decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Novell and Microsoft both file summary judgment motions in the WordPerfect antitrust case - Updated
Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 01:30 AM EST

Novell and Microsoft have each filed summary judgment motions in the antitrust litigation about WordPerfect that Novell brought against Microsoft. In addition, we find out what happened regarding the Bill Gates deposition. And neither party can find certain documents that might be in the Comes collection. I wonder if you can?

Remember how they were fighting about whether or not he'd have to submit to a second deposition to fill out the time that Novell had a right to? Well, he had to, despite Microsoft's claim that he's too important leading his foundation and fixing global health and such to have to submit to another deposition. It's Microsoft's Exhibit 10, and it oozes his usual level of charm [PDF] at depositions.

Here are all the filings:

06/02/2009 - 94 - ORDER granting (87) Motion to Compel and to continue two depositions in case 1:05-cv-01087-JFM; granting (1926) Motion to Compel and to continue two depositions in case 1:00-md-01332-JFM. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 6/2/09 Associated Cases: 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 1:05-cv-01087-JFM(cags, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/02/2009)

06/05/2009 - 95 - Local Rule 104.7 Certificate. (Attachments: # 1 Novell's Motion to Compel, # 2 Novell's Memorandum in Support, # 3 Certificate of Service, # 4 Proposed Order, # 5 Appendix, # 6 Microsoft's Memorandum in Opposition, # 7 Declaration of G Stewart Webb Jr., # 8 Affidavit of Beau H. Holt, # 9 Certificate of Service, # 10 Novell's Reply Memorandum, # 11 Certificate of Service, # 12 Appendix) Associated Cases: 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 1:05-cv-01087-JFM(Johnson, Jeffrey) (Entered: 06/05/2009)

06/11/2009 - 96 - ORDER granting (1935 in 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 95 in 1:05-cv-01087-JFM) Motion to compel filed by Novell, Inc. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 6/11/09. Associated Cases: 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 1:05-cv-01087-JFM(jnl, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 06/11/2009)

06/22/2009 - 97 - Paperless ORDER granting 92 Motion for Leave to File. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 6/22/09. (Motz, J.) (Entered: 06/22/2009)

06/25/2009 - 98 - Correspondence re: Schedule Associated Cases: 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 1:05-cv-01087-JFM(Johnson, Jeffrey) (Entered: 06/25/2009)

07/01/2009 - 99 - Paperless ORDER approving schedule proposed in re (1942 in 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 98 in 1:05-cv-01087-JFM) Miscellaneous Correspondence. Signed by Judge J. Frederick Motz on 7/1/09. Associated Cases: 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 1:05-cv-01087-JFM(Motz, J.) (Entered: 07/01/2009)

09/04/2009 - 100 - STATUS REPORT (JOINT) by Novell, Inc.. Associated Cases: 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 1:05-cv-01087-JFM(Johnson, Jeffrey) (Entered: 09/04/2009)

10/07/2009 - 101 - MOTION for Summary Judgment by Microsoft Corporation. Responses due by 10/26/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Memorandum in Support, # 3 Affidavit, # 4 Exhibit 1, # 5 Exhibit 2, # 6 Exhibit 3, # 7 Errata 4, # 8 Exhibit 5, # 9 Exhibit 6, # 10 Exhibit 7, # 11 Exhibit 8, # 12 Exhibit 9, # 13 Exhibit 10, # 14 Exhibit 11, # 15 Exhibit 12, # 16 Exhibit 13, # 17 Exhibit 14, # 18 Exhibit 15, # 19 Exhibit 16, # 20 Exhibit 17, # 21 Exhibit 18, # 22 Exhibit 19, # 23 Exhibit 20, # 24 Exhibit 21, # 25 Exhibit 22, # 26 Exhibit 23, # 27 Exhibit 24, # 28 Exhibit 25, # 29 Exhibit 26, # 30 Exhibit 27, # 31 Exhibit 28, # 32 Exhibit 29, # 33 Exhibit 30, # 34 Exhibit 31, # 35 Exhibit 32, # 36 Exhibit 33, # 37 Exhibit 34, # 38 Exhibit 35, # 39 Exhibit 36, # 40 Exhibit 37, # 41 Exhibit 38, # 42 Exhibit 39, # 43 Exhibit 40, # 44 Exhibit 41, # 45 Exhibit 42, # 46 Exhibit 43, # 47 Exhibit 44, # 48 Exhibit 45, # 49 Exhibit 46, # 50 Exhibit 47, # 51 Certificate of Service)Associated Cases: 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 1:05-cv-01087-JFM(Major, Alexander) (Exhibits rec'd 10/9/09 Modified on 10/9/2009 (jnl, Deputy Clerk). (Entered: 10/07/2009)

10/07/2009 - 102 - MOTION for Summary Judgment by Novell, Inc. Responses due by 10/26/2009 (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum of Law, # 2 Text of Proposed Order, # 3 Affidavit of Alex Hassid, # 4 Exhibit 1 to Hassid Aff., # 5 Exhibit 2 to Hassid Aff., # 6 Exhibit 3 to Hassid Aff., # 7 Exhibit 4 to Hassid Aff., # 8 Exhibit 5 to Hassid Aff., # 9 Exhibit 6 to Hassid Aff., # 10 Exhibit 7 to Hassid Aff., # 11 Exhibit 8 to Hassid Aff., # 12 Exhibit 9 to Hassid Aff., # 13 Exhibit 10 to Hassid Aff., # 14 Exhibit 11 to Hassid Aff., # 15 Exhibit 12 to Hassid Aff., # 16 Exhibit 13 to Hassid Aff., # 17 Exhibit 14 to Hassid Aff., # 18 Exhibit 15 to Hassid Aff., # 19 Exhibit 16 to Hassid Aff., # 20 Exhibit 17 to Hassid Aff., # 21 Exhibit 18 to Hassid Aff., # 22 Exhibit 19 to Hassid Aff., # 23 Exhibit 20 to Hassid Aff., # 24 Exhibit 21 to Hassid Aff., # 25 Exhibit 22 to Hassid Aff., # 26 Exhibit 23 to Hassid Aff., # 27 Exhibit 24 to Hassid Aff., # 28 Exhibit 25 to Hassid Aff., # 29 Exhibit 26 to Hassid Aff., # 30 Exhibit 27 to Hassid Aff., # 31 Exhibit 28 to Hassid Aff., # 32 Exhibit 29 to Hassid Aff., # 33 Exhibit 30 to Hassid Aff., # 34 Exhibit 31 to Hassid Aff., # 35 Exhibit 32 to Hassid Aff.) Associated Cases: 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 1:05-cv-01087-JFM(Johnson, Jeffrey) (Entered: 10/07/2009)

10/08/2009 - 103 - NOTICE by Microsoft Corporation Notice of Service of Lengthy Exhibits Associated Cases: 1:00-md-01332-JFM, 1:05-cv-01087-JFM(Major, Alexander) (Entered: 10/08/2009)

Amazing, no? It will take me days more to finish reading it all. One particularly interesting discovery matter involves the Comes database. Of course, there is much more to it than just the trial exhibits that we got to look at. Microsoft says it can't be the one to look for certain documents in it, since Novell has the whole database and it can look itself for what it wants. Novell says it can't find any evidence of some of Microsoft's claims.

It has to do with whether or not Microsoft made certain APIs available, like IShellBrowser, iShellView, iPersistFolder, and iCommDlgBrowser. Novell says Microsoft decided to make those APIs private and iShellFolder a "read only public interface", making it impossible for Novell to use the namespace extension mechanism or implement it in a customized fashion, so Novell software couldn't rely on or invoke those APIs. The context is Windows 95 and NT, in the years between 1994 and 1996.

Microsoft claims it did publish them or give them to ISVs. Microsoft witnesses talk about b-list API documentation being provided to companies on request. B-list here means APIs that Microsoft didn't promise to support going forward or that might not work. One witness, Robert Muglia, says that it wasn't just on request, that "they were in the SDK; they were talked about at conferences; they were brought up; they were available, period, not just on request; we didn't say they were internal interfaces only; we never told -- we may have told people they might not work in the next version of Windows or in NT, but clearly people were able to use them". But where is there evidence of that, other than people saying so, Novell asks?

The other topics of dispute are about some studies of Microsoft's logo certification that were allegedly done between 1993 and 1996 (an end user study in 1993 and a "May 1996 Marketing Research, Microsoft Internal Study") and about Microsoft's Windows 95 printing subsystem.

In the Paul Maritz deposition, reference is made to an email "from Belfiore to Shulman attaching the documentation" of the namespace extensions. All of this is found in the Appendix [PDF].

Novell, in one interrogatory, had a definition of Namespace APIs:

"NAMESPACE APIs" refer to IShellFolder, IEnumIDList, IShellBrowser, IShellView, IPersistFolder, and ICommDigBrowswer and any other application programming interfaces that enabled application developers to integrate into the Windows 95 and/or Windows NT shell, including "b-list" namespace APIs.
And in interrogatory 21, Novell asked Microsoft to identify all communications between it and any ISVs between October 1994 and July 1996 concerning namespace APIs. Microsoft told Novell to find it itself, but it can't find anything like that. I wonder if any of you have noticed anything like that in your reading of the Comes trial exhibits? They also asked Microsoft about MAPI changes between 3.1 and 95, and about APIs in Windows 95 communicated to ISVs to enable them to implement a custom print processor, to enable background printing. The APIs for that would be GetJob, SetJob, PrintDocumentOnPrintProcessor, AddPrintProcessor, and DeletePrintProcessor.

So if any of you came across anything relevant to any of those topics, this would be a perfect time to say so.

Update: The BoycottNovell folks have found one. We have it here also, on our Comes Exhibits page, Plaintiffs Exhibit 2158, which is an email from Microsoft's Satoshi Nakajima, dated October 10, 1994. It reads like this:

From: Satoshi Nakajima
Sent: Monday, October 10, 1994 10:26 AM
To: Chicago Shell API/Intrfc Chng Notif; Ten Shiele
Cc: SYS Chicago Developers
Subject: shlobj.h delta done; Making IShellBrowswer internal

Who cares: People in To line + out dev partners

What:
Based on the recent decision, we are hiding one of shell extension mechanisms (see below for details). I marked all those interfaces and definitions ";internal" so that we don't put them in the SDK header files any more. Out dev. partners will receive these new headers (shlobj.h and shlguid.h) before M7 release.

Notes:
Capone/Marvel - They may keep building their modules with our old public header files until M7, should use new public header after M7.
Fonts folder - George (M), We need to establish a way to update those private headers that Elsware has.

We won't change the definitions of those interfaces until M7 release so that those name space extensions (Capone and Marvell) run well. We may change those interfaces (or at least their GUID) after M7 to intentionally break those apps (please let me know if you are using those mechanisms internally).

Summary:
No change - remain as public interfaces:
IPropSheetPage, IContextMenu, IShellExtinit, IExtractIcon
IFileViewer, IFileViewerSite
IShellCopyHook, IShellLink
Became read-only public interface (read-only means no customized
implementation):
IShellFolder, IEnumIDList
Became private (i.e., name space extension mechanism):
IShellBrowser, IShellView, IPersistFolder, ICommDlgBrowser
No change - has been private:
IShellicon, IShellDetails, IDelayedRelease

Thanks,
-Satoshi

Is that not harmonious with what Novell is charging?

Keep in mind that Groklaw's grouch has a more complete folder of the Comes exhibits than we do here, and they came from the Comes plaintiffs then-website, www.iowaconsumercase.org, and nowhere else. An anonymous comment also mentions 4293 [PDF] ("the way to shut out novell in the base is to either ship a full client or make it so there is no network connectivity" and 5673 [PDF] (Gates, October 3, 1994: "It is time for a decision on IShellBrowser....I have decided that we should not publish these extensions. We should wait until we have a way to do a high level of integration that will be harder for likes of Notes, Wordperfect to achieve, and which will give Office a real advantage....Our goal is to have Office '96 sell better because of the shell integration work..." To which Brad Silverberg wrote: "I will jump in -- yes we have to take them out of marvel and capone too.").


  


Novell and Microsoft both file summary judgment motions in the WordPerfect antitrust case - Updated | 213 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
OT - Off Topic thread starts here
Authored by: Totosplatz on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 02:26 AM EST
Please make links clicky!

---
Greetings from Zhuhai, Guangdong, China; or Portland, Oregon, USA (location
varies).

All the best to one and all.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections thread
Authored by: Totosplatz on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 02:28 AM EST
If any. Subject line should hint at the correction, if possible.

---
Greetings from Zhuhai, Guangdong, China; or Portland, Oregon, USA (location
varies).

All the best to one and all.

[ Reply to This | # ]

News Picks thread
Authored by: Totosplatz on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 02:32 AM EST
Name of article in subject is possible...

---
Greetings from Zhuhai, Guangdong, China; or Portland, Oregon, USA (location
varies).

All the best to one and all.

[ Reply to This | # ]

IShellFolder etc
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 07:21 AM EST

Some of these APIs are documented by Microsoft here.

[ Reply to This | # ]

missing Comes documents
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 07:33 AM EST
based on the recent decision, we are hiding one of the shell extension mechanisms (see below for details). I marked all those interfaces and definitions ";internal" so we don;t out them in the SDK header files anymore. Our dev. partners will recieve these new headers (shlobj.h and shlguid.h) before M7 release.

Notes:

Capone/Marvel - They may keep building their modules with our old public header files until M7, should use new public header after M7. Fonts folder -- George(M). We need to establish a way to update those private headers that Elsware has.

We won't change the definitions of those interfaces until M7 release so that those name space extensions (Capone and Marvel) run well. We may change those interfaces (or at least their UID) after M7 to intentionally break those apps (please let me know if you are using those mechanism internally).

--

"I have decided that we should no t publish these extensions. We should wait until we have a way to do a high level of integration that will be harder for likes of Notes, Wordperfect to achieve, and which will give Office a real advantage"

"if we are too rude in base then oems may either stick with win3.1/msdos or defect to os/2. the way to shut out novell in the base is to either ship a full client or make it so there is no network connectivity"

[ Reply to This | # ]

exhibit 10
Authored by: grouch on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 11:24 AM EST
Exhibit 10 is a long PDF, but even so, it doesn't include the whole Q & A (it's selected excerpts). It would be great if Novell could and would provide the video of the whole deposition. Doesn't even have to be an open format; lots of us have had to deal with conversions before. ]:]

It sets the tone early in the exhibit:

Q Did you have any involvement in the decision to tell the WordPerfect developers that Microsoft had decided to document the shell extensions?

Mr. Holley: Objection: Asked and answered. I think we're on Round 6.

Mr. Johnson: Just trying to get an answer to the question.

Mr. Holley: I think you've gotten one.

Mr. Johnson: No, I haven't. I've gotten a bunch of stuff about what happens in the future.

I'm sure we could all appreciate the dance better if we could see and hear it as it took place.

---
-- grouch

GNU/Linux obeys you.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Leopard changig spots - Novell and Microsoft both file summary judgment motions in the Wor...
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 01:50 PM EST
"We may change those interfaces (or at least their GUID) after M7 to
intentionally break those apps..."

Can we trust the leopard to change it's spots?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Novell and Microsoft both file summary judgment motions in the WordPerfect antitrust case - Updated
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 09:26 PM EST

This story is odd and improbable, but I got a chuckle out of it. The source is:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-windows-7-linux-ubuntu,90 08.html

Ex-MSFT Employee: Microsoft Should Run Linux

8:50 PM - November 5, 2009 by Marcus Yam

Could you imagine a Microsoft Linux?

Should Microsoft just give up the whole Windows business and switch over to a Linux codebase? A former Microsoft Research employee thinks so.

Keith Curtis believes that not even the well-received Windows 7 will stop Linux from market domination. And in keeping with the "if you can't beat 'em, then join 'em" attitude, Curtis thinks that Microsoft and its customers would be better off if the company ditched Windows and made its own version of Linux.

Microsoft Linux? Strange indeed.

"I think we could all be running Microsoft Linux. I sent an e-mail to Steve Ballmer about this and he said he wasn't interested," he quipped in a NetworkWorld story. "Microsoft could very easily dominate the Linux market if they wanted to. I don't think they should release all their source code ... nobody would use it."

"I just look at their code bases and the world doesn't need any of their code bases," Curtis added. "From the day I started using Linux, I no longer used one line of Microsoft code -- it's been four years now."

Stranger things have happened in the world of the computing industry, but Microsoft abandoning Windows seems like an impossibility. Curtis points out that it wouldn't be a costly venture for Microsoft to dabble in, as Ubuntu was started with about $10 million just pocket change for Microsoft.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The BoycottNovell folks -- helping Novell??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 05 2009 @ 10:55 PM EST
It sure sounds to me like The BoycottNovell folks are helping Novell (see the
(1st) Update); but, this sounds contradictory to me -- unless they dislike M$
even more!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )