With all the hubbub over the Microsoft vs. Department of Justice battle, it's easy to overlook Sun's own little legal attack on Microsoft, intended to prevent the use of the "Java-compatible" logo on products that use Microsoft's latest implementation of the Sun programming language. (Faithful viewers will recall the flap that occurred when Microsoft shipped Internet Explorer 4.0, whose Java version effectively "broke" the Java specification by removing certain required components and adding others that were purely of Microsoft construction.)

Luckily, Sm@rt Reseller keeps us all up to date with a status report on the Sun lawsuit. It appears that Sun succeeded in having the case transferred to a federal judge last month, and just a couple of days ago, that judge refused Microsoft's request to postpone an upcoming hearing until the end of June. The hearing, intended to determine whether or not Sun should be granted a preliminary injunction against Microsoft to prevent the use of the Java logo, will occur on February 22nd, as originally planned. One of Sun's strongest pieces of evidence in its favor is the infamous "Maritz Presentation," which the DoJ has also used in its arguments against Microsoft. In the presentation, Microsoft's Vice President of Platforms and Applications reveals Microsoft's concern that Netscape and Java would make Windows "devalued" and "eventually replaceable." In order to prevent this from happening, Maritz proposed a way for Microsoft to get "control over Java" and tie it back to the Windows interface and API in order to "neutralize" both Java and Netscape.

Scott McNealy, Sun's longtime Microsoft detractor, is probably feeling ambivalent about the DoJ case; on the one hand, it must make him all warm and Christmassy inside to see Microsoft's stock keep slipping lower as public resentment grows; but on the other hand, the high-profile case is stealing the spotlight from Sun's own lawsuit, which appears to have been filed for publicity as much as for fairness. C'est la guerre.