Proposal to create a map of our collective evidence of tying, issues of law

[Hans Reiser <reiser@ricochet.net>]

  I wish to ask the members of this list:  do you have specific instances
  of interface tying, or other tying, suitable for putting in the form of
  an affidavit signed by you that could be used in court?
  
  Do you know of others who have legally useful or promising accounts of
  such activity?
  
  I am proposing that we put together a comprehensive digest of the
  evidence against Microsoft, of the legal strategies that seem promising,
  and of the legal arguments that seem relevant.
  
  Here are the legal strategies that I am aware of:
  
      consent decree enforcement
  
      contractual tying
  
      interface tying
  
  The parties suing:
  
      DOJ (consent decree)
  
      State Attorney Generals (investigating but not acting at this time)
  of Connecticut, Texas, California, some others....
      (contractual tying, monopolistic practices)
  
      Reiser (interface tying)
  
  Evidence:
  
      Windows 98 performs both contractual and interface tying (Dan
  Gillmor past articles at www.sjmercury.com)
  
      Testimony of various hardware manufacturers about MS pressure on
  them to dump Netscape (needs a URL)
  
      Visual Studio requires MSIE to install (needs a URL to sjmercury
  discussion group posting)
  
      Font aliasing is sabotaged for Netscape by MS (needs a URL)
  
      Disablement of CompuServe's Internet in a Box  by Win95
  (http://www.around.com/microsoft.html)
  
      Windows boot loaders do not support other operating systems, unlike
  the boot loaders of OS/2 and
      Linux.
  
  Issues:
  
      Does product integration create packaging efficiency sufficient to
  legally justify tying of OS components
      (such as browsers.)?
  
      How do we articulate a dividing line between allowing an OS
  architect to do his work, and allowing tying?
  
  Relevant Web Pages:
      (to be filled in)
  
  My proposal: that we evolve this brief outline into a much more detailed
  strategic map of our legal campaigns, and thereby ensure that evidence
  and strategies found by us separately are added to the arsenal of us
  all.  Are there others who share this interest? If so, then we can make
  a web page, and hopefully learn much and focus our energies in the
  process of evolving it.
  
  Sam Goodhope wrote:
  
  > Hmmm...what do you mean lazy?
  >
  > Special Assistant Attorney General Sam Goodhope
  
    Can you brief us on your evidence of tying collected so far in your
  investigation, and any legal strategy/intention information that you are
  able to release at this time?  That offers the potential of being the
  most definitive and positive settlement of that discussion possible.
  More importantly, it would be useful.
  
  Can other government agents working on these issues provide such
  information as well?
  If so, it would do a lot to persuade everyone that serious investigative
  and legal work was being done, rather than leaving us all alone with our
  fears that our government doesn't truly care about us.
  
  Best Wishes,
  
  Hans