From: Doug Miller
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 12:03 PM
To: Stephanie Wettstein (Waggener Edstrom); Katrina Busch (Waggener
Edstrom); Chuck Humbie; (Waggener Edstrom); Steve Aeschbacher (LCA)
Cc: David Martin (WINMKTG); Adam Sohn; Vivek Varma; Brian Schuster; Dan
Neault; Dan Crouse (LCA); Tom Burt (LCA); Chris Meyers (LCA); Lisa Tanzi
(LCA); Kim Akers (WINDOWS); Tom Philips; Carl Stork; Mike Porter; Bill
Veighte; Brian Valentine; Jim Ewel; Vivek Varma
Subject: FW: OSDL PR Plan - attorney client privileged
attorney client privileged
Stephanie / Kate Chuck, please find attached the PR response plan for
the anticipated OSDL announcement. As discussed in our PR meeting this
morning. David & I have spoken with Maureen O'Gara (based on go ahead
from Branv) and planted the story. She has agreed to not attribute the
story to us. WaggEd actions include reviewing the positioning review the
proposed buddy mail, reviews Q&As, etc.
Privileged Material Redacted .. We expect this to leak today. At the
point we will proactively respond or contact press with our positioning
points.
OSDL PR Response Plan
Situation:
Microsoft expects
1. The public announcement (8:30 am Wed Aug. 30 2000) of the following
structure (referred to as OSDL) that is a consortium between Intel,
Redhat, IBM and HP
* Independent, limited # of employees, non-profit entity.
* Participating companies contribute equipment and money
* Two levels: (i) founders/steering board, big $ contributors, (ii)
general members not steer but contribute technology, benefit from "the
IP protection"
2. OSDL's operations guidelines will be to develop a set of
infrastructure for open source development projects, claim that target
is very high end space competing against UE10000.
3. OSDL to provide:
* IP buffer for the Open Source community - @solving the IP problem of
the GPL@ - to get around GPL issues@.
* Linux primary beneficiary, other OSS projects could benefit.
4. OSDL's possible goals include:
* IP buffer. Ship GPL code unchanged without donating via GPL patents in
that code.
* Chip demand increase
* Converged Linux/GPL code base (required to make available to community)
* "Planned" releases, coordination, obvious OSS inertia and royalty
savings c.f. Windows
* Undifferentiated "subsidy" foundation for their "expensive"
proprietary, add-on products
* "Industry standard" APIs for add-on products (i) mitigating risk of
drawing of value-add products into the GPL, (ii) direct focus of OSS
energy towards slowing how much code flows into the GPL to preserve
opportunity for expensive add-on products.
Objectives:
Reduced potential negative PR to Microsoft, reinforce our message that
we are here now with customer solutions and question the customer value
of this announcement.
Actions:
Positioning:
1. The drive to build the Next Generation Internet is happening now.
* Microsoft always welcomes fair competition, as in the end this
benefits customers.
* Microsoft is in the best position today, to go after this business
and solve real customer business problems
* Microsoft focuses on customer solutions, rather than "fashion"
technologies
* We have good relationships with Intel, IBM, HP and others who are
having great success solving business customer needs today with Windows
2000.
2. Bad news for Sun & GPL
3. Old UNIX guard attempting to hijack Linux to go after Sun
* This will drive a wedge between the original Linux champions who are
for "free" software and the established commercial UNIX "old guard"
further confusing customers
* Old UNIX guard want to adopt the UNIX business model where they
provide proprietary differentiation on top of a common base as they
realize they can't add any competitive differentiation under the GPL.
* Appears to be business as usual for the fragmented UNIX market and
very reminiscent of previous UNIX alliances.
4. These types of alliances ultimately do not benefit customers and have
historically been prone to failure (OSF all over again for example)
* Customers want solutions today and clearly it will take a long time
for this new group to produce viable production quality, customer-ready
solutions.
* Linux Torvalds, the creator of Linux, himself recently said Linux was
5 - 10 years behind Windows.
* Linux and Open Source are supposed to be all about "free" technology
and no one group having competitive advantage. This new alliance seems
to go against these principles.
* What about HP-UX, IBM AIX and the IA-64 Monterey project? Are these
dead? HP and IBM have said in the past that those platforms are what
they are using to target the high-end UNIX segment.
Tactics:
* Confirm Compaq and Dell are not part of this announcement and are
informed of Microsoft's position. Owner: Compaq - Jime, Dell adamso
* Inform Maureen O' Gara (Senior Editor Client Server News / LinuxGram)
or John Markoff (NYT) of announcement on Aug 28, 2000. Owner dougmil
(Approval received from BrianV to proceed)
* Contact Eric Raymond, Tim O'Reilly or Bruce Perrins to solicit support
for this going against the objectives of the Open Source movement.
Owner: dougmil [Doug Miller]. Note that I will not be doing this.
Maureen O' Gara said she was going to call them so it looks better
coming from her.
* Issue "buddy mail" to target press list at the time of the
announcement and begin to proactively call-down to editors immediately
after announcement made. Owner: davidmar
* Contact analysts (Summit Strategies or Creative Strategies) for their
assessment of implications. Owner: davidmar
Publication call-down:
potential press list only - confirmation required by Waggener Edstrom
Rude Q&A:
Q. So what does Microsoft think of this announcement?
A. Microsoft welcomes healthy competition but we don't see how this will
benefit customers. Groups like these typically take years to get their
act together - for example OSF, the Open Group, iABI, the ACE
initiative, the UNIX SVR4 "Destiny" project, etc. Microsoft has
solutions for customers today.
Q. What does this say about your OEM relationship?
A. Microsoft has a healthy relationship with IBM, HP, Intel and have
they substantial successful businesses based around Windows solutions.
I'm sure their commitment to Microsoft technologies will not be affected
by this announcement.
Q. Is Microsoft developing a version of Office for Linux?
A. No, we have not seen volume demand for this in the commercial
marketplace.
Q.There seems to be a momentum behind Linux based research from IDC and
Netcraft
A. Netcraft recently revised their methodology to more accurately
describe sites actually used by customers. Windows and Linux have
approximately the same number of active sites however the big news is
Microsoft technology is running half of the servers that power the
Internet. Many of these servers are predominately deployed within
Fortune 500 and other major businesses around the world. IDC's recent
research highlights the number of copies of Linux distributed - however
given that Linux is free, this by no mean represents real-world usage of
Linux as a production operating system.
Q. Does Microsoft have plans to open source any of it's products?
A. Microsoft have a number of source programs today for customers and
developers. We are continually listening to feedback from customers on
how best to help them provide great solutions on Windows platforms.
Questions for the press to ask OSDL:
Q. What about other UNIX offerings (AIX, HP?UX, Monterey) from the
participants?
Q. How does play versus all the other announced initiatives (LSB, GNOME
Foundation, Trillian, etc...)
Q. This sounds like a closed club - we thought the whole point of open
source was is open for anyone to join?
Q. Isn't OSDL simply another wee-funded Redhat>
Q. Does this indicate that Redhat's existing business model is untenable?
Q. Did OSDL founders consult Linux Torvald, Eric Raymond, Bruce Perens,
et al. re appropriateness and objectives of OSDL formation?
Q. What is the corporate structure of OSDL? Who owns it? Who controls
it? Will OSDL make the agreements between its founding members public?
Q. Can other companies join OSDL and, if so, what types of participation
are possible?
Q. Would OSDL consent to OSS community oversight?
Q. Who will control the work done by OSDL? Will OSDL work be "open" to
public inspection, i.e., conducted on the web with unrestricted public
access? If not, why not?
Q. Who will have ownership of IP relevant to code developed by OSDL?
What about code contributed to OSDL?
Q. Will all code released by OSDL be released under the GPL? If not,
what code will be subject to different terms/conditions, what
terms/conditions will apply, and who will decide what code to except
from the GPL?
Q. How can OSDL avoid the code it releases being subject to the GPL if
OSDL is modifying GPL code?
Q. Will OSDL provide any representations / warranties / indemnification
that code released by OSDL is free from infringements?
Doug Miller mailto: dougmil@microsoft.com
Microsoft Corporation / Bldg. 6 Rm. 2113
Phone: (425) 705-5101
Fax: (425) 703-7562
Cell / pager: (425) 981-6128
..
[long list of press contactees]
..
From: Doug Miller
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2000 6:05 PM
To: Steve Aeschbacher (LCA); David Martin (WINMKTG); Mike Porter; Bill
Veghte; Brian Valentine; Jim Ewel; Adan Sohn; Vivek Varma
Cc: Brian Schustere; Dan Newult; Dan Crouse (LCA); Tom Burt (LCA); Chris
Meyers (LCA); Lisa Tanzi (LCA); Kim Akers (Windows); Tom Philips; Carl Stork
Subject: OSDR PR Plan - attorney client privileged
Attorney client privileged
Attached is our PR plan to address the OSDL announcement next week
Privilege Material
Redacted
All, please review and provide comments.
http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/4000/PX04081.pdf
--
court documents in the case of Comes v Microsoft.
|