoft.
In early 2003, SBC plans to start its Unified Messaging Service, which will allow customers to get voice mail, e-mail, faxes and other messages from a single mailbox using a telephone or any Internet-connected device. Microsoft is in the process of launching a similar product.
"Microsoft can effectively prevent these services from becoming commercially viable" by locking non-Microsoft systems out of Windows, or making Microsoft's own service work better with Windows than any competitor's, SBC engineer Larry Pearson said.
"If Microsoft did these things, we wouldn't have a product," Mr Pearson said.
Microsoft lawyer Dan Webb continued the firm's strategy of accusing other companies of being too close to the states' lawyers. He cited a series of meetings between SBC officials and the states in which the states adopted changes, suggested by SBC, to the proposed penalties.
Mr Webb also released SBC e-mails showing how the telephone company reviewed the proposed federal settlement, looking for loopholes. He said that SBC lobbied states to reject the deal.
SBC is one of the nation's four Baby Bell telephone companies, created from the 1984 break-up of AT&T. SBC also provides Internet access in some areas and owns the pioneering Internet service Prodigy and most of wireless provider Cingular.
States that rejected the government's settlement with Microsoft and are continuing to pursue the antitrust case are Iowa, Utah, Massachusetts, Connecticut, California, Kansas, Florida, Minnesota and West Virginia, along with the District of Columbia.
