Summary: Company that challenges GNU/Linux-powered mainframes using lawsuits is greatly connected to Microsoft

IN CHRONOLOGICAL order, previous posts that talked about T3's action against GNU/Linux on IBM mainframes are:

• Has Microsoft Just Invested in Another Lawsuit Against IBM?
• Microsoft Pays Professor to Write a Paper Against IBM's GNU/Linux-Powered Mainframes
• Microsoft Innovation is Lawsuits by Proxy
• T3 Receives Millions from “Unnamed Entity” After Microsoft Investment, to Attack GNU/Linux on Mainframes
• What People Say About Microsoft's Alleged Anti-Linux Lawsuit (via T3)
• The Microsoft Lobby and Heavy Investments Put IBM in Antitrust Probe

Groklaw has found the following little gem (highlighted in red) in a new IDG report: "T3, partly owned by Microsoft, had accused IBM of yanking its IBM reseller agreement when T3 refused to stop selling technology that allowed customers to end older versions of IBM's mainframe operating systems on Intel-based servers. The T3 dispute with IBM is part of CCIA's complaint filed with the DOJ, as well as part of an antitrust investigation against IBM launched by the European Union in mid-2008."

“Back in 2004, Black received millions in Microsoft money personally...”
      --Pamela JonesTo the above, adds Groklaw: "CCIA and Ed Black, you'll recall from the EU Commission antitrust case against Microsoft. Back in 2004, Black received millions in Microsoft money personally, half of the settlement, it was reported, when the CCIA settled its complaint against Microsoft, leaving the SAMBA guys standing alone as complainants, though they ultimately prevailed. So now a company partly owned by Microsoft raises antitrust allegations against IBM and Black supports the partly-Microsoft-owned company. It might all be legitimate and completely coincidental. Who knows? But Microsoft says it will be putting its efforts into making sure everyone plays by the same antitrust rules, and I have begun to see more activity in the antitrust complaint department against Microsoft competitors."

How fascinating. Groklaw has also pointed at this Bilski post from Patently-O, adding: "Guess whose brief agrees with Lee Hollaar's? Yes. Microsoft's. Surprised?"

Hollaar is no stranger to the SCO case, either. Groklaw wrote about him recently and we saw him involved even in 2008. It's a small world after all. ⬆