October 28, 2002, 12:00 AM — A trade group made up of Microsoft Corp. competitors has again sent a
letter to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) claiming that the
software maker is not living up to its end of a proposed settlement deal
in its long-running antitrust bout.
This time, ProComp, or the Project to Promote Competition and Innovation
in the Digital Age, claims that Microsoft has fallen short of meeting a
requirement to make available core software code that will allow
competitors to tune their software to work well with Windows.
Microsoft reached an agreement almost one year ago with the DOJ and
later with nine state attorneys general who were also plaintiffs in the
antitrust suit. A federal judge is expected to make a decision on the
settlement deal any day now. However, Microsoft has already begun
implementing some of the required changes.
For one, the Redmond, Washington, software maker agreed to license
certain communication protocols that would allow competing developers to
build desktop and server software that enjoy the same hooks into Windows
as products developed by Microsoft.
"It is our strong conclusion that the information disclosure regime
imposed by Microsoft has been a failure to date," ProComp wrote in a
letter addressed to Charles James, the assistant attorney general for
antitrust with the DOJ.
ProComp, which is backed by Sun Microsystems Inc. and Oracle Corp.,
takes issue with the licensing terms to which developers must agree in
order to view the technical information. Microsoft requires licensees to
pay fees and sign strict nondisclosure agreements (NDA) before they can
even view the protocols.
ProComp argued in its letter that such terms are onerous and prevent
companies from evaluating the effectiveness of the protocols. They also
argue that because even the licensing terms are kept secret, the
"reasonableness" of those terms cannot be evaluated.
"They must be licensed on terms that make it practical for others to
license and redistribute the technology," the letter stated.
Microsoft's legal spokesman Jim Desler denied the allegations. "Anybody
who is interested in or serious about licensing the communication
protocols can go through this very straightforward process," he said.
"And a number have."
He noted that the communication protocols are valuable intellectual
property and represent years of research and development for the
company. To that end, Desler argued that the licensing procedures are
adequate and follow industry standard practices.
Linux vendor Red Hat Inc. also has taken issue with the disclosure
policies, although it isn't represented in ProComp's complaint,
according to Mark Webbink, senior vice president and general counsel for
the Raleigh, North Carolina, software maker.