In "Redmond Justice" news, we're pleased to see that Microsoft's penchant for melodrama is holding strong through Sweeps Month. The company met its deadline and filed an official response to the government's corporate breakup proposal, and those of us hoping for lots of over-the-top whining and barefaced protestations of innocence weren't disappointed. In point of fact, the company actually filed a motion for summary rejection; it asked the judge to throw out the "radical" breakup plan right away, while suggesting its own set of conduct restrictions instead. The New York Times has plenty of details on Microsoft's snit-fit in the shadow of the axe, and its own proposed "remedy."

First, the "poor, poor us" stuff that we all find so entertaining. Get this: Microsoft is actually claiming that splitting the company in two (one to work on Windows, the other to crank out applications) would prompt its employees to "leave the company in droves," at which point "the company's entire business would be destroyed." Okay, at this point all you staunch anti-Microsoft viewers out there should wipe that drool off your chin; if you seriously believe that Microsoft would collapse just because it gets split up into two play groups, we've got two bananas and some twine to sell you. It's a nice fantasy, if that's your thing, but come on. Microsoft's obviously hoping to scare the judge into playing it safe with the American economy, and we just hope Jackson isn't that easily fooled.

As for Microsoft's counterproposal, well, the government feels that it's "inadequate." Translation: "it's got more holes in it than the plot of the average summer action flick." The Justice Department's statement notes that Microsoft's plan wouldn't prevent "attempts to divide markets with competitors; retaliation against personal computer manufacturers and software developers that support non-Microsoft technologies; or tying to require PC manufacturers to ship other Microsoft products with Windows." What it does do, however, is require Bill Gates to have a three-inch scarlet letter "M" tattooed on his forehead. (Well, okay, not really-- but we bet the government would be a lot more receptive if such a provision were tacked on.)

To be fair, Microsoft's proposal does contain some attractive (if narrow) concessions. Of particular interest to Mac users are the bits wherein Microsoft would agree "not to condition the release of its software intended for non-Microsoft operating systems, like Apple Computer's, on the other company's agreement not to distribute or promote competitors' software." Of course, it's a little late now; when the choice was between IE3 and Netscape 4, such an agreement might have actually meant something. But that's pretty much been Microsoft's plan all along-- do the damage, and count on the "remedy" not remedying anything at all.

Next up: in a week we get to watch the government's official response to Microsoft's response. We can hardly wait, especially since Microsoft's prez (and the new star of Microsoft's "The Best Is Yet To Come" commercials) Steve Ballmer is still publicly issuing statements like this: "Our company will not be broken up. It will not happen." Ooooh, it's like waving a red flag in front of a bull...