The Preliminary Injunction Case 2

Microsoft is quick to point out that when the government was trying to prove that Internet Explorer was a completely separate product from Windows, they repeatedly pointed to the early releases of Windows 95, before the integration of Internet Explorer, when Internet Explorer was kept on a separate disk from Windows. This was essentially what Microsoft's answer to the court order was—releasing this original version minus the Internet Explorer disk. Now the government said that this was not good enough.

Microsoft also points out that the DOJ expressly stated in court during the first contempt hearing relating to the consent decree that simply removing the visible means of accessing Internet Explorer (such as the desktop icon) would effectively achieve much of the government's objectives in the case, but they told the court that this was not the remedy they sought. They explicitly stated that they wanted the entirety of the Internet Explorer code removed. Thus, had Microsoft done as the government was now suggesting in the first place, they would not have been in compliance with the court order.

Back | Next
Index