Special Concerns for Free Software
Movement
The provisions in J.1 and J.2. appear to give Microsoft too much
flexibility in withholding information on security grounds, and to
provide Microsoft with the power to set unrealistic burdens on a
rival's legitimate rights to obtain interoperability data. More
generally, the provisions in D. regarding the sharing of technical
information permit Microsoft to choose secrecy and limited
disclosures over more openness. In particular, these clauses and
others in the agreement do not reflect an appreciation for the
importance of new software development models, including those
"open source" or "free" software development models which are now
widely recognized as providing an important safeguard against
Microsoft monopoly power, and upon which the Internet depends.
The overall acceptance of Microsoft's limits on the sharing of
technical information to the broader public is an important and in
our view core flaw in the proposed agreement. The agreement should
require that this information be as freely available as possible,
with a high burden on Microsoft to justify secrecy. Indeed, there
is ample evidence that Microsoft is focused on strategies to
cripple the free software movement, which it publicly considers an
important competitive threat. This is particularly true for
software developed under the GNU Public License (GPL), which is
used in GNU/Linux, the most important rival to Microsoft in the
server market. Consider, for example, comments earlier this year by
Microsoft executive Jim Allchin...
