Court Order on Microsoft
Published: March 3, 1995SAN JOSE, Calif., March 2— A Federal judge issued a temporary restraining order today halting the Microsoft Corporation's distribution of certain files in its Video for Windows developer kits, Apple Computer Inc. said.
The order was granted in response to a request by Apple in its copyright infringement lawsuit against Microsoft, the Intel Corporation and the San Francisco Canyon Company.
...
Here's something that came from the anti-trust suit against Microsoft, which brought some information to light that was not known by the public, as to what had been going on with Apple and Microsoft and that Microsoft was worried about the situation in regards to the stolen code and the position that Microsoft would be in and Microsoft's potential liability...
Paul Maritz' testimony does give some useful information not previously disclosed about Microsoft's relationship with Apple, and in particular more details about litigation issues. It turns out that Microsoft's use of Apple code in Microsoft Video for Windows did indeed violate Apple's intellectual property rights, and that the case was settled out of court. Although Microsoft officially denies any liability -- and, for once, its hands were clean because its chum Intel passed Microsoft the duplicated code -- the legal wording used is a well-known shorthand for Microsoft having paid Apple a sufficient sum of money for it to be allowed to proclaim its innocence. The Apple claim for $1.255 billion evidently caused Microsoft a great deal of anguish, and there must have been good reason for this. Apple says that 24 of its patents were infringed, and possibly 12 more. Apple lost the intellectual property case it launched in 1988 after the Supreme Court said in 1995 that it would not hear the appeal. Microsoft crows that it received attorney's fees. Apple was unaware at the time of some key evidence that might well have changed the result of this case: it shows that Microsoft did copy the Apple GUI, since a mistake in the Apple GUI was copied into Windows and still exists. There is also a witness to Microsoft having received the source code listing from Apple, but he was never deposed. Microsoft's particular concern was that if Apple went to the wall, as it was close to doing in 1996/97, it might fight a mighty patent battle and win. Maritz' testimony says in its defence that "patent liability can be found even when the product in question was developed wholly independently" but that is unconvincing. A side issue is that a so-called "patent terrorism" fight, as Maritz described it, doesn't put Microsoft in a strong position, because the opponent isn't going to be a customer.
...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/02/01/maritz_on_apple/