As expected, government lawyers called Netscape Communications Corp chief executive Jim Barksdale to the stand yesterday as their first witness in the Microsoft Corp antitrust trial. Barksdale quickly affirmed the validity of his previously- recorded written testimony and was then cross-examined by lead defense attorney John Warden, who proceeded to spend the entire afternoon session trying to find holes in the testimony. A main thrust of the cross- examination was Microsoft’s contention that Netscape has long been courting government intervention against Microsoft and that it has essentially been part of the smaller company’s business plan. He cited a Netscape strategy document that admitted DOJ and court actions create opportunity for Netscape. Warden asked detailed questions about Barksdale’s meetings with Justice Department officials before the case was filed in May, of which Barksdale admitted there were about six. He also asked about Netscape’s hiring of outside counsel Gary Reback, which Barksdale said was done to help us build our case in the event it would help us keep the playing field for internet software open. When asked why Netscape didn’t file its own suit against Microsoft, Barksdale said only, Too expensive. Another main concern of Warden’s was trying to discredit Barksdale’s assertion that Microsoft threatened to end Compaq Computer Corp’s Windows licensing deal if it replaced Internet Explorer with Navigator on its desktops. After repeated questioning, Barksdale admitted he had no real basis for that claim. The issues of browser- operating system tying and Microsoft’s alleged monopoly were also raised. Barksdale held fast to his opinion that Microsoft does have a monopoly on operating systems because consumers have no choice but to accept Windows with new PCs and OEMs can’t survive without a Windows license. Barksdale did admit, however, that market share alone does not constitute a monopoly. Warden also spent a fair amount of time on issues of Netscape’s continued enhancements to Navigator and the introduction of Communicator, asking for detailed definitions of the products and their evolution. Many of Warden’s pointed questions on the written testimony seemed designed to clarify certain points for later use. A Microsoft spokesperson characterized the afternoon’s events as a useful cross- examination, which put certain facts into the record that support the company’s case and will ultimately damage the government’s. The company claimed victory on three issues: that Netscape kept attempting to use the government in its struggle with Microsoft; that Microsoft never attempted to withhold a Windows license from Compaq over the issue of Navigator’s inclusion; and that even though Netscape held a commanding lead in the browser market, it still saw fit to improve its products – something Microsoft is claiming that it should be allowed to do. Lead prosecutor David Boies said Barksdale was a compelling witness who laid out the issues in the case clearly and with authority. Indeed, Barksdale seemed well aware of the motives behind many of Warden’s questions and made numerous jokes during the examination. The issue of the now infamous meeting between the two companies, in which Microsoft allegedly proposed a market allocation arrangement, did not come up Tuesday and is expected to provide drama for Wednesday’s session.