Microsoft Witness Provides Plenty of Ammunition for the Government

WASHINGTON — A computer executive considered a close ally of Microsoft Corp. described the software giant as a “natural monopoly” in court Wednesday and said he agreed to promote some Microsoft products to maintain close relations with the software giant.

Gordon Eubanks, chief executive of Oblix Inc. and the former chairman of Symantec Corp., which makes the popular Norton Utilities and other programs, made the remarks while testifying as a Microsoft witness in the landmark antitrust case. While Eubanks said he used the word “monopoly as an amateur” might, lead government lawyer David Boies said outside of court that Eubanks’ characterization underscored Microsoft’s power and its ability “to keep independent software vendors in line.”

To bolster his point inside the courtroom, Boies--over the objection of Microsoft lawyer Steven Holley--introduced a seven-page First Wave Letter of Agreement in which Symantec agreed in 1997 to make Microsoft’s Internet Explorer the default browser in Symantec software. The agreement also called for Symantec to use Microsoft’s version of Java over a competing version of the programming language developed by Sun Microsystems Inc.

When Eubanks described the contract as an intellectual property agreement, Boies countered, “This agreement goes way beyond protecting intellectual property, doesn’t it?”

Eubanks did not directly respond, but later said that his company did compete with Microsoft in several product areas and that companies often forge alliances and treat some rivals better than others in the course of competing.

Eubanks occasionally provided as much ammunition for the government as he did for Microsoft.

He testified, for example, that Microsoft added free software tools in Windows 95 that duplicated functions of some software sold by Symantec. But Eubanks said Symantec was not hurt by such actions. He said the company kept its products bestsellers in the PC industry by constantly improving them and staying ahead of the technology curve.

“Microsoft will occasionally add things that we were doing as add-ons and require us to change,” Eubanks said. “But by and large, the expansion of the market by making computers easier to use has been the driving force for all of us.”

Under federal antitrust law, monopolies obtained by luck or skill are legal as long as they are not abused. And Eubanks argued that like the nation’s railroads, Microsoft’s software dominance offered consumers many benefits, such as standardization and ease of use.

But the Justice Department, 19 states and the District of Columbia allege that Microsoft has used its dominant Windows personal computer operating system to extend its power to other emerging technologies such as Internet software and multimedia applications.