EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

01.08.09

Microsoft Vice President Teaches PR People How to Spin Anti-Linux Programme

Posted in Antitrust, GNU/Linux, Microsoft, OpenOffice, Windows at 2:20 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Storage technology
Core spin: we’re not dumping, we Offer® Value™

LESS THAN A WEEK ago we unleashed the full text on EDGI (further discussion here and here) which exposes Microsoft’s way of dealing with Free software and GNU/Linux adoption. This merited at least one article in the Indian press which explained what EDGI was.

We decided that it would be constructive to continue sharing information about EDGI; in particular, we are interested in what it looks like from inside Microsoft. This will be — in some way or another — the second part of a series.

In today’s post we have Comes vs Microsoft exhibit px09687 [PDF]. We append the full text at the bottom.

Kevin Johnson, a group vice president at the time (he recently quit), wrote:

Several press reports have characterized these programs as designed solely as an attack on Linux and potentially damaging to our settlement discussions with the European Commission.

To those who believe that Microsoft is paid a lot of money for its software, it’s important to remember that usage does not equate to revenue. As the message from Microsoft puts it:

Software piracy rates run as high as over 90 percent in many developing countries.

The rest can be read below. The emphasis in the recipients side is PR films (i.e. “spinners”), who we already know are rubbing shoulders with journalists whose coverage they police. So much for freedom of speech; there is threat to those who say certain truths, as Dan Geer found out [1, 2, 3]. Neelie Kroes too comes under fire from Microsoft spinners for attempting to restore justice. She did complain about a smear complain — much like those which Peter Quinn can attest to.


Appendix: Comes vs. Microsoft – exhibit px09687, as text


From: Rodrigo Costa
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 1:32 PM
To: Rodrigo Direct Reports Only
Subject: FW: Messaging on the Government and Education Incentive Funds
Attachments: Messaging on the Government and Education Incentive Funds.doc

This is important information
rodrigo


From: Kevin Johnson
Sent: Monday, .June 02, 2003 1:26 PM
To: GMs of Subsidiaries; Worldwide PR leads – Internal; Subsidiary PR Managers; SMSG Leadership Team
Cc: Mark Hill; Jim Desler; Beth Jordan; Erin Brewer; Carlene Chmaj; Stacy Drake McCredy; Dean Katz; Tom Pilla; Larry Cohen; Sandi Baldock

Many of you have likely seen the recent coverage in the International Herald Tribune and the New York Times questioning the validity of the Government and Education incentive program that we have created. I want to assure you that these programs, which were specifically designed with customer benefit in mind, deliver a compelling value proposition in a legal and pro competitive way. The intent of these programs is to provide access to technology for schools and governments in developing countries that otherwise could not afford it. There is nothing wrong with a program that addresses technology access issues while competing fairly with our competitors. We are proud of this program – as ultimately we’re talking about offering a better value proposition to these specific customers and doing it in a responsible and lawful way.

Several press reports have characterized these programs as designed solely as an attack on Linux and potentially damaging to our settlement discussions with the European Commission. I wanted to make sure you had the background on this issue and some talking points if you are asked about this by customers. Attached is a document with the messaging and additional background information. Please refer further press inquiries to Corporate PR. Please let us know if you have any questions.

Regards,
Kevin

Kevin Johnson
Group Vice President
Microsoft WW Sales, Marketing and Services

kevin@microsoft.com
425-705-8081

MS-CC-RN 000001145823

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL


Messaging:

- The International Herald Tribune article from earlier this month — For Microsoft, Market Dominance Doesn’t Seen Enough, May 15 – is based largely upon two emails sent within Microsoft. The article does not accurately portray Microsoft’s efforts to address the needs of resource-strapped governments and educational institutions.

- Governments around the world, but particularly in developing countries, have called upon Microsoft to help make computer technology more affordable in settings where budgets for technology access are limited. As an industry leader, Microsoft accepts the responsibility to help enable broad access to technology in governments and schools. We have also seen that absent such assistance governments and schools that may prefer Microsoft software might settle upon free or very low-cost software solutions that are typically billed as “good enough.” In other cases such potential customers may simply use Microsoft software without paying for it. Software piracy rates run as high as over 90 percent in many developing countries.

- Microsoft has set aside a relatively modest fund to assist governments and schools that want to benefit from lawful licenses to Microsoft software. The funds may be used to help defray the cost of purchasing new Windows-based PCs, for training or other services provided by Microsoft or third parties, for curriculum content or in other ways. In every case, the funds provided by Microsoft are less than the royalties Microsoft will receive for use of its products.

- The article selectively and unfairly excerpted a Microsoft email as stating “under NO circumstances lose against Linux.” What the email actually said was “under NO circumstances
lose against Linux before ensuring we have used this program actively and in a smart way.” We of course recognize that customers will choose Linux and other free or low-cost products in many cases. We want to be sure, however, that qualified customers are presented with opportunities to acquire Microsoft software that are tailored to their needs and limited budgets.

- Our legal team has reviewed the program carefully. We are confident it complies fully with European and other competition law. In fact, this program addresses important issues of access to technology, and delivers a compelling value proposition to customers in a legal and pro competitive manner.

Additional Background:
- The program highlighted in the piece was developed last year for the education and government sectors and principally designed for developing countries. Understanding our role as an industry leader and the importance of complying fully with all laws and regulations, our lawyers carefully reviewed this program to account for the competitive sensitivities and global scope. This program is pro-competitive and beneficial to consumers.

- We recognize that the European Union competition principles may limit a company with a successful market position from dropping its price to meet competition if the objective of this practice were to “exclude competition.” from the market. With only one deal in the European Union – with benefits granted to educational purchasers in the context of a

MS-CC-RN 000001145824
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL


government-sponsored IT program — we have conducted this program in a way that could not be construed at all as exclusionary. [Note: any questions that go to the detail of the legality of the program under applicable competition law should be referred to LCA.]

- The IHT article further characterizes the use of discretionary funding for special customer situations as somehow anticompetitive. BIF simply enables the use of consulting services from Microsoft Consulting Services and from our business partners for pre and post-sale activities for our enterprise customers. This is a common industry practice because enterprise customers often benefit from highly skilled consultants in evaluating and deploying software systems for large organizations. This program complies fully with applicable regulations.

- The article includes reports of Microsoft employees allegedly misrepresenting their affiliations while attending industry trade shows. Simply put, such behaviour violates our company policy; we are looking into the reports and will take appropriate action. We recognize and accept that, as an industry leader, we are held to high standards of ethical business conduct.

- We understand that our activities and programs will be heavily scrutinized and are open to reviewing issues with government officials and representatives. In fact we have already sent information to the European Commission to respond to any questions they may have based on this article.

MS-CC-RN 000001145825
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL


Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

6 Comments

  1. Doug said,

    January 8, 2009 at 3:01 pm

    Gravatar

    “- The article selectively and unfairly excerpted a Microsoft email as stating ”

    “under NO circumstances lose against Linux” is underlined and in bold .. :)

    http://iowa.gotthefacts.org/011607/9000/PX09685.pdf

  2. Andre said,

    January 8, 2009 at 4:23 pm

    Gravatar

    What is wrong about this. It only demonstrates the professionality of their communications and the coordination in public affairs. Memos like these are also great means of training.

    What surprises me is the attention to such a stupid IHT articles as we find hundreds of these in our feed readers. Probably this is because of the EU context.

  3. Roy Schestowitz said,

    January 8, 2009 at 4:36 pm

    Gravatar

    Doug,

    The lines below and the bold faces indicate that it’s just a minor detail.

  4. Roy Schestowitz said,

    January 8, 2009 at 4:43 pm

    Gravatar

    For the record, here is the IHT article:

    BRUSSELS: More than 90 percent of the world’s personal computers run on Microsoft software. For Orlando Ayala, that was not enough.

    Last summer, Ayala, then the top sales executive at Microsoft Corp., sent an e-mail message titled “Microsoft Confidential” to senior managers laying out a strategy to dissuade governments around the world from choosing cheaper alternatives to the ubiquitous Windows operating system.

    Ayala’s e-mail told executives that if a deal involving governments or large institutions looked doomed, they were authorized to draw from a special internal fund to offer the software at a steep discount or even free if necessary. Steve Ballmer, the Microsoft chief executive, was sent a copy of the e-mail message.

    The memorandum, which focused on system software for desktop computers, specifically targeted Linux, a small but emerging competitor. “Under NO circumstances lose against Linux,” Ayala said.

    [...]

    “Linux is obviously a key competitor,” Courtois said. Rivals use similar tactics.

    Sun Microsystems Inc., for example, “is giving away StarOffice to basically governments and schools,” he said. The suite of programs runs on Windows and Linux systems.

  5. Jose_X said,

    January 8, 2009 at 5:35 pm

    Gravatar

    >> BIF simply enables the use of consulting services from Microsoft Consulting Services and from our business partners for pre and post-sale activities for our enterprise customers. This is a common industry practice….

    Not for legal monopolists!

    Microsoft still doesn’t get that monopolists must play by different rules. [Well, they get it.. they just don't accept it.]

    That’s the law, and it exists for a reason.

    They continue to point to what Charlie and Mr. Smith are doing.

    Charlie and Mr. Smith do not have the levers Microsoft has.

  6. Microsoft Consultant said,

    January 16, 2009 at 6:25 pm

    Gravatar

    This is a rather interesting blog and some of the criticisms being leveled are quite contentious. If they are true, action should be taken – but at this point everything is pure conjecture. We need facts before acting rashly.

What Else is New


  1. They Tell Us Linus Torvalds is Sexist But Evidence Suggests Otherwise

    Torvalds and others who are middle-aged (or older) males are often torpedoed using weakly-backed allegations (or insinuations/innuendo) of sexism; that does not seem to matter and won't matter when they treat men the same (or worse)



  2. Sometimes Sounding 'Rude' Can Be Necessary

    We need to quit accepting this corporate-led ideology that says you cannot 'offend' people whose work is of offending quality (an offense against technical standards)



  3. Status Update: DDoS, Traffic, Interns

    Times are difficult for liberty/freedom; but we're trying to stay on top of it all in spite of attempts to derail us



  4. GNU/Linux Still Not Controlled Purely by Large Corporations

    Linus Torvalds was not fully canceled; nor was Richard Stallman, who's still heading the GNU Project (under conditions specified by those looking to oust him; people who code for Microsoft GitHub and many IBM employees)



  5. The Need for Purely Independent Media

    The media crisis, which has deepened greatly as more journalists are laid off amid pandemic, means that the PR/B2B industry takes over what's left of news sites; we need to counter this worrying trend



  6. Links 7/6/2020: Sparky 2020.06, Wine Staging 5.10, Vulkan SDK 1.2.141

    Links for the day



  7. GNU is Open Source

    "The GNU Project is no longer ethical. RMS may care, but he's outnumbered enough by liars and traitors."



  8. Chairman of the Board of Red Hat Explains He Was Introduced to GNU/Linux When It Helped His Regime Change in Haiti

    General Hugh Shelton, Chairman of the Board of Red Hat, explains (keynote in 2011 Red Hat Summit/JBoss World) that he was introduced to the system as part of a military campaign; it basically helped war, not antiwar



  9. The Faces of 'The Cloud' (Surveillance in Clown Computing/Clothing)

    Consolidation of the world's computers/servers and the stories told by photo ops; we're particularly interested in IBM's relationship with Condé Nast, which owns The New Yorker and Wired



  10. Microsoft is Now in the Technical Advisory Board of the Linux Foundation

    Techrights politely takes note of the growing role (or roles) of Microsoft employees inside the Linux Foundation; there are now at least half a dozen people



  11. Two Things IBM and Microsoft Have in Common: Layoffs and Fake Hype Like 'Clown Computing' and 'Hey Hi' (AI) as Perceived 'Opportunity' for 'Growth'

    The infamous pair of monopolists, Microsoft and IBM, are both suffering during the COVID-19 lock-downs (no matter how hard they try to spin it and/or distract from it)



  12. IBM (Red Hat) Lectured FSF That It Needed More Diversity, But Was It Looking at the Mirror? IBM and Red Hat Are Even Less Diverse.

    Techrights examines Red Hat’s (IBM’s) hypocritical claims about the Free Software Foundation, founded by Richard Stallman back when IBM was the “big scary monopolist”; IBM employees were prominent among those pushing to oust Stallman from the GNU Project, which he founded, as well



  13. IRC Proceedings: Friday, June 05, 2020

    IRC logs for Friday, June 05, 2020



  14. Guix Petition Demographic Data, by Figosdev

    That old anti-RMS letter, which called for his removal (or resignation) from GNU (RMS is the founder of the GNU Project), as characterised by metadata of signatories



  15. When You Realise People Who Don't Support RMS Do Not Really Support GNU, Either

    The (in)famous letter against Richard Stallman (RMS), which was signed by many Red Hat employees with Microsoft (GitHub) accounts, doesn’t look particularly good in light of recent revelations/findings; it increasingly looks like IBM simply wants Microsoft-hosted and “permissively” licensed stuff, just like another project it announced yesterday and another that it promoted yesterday



  16. The Gates Press (GatesGate) -- Part III: What Happens When You Tell the Truth About Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation

    One might not expect this from a so-called 'charity'; the Gates Foundation's critics are often met with unprecedented aggression, threats and retribution, which make one wonder if it's really a charity or a greedy cult of personalities (Bill and Melinda)



  17. Links 6/6/2020: Bifrost Meets GNOME, Wine 5.10 is Out

    Links for the day



  18. Links 5/6/2020: LibreELEC (Leia) 9.2.3, Rust 1.44.0, and Hamburg's Pivot to Free/Libre Software

    Links for the day



  19. This Article About GitHub Takeover Never Appeared (Likely Spiked by Microsoft and Its Friends Inside the Media)

    And later they wonder why people distrust so much of the media (where paying advertisers set the agenda/tone)



  20. Raw: How Microsoft and/or the EPO Killed an Important EPO Story About Their SLAPP Against Techrights and Others

    Spiking a story about spiked stories about corruption



  21. The Linux Foundation 'Bootcamp' -- Badly Timed and Badly Named in June 2020 -- Only Uses Linus Torvalds Like a 'Prop' (for Legitimacy) While Promoting Militarised Monopolies

    Sometimes a picture says a lot more than words, especially in light of political events in the US and a certain Chinese anniversary we cannot name (Microsoft censors mentions of it)



  22. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, June 04, 2020

    IRC logs for Thursday, June 04, 2020



  23. The Gates Press (GatesGate) -- Part II: When Media That You Bribe Calls All Your Critics 'Conspiracy Theorists' (to Keep Them Silenced, Marginalised)

    The assault on the media by Bill Gates is a subject not often explored by the media (maybe because a lot of it is already bribed by him); but we're beginning to gather new and important evidence that explains how critics are muzzled (even fired) and critical pieces spiked, never to see the light of day anywhere



  24. GitHub is Not Sharing But 'Theft' by Microsoft

    Microsoft buying GitHub does not demonstrate that Microsoft loves Open Source (GitHub is not Open Source and may never be) but that it loves monopoly and coercion (what GitHub is all about and why it must be rejected)



  25. The Huge Damage (Except for Patent Lawyers' Bottom Line) Caused by Fake European Patents

    The European Patent Office (EPO) keeps granting fake patents that cause a lot of real harm (examiners are pressured to play along and participate in this unlawful agenda); nobody is happy except those who profit from needless, frivolous lawsuits



  26. Red Hat/IBM Got 'Tired' of RMS. Is It Getting 'Tired' of GPL/Copyleft Too?

    After contributing to the cancellation of Richard Stallman (RMS) based on some falsehoods perpetuated in the media we're seeing the sort of thing one might expect from IBM (more so now that it totally controls Fedora and RHEL)



  27. Links 4/6/2020: Proton 5.0-8 Release Candidate, GNU Linux-libre 5.7

    Links for the day



  28. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, June 03, 2020

    IRC logs for Wednesday, June 03, 2020



  29. Social Engineering of Free Software, Based on Corporate Criteria

    What "professional" nowadays means in the context of coding and honest assessment of technical work



  30. Weakening GNU/Linux by Disempowering Its Leaders and Founders, Replacing Them With Microsoft Employees and GNU/Linux-Hostile Moles

    The coup to remove (or remove power from) Stallman and Torvalds, the GNU and Linux founders respectively, is followed by outsourcing of their work to Microsoft’s newly-acquired monopoly (GitHub) and appointment of Microsoft workers or Microsoft-friendly people, shoehorning them into top roles under the disingenuous guise of "professionalism"


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts