Massachusetts says Microsoft violating settlement

Microsoft continues to engage in monopolistic actions and is violating an antitrust settlement approved by a federal judge, the attorney general of the lone U.S. state still suing Microsoft for antitrust violations said in a court brief released Friday.

Microsoft continues to engage in monopolistic actions and is violating an antitrust settlement approved by a federal judge, the attorney general of the lone U.S. state still suing Microsoft for antitrust violations said in a court brief released Friday.

The Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General, in a court brief released by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), accuses Microsoft of charging “excessive” prices for software communications protocols that it was ordered to share with competitors under the terms of its November 2002 antitrust settlement with the DOJ. The protocol-sharing program is “ineffective,” according to the brief, which is signed by Massachusetts Attorney General Thomas Reilly and Assistant Attorney General Glenn Kaplan.

“We continue to receive and review complaints, some of them recent, that Microsoft’s pricing for the protocols is excessive, that the information provided is incomplete, and that key protocols are beyond the reach of the program,” the brief states.

A Microsoft spokeswoman called the Massachusetts complaints “unsubstantiated.”

“Given the vague and unsubstantiated nature of these allegations, it’s difficult to respond,” spokeswoman Stacy Drake said. “However, we are always willing to sit down and discuss any issues of concern.”

The Massachusetts attorneys also complain about the “Shop for Music Online” feature in Windows XP, which, when activated, opens Microsoft’s Internet Explorer browser, even if the user has selected a different browser as the default. Microsoft and the DOJ announced Thursday that Microsoft had agreed to stop its shop-for-music feature from defaulting to Internet Explorer, although the company does not believe the feature violated the antitrust settlement banning anticompetitive behavior against other browsers, Drake said.

Microsoft will make changes in a Windows XP update due out in February or March, Drake said Thursday. But the Massachusetts brief suggests that those changes may not be enough. “It is unclear whether Microsoft’s proposed changes, which apparently will not be put in place for at least two months, will actually remedy the competitive problem,” the Massachusetts brief states.

The brief does not expand on its charge that Microsoft’s actions will not remedy the situation. Microsoft’s Drake called the issue resolved.

The Massachusetts attorneys also accuse Microsoft of engaging in a “campaign against various search engines” and software for creating documents such as Adobe Acrobat. Drake said she could not comment on the individual complaints in the brief.