Microsoft offered testimony from several executives at other companies who share the belief that a breakup would damage the national economy.
The filing revises the company’s previous proposal, in which officials offered to voluntarily change some business practices rather than have the company broken up.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson previously ruled that Microsoft had violated the nation’s anti-trust laws by pressuring its clients not to do business with its competitors.
Microsoft officials deny the company has done anything improper to stifle competition and call the government’s breakup proposal extreme and unenforceable. The company has also vowed to appeal any ruling against it.
Today’s filing includes testimony the company felt was left out of previous proceedings.
“[The revisions] were designed to correct the ambiguity and vagueness,” of the government proposal, said Microsoft spokesman Jim Cullinan. “We are offering these edits with the obvious caveat that we do not believe that such an extreme and damaging remedy would be sustained by the appellate process.”
Lawyers for the Justice Department and 17 states have proposed that Microsoft be split into two parts – one to run the Windows operating systems and another to control all other Microsoft software, including Microsoft Office and the company’s internet holdings.
Jackson previously denied Microsoft’s request for as long as six months to gather evidence and depose witnesses to dispute the Justice Department’s breakup proposal.
Jackson’s final ruling in the case could come as soon as this week.