AtAT's learned a bit more about the next episode of "Redmond Justice," thanks to the hardy newshounds at Bloomberg News. Everyone's favorite courtroom drama may take a decidedly anti-Microsoft spin in its next installment, due to air on January 13th. At that time, Judge Jackson will preside over a hearing to determine if Microsoft should be found in contempt of court for ignoring Jackson's temporary injunction.

Apparently Jackson decided to lasso a technician and try to remove Internet Explorer from Windows 95 himself. Ninety seconds later, he had accomplished what Microsoft had claimed was well-nigh impossible-- IE was uninstalled. Did the process render Windows 95 unusable? Says Jackson, "To all appearances, Windows 95 functioned flawlessly as it was intended to operate." Now it's up to Microsoft to prove otherwise. But Microsoft's defense is that Jackson ordered all of IE removed, and what Jackson did certainly doesn't qualify. Jackson didn't order that IE just be removed from the desktop, or rendered unusable-- they were ordered to remove "the software code that Microsoft itself now separately distributes at retail as Internet Explorer." Those were his exact words.

So the central issue, then, is going to be whether Microsoft can be held in contempt for "innocently" obeying the exact letter of the temporary injunction in such a way as to completely skirt that injunction's obvious intent. They may be setting themselves up for a big-ass fall, though. I mean jeez, didn't Microsoft's lawyers ever watch the Brady Bunch? Remember when Greg weaseled out of a grounding by insisting that he was following the "exact words" of the punishment? If you ask us, Microsoft's going to end up washing Judge Jackson's car in the middle of the night. Serves them freakin' right for not watching the classics.