Micrografx

From Techrights

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Current revision (11:46, 27 July 2009) (view source)
 
(8 intermediate revisions not shown.)
Line 1: Line 1:
-
 
+
[[Category:Comes v Microsoft]]
-
== lying "garbage from" Micrografx (1989) ==
+
[[Category:Antitrust]]
 +
[[Category:Microsoft]]
 +
[[Category:Micrografx]]
 +
This index deals with [[Comes vs Microsoft]] court exhibits which offer a glance at the history of Microsoft abuse. For a concise summary of some of the exhibits, see "[[Petition text - overview]]".
-
 
+
* [[Lying "garbage from" Micrografx (1989)]] (Exhibits px00062 and px00050)
-
 
+
* [[Micrografx a shoe-in (1989)]] (Exhibit px00062)
-
From: billg Tue Feb 21 17:09:01 1989
+
* [[Bill Gates to Micrografx: get reasonable]] (Exhibit px00062)
-
To: mikemap
+
-
Subject: Re: Mirrors
+
-
 
+
-
..
+
-
 
+
-
These guys told me explicitly they were not trying to make money on this
+
-
product and they did it for their own use at first and were pleased
+
-
others might want to use it. Their price is $10k. Agreeing to pay them
+
-
$100k to get total source rights and all updates is a fantastic deal for
+
-
them. I want to call and tell them they are liars and we would have to
+
-
create this ourselves if they don't get reasonable. They explicitly said
+
-
we could have source. They will get a great deal if they take updates
+
-
from us.
+
-
 
+
-
I don't want there to be any restrictions on us after a year because we
+
-
may incorporate some compatibility stuff into windows or PM and although
+
-
we don't plan to use their code, I don't want any garbage from them.
+
-
windows or PM after a year we pay a small sum. They should want us to
+
-
make windows and PM closer. This is all crazy. We need to get moving and
+
-
that means closing a deal fast. I thought these guys bragged about quick
+
-
decision making. GO ahead and work on them so more and keep me posted ..
+
-
 
+
-
http://iowa.gotthefacts.org/011607/0000/PX00062.pdf
+
-
 
+
-
Micrografx will license to Microsoft for the purpose of internally
+
-
using, modifying and developing derivative products from the Mirrors
+
-
Source Code:
+
-
 
+
-
..
+
-
 
+
-
Microsoft agrees to:
+
-
 
+
-
a) Pay Micrografx a total of $175,000 for the recipient of the Mirrors
+
-
Source Code
+
-
 
+
-
b) Pay Micrografx a license fee of $2.00 per Windows Developer Toolkit
+
-
sold between July, 1990 and June 30, 1991.
+
-
 
+
-
c) Limit the use of the Source Code to develop derivative products to be
+
-
use in support of Microsoft applications ..
+
-
 
+
-
http://iowa.gotthefacts.org/011607/0000/PX00050.pdf
+
-
 
+
-
== Micrografx a shoe-in (1989) ==
+
-
 
+
-
From: billg Tue Feb 21 19:55:09 1989
+
-
To: mikemap
+
-
Subject: Micrografx
+
-
Cc: steve
+
-
Date: Tue Feb 21 19:55:09 1989
+
-
Mail-Flags: 000
+
-
 
+
-
Steve talked to grayson at the conference. They said they are willing to make it 10k for the big companies and 1k for companies with less than 3M or 2M in sales Based on this us getting full use for you including source code and rights to incorporate whereever at no extra charge after that seems like a shoe-in. Talk to steveb about this. I am excited about us making this happen.
+
-
 
+
-
http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/0000/PX00062.pdf
+

Current revision

This index deals with Comes vs Microsoft court exhibits which offer a glance at the history of Microsoft abuse. For a concise summary of some of the exhibits, see "Petition text - overview".

Personal tools
Search entire domain
Stories