Today, on "Redmond Justice:" Software giants Microsoft aren't accepting Judge Jackson's refusal to remove special master Lawrence Lessig from the case. Jackson blasted the company's request, calling their accusations that he is biased against Microsoft both "trivial" and "defamatory." Undaunted, Microsoft is determined not to let their fate rest in the judgment of a known (shudder) Mac user, and is now asked a federal appeals court to remove Lessig from the case. Details are available from Wired News. Microsoft argues both that Lessig is biased, and that even if he weren't, placing the important decision in the hands of a private citizen is "incompatible with basic principles of American jurisprudence." They contend that both the Constitution of the United States and federal precedent entitle them to have the decision made by a court and not by a Harvard law professor.

Meanwhile, according to a C/Net article, Lessig himself has filed a sworn declaration in U.S. District Court that he does not have "any personal bias or prejudice" either against Microsoft or for the Department of Justice, and that anyone who thinks so after considering the facts "in context" is being unreasonable. His infamous email message to a friend at Netscape (in which he equated the act of installing Internet Explorer on his Mac to "selling his soul") was, in fact, as informal as a "telephone call;" since his friend worked at Netscape, he expected to be teased about his installation of the competitor's product. He contends that the statement does not indicate a bias, because it's nothing more than a "facetious response to an anticipated tease."

The Justice Department has said it will respond to the appeal next week. Most likely they will argue that Lessig's sworn statement is sufficient indication of impartiality, and that since his appointment as special master was made by the appointed judge to gather data and report his findings and not necessarily to render the legal decision in the conflict, there's no reason to bar Lessig from being the judge's fact-finder. We don't want to give Microsoft any ideas, but guys-- given all the cash in the bank and how poorly this case has been going so far, has anyone considered the wonderful expedient known as "bribery?"