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.


To read comments to this article, go here
Microsoft Litigation Resource Page
Friday, January 07 2005 @ 04:06 AM EST

It seems like a good idea to collect all the information we can find on litigation involving Microsoft, anticompetitive practices, and antitrust allegations and violations. In part, we were inspired to do this by the Novell v. Microsoft lawsuit, an anti-trust case seeking money damages filed in U.S. Federal District Court on November, 2004 alleging anti-trust violations by Microsoft in regard to the WordPerfect word processing and Quattro Pro spreadsheet programs. But the SenderID fracas and the issues over Microsoft's license terms, as well as recent hints from Microsoft about patent threats to GNU/Linux were also motivating factors. The shredding of legal documents in the Caldera, Inc. v. Microsoft case was another influence. All in all, it seemed the right time for a permanent collection.

Because we are aware of a tension between patents and antitrust law, we hope a database of evidence (and leads to evidence) showing a long history of anti-competitive acts by Microsoft will serve as a valuable resource: (i) for any F/OSS developers who are later charged by Microsoft with patent infringement; (ii) for developers who may wish to sue Microsoft for refusal to license patented technology on reasonable terms; and (iii) by its existence and availability, creating a deterrent that will hopefully cause Microsoft decision-makers to think long and hard before mounting an intellectual property attack against the F/OSS community's code base or trying to establish a patent licensing policy to embrace and extend interoperability standards with proprietary rights to cripple F/OSS competition with Microsoft.

We've been working on this for a couple of weeks in-house. Now we feel we have enough of a framework to open it to the public, although we are aware it is not yet complete. If you know of any links we've overlooked, please do provide them in your comments, and we'll incorporate them. Then we'll make this a permanent resource page on Groklaw.

***********************************

Microsoft Litigation

  • Legal research
  • Miscellaneous
  • Topics

  •   View Printable Version


    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 )