Microsoft told to explain e-mail deletion memos

[dave () farber net]

...... Forwarded Message .......
From: Barry Ritholtz <ritholtz () optonline net>
To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:44:02 -0500
Subj: Microsoft told to explain e-mail deletion memos

Dave,

This is an enormous development, given the history of all the 
litigation against Microsoft.

The Judge's order implies a concern over a very conscious decision by 
the software giant to eliminate incriminating emails -- after receiving 
a judicial order to archive all of them during the Anti-Trust case.

Additionally, being ordered to search the legal department's archive 
suggests (in my biased opinion) that because of the affirmative actions 
of the company in ordering email destruction, they are not able to hide 
behind Attorney-Client privilege. Further, this implies that some 
Microsoft employees perjured themselves during prior sworn testimony.

As previously disclosed, I am on the Board of Burst, and have 
absolutely no objectivity whatsoever. But read the report yourself, and 
reach your own conclusion.



Barry L. Ritholtz
Market Strategist
Maxim Group
britholtz () maximgrp com
(212) 895-3614

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Microsoft told to explain e-mail deletion memos
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/174343_msftburst21.html

Friday, May 21, 2004
By JAMES ROWLEY
BLOOMBERG NEWS


A federal judge ordered Microsoft Corp. yesterday to search a company 
computer to help explain why Vice President James Allchin told 
employees in 2000 to eliminate e-mails.

U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz in Baltimore issued the order in 
an antitrust and patent suit by Burst.com Inc., which has accused 
Microsoft of stealing its technology for broadcasting sound and video 
over the Internet at high speeds. Burst.com charges that Microsoft 
destroyed e-mails that may help the smaller rival win its case.

Motz told the company to search a legal department computer for any 
evidence that Microsoft lawyers advised Allchin and others to adopt a 
policy of scrapping e-mails. A written policy circulated in 1997 by 
company computer operators advised employees not to save e-mails for 
more than 30 days "due to legal issues."

"I want to know as much as I can how 'due to legal issues' got in 
there," Motz told Microsoft lawyer John Treece at a hearing yesterday. 
"I want to know who talked to Mr. Allchin from the legal department 
before the e-mail was sent and what was said."

Motz didn't accept Microsoft's explanation that the information 
technology department inserted the words in the company policy 
statement to make it easier to persuade employees to delete e-mails 
after 30 days to save computer memory space. "It may be true, but it 
doesn't have the ring of truth to me," the judge said. Allchin's Jan. 
23, 2000, e-mail said: "do not archive your mail. 30 days." Allchin 
told employees, "This is not something that you get to decide. This is 

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/