Caldera Submits Evidence to Counter Microsoft's Motions

for Partial Summary Judgment / Evidence Includes E-Mail and OtherDocuments Exchanged Between Bill Gates and Other Top-LevelMicrosoft Employees Salt Lake City (PROTEXT) - Caldera(R) today filed publicly acomprehensive, 188-page Statement of Facts in its antitrustlawsuit against Microsoft. The statement will serve as a factualfoundation for subsequent filings by Caldera in U.S. FederalCourt in Utah required in response to nine motions for partialsummary judgment brought by Microsoft. In January, Microsoftsubmitted the motions in an attempt to have portions of Caldera'scase thrown out. Caldera's Statement of Facts, along withsoon-to-be-filed individual responses to Microsoft's motions,introduce evidence never before made public that establishesfactual support for Caldera's claims. This evidence includes 449exhibits, expert reports, and deposition testimony of Microsoftexecutives including Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer and BradSilverberg. "Our filings establish Microsoft's liability in our antitrustlawsuit," said Bryan Sparks, President and CEO of Caldera, Inc."For the first time since we filed our case in July of 1996, thepublic will be able to see some of the evidence that supports ourcontention that Microsoft systematically and routinely engaged inpredatory acts in maintaining their operating system monopoly --acts that involved employees at all levels of the company." The comprehensive Statement of Facts presents a chronology ofCaldera's evidence, much of which is presented in the form ofMicrosoft e-mails, internal memos and sales reports. Calderabelieves its evidence will demonstrate a contradiction betweenwhat Microsoft has said publicly and done privately. For example, in the Aug. 16, 1993 issue of PCWEEK, Bill Gateswas quoted as saying, "Is there anything Microsoft has ever doneto intentionally build in incompatibilities? The answer isabsolutely not." However, when Microsoft was designing andcoding Windows 3.1, one of its senior engineers, Phil Barrett,said in a September 1991 e-mail, "heh, heh, heh ... my proposalis to have bambi [code name for work on Windows 3.1] refuse torun on this alien OS [DR DOS 6]. Comments? The approach we willtake is to detect dr 6 and refuse to load." Caldera believes its evidence establishes that: -- Microsoft has used misleading product announcements knownin the industry as "vaporware" to dampen sales and diffuseinterest in DR DOS -- Microsoft made false and misleading statements about DR DOSto create FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) in the industry -- Microsoft developed intentional incompatibilities to makeit appear to be difficult for DR DOS to work with Windows -- Microsoft used "per-processor" and other exclusionarylicensing terms to block out DR DOS Moreover, Caldera believes its evidence demonstrates thatWindows 95 is not an "integrated operating system" as Microsofthas asserted, but rather a simple combination of Windows andMS-DOS. Microsoft documents reveal that Microsoft releasedWindows 95 as a single product to eliminate operating systemcompetition from Novell. Until recently, almost all court filings containinginformation coming from Microsoft documents have been held undercourt seal because Microsoft has designated those documents asconfidential under a protective order. Caldera claims thatMicrosoft has overused the confidentiality designation. During the course of Caldera vs. Microsoft, the first ofseveral antitrust lawsuits brought against Microsoft in the pastthree years, Microsoft has attempted to discredit Caldera'sclaims by making statements to which Caldera was unable torespond because the documents were previously sealed. For instance, Microsoft Associate General Counsel Tom Burtsaid in February 1999, "There is simply no factual basis forCaldera's claims. Many of Caldera's allegations merely recycleclaims that the Federal Trade Commission and Department ofJustice reviewed years ago and decided were groundless ... Afternearly three more years of investigation, Caldera still has noevidence to support its claims." The public can now see some ofthe evidence Caldera relies on to support its evidence. Burt's statement that Caldera's allegations have "no factualbasis" and were found by the government to be "groundless" arecontradicted by a statement by Attorney General Janet Reno at theconclusion of the government's investigation of Microsoft in July1994. Reno said, "Microsoft's unfair contracting practices havedenied other U.S. companies a fair chance to compete, deprivedconsumers of an effective choice among competing P.C. operatingsystems, and slowed innovation." In addition, Anne K. Bingaman,Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division in1994 said, "Microsoft is an American success story but there isno excuse for any company to try to cement its success throughunlawful means, as Microsoft has done with its contractingpractices." Even though Microsoft agreed in 1994 to a consentdecree dramatically changing its licensing practices, Calderaalleges in its case that Microsoft continued to engage inanticompetitive practices to maintain its operating systemmonopoly. "Microsoft attempts to downplay the use of e-mail as evidence,even though in his recently released book, Gates counsels thatall business communication should flow through e-mail," saidSteve Hill, lead attorney for one of Caldera's law firms handlingthis case. "Caldera has attached Microsoft's e-mail and otherMicrosoft documents as exhibits to its Statement of Facts. Thesedocuments show that what Microsoft discusses in e-mail oftentranslates into action." Hearing Schedule The Statement of Facts filed today and subsequent rebuttals toeach of Microsoft's motions for partial summary judgment arepreparatory to a series of hearings scheduled by U.S. DistrictJudge Dee Benson, who has been assigned as trial judge to Calderav. Microsoft. During these hearings, Judge Benson will rule onMicrosoft's nine separate motions to have portions of Caldera'scase thrown out. The hearings, which begin on May 25, will takeplace in U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City, where the casewill eventually go to a jury trial on January 17, 2000. Aschedule of these hearings can be accessed athttp://www.calderathin.com/lawsuit/index.html. Contact Information Caldera, Inc. can be reached at (801) 426-5001 or via E-mailat legal@caldera.com. A full copy of Caldera's Statement of Factsand additional information about Caldera vs. Microsoft can beaccessed at http://www.calderathin.com. Caldera, Inc., the parent company of Caldera Systems, Inc. andCaldera Thin Clients, Inc., was founded by Bryan Sparks inOctober 1994 as a start-up venture funded by Ray Noorda, formerCEO of Novell(R), Inc. Caldera Thin Clients, Inc. providescompact solutions designed for Internet set-top devices and otherembedded OEM solutions, including DR DOS and DR-WebSpyder, agraphical, DOS-based Internet browser. Caldera Systems, Inc.designs, develops and markets a line of Linux-based businesssolutions, including OpenLinux, technical training and support.ots Original Text Service: Caldera, Inc. Internet:http://www.newsaktuell.de Contact: Lyle Ball of Caldera, Inc.,(USA) 801-426-5001, ext. 305, or fax, (USA) 801-426-6166,lyle@caldera.com Web site:http://www.calderathin.com/lawsuit/index.html Web site:http://www.calderathin.com

Subscribers please note thatmaterial bearing the slug "PROTEXT" is not part of CTK's newsservice and is not to be published under the "CTK" slug. Protextis a commercial service providing distribution of press releasesfrom clients, who are identified in the text of Protext reportsand who bear full responsibility for their contents.

PROTEXT