By Fjodor on Feb. 17, 2007.
Remember the “Burst vs. Microsoft” case?
At some point in time, Microsoft were ordered to deliver copies of email correspondence relating to Burst, but told the court it would be infeasible. The order was none the less repeated, but before said emails were delivered, the case was settled. Robert X. Cringely covered the case, and he recently received an email from a contractor involved in backup procedures within Microsoft.
The following timeline seems to cover the problem of the email correspondence:
- Microsoft is ordered to hand over the emails.
- Microsoft informs the court that this would be infeasible
None the less, Microsoft instructs their contractors to gather backups from the specified period, and store them at a given location
- The court repeats it’s orders
The backup contractors discover that the previously gathered tapes are “mysteriously missing”, and are held responsible by Microsoft
- The case is settled out of court without Microsoft producing the emails
How very convenient, and how very sad.