Some of us remember back in 1983 when AT&T was broken up. Essentially, the case boiled down to antitrust issues, where the monopoly telephone company couldn’t stop others from using their infrastructure in order to compete. Of course, the case and issues were much more complex than that, and government action was involved re: placing of poles and cables and all that, but the crux of the matter was that the monopoly player is not allowed to shut out others from playing on their turf.
Some of us also remember WordPerfect, a word processing program much loved by lawyers back in the early 90s. Then it seemingly disappeared, being eaten by Microsoft Word. Novell claims that in 1994, Microsoft changed Windows so that essential pieces of WordPerfect, and another of its products, Quattro Pro, would no longer function.
This particular case also has some quite interesting legal theories that could serve to broaden antitrust law. It’s definitely worth watching.
Bill Gates was on the stand Monday in the Novell v. Microsoft trial in Utah. Bloomberg says Gates totally denied Novell’s central charges:
In response to questioning from Microsoft lawyer Steven Holley, Gates said he “absolutely” denied the central allegation of Novell’s suit, that in 1994, in developing the Windows 95 operating system, Microsoft withdrew an element of the software to thwart Novell’s WordPerfect and Quattro Pro programs.While the elements withdrawn from the operating system may have been useful to companies developing e-mail programs, they were “pretty irrelevant” to word-processing programs, Gates testified.
Cross-examination began today and is scheduled to resume tomorrow.
So he’s going back today. And Novell has filed a motion to reopen its case in chief [PDF] to supplement the record. Here’s the Memorandum in Support [PDF]. Of course Microsoft opposes [PDF]. They are also in a legal dispute about whether deception is an antitrust matter. Novell has also sent a letter [PDF] to the judge about the correspondence between then-Novell CEO Robert Frankenberg and Microsoft’s Bill Gates, in response to the judge on Friday saying that there were no such communications in the record. But there was, as you can see. And Novell wants to put some documents into the record that the judge earlier refused to allow in, because they show that high level executives did know about Microsoft’s API switcheroo, and that they complained about it to the US DOJ. Microsoft opposes [PDF] that too. Microsoft had been saying otherwise to the jury, evidently, and the judge apparently believed them, and Novell wants the jury to know better, not to mention the judge.
We also have Novell’s opposition [PDF] to Microsoft’s motion for judgment as a matter of law, and I want to highlight that filing in particular. I have it for you as text. According to the Salt Lake Tribune, the judge has denied Microsoft’s motion, and when you read Novell’s filing, I think you’ll agree that it would be the correct decision. The minutes of the day’s events don’t say that, but AP now is also
reporting that it happened late in the day. In the filing, Novell details for the judge, who
seemed earlier not to grasp the big picture, or recall several pertinent details, all that Microsoft did to Novell to kill off WordPerfect. Novell says Microsoft’s excuses are “pretextual” and a “sham”. That’s a polite word for not altogether true.The media reports that Bill Gates’ testimony was that they decided to make the API change because of worry about breakage, but Novell responds to that and the other excuses amply.
Novell even points out that the judge is bound by the appeals court. They did rule that this case had to go to the jury, after all. It’s the law of the case. Novell seems to be setting things up so the record is complete and clear for an appeal, should one prove necessary.
[From Novell Asks to Reopen Case in Chief and Tells the Court How Microsoft Stabbed It In The Back ~pj]
