WASHINGTON -- Characterizing the government's attack of Microsoft as the "return of the Luddites," the company's chief litigator, John Warden, took the stage to mount a defense in the second day of this historic antitrust trial.
Warden delivered few surprises in an opening statement that was, nevertheless, distinctly different in style from the one made yesterday by the Department of Justice's David Boies that kicked off the trial.
Boies used his time before U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson to unveil key pieces of evidence and to point out damning contradictions between the e-mails and the videotaped deposition of Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates. In contrast, Warden (except for an occasionally flamboyant statement) was more straightforward, saying only that the evidence will show Microsoft has done nothing wrong and that the DOJ's case is without merit.
"I was surprised they didn't present any evidence," Boies said outside the courtroom during the lunch break."Each lawyer has a different style."
"We are saving that information for the trial," said Mark Murray, a Microsoft spokesperson.
Still, the decision was somewhat surprising given Microsoft's repeated characterization of the DOJ's evidence as little more than "snippets" taken totally out of context. During his 2-hour monologue, Warden used only two documents -- an e-mail message sent by Gates to Andy Grove, at the time CEO of Intel, and a memo sent by Netscape Communications to the DOJ -- to refute the government's claims.
By comparison, the DOJ showed more than 80 different documents in its opening statements Monday to show that Microsoft violated antirust laws.
In any event, the two memos Warden did use were illuminating. In redisplaying the Gates/Grove e-mail that the DOJ showed yesterday, and which it claims proves Microsoft tried to prevent Intel from developing multimedia software called native signal processing, or NSP, Warden said the truth behind the memo was that Gates for the most was in favor of NSP but was concerned about possible incompatibilities between it and Windows 95 and NT.
As for the Netscape memo, Warden said it displayed the tight relationship between Netscape and the DOJ as well as proof that even Netscape believes Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser and Windows 98 cannot be separated.
Warden called the DOJ's case "long on rhetoric and short on substance" and "the effort to demonize Bill Gates in the opening statement is emblematic of this approach."
Asked during the break to respond to Microsoft's claims that the DOJ is using snippets taken out of context, Boise countered by saying that the DOJ again yesterday attempted to get all of the information it needed but that effort was objected to by Microsoft's lawyers.
